bsharpe269

I'm from a different field so my experience may not be directly applicable but I don't think that schools care as much about grades as we think they do. I got into biophysics PhD programs with a few Cs and Ds in some very relevant courses (like physics, math, and chem courses). No one mentioned it at interviews. Programs seemed to care way more about LORs, knowledge of the field, and passion for research than anything else. About half of the programs I got into would be considered top 15. A couple of the top 15 schools added extra fellowships on top of their normal stipend offers. I say this to stress that programs REALLY don't care about grades like we think they do. If your LORs are terrific and you really know your field (like read literature regularly) then I really don't think they will care about that one grade at all.

I don't think anyone on here can tell you what to do... this is tough decision and you have to just make the best possible decision you can! Since you want to go to the academia route though and realize how competitive it is, I think it is worth considering both options. I think that some info about my background might help show some of the positives to taking a couple years off. I come from a mediocre undergrad school, mediocre GPA background. I probably could have gotten into a PhD program right after undergrad but definitely not a top one. I took 3.5 years off after undergrad. For the first 1.5, I just did some unrelated industry jobs but for the past 2 years, I have been working on my MS. I will be getting a high impact first author paper out of my MS along with some middle author ones and am super knowledgeable about my research area.... knowledgeable enough that I feel that will be able to jump into my PhD program way ahead of the game and start publishing very fast. So in addition to starting with multiple papers in my field, I think that I will publish more during my PhD since I can skip that 1-2 year learning period that can hold people back. I don't think that you need a MS to do this... I think a full time research position can work just as well if you put a lot of effort into it. Despite my unimpressive undergrad, I will be pursuing my PhD in Biophysics at Washington University in St. Louis / WUSTL this fall (hard to find good biophysics rankings but definitely top 15 at least, maybe top 10). I was admitted to other great schools like UW and Hopkins too. This NEVER would have happened for me right after undergrad and was 100% worth the wait. If you were to take some time off then you could benefit from not only getting into a higher ranked schools but could also put yourself in a position to be even more successful in that high ranked program. Like everyone else is saying, either direction is a gamble since you can't predict the future. There are risks in both directions. I think you need to figure out which would be worse for you... 1) never knowing if taking a couple years off could have gotten you into a top 20 (or 10 even) PhD program or 2) reapplying and getting no acceptances. Honestly, if you improve your application then I view 2 as very unlikely but it is of course possible. Good luck in whatever you decide!

I really doubt that A will badmouth you. That would be very unprofessional and would look worse on them than it would you. If they did do that though then it wouldn't change B's offer. They wouldn't take it away just because you declined another school...

What do you think the weakest aspects of your application are? Do you think that you can improve your application significantly in the next year or two? How many schools did you apply to this cycle? Did you apply to any top 25ish programs?

I have always done well on the quantitative portions of standardized tests and mediocre at reading/vocab (like 60th percentile). I used magoosh to study for the GRE. I spent around 3 months studying. Each week, I spent around 30 min-1hour on vocab flashcards. Once every few weeks I would spend a more substantial portion of time (like a few hours) doing a practice test or practice question prep. I didn't study for the writing section at all. I scored 168Q, 162V, 4.0. In my experience, after a certain point (maybe ~320), schools don't really seem to care how well you do. I wouldn't let studying for the GRE consume your life. Your time is much better spent on research. I recommend just spending an hour or two week reviewing your weakest areas.

The majority of my class are between 9 and noon

I am not in anthro but saw your post and thought my situation might be relevant. I was a math undergrad and will be doing my PhD in biophysics. Most people getting PhDs in biophysics either come from physics or biochem (maybe with a physics minor) backgrounds. Professors were excited about my "different" background because it gives me a different perspective and different set of skills than the average person in the field. I think that a big part of my application success though was that despite being a math major, I am well read on current biophysics literature so I can chat in depth about current research in the field and about my specific research interests. Also, I only applied to schools with multiple professors in my subfield of interest. I think that a couple things will be important to keep in mind if you want to change fields. 1) You should be as well read on anthro literature as other people coming from anthro undergrad majors. Make sure you are regularly reading about your topic of interest and can discuss it from the appropriate perspective. 2) Apply to schools that are great fits for your topic of interest. 3) Sell your background. Your quantitative strengths that come from sociology coursework are probably rare in anthropology. These differences in curriculum arent bad. You just need to find a way to discuss the aspects of your background that will help you do PhD research. Maybe others with more knowledge of anthro specifically can give advice too. Hopefully this can help you some though since I was successful in PhD applications, despite an odd undergrad focus.

What field are you in? In the sciences, ETH Zurich is considered on of the best schools in the world. A degree from there would be VERY highly respected.

It sounds like you want to go RPI. Is there a large difference between the reputations of the programs or are they similar?

I think it makes a lot more sense to do research full time for a couple years. Switching grad schools can be a mess and professors may not support decisions and may be unwilling to write LORS. If you do research for a couple years then you will make more progress than in the first year of an MS or PhD program since you will not have to take classes. You will also set yourself up for a terrific LOR if you do good work.

I agree that top 15 vs top 50 is a big difference. I would go with top 15 unless you like the top 50 school significantly more.

