Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Karoku_valentine

  • Rank
    Double Shot

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Application Season
    2015 Fall

Recent Profile Visitors

2,658 profile views
  1. I think others will give you a better advice. But in my personal opinion, your profile seems strong. The research experience is very very important. In my university, people with some good research experience in biostatistics were able to get fellowships. They also had master degrees in statistics/Applied Mathematics, and also took a lot of graduate math courses (analysis, measure theory and probability, etc. but I guess it becomes less relevant if you are going to biostatistics). One advice a professor told me was to see my research interests and apply to schools with active faculty working on those, and that would give you an advantage over candidates who just finished their undergraduate studies (since you already have a master, you probably have a better idea about the topics in which you want to do some research). The low verbal score in the GRE may be a red flag though.However many programs are used to admitting students with weaker communication skills in English, maybe you could address that in your letter of intent.
  2. This is the opinion of the people who have some knowledge of graduate programs in statistics. Even if Real Analysis is not "required", the school pre requisites are what they expect as a minimum. The strongest applicants will have graduate level real analysis and linear algebra plus some research (even if it is not super specialized), excellent grades and recommendation letters, and GRE higher scores. No one is saying you can't do or you won't be admitted. However, the admission committees will have this concern. certainly departments in Penn, Iowa St and Michigan will have it too. This concern is very valid considering, for example, how heavy in probability theory is the qualifier at Iowa State, or how hard classes can get. In my experience, if I consider into account all the people who are in the PhD of Stat and Biostatistics AND people who were admitted into the master program, only one person had not taken Real Analysis, but this student was admitted to Biostatistics and already had a MS in Biostatistics. In addition, at least one third of the entering class had already master degrees in biostatistics and statistics, I am also certain they all got A's in all or most of their undergraduate Analysis classes. In other words, you will be competing against people with: 1) Master degrees in statistics and some in mathematics, or just people in the honors program of undergraduate mathematics, 2) people with excellent or good grades in more advanced classes and excellent GRE scores, 3) people with excellent recommendation letters. Even the "weak applicants" are still excellent in most of the schools you mention above.
  3. In my Personal opinion, your profile lacks some of the basic mathematical training the committees are expecting. There are no higher level Math courses like Analysis or linear algebra (if these were graduate level that would be even better). Even if you took all of those econometric courses, the committees need to know you have enough mathematical training to be able to understand and produce your own proofs because the applied part will come easily later. Good things are that you have internship experiences and that you have some interest in applied statistics, and I think even being an American may give you a slight advantage in admissions. You need to prepare very well for the gre to get a score that above 165, but I don't know if this would compensate the lack of math. i would consider doing a master in one of those schools, get math and measure theory necessary for the PhD and apply for PhDs.
  4. In my opinion, you seem to have a good technical knowledge about mathematics. Though your GPA for your mathematics coursework seems a little low for some standards, and I think most committees look at the grades for linear algebra and real analysis classes. If you did well in those classes in grad school, you should have no problems getting admissions in mid-tier schools.
  5. Ah, well. I have been in two different American schools, and, unlike my home country, people with money seem to be very down to earth. Maybe I haven't met super rich people. Also, I have never heard most people are receiving money from their parents. I think some people may receive money from their parents. In my department everyone is funded, soooo
  6. I second this. Additionally, it's not that the requirements for IR are that high. You can buckle down and get things done. It may be harder because some people may not have taken many Math classes in high school (and none in college), and then when they need to take any number-related classes they get nervous and stressed. I met people with History degrees that ere able to fare well in their Econ classes. So don't give up. Also, consider what kind of technical skills you will get without having skills on data analysis, policy evaluation, economics, etc. Pretty much all the other graduates could do what you do, but you could not do everything the others can.
  7. That is a very low GPA. However, as they said, you can make it up with good working experience. Given that you have 11 years of working experience, I have the impression you will have a good chance at being admitted at MAS programs and that you will pay for them (I say this because most people I know are being funded, even in the MAS, but they have better GPAs). You should have excellent recommendation letters and GRE's, you should also study more English. I also have to say that the theoretical requirements for the MAS are lower than those for the PhD/MS, so it may not be very easy to make the switch. Good luck.
