Dedi

For the second paragraph, you can probably cut the second sentence, otherwise it sounds redundant.

I can also take a look, considering that I'm not doing the NSF grant (I'm applying to Canadian schools). Might be a new perspective.

This is fairly useful for most social sciences/basic sciences people. Thanks for the insight!

Sounds like research to me, in terms of having more questions come up than answers. My first research experience also didn't go over so well. However, I am an undergraduate and still have some freedom to make my mistakes and learn from them. I guess my question is what do you mean by having no data to show for? Meaning that you crunched the numbers and no significant differences popped up, or that you have no actual numbers to crunch? If it's the former, then that's pretty normal for a first research experience. If it's the latter, I think there is something wrong with the methodology. I guess I feel kind of silly for not really having an image in mind of how engineers do research... Apologies for not being much help regarding graduating on time.

I agree with Applemiu regarding the ideal response. However, I've found that (at least with Canadian schools) interested POIs might want to contact you via phone/skype as an informal interview. I've had one last January that went very well and now have two more coming up in November. If those also go well, then I will be more inclined to have a larger discussion with them in the future. Some POIs will ask for different documents (CV, transcripts, the standard items) to gauge whether you would be suitable for their lab/program. I've had one POI that asked me to list my research experiences, didn't reply for three months, then asked for an informal interview. He is my top choice POI right now. In other words, the response varies and you may be surprised with who ends up being your top-choice.

I feel you. About 80% of the POIs that I've contacted have full labs or have some other circumstance that does not allow them to take me in. I've learned to be more flexible for my Master's and have one ideal PhD program to aim for. The process of applying is a learning experience in itself.

It is odd indeed. If you want to inquire to professor X the discrepancy on the website, I would do it. Then again, I'm quite used to being upfront with professors.

But since you've contacted this professor and he's not taking in graduate students (I assume that that the adcom might know this as well) I think it wouldn't be appropriate to put him in your SOP. I also don't think they will necessarily toss out your application for mentioning him. I'm just afraid that it would leave a bad impression. I would personally tailor to interests Y and Z and not mention X at all. I'm doing that for my applications for UBC and uWaterloo because I have talked with faculty that have similar interests and are taking in students but not as exact as the one at U of T. Other people can chime in on this issue, too.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Some people do grad school because they want to prolong the wait for career searching. I've found that those people do poorly and wonder why the heck they are there. It is a commitment. It is also not for everyone. You are no worse of a person for not going to graduate school. As for rejection, you're going to need to be able to take in criticism if you're going to a career or grad school. You can't take it personally. It is what it is.

You can't mention other faculty member(s) that match pretty close to your interests in that program?

I had a bad 1st year, but I'm not mentioning it because a ) if not put in the correct way, it does sound like I'm making excuses and b ) I have a major upward trend starting my 2nd year (went from ~2.89 to 3.52 for cum. GPA) and the adcom can see that in my transcript. That's my two cents.

My writing score is worse than yours (3.0), but only one program I'm applying to looks at the GRE scores. As far as I know, the writing portion is the last thing that admissions will consider when looking at the GRE (and the application package in general).

That was my experience as well. We talked about the projects going on at the lab, how my ideas would fit, and some other random odds and ends. I do recall the POI asking me why I wanted to go into graduate school. It was very informal and I felt like I was allowed to calm down (which is a very good sign that I will get along with him). At the end, he mentioned how he would like to keep interacting with me in the future. This was back in January, and I still communicate with him (In fact, I had another skype conversation with him last Friday). I don't think I would stand a chance as an "international" applicant without him trying to advocate for me. It does make a difference.

Most Canadian programs do not require GRE scores either. Standardized tests don't mean much, IMO. No Child Left Behind is an example of what education has come down to when standardized tests come into play. I wouldn't say that they are a low level program. It's just that they consider other aspects of the application to be more important (which may even be a good thing).

For the sciences, plain English is usually preferred. The adcom is looking at many of these SOPs and it's almost a relief to read something that doesn't require a lot of effort to understand.

I see. Well, best of luck to you! Some people are very lucky in terms of having a lot of schools that would match research interests.

Adran6, Quick question; what are your research interests? Do these schools have professors that match your interests? When you say you aren't messing around with getting a PhD, I worry that you aren't carefully researching the schools and making sure you wouldn't mind going to that school if you got rejected everywhere else. In other words, I wouldn't choose a school that you feel would make doing your PhD a chore. I'm sure you did your research, but I wanted to be sure.

From what I gather, a high score will not guarantee admission but a low score will hinder your chances. Think of it as a graph with the GRE score on the x axis and chances of admission on the y axis. The line rapidly increases as your scores go up and plateaus after a certain point (and it won't ever reach 100%). There are a lot more than a GRE score that admissions committees consider (such as SOP, letters of rec, and research experience for most programs). IMHO, getting a high score on the GRE means that you played their game and it's not really indicative of grad school success (as much as they BS about it).

I'm finishing up an application (just need to pay the application fee). I am starting to get anxious about results already (the deadline hasn't even passed yet!). Excited, but also nervous.

I agree with Vene. Talk with them now so that they are prepared to write you a letter (provided that they agreed to write a LOR) when the midterms arrive. Establish the relationship now (go to office hours with thoughtful questions, for example) and send them your application materials (CV, SOP) so they can write the best possible letter. A grade is only one component of the letter (and it's not really that important). They are evaluating your characteristics and work ethic that will determine success in graduate school. One of my letter writers didn't even teach me, but I have worked as a research volunteer with him. Overall, if you feel that you can give an accurate picture of how you would do in graduate school to these professors, then go ahead and ask them for the letters.

I agree with TakerUK. Though I use a very brief narrative (1-2 sentences) instead of bullet points, I think both can work if done effectively (then again, I did this for work experience and not projects. I just list the project name, place, and PI). 10-15 projects is a lot. Were you particularly engaged with a few of them? If you were just doing literature searches, data analysis, etc. I don't think you are obligated to list them all/list them in detail (I didn't list all the projects I've done that didn't go beyond a poster at my university's academic conference for me). However, if you led a project or did an independent study, it would be worth noting more in detail. Another way if getting your mass of projects mentioned is to say that you did x with y number of projects under the Research Assistant position portion of the CV. However, it really depends on how engaged you were with all those projects. Did any of your projects lead to conference presentations/publications? Putting those in their respective section and not putting them in the "Projects" section (which I use for projects that are still in data collection) will also shorten your list. I might be able to help guide you to writing your CV (not like I have enough on my plate as is). If you're interested, go ahead and PM me.

I'm confused. Are you applying to an Undergrad program or a Grad program? If the former, I think you came to the wrong forum. If the latter, I'm not seeing much in terms of research interests. I know you want to do automotive engineering, but can you be a bit more specific? The quotes don't make sense in the given context. Your organization is very choppy and doesn't have a sense of direction. You seem to have a very shallow understanding in your topic of interest and about higher education (Undergrad or Grad). It does read like a high schooler wrote it. You're better off starting fresh. Get advice from your professors/teachers about how to write a SOP and get a native English speaker to proofread. This isn't about understanding English. It's about understanding how to communicate effectively in writing. (Yes, I know I'm sometimes harsh, but I'd rather nip the ineffective SOPs in the bud.)

I will also look at your SOP, but not until the weekend.

It may be another deadline. Mine is November 15th...