sqxz

I think the real question is: do you really just need to do slightly better? If you got E/E, E/E, VG/E and an honorable mention, then fine. Maybe a slight improvement would be all you need, but it doesn't sound like this is the case for you. Going from your first to your second year, you should ideally have a ton more stuff to cram into you personal statement. With only ~3 months of grad school under my belt, my first year personal statement necessarily focused heavily on my undergraduate research experiences and had to be dramatically retooled to incorporate all the stuff I had done in the past 12 months. And I had a 12 month better understanding of my research project as well as preliminary results that had to be reflected in my research statement. Additionally, you should be scrutinizing your reviewers' comments for any hint of what they saw as weaknesses and make sure to address these matters in an obvious way in your essays to ensure that your new reviewers do not have any excuse to give you the same feedback. To your second main question, reviewers will not have access to last year's application. Even if they did, they would not have the time to go through it and try to look for the differences between your applications.

A lot of people, myself included, have done this in their proposals. It shouldn't be a problem.

I think you should definitely have separate IM and BI headings in both statements for two reasons. First, as was pointed out previously, the solicitation "recommends" it. Second, I think some reviewers use these headings to determine where they should pay extra close attention. At least one of my reviewers just regurgitated (almost verbatim) what I had written in my IM/BI sections in his/her reviews. I would recommend using these sections to convey the most important pieces of information that you can about you/your proposal that fulfills the IM/BI criteria. For the research statement in particular, I was more general in the Introduction and very specific in the IM section. After all, how can you be specific about IM in the Introduction when the reviewer doesn't yet know what you're proposing to do?

