sunpenguin

I would be happy to give it a read, too.

It's not really a matter of correct or incorrect, but saying either that you scored at the 98th percentile, or saying you scored in the top 2%, sounds more impressive than the raw numbers given in your first sentence. You can use either of the second two sentences, with slight edits to make the language flow more smoothly:

I received this too, and so did the girl who sat in front of me at the GRE subject exam. My impression had been that they sent this out automatically to anyone who created an account, but the theory of the girl I met at the exam was that they automatically send it out to everyone whose GPA is above a certain cutoff. If my first impression is correct, then no, it probably is no reflection on our chances of admission. But if the GPA theory is correct, it could be an indication that they'll be giving our applications some extra attention. Either way, good luck!

I agree with MsDarjeeling. Also, many universities will allow you to do a skype interview if you can't spend the extra time flying across the country, so you could probably still manage some interviews without taking time off work.

I would say it has taken me the equivalent of 2-3 full business days to finish each app. That includes tailoring SOPs and short answers to answer the university's specific questions, researching POIs and, in many cases, spending time crafting emails to the POIs. Then there's ordering transcripts and filling out all the general information. I've attended a lot of past educational institutions, so just filling out the "educational background" sections usually takes a chunk of time. In August, I did a couple of apps that were open early. Since then, I've been working on this since September, and I still have one app I'm planning to reread and double check so I can submit it today. One of my recommenders is very helpful but has been pretty swamped lately, so he has left most of the letters until the last minute and will be submitting those over the next couple of weeks as the deadlines come up.

Yep, you have to disclose all your degrees, but in my SOPs, I don't talk about the fact that my UG is in an irrelevant field. Instead, I talk about my current interests and my two relevant master's degrees. So there's no reason to make a big deal out of trying to explain it away, or to assume the adcomm will be too concerned about it. A lot of people start out in one field at 18 and change their minds later about what they want to do in the long term, so it probably won't be that much of a concern to the profs reviewing your app as long as you can also demonstrate relevant interests.

If they don't ask for a CV elsewhere, this would be a good place to include it. I've also used that spot on applications to explain the grading and credit system at an non-US university where I took a few post-baccalaureate courses.

I agree with Geo's conclusion. My personal feeling is that you're always better off avoiding debt. If you take the second offer, you'll have a lot fewer financial worries, so you'll enjoy your grad school years more, which could also translate to better work, better relationships and networking, and possibly better job opportunities down the road because of it. I opted to do my undergrad on a full scholarship at a liberal arts college instead of paying a lot of money to go to one of the Ivy Leagues, and I'm still glad of that decision. I know quite a few people still paying off student loans 20+ years after graduation, and IMO the big-name school isn't worth that.

I wouldn't write off applying there just because of the GRE score. They'll look at your application as a whole. Especially if there are professors there who share your research interests, they might not care at all about a so-so GRE score.

I agree with this completely! You never know what your chances are until you've given it your best shot. Also, top programs may actually be more open to applicants with less-than-perfect GPAs, because they're holistic in their admissions process. They'll look at what you have to say about your research interests, whether you're capable of conceiving of a dissertation-level project and whether they think you're going to be able to complete it and make the department look good.

Definitely! Hope you got my message.

I'm up for a trade, aridneptune! I probably won't have my draft ready for another few days at least, but feel free to pm yours to me any time. Anne, those are some really helpful points!

The reason public CA schools sometimes prefer in-staters is that they have to pay higher tuition on behalf of out-of-state students for the first year. It should make no difference for private schools. So Berkeley, for example, might have a slight preference for in-state students but would very likely be willing to eat the higher first-year tuition cost if they think you're a really great fit. Stanford, for example, isn't all that likely to care. I don't think they'll even think twice about someone from the East Coast moving to California. Universities are used to students making a major move to attend school. The concerns are purely financial.

I think anything above the 90th percentile speaks very positively of your skills. From looking around, it seems that anything above 160 is generally good, and anything above 165 makes you competitive for the top programs in any field.