Probably... but PhD programs will care much more about your research than specific grades. They will want to see that you will definitely be able to handle the grad level coursework and outside of that, it is all about research. By your description of your grades, I assume that you have around a 3.5 GPA? That will be fine.

I am in a MS program that is course work based but have been doing tons of research and will have 2 first author papers. Interestingly, during PhD interviews, no one cared whether my MS was course work or research based. Only 1 prof asked about this and when I answered that it was course based and I have been taking 3-4 classes a semester he got really impressed that I was publishing on top of that course load. They seemed to care WAY more about publications than whether I had a thesis or not. Based just on my personal experience, publications are more important.

I don't think you have choice... you of course have to take the funded offer.

I relate to this... I am very conflicted about the baby thing. I always thought that I would have a husband and kids but as I get older, I'm just not sure anymore. There are so many different things that I could be doing during those 18+ years. Do I want kids more than I want all of those other opportunities? I worry that I only want kids because society tells me I should. At the same time, my mom is a nanny and I have grown up around kids. I am very comfortable around them and enjoy their company, especially once they get to be around 3 years old at least. I guess we don't necessarily have to make these decisions right know. I KNOW that I want to pursue science and think that MAYBE I want kids. Since of the two, science is the more sure thing, it makes most sense to go after that one right now.

I think that Duke probably is a bit more prestigious than Stony Brook but the Laufer is being opened by Ken Dill... He is one of the biggest names in protein folding. I think that anything connected to him will be respected. If possible, I would try to figure out specifically how much money you will be bringing in for each and how much you will pay in rent. I stress the money thing because I've heard that it is really hard to find decent housing in long island for a reasonable price. I cant say for certain that this is true.. just something that I have heard. I think it might be worth you looking into some more though. How many potential PIs at each? Have you visited both? Did you click with the students of professors at either more? Finally, do you have a gut feeling that is leaning you towards one or the other? If you imagine accepting each of them and think about how you would feel after, does one make you much happier than the other?

I also looked at the Laufer Center. They have a lot of cool research! How do the stipends compare? I think that Durham might be alot cheaper than Long Island.

Have you guys started looking for housing yet? Any luck?

A couple brief comments: 1) This line: "Since I did great in school and had all my previous class materials, people would usually bug me for giving them what I had, so they could prepare to midterms." came off as snobby to me. I think it is great to include info on how you created a website but I wouldn't include the line I just quoted. Also, in the US it is often considered cheating to give people old copies of assignments. This paragraph could be viewed very negatively. I would change the focus away from copies of old tests and assignments and focus more on the website design and programming aspect maybe. 2) A couple times, you mention that a couple years ago you have no idea what you wanted to do with your life. I don't see a reason to write that in this essay... I don't think it adds anything and if anything, seems like a negative. I would take this out and instead focus more on what you are passionate about now. I also fine this line: "Coming from a family that had its main needs covered, having a huge house, sports car, and expensive clothes and accessories never attracted me." very unnecessary... The adcom probably doesnt care about whether you want a fancy car or not. They want people who are passionate about their field. 3)"Which have come of unmeasurable aid on my daily tasks: simplifying hours (even days) in getting my job done. " This line is great but I would go into examples of what you have done. I think that giving specific examples here could be useful. I hope that helps!

Write them! You have a lot to potentially gain and not that much to lose!

Different field (biophysics) but I turned down Johns Hopkins for Washington University in St. Louis. Johns Hopkins has slightly more name recognition but WUSTL is the better program for what I specifically want to study. I don't regret this decision even slightly! Are you going to grad school for prestige or for a terrific education? My answer is for the education... I could care less about the average person's thoughts on the prestige of my grad school. I would think that most people going to grad school feel the same way. Go to the program that is best for you! Not the one that sounds impressive to people outside of your field.

It sounds like a no brainer to me.. Yale! You seem way more excited about Yale than Princeton. You're really not going to go wrong with either program so I think you should go wherever you feel that you will be the happiest. Try to play the mind game where you pretend to have accepted each offer and see how you feel about that decision. That helped me confirm my decision.

I found that the best way to find the big PIs in my subfield was to look at who is speaking at the big conferences. For example, the Gordon protein folding conference is big in my field. I started by seeing who was speaking there then looked at where they work, who they publish with, whose work they cite. Once you find the top 10 big people in your field, it is really easy to use citations and review papers to find others. Through this method, I found 10 schools that have large clusters of people doing the sort of work I would like to do.

I would wait until late summer/early fall. I think the key is to keep the emails short. Professors are very busy. I would mention that you are interested in applying to their program this winter, have read X and Y publications and are intrigued by XYZ finding. You can mention something in your current research that is connected to what they have done. In all, the email should just be 1 paragraph in length. I would attach a CV and say that you would be happy to discuss your experience in more detail if they are interested.

I think this is an easy mistake to make... I would avoid getting into specific reasons in additional emails if possible. I would just stay vague and say that you feel like you will be really there and it's a perfect fit. I don't think this will result in any burned bridges with this guy! It sounds like you have been professional and I'm sure he will understand.