Dedi

On the phone with Columbia (to track your application you need an app ID number and I wasn't sent one so I freaked out a little bit)... Their admissions committee is meeting some time next week to review applications and interview invitations should be sent around Xmas! Just an fyi for everyone else

Looks like another person got an interview invite from UCSF (in case people have applied to that school).
 
I'll probably start getting nervous in January. Most of my applications are due later and I won't get response from most of them until March. Just trying to keep rational (at least for now).

Got an e-mail from OSU saying one of my letters was missing (their website says otherwise). Was worded a bit odd I think. Kind of interpreting this as good news possibly? 
 
Hello,
 
I am writing to let you know that we still need an additional letter of recommendation to complete your OSU graduate application.  We have received letters from Drs. XXXX and XXXX.  Please have your third recommender complete and return the attached form with a letter and send it to us at:  bsgp@osumc.edu at your earliest convenience.  The Committee would like to see this letter come from your current research supervisor.  We look forward to receiving this additional information.
 
Thank you,
Program Director

Looks like another person got an interview invite from UCSF (in case people have applied to that school).
 
I'll probably start getting nervous in January. Most of my applications are due later and I won't get response from most of them until March. Just trying to keep rational (at least for now).

There are definitely higher and lower impact conferences within subdisciplines and the criteria are (1) do important people attend? and (2) is it hard to get in? I'm going to go out on a limb and say that by the time you graduate you should have two pages of poster presentations, so the little ones don't really matter for your CV because they fail both the above criteria, though of course they can be good experience while you're learning. I don't bother listing any presentations that were on my home campus anymore. 
 
Any way you can submit as a talk? Talks are more prestigious than posters because (1) more people will see you and (2) everyone knows the rejection rate is higher. Exclusivity = prestige is a strong heuristic. Your supervisor could say whether it's strong enough. 
 
 
 
I know you didn't ask about social but that's all I know, so I'll mention those in case there are lurkers from social.  The highest impact conferences are often but not necessarily the larger international conferences. It's not just how many people might see you, but who those people are. You want to go where the important people are. Here are some general impressions...
 
The #1: Society for Experimental Social Psychology (SESP). Talks only, no posters. Prestigious because it's small (membership by nomination), all the top people attend, and attendance requires a member sponsor. High rejection rate. You won't attend this as an undergrad and probably not as a graduate student but included for completeness.
 
The standard conference is Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP). Talks are prestigious because symposia have a rejection rate of 70% and large audiences attend. Posters are good too because lots of people are there, but the acceptance rate is 90%+ so getting in is kind of expected. SPSP also has lots of preconferences that are great to submit to because there you'l be exposed to people in your specific research area. They're also smaller so you get more attention, and many have possibilities for short grad student talks or data blitz talks (3-5 minutes).
 
In my area, there are also subdiscipline conferences like Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI) and International Society for Justice Research (ISJR). Those are good because they're small and you get a chance to meet people who really care about your specific research area (if you're into social justice). Great for networking.
 
Next are regional conferences like Eastern Psychological Association and Midwestern Psychological Association. These can be worthwhile if the conference is near good universities. MPA is really great because it's in Chicago and you get people from Northwestern, Chicago, Ohio State, Michigan, Waterloo, etc., which all have really strong social programs. MPA takes talks and posters. I've never been to EPA but I think they're more oriented towards cognitive/neuro?
 
Last are big, interdisciplinary conferences like Association for Psychological Science (APS), American Psychological Association (APA), and Canadian Psychological Association (CPA). I've never attended APS but there are usually big name speakers and it looks like they attract sexy research so could be worthwhile. APA and CPA are, frankly, dominated by clinical psychologists so they're less interesting for a social person to attend. The CPA preconference is usually really interesting though, and they take posters.

I'm not sure how much they will scrutinize the letter. You'll probably be fine though. Most likely they've seen worse.
 
I see you applied to U of T's psychology program. Maybe we'll see each other at the recruitment weekend (if we both get invited, of course). Do you have a POI in mind there?

Glad it's helping!
 
I don't have much news to report. My PI/POI sent in his LOR, making my first application complete.
This was the email I got when he sent in the LOR (which still makes me flustered every time I read it):
 
Submitted. I basically told them you walk on water (so don't let me down if you come here!). As I said, it is difficult to know what chance you have in this competition, but I gave it my best shot.
 
My advisor is freaking out, under the impression that I'm going to be accepted into the program. I'm just relieved that he turned in the LOR on time.