Hey, everyone. Welcome to the 2017 application cycle! Since the new school year has begun (at least for me), I'm expecting things to pick up here pretty quickly. As in years past, I will be monitoring posts to this topic to see if there is any advice/questions I can provide/answer. I'm now a third-year Biophysics and Quantitative Biology PhD student at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and I would describe my specific field as computational molecular biophysics. A copy of my stats (i.e., the form that current applicants have been posting), as they stood when I applied can be found on my profile, along with a list of the programs to which I applied and my results. I have also included my results list at the bottom of this post. There are many things I wish I had known when I was in your shoes, but I'm going to limit myself to two pieces of unsolicited advice, lest this post go on forever. 1. Look at individual professors' lab pages to decide how well your research interests fit with a program's. When I applied, I initially relied on program websites to determine what kind of research was being done. This was a mistake. Such information on program websites quickly becomes out-of-date when professors move to/from a university, and such information can also represent a program director's hopes rather than present realities. There is also a lot of room for misinterpretation when using the information on program websites. For example, several programs I looked at had titles like "Biophysics and Computational Biology" and stated they were doing research to figure out the mechanisms of proteins. That means they must be doing computational molecular biophysics, right? Wrong! Turns out, that stated research goal is only experimental, and the computational biology done in the program is all systems biology. When I applied, I didn't start looking at professors' lab pages until after I had written my SOP template and was trying to fill in the details for each program. Because of this, I had to scramble and swap out three of the programs to which I had originally been planning to apply...in October. (Coincidentally, the three programs I swapped in ended up being the three into which I was accepted, so these decisions really do matter.) Don't be like me. If you have not already done so, start looking at lab pages now! This is a lot of work, so plan accordingly. 2. You are (most likely) currently eligible and should apply for graduate fellowships. No one told me this until I was already interviewing, and it was far too late to apply at that point. There are many field-specific fellowships that you should all look into (this list is as close to comprehensive as any: <https://www.grad.illinois.edu/fellowship/>), but there are four general national US fellowships that I want to mention in particular (below). I will immediately note that you must be a US citizen, a US national, or a permanent resident to have a chance of being eligible for these fellowships, but there are many listed on the website above where this is not the case. In the past, three of these fellowships were open to applying graduate students (e.g., undergraduate seniors) and first- and second-year graduate students. In recent years, however, two of them have changed their eligibility such that you are eligible to apply once as an applying graduate student and once as a practicing graduate student. This past spring, I was fortunate enough to receive one of these fellowships (NSF GRFP), but this was only possible because I had already applied once before and was able to utilize the feedback/experience I received in that process. It is very much in your best interest to apply now if you are able! Applying to these fellowships requires a lot of work on your part, but that workload is reduced because you are also applying to graduate school. You already have the references, materials, and the information you need on-hand, and you have already thought a lot about what motivates you as a scientist and the kind of research you want to do. Unlike most program applications, you will have to write a short research proposal for these fellowship applications, which will help you immensely when you go to your interviews. You should apply even if the fellowship stipend is smaller than what you would receive from your target programs. Many such programs will pay you the difference and even an added bonus because these fellowships are such a big deal in terms of prestige, both for you individually and for your university/program/lab. These websites (<http://www.pgbovine.net/fellowship-tips.htm> and <http://www.alexhunterlang.com/nsf-fellowship>) are good starting points for information and advice on applying to the four fellowships to which I have alluded. You can also find a ton of information on "The Bank" forum <http://forum.thegradcafe.com/forum/17-the-bank/> for these and many other fellowships. While there are a few things I want to highlight about each fellowship below, you should definitely visit the fellowship websites for definitive information on eligibility, award, deadlines, etc. I will also note that I have only included the stipend in the information below, but there are other elements to each of these fellowships awards, both financial and opportunity-based. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (NSF GRFP) <https://www.nsfgrfp.org/> - Stipend: $34,000, 3 years - Deadline: 10/24/2016-10/28/2016 (depending on your specific field) - Open nationally to most STEM PhD and Master's graduate students. You are allowed to apply once as an applying graduate student and once either as a first-year graduate student or as a second-year graduate student. This is new, and you are the first group of students to whom this eligibility requirement applies. Eligibility is more complicated than this (see their website), but I will highlight that you are most likely ineligible if (1) you plan to pursue applied biomedical research or are applying to MD/PhD programs or (2) you already have or will be receiving a Master's degree and are applying to PhD programs. National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate Fellowship (NDSEG Fellowship) <https://ndseg.asee.org/> - Stipend: $34,000, 3 years - Deadline: mid December - Open nationally to PhD graduate students in many STEM fields (including "biosciences"), but your research must tie into one of the Department of Defense's research goals in national defense. You are allowed to apply as an applying graduate student, a first-year graduate student, and a second-year graduate student. Department of Energy Computational Science Graduate Research Fellowship (DOE CSGF) <https://www.krellinst.org/csgf/> - Stipend: $36,000, 4 years - Deadline: late January - Open nationally to PhD graduate students in many STEM fields (including "life sciences") whose research heavily utilizes computation. You are allowed to apply as an applying graduate student and a first-year graduate student. Hertz Foundation Graduate Fellowship <http://hertzfoundation.org/dx/fellowships/fellowshipaward.aspx> - Stipend: $32,000, 5 years (though there are alternative options) - Deadline: 10/28/2016 - Open nationally to all PhD graduate students in "the applied physical, biological and engineering sciences or mathematics" whose research will "generate solutions to problems of comparatively near-term, widespread human interest." You are encouraged to apply as an applying graduate student and a first-year graduate student. (You may continue to apply after your first year, but only 3 such people have won in the past 10 years). If you have questions about any of the programs or fellowships to which I applied (especially my current ones), my field, graduate school in general, or anything you think I may know about, please feel free to get in touch with me. Since the GradCafe no longer allows me to get email notifications when I receive a new message (*grumble, grumble*), posting your questions to this thread (or just quoting this post saying that you've messaged me) will ensure the most timely response from me, as I am able to get email notifications for each new post to this thread. Good luck with this process, everyone! I wish you all serenity, patience, and good fortune over the next several months. Graduate School Application Results: 2014 Application Season: Applied (8/8) - Interview/Visit Offered/Attended (7/8) - Rejected (5/8) - Accepted (3/8) - Admitted (1/8) Carnegie Mellon University-University of Pittsburgh - Computational Biology (1/22/2014, email; 2/20/2014-2/22/2014) (2/28/2014, unofficial email; 3/18/2014, official email) Johns Hopkins University - Molecular Biophysics (4/11/2014, email) Princeton University - Quantitative and Computational Biology (12/30/2013, email; 2/6/2014-2/8/2014) (3/11/2014, email) Rutgers University - Computational Biology and Molecular Biophysics (2/18/2014, email; 3/26/2014-3/27/2014) (2/18/2014, email) University of California, San Francisco - Biophysics (1/13/2014, email; 2/13/2014-2/15/2014) (3/3/2014, website) University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign - Biophysics and Computational Biology (1/10/2014, email; 3/20/2014-3/22/2014) (1/10/2014, email) (4/10/2014, website) University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center - Molecular Biophysics (1/2/2014, email; 1/9/2014-1/11/2014) (1/13/2014, email) Washington University in St. Louis - Computational and Molecular Biophysics (12/19, phone, email; 1/30/2014-2/1/2014) (3/12/2014, email) Fellowship Application Results: 2015, 2016 Application Seasons: Applied (4/4, 2/2) - Rejected (3/4, 1/2) - Honorable Mention (1/4, 0/2) - Awarded (0/4, 1/2) - Accepted (0/4, 1/2) DoD National Defense Science and Engineering Fellowship (4/1/2015, email) (4/1/2016, email) DOE Computational Science Graduate Fellowship (4/15/2015, email) Hertz Fellowship (11/12/2014, email) NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program (3/31/2015, email) (3/29/2016, email) (4/4/2016, website)

