dzk

Way to misrepresent that e-mail. I'm retaking the GRE soon, but you still freaked me out a little because I have exactly a 1250 right now. It doesn't sound like that 1250 is a hard minimum at all, just what they expect out of most of their students. How did you do on the reading comprehension part of the GRE? (kidding, kidding!)

An important thing to keep in mind is that the importance of networking at this stage is extremely dependent on the program. Without exception, e-mail contact with prospective advisors does absolutely nothing for my chances at any of my programs. However, this is definitely not the case for other disciplines, where you quite literally need to have a professor in the program personally vouching for you for you to have a chance. I am contacting professors to make sure they're taking students and to introduce myself so I can wrangle a visit to their lab on interview weekend... ultimately, it doesn't particularly matter how much they like me at this stage, because they aren't going to be involved making the admissions decision. If you're in a case like mine, make sure you have something interesting to say

It doesn't. I mean, ideally you can improve upon your application because you know you're on the right track, but each application cycle is independent. I'm pretty sure they don't even look at whether you got an HM before. Also, I have had friends who had their IM score dropped specifically because of their GPA or GRE score, despite the quality of their essays. You absolutely want to address them if you have a problem there... the reviewers will certainly notice, so you want to stop any argument that your numbers reduce the quality of your application. It is very stupid.

Agreed.

If it's not a strong, mature relationship, it won't work. Every high school relationship any of my friends had that tried to go long-distance failed pretty quickly, once they realized there really were more personalities out there than what they saw in the people in the town we grew up in. Realistically, you need to have a good amount of experience and maturity to have a long-term relationship work out, because most people who try it are quite certain that the first or second serious relationship they've ever had is the right one. And sometimes it is, but sometimes they just have tunnel-vision and a fear of being alone. Of course, everyone is going to think that they are an exception. Obviously, as applicants to grad school, you've seen a bit more of the world and you know more about who you are, so a long-distance relationship is more likely to work... but that doesn't guarantee anything.

Also applying to neuroscience programs, and yes, I am modifying my statement for each school. It's not really that much work, since the reasons I picked the schools I did are the same for all of them.

Not usually, no. Neither Embark nor ApplyYourself systems should require this, at least.

It's what the right pertains to, but it's not what is necessarily implied by checking that little box. It is unfortunate, but it is how it is perceived by some, and were it not often perceived that way, we would not be having this discussion in the first place. If you do not waive your right, it could affect the content of the letter, and that is an ever-present concern. You can complain about the logic as much as you like, but while the little check box refers exclusively to FERPA, it can imply more. A quick search finds plenty of websites that suggest you waive your right for exactly the reasons that have been given. Basically, I see no positives in this except that you want to exercise your rights at every opportunity. The negatives are clear. [edit:] Also, you're absolutely right that you can still see the letter from the writer after having waived this right. Not quite sure what I was thinking with that.

When a student chooses not to waive their rights, the admissions committee does not know if the letter is concealed to the student or not. It is illogical to assume that the student will not have seen the letter before it is sent, because there is no longer any ethical concern about it. When the student waives their rights to see the letter, it is assumed they will not have seen the letter at any point in the process. Right now, you just have a big strawman going... all of the arguments against make the reasonable assumption that the letter is open. If there exists a situation where a student is asked if they want the letter to remain confidential until after their admission, then yes, your arguments are valid. However, I have only seen it stated as it is in the OP, which leaves the question of whether this letter is truly confidential until the student is unrolled completely open. No, you misinterpreted that. Those are not arguments against, those are possible thoughts that go through the head of the person who sees the student did not waive their rights. So #5 is the best-case scenario.

...well, I thought I had a great ending to my SoP, but now I'll just have to change it to this. It simply can't be beat.

All of my friends scored higher on the real thing than their practice. I, on the other hand, scored a whopping 250 points lower than my expected score (was aiming for 700V/800Q, got 610V/640Q). It was just a terrible day. Obviously, I'm retaking it... the drop in verbal would have been fine with me, since I do have some big variation there, but that quantitative drop is just totally unacceptable considering I was a freakin' math major before I switched to neuro.

Thanks! Honestly, part of the reason I have six schools is because I decided six was a good number Actually, I ended up with a really solid "Top 6" after going through my list a ton of times, and after some thought, decided I'd rather reapply than go to #7. How many schools are you applying to?

Oh, I agree. This wasn't really my point, though. If your career plans involve American academia, then it serves you well to learn in American academia where all else is equal. There are excellent reasons to study internationally, but "the US is boring" is a terrible one. You want the best education you can get. If you can do as well or better for your interests in a foreign university, then absolutely, go for it. But do not expect it to be viewed fondly if you just bolt off to go to an average program to study under average faculty if you could have done better at home. Your motives will rightly be called into question. [edit: WOW, that sounded OBNOXIOUS. Um. I guess I'll leave what I wrote there, but I need to make it a bit less snotty with some further explanation. Academic careers in biology are very competitive, and what is going to matter in the end is what you have published and who you know. You lose that second factor if you're working with someone who isn't known by US academics. Now, if you're going to an internationally respected program with internationally respected faculty (i.e. not a recent hire) then you'll have no problem there.]

I'm interested in developmental neuroscience, applying to PhD programs at Johns Hopkins, Penn, Stanford, UCSD, Michigan, and Harvard.

What are your career plans? It'll definitely raise some eyebrows from US academics to see a US citizen go to a foreign school (even Canadian) unless it's to work with someone who is internationally recognized in a big way.

Applied yesterday for Life Sciences - Neuroscience! And actually, I think last year almost all of the results came out after April 15th (their line is that they don't want to affect grad school admissions). There might've been a round before that but I don't know anyone who was in it. Either way, I think the best thing to do is to try to forget about this thing for the next five months (well... once my letters and transcript make it there. My transcript was mailed last week, why isn't it in the system?!? haha...)

In the sciences, it reflects poorly on you if you mention someone who is not taking students. Furthermore, it's not really an advantage to name a specific professor if their presence doesn't make a critical difference to whether you're going to that program. There are other factors that vary from program to program. If you have to resort to naming people to show that you're a good fit for the program, you have a weak SoP. That's not to say there isn't a place for naming names, but you need to be exceptionally careful about it. Not only could they misinterpret your point, but academics can be very petty. That said, classes mean very little in the sciences, you're focusing on your research, so it's clear that the culture is very different.

I am using "Dear admissions committee," but mine is still written basically as LordNorth says. I think whether you should have a greeting like that depends on your opening... it would be awkward to launch into a clever anecdote after opening your SoP like a letter, for example. I prefer a different style, so my opening paragraph is just me bashing them over the head with what I'm applying for, why I'm doing it, and how incredibly awesome I am in three sentences.

You're applying to the program/department, not to the school, so they really don't care about what you think about faculty outside the department. Focus your interests and show them that you're a good fit... they'll figure it out without you invoking names. In fact, you often need to be very careful even with the names you drop within the department. I don't know how anthropology works, but in the life sciences, I would not mention anyone by name you have not personally corresponded with.

There's really not that much to memorize... you may be doing it wrong if you're drilling formulas. Aside from geometry (area, volume, special triangles, etc.) what is there?

I would say no. Though I hope your family reasons will be disappearing before you finish your PhD, because you will almost certainly need to relocate to find a job.