I read your SOP and please let me give some comments and questions:
There are several grammatical errors that you have to fix such as capitalization, punctuation, and parallelism. These errors are quite noticeable and might turn off your reader. You already have Master degree in Electronics, you really have to check if the university you are targeting allows you to pursue another Master degree. "I feel good that I know what tickles inside processor" seems flat. Avoid such things in essay as reader might not understand with what you mean. The third paragraph is way too long. Rephrase it and make it more concise. It is actually very good that you brought up your personal limitation, but it is just too wordy and does not really punch out. Especially your story about your family, it is too bland. I think focusing on your hearing impairment is a very good idea. Fourth and Eighth paragraph seems redundant or dangling. It does not focus on anything. Put your experience regarding hearing aid in previous paragraph about your limitation. Fifth and Sixth paragraph seem talking about your persistence and effort, but it is crafted poorly. And perhaps it will be good for your final concluding paragraph, instead in the middle. Seventh is also too long. You once again mentioned your hearing aid, I think it is just too much (forgive my frankness), but it makes your essay unstructured. The way you address your university is quite good, which you mentioned the professors and their research. A good restructuring your sentences and omit the obscuring heading sentence will be good. It will be a very good idea if you write by outlining what you want to say before you start writing. Here's example of outlining I made based on your essay:
 The intention of pursuing Master degree in university Having 3 years experience in industry Eager to expand the knowledge with theoretical foundation and latest research Long term goal to pursue PhD Master degree in CS is one of my step My academic background and current experience Degree in Electronics and Communication Currently working in industry, protocol department. (Explain your duty/role) Found interests in CS after working in related area (Explain your experience why you finally interested in CS, and relate it with your job) My limitation that I have to overcome Suffered partial deafness in high school, limited my performance in class. Social stigma attached to someone with hearing impairment in my community. I turned my disability into my strength: I can easily focus on my study without being disturbed by external noise. The only restriction on my capacity is imposed by my own mind. Along with my economical advancement, I can purchase hearing aid to help me and overcome this issue. My undergraduate degree experience Explain what I do during undergraduate degree Explain experience in nailing the hardest exam in your country Reason pursuing Master degree in IIT My graduate research/coursework Try to focus on your BEST research work After graduating, joining CISCO, explain your BEST project What you learned so far How OS are designed, I learned it from my project, bla bla Software engineering methodology Relate it with your project Why I want to attend this target university Main reason Explain about professors and research briefly Final remarks Limitation is not disability I prove that I am highly qualified candidates despite my disabilities Good luck! 

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

When I applied to PhD programs I found Grad Cafe forums extremely helpful. I suspect that many of us do come back because we feel like we want to give back as much as we can to continue passing on what we’ve learned. I know there are many others here, like myself, who used Grad Cafe in the past and are now settled into our PhD programs. So, I just wanted to give a few tips from my own experience in case it’s helpful for others. This isn’t new information, it’s just what I found most helpful, you’ll find much of it repeated elsewhere and some of it might not apply. So, with that caveat… I’ll keep it short and answer questions, and hope this also encourages others who are already in programs to join in and add their thoughts.


Finding a Topic/Theory/Approach/Region

You can’t pick a program or a supervisor, or write a statement until you’ve figured out what you want to do. Not exactly what you will study, but what it means to you TO STUDY. Does it mean doing library research? Does it mean 1 year of fieldwork, 2 years of fieldwork? Do you want 2 years of classes? How do you want to do your comprehensive or qualifying examinations? 1 test that your department produces and gives to you? 4 tests that you design yourself? These details matter. You also need to know what area of the world you want to study and what kind of anthropology you want to do.


Identifying a Program

The programs you apply for might be limited by where you need to live because of family or a spouse, or what country you want to be in, or what the department specializes in, or where you can use a special scholarship. So first pay attention to those limits and find all the programs that fit inside that group of limitations. Next, within those programs you must identify the ones that have at least 3 professors that you REALLY want to work with. You need to be able to draw on more than one person in the department. One of them will be your main contact, your POI or your potential supervisor. But the others are important. You want several people to be excited about your application so that when the department sits down to look at the applications, you have more than one person arguing for yours. I did this by emailing everyone in the department whose work I was interested in. A simple short email that said where I was studying, what my interest was, what I liked about their work that I had looked at, that I was interested in a PhD in their department and then asked if they were accepting new students for supervision.


