tarrman

Fair enough, I guess it doesn't hurt to ask. But I think there is a big difference between asking for a better financial package when the school is funding you and asking for more money when you're already fully funded from an external fellowship. I personally couldn't justify asking a school for more money in addition to the $30k/yr NSF stipend without feeling a little greedy.

When it comes to supplemental funding, I don't think it'd be appropriate to ask for more money.

Hopefully soon! I'm dying to know (but don't have high hopes)!

Hey guys just found another great tool for determining a professor's reputation, and it's an accredited source. The Institute for Scientific Information publishes a list of researchers whose publications are most often cited in academic journals over the past ~10 years. The list is organized in to multiple disciplines (CS, Math, Physics, Engineering, etc.), and those given the distinction in a particular field are among the top 250 most cited researchers in a specified time period. More info about the list can be found here on its wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Scientific_Information#ISI_Highly_Cited The link to the actual list can be found here: http://highlycited.com/browse/ The data for this list was compiled between 2000 and 2008. I suggest looking up professor's names instead of the discipline, as the fields you can search by are very broad; one of my POI's is listed on here under mathematics even though he is a professor of ECE.

If you're looking to do finance, Princeton is the best place in the world for that. I've heard so many stories of students going on to work at Wall Street after graduation. The math/econ dept. also do a considerable amount of work in finance. However, being at Stanford would give you more opportunities to work with Google, Facebook, etc. working on those big data problems. I'm not sure how the big data research at Stanford compares to Princeton, but I'm guessing it's stronger.

Is this 4.5 hours away by plane or by car? If it's by car, that's not far at all and more than reasonable for a weekend trip home. I'm used to going all over the country away from my family, and I wouldn't even consider that "moving away from home".

Both of these statements are true. Most people at Princeton prefer theory in the CS and ECE departments. I think this is true for most departments there in science and engineering.

Some answers to your questions, in order: 1.) This depends on the program. Some schools offer the option of a thesis or non-thesis based Masters. For the non-thesis, it is coursework based only. For the thesis, you perform research under an adviser that ultimately manifests into writing a thesis. This option requires more work and more time. Check with the programs to see what options are available. 2.) Also depends on the the program. Some schools have more funding available than others. For example, Princeton is able to fund all of its Masters students, while Georgia Tech is only able to fund a select few. Stanford doesn't fund Masters students until they've completed one quarter, I believe. This is something you want to look into when applying, but there is definitely funding available. Many people who are unsure about doing a Ph.D. will apply to the Ph.D. program and drop out when they get a Masters. In science and engineering, funding is almost always available for the Ph.D. students as long as you are applying to top schools. 3.) Also varies depending on whether you're doing thesis or non-thesis. The non-thesis option will only take a year. The thesis option typically takes 1.5 years to 2 years. 4.) The average is 5 years from Bachelor's to Ph.D. Starting with a Masters, it's probably closer to 3 years. Some people take longer (closer to 6 or 7 years). You usually have a good bit of control over how long it will take, but some people have better (or worse) luck than others. I've also heard of people getting out in just 3 years, but you typically don't wanna do that if you're going into academia since it isn't enough time to publish enough papers. 5.) Again, this is what you make of it. If your goal is academia, you really ought to be putting your all into it. I'd say 50-60 hours a week on average, maybe some weeks better than others. Expect a 40 hour minimum in years 3-5, as your Ph.D. should be treated as an actual job. One of my friends in his final year of his Physics Ph.D. is working 40 hours a week, but his ultimate goal is a job in industry. Personally, I'm expecting work to be more enjoyable and a little bit less in quantity than some of my undergrad semesters. In my worst semester, I was working 60 hours a week Sunday through Sunday in addition to going to classes. I don't think grad school can get any worse than that. Most schools let you focus on getting coursework out of the way your first year so you can focus on research for years 2-5+, so it might be comparable to undergrad the first year. The key is to find work that you enjoy doing, so you don't really care about how much work you have to do. 6.) I don't see any issue with doing a masters at one school and a Ph.D. at another. I know a few people who have done this, and I've had a few professors who have done it as well. You will have to reapply though, and you'll see how stressful application season will be when you first start applying to grad schools. 7.) Usually the first 1.5 years - 2 years is classwork and the rest is mostly research. Maybe a class or two mixed in those last few years. There isn't really a timeline to the Ph.D., so you will be working on your dissertation throughout and will prepare it for submission during your final year. Your adviser will work with you on this and will tell you when you are ready to defend. 8.) What you do for your summer is discussed with your adviser. For those who want to do industry, they usually do internships with companies their adviser has connections to. For those who want to do academia, they stay on campus to do research, as this is most important. The less time you spend on your research during the summers, the longer it takes to graduate. Some people will visit other universities to work with professors doing research in the same field during the summer. I've never heard of people taking the summer off, if that's what you're asking. For the final year, you need to stay on campus to finish your dissertation. It doesn't make sense to do this elsewhere away from your adviser. 9.) Nowadays people typically need to do post-docs before getting a faculty position just because so many more people are getting Ph.D.'s than they were 30 years ago. You aren't at a disadvantage by working in industry for a few years first, and many professors start out in industry and end up in academia, but it might take more time than you want. The profs I know who jumped from industry to academia did so 20+ years ago and never did a post-doc, but things may be different today. It'd be better to sample industry again early on in your Ph.D. to see if you like it. There are also places that offer a good blend of industry and research, especially at national laboratories, that you might want to look into. If you want a P. Eng license, then go for it! It really isn't very useful though unless you're working on public works projects. It's very common for Civ. Engineers, but I know a few EE's that have them as well. I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any more questions on here or PM.

