whitemud

It's not definite as to when the last possible date is. All I'm saying is that decisions are made and acceptances are going out. I would expect it to take them only about 1-2 days to inform everyone.

MIT Electrical Engineering acceptances went out yesterday and/or today (some might trickle out tomorrow, but they tend to be quick about it). (I'm a grad students in the department, and just got a few Acceptancees to email with Congratulations.)

I just got an acceptance e-mail! Apparently I'm not special enough for a phone call. :-( Special thanks to whoever turned it down. Haha. ETA: (That's for the DOE SCGF)

Just got an e-mail about being an "Alternate." (i.e. waitlist) Now I get to wait until May 5th.

That's close enough, I still have hope. :-D (Figures: 80 people, 5-10 minutes per call, probably only 1 person calling. Should take 2 days. Ok, back to doing real work, for me.)

Congratulations (And Happy Birthday)! I, for one, hope you have a name near the beginning of the alphabet.

Hi Neil, I'd love to give you advice, but, being from the US, I'm at a loss as to what you're numbers actually mean. For instance, what is a backlog? Whether or not this sort of thing will be on your transcript, I do not know. However, your university will know. Ask the registrar's office, or get a copy of your transcript for yourself and look at it. If you feel like you need to justify your poor performance in undergraduate, do so in your personal statement. This won't take away all of the problems, but if you provide a decent argument for yourself, then you can have a fighting chance. I wish I could give you more advice, but I am at a loss as to converting your profile into units that I can understand.

Yeah, I'm waiting for the SCGF. I was still holding out hope because the application status still tells me "March 20th" (which is clearly not the case).

Same here, and I'm not even looking for the same one that everyone's talking about now. Ha. Time to work on the Master's thesis, I guess.

I am also waiting to hear from this fellowship. If I sign in, I get: "Notification will be made to those selected for the Office of Science Graduate Fellowship by March 20, 2010." So, hopefully notifications will be out soon. (Good luck!) No insider info, sadly.

I am in Electrical Engineering, so this may not apply to you. On days when I'm not in the lab, my morning goes: Turn on computer, open firefox, open matlab. I could not survive without matlab, it is how I (quickly) process all of my data and start all of my theory-based research. I view it as a big-giant calculator that does all of the hard work for me.

As I've heard, UK focuses more on personally leading research and one-on-one sessions with professors when you need to know more about a topic. Whereas, the US has a more finite structure to a Ph.D. program, with academic advisors that guide you in your research and strict credit requirements. Both structures have their obvious pros and cons. However, I've no personal experience, so take this assessment with a grain of salt.

I wouldn't call any sort of PhD a useless degree. Sure, top universities tend to have more opportunities and better connections - but that's not the be-all, end-all of graduate work and careers-after. In the end, you'll be judged on your own work and research. You can focus more on finding a professor and/or lab that you'd like to work with, than a top-ranked university that you'd like to attend. Glad to see that you got a reference letter from your MS program. It would look suspicious if you didn't have that. Also, noojens made a good point about your GPA, personal experiences aside. I agree with her, but the personal statement was made to get around those sorts of anomalies - you can try to use it to account for your low gpa and to emphasize your bigger assets.

You've worked at three different labs for prolonged periods of time, and your worried about your research experience? Were these just grunt-work jobs, because at first skimming I assumed they were research-oriented? To be fair, I know nothing about BME or the programs that you are applying to, but as a general rule - any research experience is good research experience (so long as you spin it right). Having three lab-related jobs to talk about is brilliant; even if they're only tangentially related to what you want to do. If you get to submit a resume, use it to emphasize these jobs in the context of what you'd like to do as a master's student (and after getting your master's) and to emphasize how they've given you some sort of research experience. You can list the job, then 1-3 bullet points underneath with related responsibilities. I think it's a quick way to show that you've got some experience under your belt.

Yes, apply. At worse, you'll be out the application fee. To me, It sounds to me like your advisor is discouraging you so that he can keep you all to himself. A 3.48 gpa just means that you need to focus on showing your research experience (which is quite impressive), and have an extra special personal statement. It's not a bad idea to contact professors you'd like to work with, too; they can certainly help with the application/funding process.