Finding a Supervisor/POI

Once you’ve emailed everyone of interest you’ll have a great sense of what your options are. Some will write back excited to hear from you telling you all about the program. Some will say: “Apply, I’ll see your application, and don’t email me again.” Some faculty really want to talk to you, some don’t want hear from you at all. Some will tell you to email the graduate student advisor in the department, some will send you to the web site. This will tell you a lot about their personality and about how the department works. You’ll quickly figure out whether you really want to work with this person for 5-8 years. If you develop a good correspondence with someone, keep them updated. Let them know you’re applying, ask if they’d be interested in seeing what you are writing for your statement. Sometimes they’ll offer to edit it, to give you sources to cite. Sometimes they’ll tell you what to say about particular things in order to improve your essay. All of these things happened to me.
 
Don't forget to ask for email addresses of current students they would reccomend you speak with about what it's like to study there. Especially ones they are supervising. Then go over to Academia.edu and look up students yourself and reach out to them so that you talk to other students,  not just the ones that they reccomended. I ruled out schools very quickly when I spoke to many students in a prestigious, highly ranked program and they were all miserable.


Writing a Statement

All of my statements were well received and resulted in offers to several fully funded programs as well as a few prestigious scholarships. I used a simple formula. Sure, you can try to re-invent things and stand out, but my opinion is that people on admissions committees are actually happy to find that you’ve followed a clear outline so they can more easily read through many essays. Here’s what I used. Same for all of them, but tailored to that specific program. I DID NOT simply change the last paragraph, the whole statement was written specifically for each school, based on the long email conversations I had with potential supervisors.

Paragraph 1:
First sentence saying briefly and straight to the point: This is what I plan to study, broadly.
Second sentence clarifying and giving more detail

Paragraph 2:
The following scholars have looked at X, (citation, citation, citation). The following scholars have looked at Y (citation, citation, citation). Studies around the issue of X and Y have tended to look at them like this… (citation, citation, citation).

Paragraph 3:
However, this literature has not yet looked at how XY affects A, B, and C (this is where you insert your topic, from the first sentence, but in the context of existing scholarship, the point is to show how you want to contribute to knowledge).

Paragraph 4:
By looking at XY in terms of A, B, and C, I want to open up new questions about XY such as: New Question 1; New Question 2; New Question 3; etc. By exploring these questions my project will use theory D, theory E, and theory F in new ways to address XY through ABC.

Paragraph 5:
The University of (Insert name here) anthropology program is the ideal place to do this work. The department focuses on X and Y, and these people work on ABC, and their use of theories DEF are interesting because… Professor H’s work on A and X is relevant to my work because… Professor I’s work on B and E and Y is relevant because of the way she… While studying at University of (insert name here) I will draw on expertise in…

Your V GRE score is about a 149 on the newer revised GRE.  Q is about a 151.  Both are near the 44th percentile.  This was probably more of a problem than those three "week" recommendations you mention. Your Master's GPA is 3.4, yet your uGPA is 3.2.  Probably not that big of a deal but also not that big of an improvement.  It seems odd to me that you do not want to retake the GRE, but it seems more odd that your same program would want you to. 
 
And what is the difference, in terms of wasted time, from only applying to one program and being rejected by one program, or applying to ten programs and being rejected by ten?  Aside from the money (which you did not mention as a factor), it should still equal a 1:1 ratio in terms of investment compared to reward.  However, your odds increase for every number of programs greater than one that you apply to.  You GRE scores are not impressive and you stated you will not retake the GRE because you feel like you cannot do better.  Really? For your sake I hope you do not have to.  
 
If you do not want to feel rejection, or cannot handle it, than why are you even bothering?  Seriously. I read all sorts of discussions by biology grad students (accepted, obviously) who now question why they are in graduate school, I don't like grad school, it was all done on a whim anyways, and so on. This website has some of them.  My numbers are not the greatest, sure.  But I was waitlisted to my number one program last year.  In the end, I was rejected.  I know the reasons why, I contacted the program to inquire about my application and its deficiencies...but every time I read posts by once ecstatic undergrads who now have no clue what they are doing or if they even want it anymore or...or...I keep wandering if I was edged out by some twerp who only applied on a whim, and accepted the offer because why not?, and a year from now he, or she, is not going to be interested anymore. 
 
If you want grad school then want it.  If you don't want to want it, then don't.  Don't take a spot from someone who has a reason and solid desire to be there.  

