Crucial BBQ

I also worked 40 hours/week during undergrad on top of living off campus (commuter student). Went to school full time, volunteered, had a "full time" social life; for me this is "normal". I worked on my applications when I could, but I had also begun the process early.

.

Well, it's past your deadline but I do hope you went with what you posted here as it is "great stuff" as some might say.

I did just that; saw and experienced more life by the time I was 21 than most will in an entire lifetime. I have no regrets, but I am now old--I didn't step foot onto a college campus until the age of 23 and that was me just wondering through a community college with no real direction. Then, and after some time had passed (how much time is secret ) I applied to and was accepted into a university on the other side of the country, paid the deposit, moved, only to end up in a 2-year AS program at yet another community college because I liked that program more (still do not regret this one either. That community college had a research vessel that went out often and I was able to do things that "marine bio" students typically do not do until grad school). I then applied to a few universities as a transfer student, got accepted to one awesome school but turned it down to attend a "lesser" university in Boston because I so wanted to so to school in Boston and that is where my original university was, anyways. That move I do regret. I had to take a Bio III and one more intro class before I could move on. Essentially, I was junior freshman. I ended up transferring into a second university after one year and once again had to start at the beginning; this time it was a freshman seminar (I kid you not) and a "lab techniques" course that I had to wait a year to take as there was only one section offered. It filled up quick, and as a transfer student I lacked the priority. Really. Sucky. I do not regret transferring into that school as it turned out to be an awesome place to study but I now realize I should have just stayed at the first school. My grades where also horrible throughout. Despite As, they were bad. But for what I lacked in grades I surly made up with in experiences (volunteer, paid RA, labs, field, built a robot for competition from scratch, unpaid RA, and so on). Despite an impressive CV for someone with only a B.S. I would tell my younger self to focus more on grades and less on the "ECs". At the time I firmly believed that experiences (in particular research) trump GPA when it comes down to grad school admissions--largely because that is what I was told by "experts"-- I now see that is not true in an of itself. Thankfully, "industry" does not give a hoot about GPA and your feathers-in-hat and credentials are the name of the game. *Also* I would recommend to my younger self to also seriously consider taking Calc I and Calc II during my A.S. program. One of the holdups at my first transfer university was that I could not move onto some upper level courses until having taken Calc II first.

Wow. Last time I checked this thread we at like page 13. I was wondering when it would explode. The above is pretty much correct. If you are honest with yourself you will be drawn to that one program over and over again.

Well, I am still interested. Got an interesting story to tell for sure.

I would suggest that you also post this in the Math sub-forum; likely to get more relevant responses there.

I am not familiar with public health programs or anything really not relating to ecology/marine biology/oceanography for that matter. I will offer only what I would do based on a: my own past experiences, and b: what you wrote above. "New ideas". Here, I would do at least two but no more than three. I would also avoid pinpointing any niches as to not appear too narrow. Keep in mind that between the time you hit "submit" and the time you begin working on your dissertation your own ideas likely will change. Besides, the more specific you are the more you potentially alienate yourself from PIs/labs ("I want to study patterns of disease spread through a community" vs. "I want to study how the Antarctic fruit fly spreads disease in the Tasmanian low-lands during the summer monsoons", for example). "Who to work with". I am convinced this is only another way for the program to vet out those who actually researched the program from those who are only applying willy-nilly. I would spend one or two sentences with this, writing something such as, "I am interested in the research of Profs. Joe Blow (communal disease), Jane Smith (epidemiology) and Jerry Pam (Antarctic fruit flies in Tasmanian low-lands). When considering my own areas of interests, I find I am most aligned with those three labs." As for showcasing, that is what your CV is for.

Eh, I blame College Con. and the College Board for this. I posted this in last year's Profile, a few times, but here it goes again: I know someone who got into Duke with way lesser stats than yours (and of practically everyone posting here) and from a "no name" State school at that. I am not saying that Duke has low standards or anything, just that if she got in you stand a chance, too.

When I went through this with my ex, we generally selected programs within the same city or at least within commuting distance. This was easy for us because each of those programs/schools were in major cities and as such held options for us both. However, there were other schools on our lists that did not match up and in general the plan was to see where the acceptances were and then go from there. This will not fly with some on here but ultimately we loved and respected each other enough to allow the other person to seek their own life path, and that is what it ultimately came down to. I had hope that we would get back together at some point, and that thought carried me through the day initially, but that did not happen, either, and we are now in good places, respectively.

Exactly why only one or two vague lines are sufficient.