I tend to use the h-index criterion. The really well known professors have an h-index around 60. I think anything above 30 demonstrates they are well known in their field. Another good way to see if a Professor is well-reputed is to look at the title of their professorship. These are honorary titles that precede "Professor", and they usually indicate the professor is well-respected in their field. But not having a title doesn't necessarily mean the professor isn't well known.

Don't count on being funded at Stanford. I'd only take that offer if the fit was much better than at Princeton. Stanford's also a really great place if you're interested in joining a start-up. Being close to home at Princeton might help with the social life issues, but I don't know the details of your situation. I'm also not convinced its as bad as everyone says it is, but I bet it'd be harder to make friends at Princeton than at Stanford just because of the population difference. Doesn't mean it's impossible. Not that I'm saying you should base your decision on this, but I found this really cool video about the Princeton CS dept. that made me want to be a part of it: Does the research at one school seem more appealing than the other, or are they pretty much equal?

Doing a research internship will never "harm" your chances, but an internship at UIUC will look better than one from ASU. If you have a choice, go with UIUC. Otherwise I wouldn't worry about it!

Why do you want a Ph.D.? If you have no interest in academia, and you say that's all the degree from UCLA will be good for, it doesn't make sense to even be considering that offer. I met someone who was going to work full-time and do his Ph.D., but he didn't have to travel. I think the distance from your job will make this nearly impossible, but if you're serious about doing both, try to work something out with the program at Berkeley.

I disagree. Most of the state schools in or near the top 10 (Ga Tech, UIUC, UT Austin, UMich) are also easy to get into undergrad, and the quality of some of the undergrads suffers as a result. I'm not really sure why only Purdue's reputation would suffer in the eyes of your dad's colleagues, but if they think that this is only an issue with Purdue, they must not know much about US universities. To judge a school's graduate program based on the strength of its undergraduate program doesn't make any sense. I'd say only UMich's reputation in ECE is stronger than Purdue's, and for people to think that a Ph.D. from Purdue "looks bad" just shows how little they know about the school.

You will be fine if your ultimate goal is to work in a national laboratory or in R&D in industry

That's true for any program; if you publish really solid papers, top schools will be impressed. Both CMU and Ga Tech have really strong reputations and send out students top schools every year. A thesis will look much better on your CV than a non-thesis (or project) when applying for a Ph.D. I'd say the intake is pretty high considering the ECE program is the largest in the country. The prelims are also pretty easy: the written test is a collection of undergraduate level questions in various fields of ECE, but you only have to answer a few of them.