Hi there,
 
I am also in the process of applying to Neuroscience PhD programs! I've gotten a lot of advice on my SOP and hopefully some of this will be of help to you. I'm kind of critical, so please take everything I say with several grains of salt.
 
1) References to high school are discouraged, even if AP Biology is a "college" level class. There are a lot of different ways to start SOPs, and the "cute anecdote" is definitely one of the more challenging introductions to pull off successfully. I recommend the "boring" introduction, because although it is very easy, it is also very easy to do WELL. Biomedical engineering is a UNIQUE undergraduate endeavor, so flaunt it! I studied math and biology in undergrad, so my introduction brags up my "quantitative reasoning" skills that only math folk, like you and I, can truly own in a statement of purpose. Neuroscience is interdisciplinary, and your background is, too. Embrace what you have.
 
2) It isn't too clear how you became interested in neuroscience. Perhaps you could provide a concrete example (something you learned in a class once?)
 
3) You write in the passive voice. If you don't know what this is, you may want to Google it. I could try to explain it but my English background is lackluster -- the passive voice means that you write as if things happened to you, rather than you happened to things (awkward phrasing, sorry). Take more credit for your experiences. Oh, you took some classes? I know plenty of people who have done that. Did you engage yourself, ask lots of questions, stay involved? Turn the stituation around -- YOU happened to those classes, YOU took a lot away from them. Own it!
 
4) Also, for the 2nd paragraph: these schools have your transcript. You don't need to talk about your record. Talk about why these classes were significant enough for you to think of them in the first place. Did they sculpt your interests, inspire your future direction? Say it!
 
5) Good description of your research. However, see #3. Even if you did "help" and "assist" and "volunteer", there is no need to put emphasis on those things. The schools that you are applying to are competitive and you may want to rephrase things. "My research in a motor neuropathy lab..." "I am working on behavioral testing..." etc. Let me know if you want more help with this.
 
6) 4th paragraph is good! Notice how you take more credit for the things you accomplished here. BUT, did you present the findings? Or did somebody else? If you didn't present them, I would leave it out.
 
7) Last paragraph. Do some quality brown-nosing...ERR, name dropping. For each of your schools, dig through the professors and name 3-5 of them that you would be interested in working with. Nobody will ever hold you to these names. It just demonstrates that you've done your homework and are applying for more than the school's name.
 
8) Overall: I think the structure of your SOP is logical, and you've got a good "skeleton" here. It may be wise to fill in each paragraph with a few details about WHY the experiences relate to your current interest in neuroscience. For my SOP, after paragraphs about research, I said something like "I found the challenge of research enjoyable and that's why I want to pursue graduate education". Sprinkling this shit throughout really aids in emphasizing the underlying message -- that you are wholeheartedly committing yourself to 5 years of this stuff.
 
Please ask me if I can clarify any of my suggestions! I love editing!

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).

When I had informal Skype interviews with POIs, we talked about everything you've mentioned. Even though it was redundant information, the Skype meeting was a good way to gauge how we interacted "in real life". There was a lot of small talk, and we discussed how the interview process at the university would work if I was invited. I was a lot more stressed out and prepped much more than I needed to. It was very friendly and less formal than I expected.

Not true at all! It's a good example of what a first draft of sorts looks like. Fuzzy made a lot of great points to help you improve and I really don't have much more to add unfortunately. When you write your next draft, try talking about what your research focus will be, how you fit with that school's particular program, and lastly what you plan to do with the degree and how it would benefit your department. Good luck!

I would just make a skills section in your CV. In the SOP, you go into more detail about how you used a couple different techniques in your research if you want.

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.

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).

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).

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).

Hi JessePinkman,
 
I think this needs some work. Really you should be showing it to your professors and reference writers to get a good critique, but I'll make a few suggestion. First, consider that the adcomms have a lot of these to read, don't waste their time with unnecessary details. Get to the point. Talk naturally. Don't try to impress them with your vocabulary.
 
"what really made me choose Civil Engineering. [is that] I wanted to follow in the footsteps of my father!" is more to the point and endearing than your entire first paragraph.
 
Most of the writing is pretty awkward. "I count my interest and career decision as most fortunate. . ."
 
"USA is renowned for skill at executing huge and complex projects in every field from space to civil engineering, from putting a man on the Moon to building the Empire State Building, the Hoover Dam and the Panama Canal." The adcomms don't need to hear you laud a list American engineering accomplishments, especially such old ones as these. In fact they're probably more interested in why their specific program is of interest to you beyond the fact that its American. Also, "USA" looks and sounds awkward.
 