Professional: this is why I want a MS/Ph.D.; this why I am applying to this program; this is why I want this lab/PI/mentor/etc. Personal: "Ever since the age of five..." Look at it like this; if you were to apply to a position on Wall St., would you begin your cover letter with "Ever since the age of five I have always wanted to work on Wall St."? No, you would not. You would state, "For the last ten years I have held the position as Lead Financial Advisor for the largest company in my State. During my tenure, I was responsible for a budget of $500M annually. Between 2010 and 2014 I helped Large Company grow from a valuation of $40B to $60B by...." My ex GF attended the best private school in that particular State from K to 12. By the time she graduated, she had eight years of foreign language under her belt, did calculus in 6th/7th grade, and so on and so forth. Essentially, she was being groomed for the Ivy League; her mom nearly disowned her when chose a local not-the-flagship state university. During undergrad she continued to excel, held prestigious internships, graduated in the top 1% of the entire school (year, not historically), was a member of various societies, for examples. I had a chance to read her grad school SOP and to my surprise she fell into every trapping and cliche you can think of. The piece read like a "this is my life's sob story, therefore I deserve this opportunity." Point being, even the well educated/read fall into this "personal story" as I believe it is simply human nature to do so; that we inherently believe that we deserve future outcomes based on past events. That's cool and all for charity, and graduate school is definitely not charity. Hence why it is imperative that you take the professional approach even if not asked for. I all but guaranty that even with such direction the majority of applicants are going to go personal with their SOPs. Yeah, my ex was still accepted into her programs of choice but she was also an exceptional student with exceptional experiences and LORs, by the way. addendum: I initially wrote this on the fly, no time to edit....

I just picked and choose which referees would get which programs based on who the referee was/is and who I thought would write the best LOR for the particular program in question. The reason why I had done this was because I had participated in three different research opportunities within three different disciplines (chem, biochem, and ecology/environmental--although ultimately falling under biology). I also had one referee who was/is from Humanities; it was a research/writing intensive course where our sole evaluations came from participation and projects. My last referee was someone from Administration who is aware of my "work ethic" and dedication outside of the classroom.

If I remember correctly, San Jose State is the #1 feeder to Apple with UCB falling in 3rd place and UCLA something 7th. San Jose is the only CSU that makes it into any top 10 list for California tech companies and for the UCs it is typically UCB followed by UC Davis then UCLA. For Google and Facebook I believe the #1 feeder is Stanford followed by UCB. Of course this is only for undergrad. Not sure how the numbers stack up for grad programs. You are correct in your assessment, however, in that the UCs tend to focus on the theoretical with the CSUs focusing on the practical "career training".

Thought I participated in this thread a few times.... now I realize I never actually posted any of my comments... Well, count me in as one of the older students. As for the OP; I am from Sacramento, CA. To me, it will always be CSUS or simply "Sac", not Sac State.

Impossible to know. You got great stats but so will nearly all who apply to those listed programs. In fact, you are most likely to be an "average" applicant when compared against the rest based on the info you posted above. It is really going to come down to your SOP and LORs. Outside of crafting a stellar SOP, one of the best things you can do is to have LORs written specifically for why you would be a good fit at each program. Not sure how it works in India but here in the States the best way to do that is to feed recommenders the info you want them to include. Good luck.

I'll get to it later after work. In the meantime, way too much hyperbole, too many "ifs" and "...hopefully conducting research of interest to me." are going to kill your application no matter how well it is written. Definitely a rough rough draft for sure but one that in no way demonstrates that critical communication skill you claim.

My comment was in response to what you wrote, "I can think of a few ways to insert just a sentence or two in the SOP while staying on topic, though. I'll consider that more when I get to work on SOPs." I have been through the application process two years in a row. My own advice to myself back then would be to follow the prompt to a T. Then again as always I suggest you contact the program directly and ask if you are still to considered inclusion of a sentence or two. Edit: Not sure what is up with the strike out....

For those looking for the tamu link from a few pages back (that leads to an error page), here is the new link: http://honors.uiowa.edu/files/honors.uiowa.edu/files/wysiwyg_uploads/Personal%20Statement%20Invitation%20to%20Frustration.pdf edit to add: link is to U Iowa, but document is the same.