I would not choose your undergrad research based on what increases your chances of admission to top schools. If you're good at what you do, you'll get in to a good school. Pick something you're interested in as you'll be more motivated to work hard on your assigned project. I doubt anyone on here even has an answer to this question anyways.

My apologies I did not read the OP post carefully.

I spent a good week freaking out trying to determine if I should retake or not (I was happy w/ the verbal, but I know I could do at least 5 points better on the quant without any studying). I eventually decided that if my score could fluctuate +/- 5 points on the quant section, the admissions committee probably wouldn't view my scores any differently if I retook. I think at top schools, the GRE is sort of used as a filter; if your scores are below a certain threshold, they will toss your application out. Outside of that it doesn't affect your chances. MIT EECS doesn't even take GRE scores, I'm guessing because all of the students they admit have about the same scores. I've also heard they are more heavily weighted when coming a from school that is unknown in your field. My school is top 5 in the field I applied to, so I think much less emphasis was placed on my scores.

The tuition requirement is waived, but sometimes you have to pay fees at the beginning of each semester (usually < US$1000). You'll also receive a stipend, but the amount they will offer varies greatly depending on the field and school. It could be anywhere from $1.2k/month to $2k/month. You should be able to live off of it, provided you make sound financial decisions (like where you live). Try to room with someone, as this usually cuts the amount you pay for rent in half. You ought to also ask the department what the stipend is for the TA and also look into the cost of living in the area. Being at the top of the wait-list means that if someone who has received the scholarship rejects the offer, you receive their offer. I'd say it's likely, but I wouldn't make any assumptions.

I scored 157 in verbal and 162 in quant, and I was still able to get into top schools. If you've got time and money to retake, it doesn't hurt to try and boost your scores.

One of my friends was choosing between Princeton and Stanford EE a few years ago (he was fully funded at Stanford), and he decided on Princeton. He finished up his Ph.D. a few years ago. Here are a couple of things to consider: 1. Princeton focuses on more theoretical work in the EE dept.; moreso than most universities. If that's what you're interested, great! But if not, you're gonna have a harder time finding a good research fit. I've also heard it isn't that easy to switch departments, but it is easy to collaborate. Princeton's endowment is strong enough that many advisers are very flexible with what you do research on, and it is easy to strike up collaborations with other professors in other departments (and often encouraged). 2. You'll have to reapply at Stanford to get in to the Ph.D. program, and you aren't guaranteed admission. Don't underestimate the amount of work that will need to go into this. 3. Even if you do get in, you don't know what kind of funding you'll have. Palo Alto is one of the most expensive places in the country, and it'd be very easy to go into debt there. 4. This may just be hearsay, but I've heard that your performance on the quals at Stanford determine who you get to work with i.e. if you perform in the top 5%, you can work with the more well-known professors. At Princeton, you're almost guaranteed to work with the professor of your choice. My friend cited about 85%-90% success rate in getting your first pick. 5. Don't let other people tell you that you don't have a chance of getting into academia. If you work hard enough, you can accomplish anything. Coming from Princeton or Stanford greatly improves your chances of scoring a faculty position. If that's what you truly want, don't give up so easily. 6. Most of the opportunities and advantages in the Bay area come from start-ups. If you're looking to join a company to do research, both schools offer great opportunities (along with many others). I don't foresee you having significantly "greater chances" by living in Silicon Valley. Princeton has many connections with companies like Qualcomm, IBM, Microsoft Research, etc, and you could easily score multiple summer internships during your time there. You're choosing between two great schools, neither of which is substantially stronger than the other. Of course Stanford is more well-known and carries a better reputation, but not enough to justify declining a fully-funded offer from Princeton (and they pay EXTREMELY well). The only way I could justify going to Stanford is if the research fit was much much better than at Princeton. I suggest talking to some professors at Princeton about their research and also about your interest in CS.

There are multiple websites, but I found one that's really good for college students at http://www.forrentuniversity.com/

Definitely not new GC. Community bathrooms suck. Maybe old GC, but I'm gonna try for one of the other apartment complexes.

How low is 'low'? I wouldn't be too concerned about it, as it sounds like the school was very impressed with your application.

Took the words right out of my mouth, budgie. I'd love to have that written on my CV.