My humble opinion is that you should wait out the semester, and try to scrounge the motivation to do the best that you can. Unless you feel like staying in your current state for the next few months will do irrevocable damage to you or your well-being, there is no harm in sticking it out. Perhaps that will also give you some time to redirect your focus and get a clear plan of what you really do want to do. It will also give you the time to warn any professors you are working with or you are academically close to. That way, you won't burn those bridges, and they will (hopefully) respect your decision. It would not be amiss to talk to your professors and any academic/research advisors about this decision before you make it, too. Though it may not seem so, they have also been where you are and should be able to offer you sound advice and direction. Though, this advice is largely hinged on your amount of misery, which you need to assess for yourself. Hope this helps a bit.

I'm surprised that your bf is having so much trouble. Did he not have any internships throughout college? Or is he looking for non-entry level jobs? If something asks for 5 years of experience, in my opinion, it is not entry-level. It's also possible that, though the description says "5 year of experience", they're really only listing the ideal (especially if it's listed as "entry-level"). As far as I know and have experienced, it is not-too-difficult to get an entry-level position for EE straight out of college. Most of my undergrad friends have received multiple offers, and a lot are going to work for companies that they had interned for during the summer. As far as further education goes. Getting an MS in EE is seen as the best thing to do for someone who wants to work in industry. For 1-2 more years of education, you get a significant pay increase and an entry-level position that's slightly higher than those offered to BSEEs. Oftentimes, companies encourage those who they've hired with a BS to get their MS - offering tuition reimbursement and (in some cases) time off work to attend classes. They obligate that you stay with the company for a set amount of time after completing your MS. Because of these types of programs, I think the hiring potential for a person with a BS or an MS is about the same. Now, getting a PhD in EE tends to close more doors than it opens. I have a feeling I'm going to hear the word "overqualified" far too much. However, it's necessary for anyone that wants to get involved in research. That is, working for a national lab or in academia. There are also R&D possibilities in industry, though those tend to be fewer - I think there's a lot of "company inbreeding" that tends to happen there. On a personal level, I'm motivated to get a PhD because I know I want to do research and I know I don't want an entry-level BS position. (Unlike my friends, I did not enjoy my internships.) Hope this helped a little. And, anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I'm only judging from my personal experience.

Boy, has this month been crazy, eh? I just got back from visiting Cornell and I've realized that I really wish I didn't have to make a decision. I've managed to narrow my choices down to two: Cornell or MIT. I'm looking to do Electromagnetics and have been sort-of-pulled into plasmas and atmospheric research. I think it's cool, and one step close to achieving my "super villian" status. I feel like both programs would suit me the same and that there are really three differences. 1) Cornell gave me more money (with a lower cost of living - so it's a significant difference.) 2) MIT has bigger equipment. 3) Ithaca vs. Boston. Any thoughts? I'm thinking of buying a dart-board. That's how I decided undergrad.

I was accepted everywhere. They all want my babies. (In the fun "Here's money!" way, not the evil "Give me your first-born child." kind of way.) My only complaint is that MIT offers the lowest stipend (for the highest cost of living).

Undergrad at Penn State, in the Honors College GPA: 3.97 GREs: 780 Quantitative / 560 Verbal /5.0 Analytical Writing Writing an undergraduate Honors thesis; plan to publish Have had 3 internships including Lockheed Martin and a nuke plant ETA: Being a female American helps, too.

So, I contacted Cornell for another reason and was told: "I cannot say for certain but there should be additional offers made very soon." What does this even mean? Was I waitlisted, and didn't know it? I'm not worried (Hell, i got into MIT), I'm just confused. ETA: Nevermind, got in. Accepted with funding: Cornell Stanford PSU ("visiting" this weekend) Accepted, no word on funding yet: MIT RPI Withdrew Application from CMU (I love Pittsburgh, but they're silly)

That's odd. I talked with a professor who seemed rather excited. I'd like for them to tell me, at some point, that they'd rather not have me, if that's the case. *twiddles thumbs*

I heard from RPI a while ago (no news on funding yet) for MS/PhD. I think they have an odd system, though.

I've got to be honest, I don't even know what Operations Research is.

I'll throw in my two cents. Statistics, networks, and publications aside, I feel like a lot of my applications have been judged by my personal statement. For MIT particularly - I had no network and no publications. But, I had the ability to tell them "THIS is what I want to do. These are things I've done to make this happen." With the personal statement, I was able to qualify my lack of research (with the caveat that I was planning to do more in the current year) and expound upon my internship experiences. The statement makes you into an actual person for them. I don't know how much of this true: Considering the stats I've seen, I feel like MIT just throws all the applications down the stairs and accepts the ones that go the farthest. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure I got into Stanford because of my current advisor. So, it's all relative.