Stat Assistant Professor

Just as an FYI, the vast majority of applied math program -- apart from the very top tier (Berkeley, Princeton, etc.) -- will care less about the subject score. I've seen people getting into highly reputable applied math programs like UT Austin and UWashington with 50-60th percentile scores on the subject test. However, a high subject GRE score certainly might help, but I doubt it will be weighed as heavily as other factors like letters of recommendation, performance in upper division math/statistics, etc. I DO think that good grades in classes like abstract algebra, number theory, topology, etc. WOULD help for applied math programs (and that low grades in those classes will hurt an application -- especially low grade in real analysis), since there are still a lot of proofs one has to do in applied math courses. If you focus on applied analysis, PDEs, or probability, then you will be doing a lot of proofs in your research too. if you do numerical analysis, computational fluid dynamics, or math biology or something like that, you might encounter fewer proofs, but the qualfying exams and classes you'll take as a first and second-year grad student in applied math WILL contain a lot of proofs, so you need to show you can do the proof-based work too. Occasionally, students in other disciplines like computer science, physics and engineering get into Applied Math PhD programs too (however, typically these students were double majors with math, had minors in math, and/or did significant research in an area that overlaps with applied math such as computational fluid dynamics, machine learning and computer vision, etc.). If you don't have research experience or something like that to compensate for lack of upper division math classes, then you really do need to have top-notch grades in upper division and graduate math courses for applied math programs. Luckily there are a lot of MS programs in Applied Math and a good number of them are also funded, so folks who need to compensate for low grades in upper division math should consider MS programs before applying to PhD programs.

I logged onto the Minnesota applyyourself site and see that the status was changed to "final review." So I expect those of us who have not heard from MN yet will most likely receive rejection or waitlist e-mails this week. To anyone who is interested, I will decline Minnesota if I am waitlisted, since Florida is a comparable program and cost of living is higher in Minneapolis.

Congrats clurp and HappyGem! I am still waiting to hear from UNC-Chapel Hill, and I did not apply to PSU but I know their program is excellent.

I just e-mailed the Graduate Coordinator, and they pretty much forwarded it to someone else immediately upon receipt to have my application withdrawn.

I was accepted to University of Florida! My first acceptance. Anyone else apply to or hear from UF? If anyone cares, the stipend is $18k a year and I was offered a TAship and free health insurance. I will be withdrawing from consideration my applications to UMass-Amherst and Oregon State. Someone here mentioned that the Minnesota financial support is low? Could you please let me know how much it is? If it's too low, I will withdraw from Minnesota as well (feel free to message me personally if you're worried about "outing" yourself) Thanks.

Rejection from Harvard finally arrived in the mail. Congrats to those who got it!

Agreed with peachypie, I think the application form itself should be submitted by the deadline and the application fee paid and all that, but the supporting documents can arrive a little bit late without any adverse effect to your application. Best of luck.

I think programs are pretty flexible, and some materials arriving late will not hurt your application. I submitted my Florida application on 2/1 (the official deadline), but my GRE score report did not arrive until late last week (and photocopies of my official transcript didn't arrive in the mail to the dept until early last week either). And my letters of recommendation were not all submitted until last Thursday (2/6) either. Nevertheless, I still received a personalized e-mail from a professor yesterday indicating positive response to my application from the graduate admissions committee and asking if I was still interested in potentially joining their program. (I replied "yes, I would definitely consider it" and he said that I would hear back from him again very soon).

In case anyone is still freaking out: University of Iowa's PhD application deadline is Feb. 15, so there is still time to apply. I was considering this until I received personalized e-mails from professors at Florida and Rice U., so I am going to pass now. But just throwing this out there.

Oh wow, I had no idea Pittsburgh was that cheap! My mistake. I think I was probably confusing Philadelphia with Pittsburgh... haha. Ithaca is pretty nice area though, if you enjoy open air, gorges, waterfalls, and state parks. Not sure about Pittsburgh.

awesome. I didn't apply to Cornell, but I def think it's a good idea to attend visit day at both CU and CMU before ruling out Cornell... especially since cost of living in Ithaca will be cheaper than cost of living in Pittsburgh and CU is giving you a lot of money.

I'd visit both depts. Are there enough stat faculty at Cornell who do machine learning that can supervise a thesis? Could you get opportunities to do machine learning research too? Cornell's CS department is world-class so it's possible you could get similar opportunities there as at CMU. I'd want to visit Cornell to see if there are enough opportunities to do interdisciplinary stats/ML research, and then compare that to CMU.

Good point, lidon. Other things matter too, like who your adviser is, how well-connected they are, and what your area of research ends up being. I've heard that right now, social network analysis and random graphs are "hot" areas, so departments making hiring decisions may opt to go with someone who does probabilistic graph structures even if their pedigree is a "lower ranked" school. Pedigree does matter, but it is not the only thing. For me personally, I care most about job placement, funding, and fit (I'm more of an applied stats person with interests in machine learning, computation, and algorithms).