To answer your question about your research experience, I think you're pretty well set. Adcoms like to see variety and depth in research experiences, and you have both. The long-term research experience should help you out in that you should (hopefully) get a better LOR from this experience than you would from a short-term experience. To answer your question about your minor GPA, my first inclination was to say no, but actually I think it depends on a couple factors. In my experience, the higher the GPA, the less weight adcoms place on it. (I.e., if your GPA is good, then you're set, and the adcom moves on. If not, your application gets treated with higher scrutiny/"suspicion.") Most adcom members have neither the time nor the interest to go digging through your transcript to find the reason for your GPA. Accordingly, if the application does not ask you to list your minor GPA anywhere and it is not listed prominently on your transcript, then I think you're fine. Otherwise, some may see this as a yellow flag, especially for programs on the physical/computational/mathematical side of the biophysics spectrum rather than the biological/biochemical side. Are you looking to be a computationalist/theoretician, an experimentalist, or both? This matters for your list of universities. The only other preliminary comment I have is that my program at UIUC is particularly friendly to international students.

@bsharpe269 The unsolicited advice I received from at least two people when I was choosing a lab was to place more weight on your working relationship with the PI/lab colleagues than your research fit. This advice was not particularly relevant to my situation, but it stuck with me since the people who offered it went so far out of their way to do so. Now having worked in my current lab for ~1.5 years, I could not agree with their advice more. Grad school is hard. Even in the best of circumstances, it is mentally, emotionally, and physically draining, and I think the stresses you face as a grad student will only be multiplied if not exponentiated if something like a poor working relationship with your PI/lab colleagues is making you unhappy for 5, 6, 7+ years of your life. This is a PhD we're talking about, so there should be no way you won't be challenged doing whatever research any lab does. Perhaps it won't be exactly what you first envisioned for yourself, but I think it's far easier to grow to love a new area of research than it is to try to force yourself to work in ways that accommodate a particular management style. The bottom line is, I would avoid Lab 1 and 2. Due to the ambition of PI 2, I think it is unlikely that you will be able to negotiate a new management style because of the point made by Ignis. (I.e., even if you bring your concerns to him and he is sympathetic, I don't think he'll be able to help himself because his future as faculty is tied up in your results.) If you can't make Lab 4 work out, I would advise reconsidering Lab 3 or looking at other labs with less than perfect research fits. Have you had a frank conversation with PI 3 about your concerns? Perhaps PI 3 is very open to incorporating new techniques into their lab and establishing new collaborations if it's something the grad student wants. You'll never know for sure unless you ask. I also like the idea of being co-advised, but I think it's fair to say that if only one PI pays you, they are going to have much more leverage to exert influence over you.

Thanks, I remember you too! I hope all is going well, and congrats on your HM! I felt the exact same way about my reviewers' comments last year, but I'm glad to hear your initial annoyance is already fading away.

I can hardly believe it, but I got it! I don't know how I'm going to sleep now... E/E, E/E, E/E

As of two years ago, applicants were admitted to either CMU or Pitt, not both. Based on their applications (faculty interests, research interests, etc.), all applicants were assigned to either CMU or Pitt. The interviews for the CMU applicants were separate from those of the Pitt applicants, and acceptances for the two schools were sent at different times. Two years ago, the CMU dates were weeks in advance of the Pitt dates. It looks like there are now three entries in the results for this year, two interview invites and one acceptance. I'd say the acceptance is probably for CMU, and the interview invites are probably for Pitt. If you don't hear something soon, I think it's probably safe to assume a rejection.

No, I don't think that's right. If your application is going to be returned without review, I'm pretty sure you find out almost immediately after that determination has been made. See this post from last year, for example:

I'm well! Things are so busy though...I can't wait for the end of October. By then, two publications and a fellowship applications should both be submitted, and Thanksgiving will be right around the corner!

Definitely list them on your CV! If you'll be submitting them soon and know where they'll be submitted, I'd just list them as "submitted." It's perfectly acceptable to include unpublished works on your CV (and elsewhere in applications) so long as you use the right terminology to indicate where you are in the publication process, and posters, presentations, and publications are definitely things admissions committees want to know about.