  8. I would suggest you taking a probability class as soon as possible. I think you would be admitted, as you studied physics and mentioned your Math is good. However, a course in real analysis would be better, even if you only do a MAS. My friends in the MAS were suffering with their theory classes. You should look for MAS in different schools, OHio State is an option, Iowa State, Columbia (cash cow though), and some universities in Texas also have good programs, NCSU.
  9. Well, my advice is the following: 1. What is the most profitable option? Some Americans are indebted, so for them, getting more education means getting more debt and they need to start working to pay their loans. In my case, I am not American so my education abroad was free and my degrees (1 master and I am working on a Master-PhD) did not cost me anything, so I am in no debt. I always wanted to work in statistics positions, but my degree was not in statistics. So switching from international relations (my original major in college, though I did have training that made my degree employable) and moving to statistics makes sense financially: I can apply for different jobs and for more jobs and now I have much more technical skills that most people do not have. 2. How do you know you prefer psychology over education? I don't recall reading you have worked. Many people change their minds after working and realize what they are good for some things and that they want to specialize in other things. I would say to get a job, pay some loans and see what you are good for. 3. Following your passion. You can only follow your passion when you know what is that. In reality, people have adaptive preferences: if they are good at something, then will start liking it more, and if they are bad at something they like, they may start disliking it more. You don't have to the best, but you have to assess how good you need to be in order to achieve what you want. For example, many people here want to become professors; yet in order to become a professor you need to have a very specific skillset and work hard and the financial reward is not even that great; so some people who are "worse" than them can actually achieve a lot more success in terms of income. In sum, what do you want, why do you want it, and how does that fit into your life plans and abilities?
  10. You just need to report your overall GPA with your transcript from imperial college. In your transcript it will appear that you took 4 classes and got 2:1 or whatever that number is.
  11. Yes. I read your other posts. I have a lot of friends in master programs, but not a lot in PhD's. Specifically, I have just one friend who did her major in Poli-Sci and IR; she worked at PWC doing some lobbying for 3 years (it sounds good, but in reality is just a regular job, nothing out of ordinary) and published a paper in an unknown but peer-reviewed journal (in Spanish). Overall, her profile seems good. However, I have no idea about her writing sample. She is attending OSU and is interested in subnational/province democracy. If I had more friends in PhD programs, I would tell you. Maybe you can search on Linkedin or in google the students at the universities you want to attend and see how your profile compares to theirs.
  12. I don't think the grade calculation matters. If you have 9.5 out of 10, just change it to the grading scale of 3'sh, which is 9.5*4/10=3.8, or just leave it as 9.5. I have no idea why Americans have such a weird scale when they could just do 1-100 or 1-10. Anyway, all of my friends were admitted in American universities and their transcripts were like mine: 1-10. Paragraph 3. They will ask you for writing samples or to write a paper in the application. So, you can show how good you are. This is what is important: "My CV includes two internships at the national parliament, a 9 months voluntary year of social service at a research institute for sustainability studies where I to a degree assisted in their research, extracurricular activities (member of the youth group of the council of foreign relations of my country and organiser of a project to support disadvantaged students before and during their undergraduate studies), practically two scholarship (one for my exchange year and the other for academic achievement [1/2000, long-term funding]), and a very high workload in all terms (finished all required courses after two instead of three years). I also speak 4 1/2 languages (German, English, French, Italian, Mandarin[1/2]), " I didn't carefully read your whole text, but I am not sure if you are mentioning PhD or Master. If it is a Master, you will probably be admitted in any of those programs. I have met people at SIPA in Columbia and at UCSD with bad CVs and they were still admitted. Even friends with Ok CV's were admitted to Harvard. If it is the PhD, then it will become much more complicated, and you will have to show you have very good analytical skills in the writing samples. Luck!
  13. I think it has to do with the belief hold by many people that students in social sciences tend to be bad at Math. While it is true at some level with some disciplines, some people (STEM and not STEM) assume that this mathematical barrier filters most students, and so, the "lazy" ones study majors like communications or other "easy" majors. With Poli-sci, I have the impression it is not seen as a major for lazy people, but it is not seen as a very useful major to get a job. Though it clearly changes from school to school, the core of Political Science is mostly about philosophy, political theory and analysis; if you took classes in data analysis, economics, policy and others, then Poli-Sci becomes a much more employable major. But the core of poli-sci seems to be much more theoretical, and the rest are just ramifications. You may agree or not with this last statement, but I think it reflects the view of many people.
  14. I would say any class in a real economics department would be better than most classes in GPS in terms of the rigor and technical skills. Also, Yale has better branding than UCSD outside of the USA. Since you are Indian, that's a big deal.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.