For what it is worth, I would follow the program's instructions. If they say to not include such info in the SOP then do not do it, no matter how tactful. Here is the thing, without knowing the program or its applicants I am all but certain that the majority of applicants are not going to follow the rules. Why? Because most are getting their advice from websites. Instead of writing the SOPs that the program wants them to write they are writing SOPs that they think the program wants to read. Chances are you will ignore my advice here, too, and that is fine. Just keep in mind that the SOP is meant to show what you will bring to the program if admitted right at this very moment. What happened 3 or 4 years is largely irrelevant unless it is a continued issue. My top choice is/was a terminal MS program in the sense that there is no Ph.D. option within the specific program, or even at the school. However, many do go on to Ph.D. programs at other institutions. What I did, and this advice was given to me from profs/PIs/POIs within this same program, was to only focus on three things: why I want an MS degree; why I want this program; why I want this lab. Obviously this is a thesis based program so if you will not be doing a research project you could possibly pitch that last one and replace it with "future career goals". I was also told to not include any "life stories" as they flat out did not care and to also not restate anything already on my CV. In a nutshell, stick to prompt professionalism and treat the SOP to terminal MS programs strictly as a cover letter with a job application: this is why I am applying to your company; this is what I bring to the table; this is what I will get out of it.

As someone who has been through the application process twice, here are my opinions. Take with a grain of salt. There is a lot of advice out there regarding SOPs, and to be frank, I think most of it is BS. For one, while most programs look for the same thing (why this program?/how well will you do in this program?/what do you hope to gain from this program?) it is impossible to give general advice when even programs from within the same field may look for different criteria. Some want only 300 - 500 words. Others allow for any length, within reason. Some want specific mention of a PI or three, others do not. And on and on. Secondly, what a PI looks for and what the program looks for are often times in the same boat but on a different page. Another thing to keep in mind is that in reality when applying to Ph.D. programs (maybe also true for MS?) is that you are essentially applying to a job; a paid position. In the "real world" you are expected to tailor your cover letter to the specific employer, and in reality the SOP is just a cover letter. I am pretty sure this is where the idea to tailor individual SOPs to each program. Then again, there are some people out there who submitted the same one SOP to each program, and with luck. My opinion is that your SOP should follow each of the programs' prompts; and by that, you will have effectively tailored each SOP. So, don't write about specific profs/PIs/labs at length if not prompted to do so, but a sentence or two won't hurt. Now, to your questions: Future goals: this is a key point to include, and you can (and should) keep it brief. If your goal is academia you can simply state that you wish to become a professor. If you want to save the world, simply write that you desire to work for an NGO. That sort of thing. Short, sweet, and gets the message across loud and clear. Interests in program: well, just write the truth (unless your only interest in the program revolves around prestige. In that case it is best to keep your mouth shut). Do not write, "...I understand at your program there is..." It may be hard to see but such a statement portrays a lack of confidence and shows doubt. Also, don't write "...I want to work on..." It sounds pompous--save it for a potential mention during the interview and/or "future goals". Instead, go for something such as, "My research interests are in X, Y, and/or Z." For mention of specific profs/PIs/labs, simply state, "At University U, I am interested in what Profs John Q (immunology) and Suzy B (molecular medicine) are doing in their labs. And that is it. If what John Q and Suzy B do truly align with your interests that will be (or should be) evident elsewhere in the SOP.

For what it is worth graduate school is not the place to find yourself. Granted, with lab rotations that is likely to happen but keep in mind that while you do not need a narrow focus of interest/intent going in I'd leave the part about "exploring other fields" out of the SOP and interviews. As for schools/programs, you seem only interested in the top programs (I tip my hat to ya for not listing MIT). A few things to keep in mind, with U.S. schools anyways, is that sometimes the best programs are not at the "best" schools and the best programs for you might not be at the top schools. "Rock star" scientists are all over the place, even at "no name" schools in the middle of nowhere.

It is impossible to tell and to be frank it is largely a crapshoot to begin with. It will really come down to your SOP and LORs, and both need to work in conjunction. That is, your LORs need to support topics written in the SOP. Now, should you bother applying to your selected programs? Yes, of course. But instead of treating it as a roll of the dice you will increase your odds significantly by speaking to people in the program; from program directors to current students. At one program I went down the list of current students, some 40 in total, and emailed all of them the same basic set of questions about the program. Roughly 30 responded, with the majority of which doing so within 24 hours. Also cold calling (or "cold emailing") faculty, program directors, department chairs, and so on is a good idea. I have yet to find one who was not willing to discuss the program with me. You will gain far more insights and behind the scenes knowledge about not only the program but applications, too, which of course will aid you in crafting SOPs.

It depends on the program and how competitive your application is overall. Some programs I have looked at allow for students to take the pre-recs prior to matriculation, like say the summer before, and others allow admitted students to take them concurrently with either placing the student on "probation" until required pre-recs are met or simply allowing them complete the courses anytime during the program, but within reason (I mean, you would not take Calc I as your very last course, obviously). As always, contacting program directors and/or department chairs is good advice.

It's all good. When I later came back to this thread, and read my post, I see I came across a tad snotty.