I don't think 13 programs is too many. I'm applying to 14. I have some geographic restrictions, so I'm applying to every program that's a good fit in the cities that are possible for me. I don't think it makes you look desperate, because the programs you're applying to will never know how many others you're also applying to. IMHO your list looks like a good mix of more and less competitive universities. Your credentials look pretty good, I would think. So don't discount the highly competitive programs...but also don't discount the possibility that another program that's not quite as prestigious might turn out to be the best one for you, regardless of whether you get into Stanford or Berkeley.

Good luck, Molecular! I'm not quite done with applications, but getting there, and I think I know what you mean. I'm going to have so much free energy after focusing so intently on this. Keep us posted when you start to hear some news on your apps!!

I took the GRE in 2009 and scored 770V, 700Q. I was very happy to hit 700 on the quantitative since it covers math I haven't seen since middle or high school, and some things I didn't think I'd ever studied. It's only recently that I've learned how many people score 170 on the new GRE, and how low a 700 is really going to look to adcomms. It's probably above minimum cutoffs, but it might still raise a red flag at more competitive schools. So here's the deal: I'm taking the biology subject exam on Oct. 19, and all my study efforts are going to continue to be focused toward that this week. After that, if I decide to retake the general GRE, I could focus on studying to bring up my Q score. I know the scores take 10-15 days to be reported, so I would need to take the exam by about Nov. 15 to have a hope of the scores getting there by Dec. 1 deadlines. I feel confident I could bring my score up to a much more competitive level with some dedicated study, but I don't know if 2-3 weeks is enough time to do it. I would probably be able to manage about 20 hours of study a week. My background: not a complete idiot mathematically, but I don't use anything beyond basic arithmetic and basic algebra, and sometimes very simple statistics, in my everyday life and my research. I've forgotten almost everything I ever knew about geometry, calculus, statistics, and probability, but probably had enough knowledge at one point that it would come back to me with a little prodding, or at least that I could learn it more quickly the next time around. Any thoughts on whether it's worth dedicating those 2-3 weeks of my life to study? I'm on the fence between giving it a shot, or saying it's a done deal now and I'll just have to let the chips fall where they may.

Master's Institution: Medium-sized state university Undergrad Institution: Small liberal arts college Major(s): MS in cell and molecular biology MA in biological anthropology Master's GPA: 4.0 Undergrad GPA: 3.96 Position in Class: Not ranked Type of Student: Domestic female GRE Scores (old version): Q: 700--61%, revised down from 69% prior to 2011 V: 770--99% W: 4.5--78% B: Will take later this month. Research Experience: (1) Master's thesis, which was of a bioinformatics/computational bio nature (2) One single-author paper published, which was also presented at a conference (3) A one-semester, unpaid internship at a biotech company. Worked on one of the kits sold by the company. Awards/Honors/Recognitions: (1) Won a graduate student paper contest (scope: university department) (2) Received three merit-based tuition scholarships at my undergrad alma mater, where I graduated summa cum laude. (3) Was a National Merit Finalist Pertinent Activities or Jobs: (1) TA for three semesters. This involved only a little teaching, a lot of grading, and some educational content creation. (2) Fairly extensive non-higher-education teaching experience (for-profit workshops and classes). Any Miscellaneous Accomplishments that Might Help: Published author of non-academic books. Special Bonus Points: Have had the opportunity to connect personally with a couple of POIs at universities near me. Any Other Info That Shows Up On Your App and Might Matter: My bachelor's was in an unrelated field, earned in 1994. Around 1999 I knew I wanted to go into biological research. As it was feasible, from the early 2000s to 2010, I took the prereqs necessary to do a master's in bio (fitting them in around work and starting a family), and from 2010-2013 did my two master's degrees. This could be seen as a positive (I'm a mature student who knows what I want based on life experience as well as academic work and who has a proven track record of two master's in three years), or it could be a negative that my bachelor's isn't in bio. I think it will depend on the individual members of the adcomms. Applying to Where: University of Washington Genome Sciences Berkeley Integrative Biology UC Santa Cruz Biomedical Engineering/Bioinformatics Stanford Biology University of Massachusetts Boston MCOB Boston University Biology Harvard OEB Brandeis Biology Northeastern Biology Tufts Sackler Genetics

