Jump to content

WhitH

Members
  • Posts

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    New York, NY
  • Application Season
    2013 Fall
  • Program
    Cell/Molecular Bio

Recent Profile Visitors

1,901 profile views

WhitH's Achievements

Decaf

Decaf (2/10)

9

Reputation

  1. I'm not an international student, so I could be wrong on this, but from what I understand the GRE is probably the least important part of your application. It seems to work like this-- a very low score could keep you out of a school, but a great score will not get you in alone. So while it is important to retake the GRE and show some improvement, I think that putting all of your energy into making it "perfect" may be less worthy of your time then securing a tech position. You need to show the admissions committees that you've tried to address all weaknesses in your application to the best of your ability, but outside of showing effort and some improvement I'm not sure that the GRE will be that important. Definitely get yourself a tech position, preferably in a decent lab where you can get LORs from people who carry weight if possible. While getting tech jobs are tough straight out of uni, you seem to have a decent resume that most PIs would gravitate towards. At the end of the day all they want is a good technician, so I think that as long as there aren't too many hoops to jump through they would be ok with your international status. HOWEVER, I would strongly suggest considering taking two years off instead of applying for the next season. PIs strongly prefer a candidate that will guarantee 2 years, and based on what I've seen from the hiring process of technicians this is a deal breaker. Also, the best way to overcome low GREs and no publications is by getting some solid full time research experience, so taking the two years will work very much to your advantage. It will also show commitment to the admissions committees. I would also work on strengthening your personal statement and think about the people you've asked to submit LORs for you. If you think any of them may be a bit weak, try to swap it out for a better one next season.
  2. I'm just gonna toss my hat in with everyone else. If you are interested in research but you really want to be an MD, do yourself a favor and stick to your guns. There are one year masters programs that are explicitly designed to fast track you to med school and to help you increase your GPA, there are also lots of post bac programs, which is a route many people take, to increase their GPA for med school apps. Put your energy into making yourself a standout med school applicant, volunteer at places, shadow doctors, etc., consider applying to DO programs (there are some very good ones fyi) and do research as a fellowship later on.
  3. Two things-- 1) Why is it so bad to take two years off between undergrad and grad school? It not only strengthens your application, but you might actually realize in a year from now that you weren't really ready to go straight into a PhD program. I sometimes think that taking two years off to tech in a lab should be required for PhD programs. 2) If you think that a job in academia in the US is something you'd want to do after grad school, then doing your PhD at a reputable institution is very important. Even if you want an industry or consulting job, it will be much harder to get if the place you've gotten your degree from doesn't have solid name recognition. People may not like the school ranking system, but don't ever underestimate the importance of being in a highly ranked school. Sorry, but that's the truth. Rankings and name brand institutions do matter, even in science. So I don't blame you for wanting to try for a better position if it makes sense for your long term career goals. But getting to those places requires a solid background in research, and undergrad experience often doesn't count for much because it was part time. You need two solid years of tech work.
  4. I second (or third) the suggestions already made. You've been rejected based on the weaknesses in your application as it stands today, if you want to do a PhD eventually then you need to address that. A second masters degree won't say to the admissions committee, "hey, remember me? I get why I was a weak candidate last time, so look at what I've done since you last saw me to fix that!" Which is the only way that you will be a stand out to them the next time they look at your application. I'm of the firm opinion that getting a masters in between undergrad and grad school is only helpful for those who have low GPAs, which is not your problem. I'm not sure why you have an aversion to taking a couple of years off before heading to grad school. Many people do it and they are stronger candidates for it, not just in the eyes of admissions but in the success they have as PhD students. I think you need to take those two years off and take a tech job somewhere more than you know. You might come to realize that you weren't ready for grad school the first time you applied, and your rejection was actually a blessing in disguise. So my advice is to take two years off and use that time to do the following: 1) Retake the GRE- Even if you only do marginally better than before, it will at least look like you tried to improve. And honestly, GREs are probably the least important part of your application. 2) Get a job as a technician- Experience gained as a student rarely counts for much because you're doing it part time. Do it full time in a lab you think will give you skills that might help strengthen your application. If you don't have a paper then research experience is all the more important. 3) Try to read as much as possible and really zero in on your particular research interests. Based on the range of programs you've applied to, it seems like you're still unsure of what you want to study. That's ok, but you need to narrow it down somewhat. 3) Rewrite your personal statement and pass it around to as many people as possible. Reach out to old science profs if you can, PIs, grad students you know, etc. Include areas of scientific interest. 4) Try to get better letters of recommendation if you can and if you think yours may be lacking. Good luck!!