Since some people are on waitlist or haven't heard back... in addition to acceptances/rejections, could people please also post what schools they're *definitely* withdrawing applications from and/or declining offers from? This would likely be helpful to some people who can then contact those departments. Thanks y'all! Appreciate it.

Sure. Take these with a grain of salt though. From what I've heard, there is considerable disagreement amongst current statistics scholars over these rankings, below the top tier ones I mentioned (i.e. below Chicago for stats and below Washington for biostats, there'll be some disagreement on USNWR). And it also depends on sub-area too -- some schools are much stronger in one particular sub-area than others (e.g. Duke is probably better than some of the tier 1 for Bayesian statistics specifcially, CMU is better than everyone else for statistical machine learning, etc.) USNWR does not segregate statistics and biostatistics, so you'll have to click on the individual university to make separate lists for stats from biostats. USNWR: http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-science-schools/statistics-rankings NRC: http://chronicle.com/article/nrc-statistics/124660/ Ultimately, where you want to go should factor in: fit (e.g. if you REALLY want to do machine learning and got into CMU, that's probably the best place for it... or if you are particularly interested in social science statistics, UW is a better choice over Berkeley), funding, typical time to completion, and job placement of recent graduates.

IMHO: I think OSU and Minnesota are pretty comparable programs for stats (Minnesota a lot more reputable for biostats). I think academic and industry placement are both decent, so if I were deciding between these two programs, it'd come down to funding and "fit" for me. The US News and World Report rankings are rather weird -- it seems like some schools like Yale, Columbia, and Florida are ranked lower than they should be on this list, while others are ranked higher than they should be (e.g. I don't think Duke is better than NCState, UMich, or UWisc, seeing as these latter programs have much broader focus than just Bayesian stats). The top tiers on the USNWR and the NRC rankings are more-or-less accurate. But below UChicago (for stats) and UW (for biostats) on the USNWR, the rankings are a bit dicey, and if I were admitted to any schools below the top tier, I'd visit the departments and then make decisions based on financial support, fit, and academic/industry placements. If the job placements are really strong, then it would come down to money and "feel" I get from visiting. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

muzili, I have not received a formal acceptance offer yet, but my correspondences with the dept have been very positive. My interview was last Thursday -- they said I should know within a week or two (so I anticipate I will know for sure between tomorrow and next Friday).

statisticsfall2014, No word from UCLA yet for me. I don't think they have sent out anything. It seems like Columbia, UCSB, and UCLA do not notify until late Feb. and early Mar. Judging from past results, NC State will do another round of acceptances and rejections in late Feb./early Mar., so you're likely still being considered. (I didn't apply to any of these besides UCLA, just what I infer)

Thanks aridneptune. Just to clarify, this is for pure Statistics, not Biostatistics, correct? Either way, the e-mail I received from UF today made my day, so if I'm in at UF or Rice, then I won't be too upset about being snubbed by UNC or Minnesota.

fwiw, I received a personal e-mail from a professor at University of Florida today asking if I'd potentially be interested in joining their department. This appears to be a positive sign, but I don't want to jinx it. Just thought people should know... So if you applied to U of F, there is a possibility that a professor might reach out to you personally to see how interested you are in them.

Congrats, aridneptune! Was the acceptance letter from the Graduate Chair? Was the e-mail generic or personal? Thanks.

muzili, I think Minnesota already sent out two rounds of acceptances, and they set out funding info to boot. So I doubt there will be more offers, except for offers from a waiting list if enough people decline. I might be wrong, but i'm not confident either. Hopefully we're on a waiitng list at least. :-)

Congrats Berkeley admits!

"To some extent, that's the case. But saying that is like saying that in order to get into Harvard's PhD program, one has to go to get their B.S. from Yale." Huh? I was just saving that the most top tier universities will care the most about pedigree when it comes to hiring TT faculty. Industry and lower-tier schools will most likely care less. Although based on what faculty and current students have said on this forum, PhD programs do care a lot about where you got your undergrad degree too (so students from less-known, regional universities will most likely be at a disadvantage compared to those from more well-known, elite institutions, all other things like GPA, GRE, etc. being equal).

I think "prestige" matters most if you're interested in getting TT positions at RU/VH schools (very high research universities). If you're fine with ending up as a prof at a mid-tier or less well-known, regional university or college, going to one of the lower ranked PhD programs won't really hurt you. I got my MS at a top 70 math program that was by no means top tier but I still loved it, and there were PhD graduates who got TT jobs at less well-known colleges, like Merrimack College and Endicott College. It is unlikely they would have gotten TT jobs at Harvard or MIT, but they did end up somewhere. Plus, it seems as though industry cares much less about the distinction between different tiered schools or R1 vs. R2 universities (apart from possibly places like Google that would probably prefer a PhD statistician from Berkeley or Stanford, for instance). In any event, it's good to look at alumni placements to see how well alumni are doing. If the post-graduation placement is good for academia and industry, then I wouldn't worry as much. So in short, program prestige is nice and all, but it isn't the *most* important thing unless you're really gunning for a TT professorship at an R1 or just below R1 school.