I'm taking the biology subject exam on Oct. 19. The ETS website says the scores will be available online on Nov. 18, but the scores won't be sent until Nov. 29. I'm applying to several programs with a Dec. 1 deadline. None of them absolutely require the subject exam, but several of them say it's strongly recommended. I called ETS to ask about the process and was told that if schools accept scores electronically, they'll be received 3-5 business days after being sent on Nov. 29. If the schools require the scores by snail mail, they'll receive them 5-7 business days after Nov. 29. To the best of my knowledge, scores received even one day after the deadline won't be considered. Does anyone have experience with sending an October subject exam to programs with a Dec. 1 deadline? Did it get there on time?

It depends on the university. Some review as applications are completed, in which case it's definitely to your advantage to apply early. More often than not, they don't look at anything until the deadline. There are still some advantages to applying early: 1. Plenty of notice for letter writers. 2. Plenty of time for you to notice if something's missing. If you order a transcript today, and then you check your online application status on Nov. 1 and the transcript still hasn't been received, you can send it again with lots of time for it to be received by even the earliest (Dec. 1) deadlines. 3. Peace of mind. Getting it done soon after applications open, instead of waiting until the last minute, means your part in the process will be done until further notice, and you can sit back and relax for the rest of the fall. This one is really up to personal preference. Personally, I don't want to keep feeling the unfinished applications hanging over my head, so I've been doing them all as early as possible.

stamp out

Juilletmercredi did a fantastic job of describing how to discuss challenges (or any life experience, really) in a way that is professionally relevant. I also agree with CP3. Any life experiences, whether they were challenges that motivated you to rise above or something positive that inspired you, should be mentioned very briefly in the SOP if at all. In your specific case, it would make sense to include the info in any essay that asks for your personal history, but not in a brief SOP in which you're simply being asked to describe your research interests and experience.

I'm no expert because I'm in the application process myself, but it seems to me it might make sense to tell the adcomms essentially what you just told the forum. There might be a better chance they'll overlook the low UG GPA if they know it was due to your dislike for your major at the time, and that you have already and will continue to excel in philosophy. I'm in an obliquely related situation, in that I did my undergrad in a different field from my master's. I'm a little worried the lack of a bachelor's in my graduate field may hurt my chances. It was a long time ago, so I hope it will be obvious that it simply took me a while to find my true professional passion. I'm not mentioning it unless an application explicitly asks the applicant to explain "anything unusual" about their academic history. But in your case, my impression is that it would be a good idea to explain. Good luck!

I agree with TakeruK that this is a personal decision only you can make, but I also agree with Lisa: if I were in your shoes, I would take the PhD. One point is that it's remarkably easy to adjust your standard of living when you're doing something you love. (This wouldn't apply if you were choosing between a decent-paying job and something that would put you below the poverty level, but that's not the case here.) Another is that you're always going to wonder what would have happened if you'd chosen the PhD. A very likely scenario, if you choose the job, is that in five years you'll find yourself reapplying to PhD programs but having a hard time getting admitted because adcomms will see you already started one and then dropped out. Jobs come and go. Education is with you for life.

What I've done is to create sections that go like this: Education Professional Experience in Research and Teaching (this includes everything related to academia) Publications Honors and Awards Prior Professional Experience (This includes unrelated experience, so they can see what I was doing between undergrad and my master's, even if it isn't directly relevant to the skills needed to be a successful Ph.D. student.) I managed to format the CV so that everything except "Prior Professional Experience"--that is, everything they'll really care about--is on the first page. Then the prior stuff is on the second page.