  5. Acceptance by the program is almost always indicative of acceptance by the grad school. From what I understand it is usually a formality, although in extreme cases it could go otherwise. Wouldn't worry about it too much.
  6. committed to Penn CAMB this morning. Psych!
  7. I would go with your gut. Paper means nothing if it's going to take 5-6 years of your life. You might as well be happy.
  8. In the US a masters is only necessary if you feel that you are not ready to go to graduate school. Otherwise it's a waste of time. I did do a masters after graduating undergrad because I felt like I needed more lab experience and better letters of recommendation. I also got a masters from the UK where it was research focused instead of just taught classes like in the US. If you have lots of research experience good letters and you feel ready to start a PhD program, then a masters would be a waste of time.
  9. i actually transfered from a big school to a small school. Basically I looked through the profiles of the professors with labs at my new school, picked ones I wanted to work with, and then tracked them down once I was on campus. If it makes you feel any better I got the majority of my research experience after undergrad. I took three years off to get a masters (masters is NOT necessary at all) and to get a tech job. I really only had one and a half years of lab experience in undergrad. I think that if you make yourself known to the profs you're interested in right away, get even just one academic year of lab experience, and fill you summers with research experience from now until you graduate you should be more than ok. What will really help is spending a significant amount of time (one summer full time or 1 academic year part time) in at least two different labs so you can have at least 2 strong letters of recommendation from PIs who know you as a researcher. Also remember that the kind of research you do doesn't matter; you dont need to be doing something close to what you want to do in a PhD at all, so long as you can explain your role in the project and the science behind it is really all they care about.
  10. I also transfered from the undergrad I started in. I just never mentioned it and I never felt the need to explain it, no one ever really asked or seemed to care. But I guess you could just say it was for personal reasons, if they ask.
  11. Ok, so. First of all, I agree that research experience is the most important thing for PhD programs in science. Then comes letters of recommendations, then GPA, then GRE. Unfortunately (or fortunately), unless your extracurriculars have something to do with science or academic honors, they don't care at all and I wouldn't put it on your application at all. Nepotism doesn't really exist in this field, so while your professors may be able to introduce you to some program directors or a couple of your interviewers, getting the interview will be completely up to you and you'll still have to impress all of you interviewers. Don't worry about not having publications, though they are very helpful if you can get them. I don't have any and I know plenty of people who don't either and had no problems getting into top schools. Focus on getting good letters of recommendations from people who know your potential as a scientist. Character references really don't count for much. It's definitely not too late to start getting research experience, but I would start ASAP, don't just rely on summer programs. Try to get some part time volunteer work with a professor with a lab a your university. That being said the most important thing you can do now is find out if academic research is right for you. There are joint PhD DDS programs but they are long, I think 6-7 years, so you have to be sure. I would find a lab doing research that you think is the kind of thing you'd want to do and shoot an email to the PI asking if you can work in their lab over the summer. You'll probably want craniofacial labs. There are actually a few at U Penn that specifically are interested in teeth. Now, if you choose to get a PhD, you do not have to do academic research for the rest of your life if you don't want to. Many people go into pharmaceutical or biotech, many go to teach at small liberal arts colleges or even high schools, some go into consulting, and some go back to law school and go into patent law. There are plenty of avenues other than research to utilize your PhD. If you decide that getting a PhD isn't right for you, but you still want to become a dentist and stay in academia, you can do that too. There are plenty of DDSs that teach in dental school and probably even some teaching pre-dent students in undergrad. It also wouldn't be totally out there for a DDS to do craniofacial research, though I think that most do not want to.
  12. What do you mean? Like did anyone get rejected after interviewing at program x but got into program y or did anyone get rejected from program x after interviewing but got into program x eventually?
  13. Just had my Einstein interview yesterday. For those of you going, be warned. They will stick at least one member of the admissions committee onto your list of interviewers, whether you've requested them or not. In fact, if you havent requested them then that is a good way to figure out who they are. They will grill you pretty hard and ask you leading questions to try to see how you react. Be firm about your desire to go to Einstein.
  14. Ok, so now that that's cleared up...anyone know what the likelihood of getting off the waiting list for ucsd bms is? Maybe from past years? Or is a wait list from ucsd basically a rejection?
  15. Even people who've gotten interviews? ...So there is no wait list???
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use