"After considerable research on the Internet through websites of several universities,"- these sort of statements are redundant, the adcomms will assume you've done your research into their program.
 
"In India, in particular, the paucity of high quality infrastructure is proving a hurdle for economic growth and the Government’s efforts for it are proving less than effective even at great cost on account of lack of professional management at every level of project planning and implementation." - Too long. Confusing syntax. Too many 'it' pronouns. Don't make grand, unsubstantiated, statements, it makes you look bad, especially when you're broadly criticizing your own government.
 
Try something like this:
"In India more high quality infrastructure is needed to keep up with the economic growth. This growth requires professional management at all levels of project planning to fill this demand. It is a very exciting time to be a Civil Engineer in India, which is why I hope to make a contribution by returning with a professional degree in Construction Engineering & Management."(Just an idea)
 
"However, in the second year I suffered a few setbacks." - if this is worth mentioning[which I don't know that it is] then you have to be specific and honest. Highlight that you significantly improved your score in your final year, and your First class distinction. Don't bother with the disappointment.
 
I suggest a heavy rewrite. With these points in mind.
 
Don't use passive sentence constructions.
 
Tailor it to each school/program, you should really demonstrate why a particular program is of interest to you.
 
Don't stress the American aspect because that just tells the adcomms that you would settle for any American school.
 
Tell them why their particular program interested you. (I say this twice because its so important)
 
Details like the soccer thing don't really fit. I understand you're trying to say that you can be a leader but is sounds disingenuous and artificial, and it doesn't fit the flow of your SOP.
 
Anyway these are just some of my thoughts. Hope that they're helpful
 
best of luck!

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).

Are you very unsure of your research interests or something? I understand applying to 2 different departments at the same school if the faculty overlap alot but there is certainly no reason so apply to 5 programs at the same school unless you have absolutely  no idea what you want to study (and in that case, get more research experience first!). This list also seems way to top heavy. Honestly, looking at this gives the impression that your goal is to go to a fancy school, not pursue research.
 
I would choose one program at each school that best fits your research interst and apply only to that program. If JHU notices that you are applying to this many programs there then I wouldnt be suprised if you get automatically rejected from all of them. I would then add in some more schools that fit your research interests. You are basically just applying to best ranked schools in the country here and the chance that all of them happen to excel at your reserach interest is pretty low. I would focus in your interests and apply according to that, not ranking.

1. That is an excessive number of applications.
2. You should check if you're even allowed to apply to so many departments within a single university.
3. You probably want to fine tune your research interests if you can't your list smaller than that.

I just want to remind any current applicants to take a deep breath. Talk to as many professors, postdocs, grad students, etc. as you can before you make those final decisions. You are essentially marrying the program/advisor that you choose, so you want to make sure that you will be happy for that 5+ year haul.
 
Talk to a lot of potential advisors in the program. I actually got accepted to my current university in a different program with a different advisor, realized my mistake after acceptance (with funding for that department!), and frantically got arrangements to transfer my acceptance to my current program and advisor. This was only possible because I had talked to my current advisor during the application process.
 
Make some sort of list to keep track of your application requirements, when they are due, etc. Don't get overly attached to your list, however. It will change (If it doesn't change at least a little throughout the process, I would be very surprised). Don't feel badly if you take a program off of your list because of geography, personal conflicts, advisor personality, funding, etc. I don't think that there is any perfect program, but you want to get as close to it as possible.
 
Remember that numbers are just numbers. Yes, GPA and GRE are important. Yes, there are cutoffs. Yes, there are other students with more research experience and more publications. But you can still get into a good program with an advisor who you're happy to work with for 5+ years. Graduate admissions is a game of sorts; make sure you play it well. You may not come in with the best cards, but you can place them in such a way that you get the same result as someone who started off with a great hand.
 
At the risk of sounding cliché: Keep your life goals in mind. Everyone wants to be in the best program, with the best advisor, with the most publications, and the most awards. But do you need that to be happy? If you can't get into the "best" program but you love the research somewhere else, and you can still be competitive for a job that will support you and make you happy, who cares that you didn't get into the "best"? I think it's easy to lose perspective throughout the process, especially when you see competitive profiles on GradCafe and the list of potential schools that other members are aiming for.
 
** And again, any environmental science, plant ecology, forestry, etc. applicants can feel free to PM me with questions about the process.