1. Personally, I did not contact anyone before going to my interviews, and this was partly because I didn't really know what to say. This might be a good question for the main 2016 Application Profiles forum to see what other candidates are doing, if anything, though I suspect it's already been addressed in some capacity somewhere else on this website if you search hard enough. I will say that I suspect that professors don't get that many emails saying "I really like your research," but I would certainly advise you to say more than that if you end up sending emails. Perhaps you could do something like this: In your first email, establish that you are applying to Program X this fall. You've visited their website and read some papers and are really interested in their research about A, B, C. You yourself have a background in Q, R, S, and you hope to do T, U, V in grad school. You had some questions about N, O, P (related to their research or the grad program) and were wondering if they were willing to talk to you about them.Even though this is a lot, I would recommend you be as brief as possible in your emails. In my experience, most professors don't have the patience to wade through a lengthy email. Also be sure your questions are insightful and genuine. You don't want to ask a question that can easily be found on the professor's/program's website. Now, many professors will likely ignore such emails because they think it's too early in the application process. Some may tell you to wait, or they may refer you to someone or somewhere else for answers to your questions. Others will be more than glad to talk to you, so you should be prepared to have a meaningful conversation about the professor's research/the grad program and the questions you asked. This will be your first impression, and it matters. Eventually, since it's so early, I suspect the conversation will die with the Professor saying something like "Good luck with your applications!" or "Let me know if you have any more questions." or something like that, which gives you the opportunity to send a second email later on. If you had a good conversation with a professor and are not offered an interview, let them know. If he or she likes you, he or she may be in a position to pull some strings. Even if that's not the case, the professor is soon going to be like a colleague. I often see professors who interviewed me at conferences, on papers, etc. You never know when you're going to run into this person again, and it pays to have a good relationship with him or her. If you do get an interview, you might send an email like this: Remind the professor that you've talked/sent an email before and have now been invited to interview. You are hoping you have the opportunity to meet with him or her during your visit, and you have some questions about F, G, H (either related to the interview process or things you want to talk about related to research).Those who didn't respond before are going to be much more willing to talk to you now. At this point, you are being interviewed, but professors know that you are also assessing them/their institution, and it is in their best interest to make a good impression. After your interview, be sure to send a "Thank you" email to those professors who you've previously been in contact with. This is an opportunity to continue to show genuine interest in the professor's research. Consider also sending emails to those professors who you haven't previously been in contact with. This is your opportunity to establish a relationship with this person like you've been doing with the other professors with whom you've been in contact. Some admission decisions will come so quickly that you will also be able to let the professors know how things went in your "Thank you" email. For other programs, this will be another email that you send. If you don't get in, treat it the same way as when you didn't get an interview. If you do get in, things suddenly become very interesting. If you haven't done so already, now is definitely the time to ask if professors expect to be accepting new students into their labs in the fall. Now is a good time to ask especially tough questions (while still being polite, of course) that you didn't feel comfortable asking during you interview. Discuss whatever you need to talk about to make an informed decision about where to attend grad school.At this point, some professors are going to actively try to recruit you into their labs/institutions. You've demonstrated that you're interested and that you're going to be a good student, and they like you. This may become tricky for you because you may have made several contacts at different institutions, but you can only go to one school. Most professors will understand that this is an extremely personal/important decision and will encourage you to choose the school that is ultimately the best fit for you. But you should make sure that you haven't made any promises by this point that you can't keep (e.g., "I'm going to join your lab, no matter what!"). Once you've made your decision, let everyone know, and treat it like you did when you didn't get an interview/didn't get in. This was the long answer to what I meant by "establishing a good relationship." 2. It was primarily research fit, but there were a lot of other factors, which I'd be happy to discuss in a PM. 3. Sure, go right ahead.

I can't comment on your chances with any of the other schools, but I think you have an excellent chance at UIUC based on the stats you've posted! We have had several students switch from the experimental side of things to the computational side of things or vice versa when transitioning from undergrad, so I do not think this should hurt you. In fact, one of the guys in my cohort came in with no computational/programming experience whatsoever. He is now happily settled in a purely computational lab, so I think having a minor in Computer Science will make you very competitive, even though you don't have any computational research experience. The important thing is that you have lots of other research experience. Just be sure to explain how your research interests changed and why in your SOP. (That goes for any program you apply to.) Also, unlike other universities, being an international student will not hurt your chances with our program, as the number of international students accepted is often greater than the number of domestic students accepted in any given year. For example, in my cohort, there were (originally) five domestic students and eight international students. As to your question, I think all of the programs I applied to (see my signature) are worth taking a look at, depending on what kind of computational biology research you're looking for. I do agree with @aberrant that you should definitely be looking now for PIs whose research is of interest to you. When I applied, I found out (almost too late) that my interpretation of the overall focus of a program (as stated on the program website) often did not comport 100% with the research pursued by the faculty associated with the program. Unlike @aberrant, I do not necessarily think it will be a useful exercise to ask PIs at this point if they think they will be accepting students more than a year from now. In my experience, most PIs will not have a clue. However, establishing a good relationship with PIs whose work interests you early on can only benefit you throughout the application process, so I would advise you not hesitate to email these PIs if you feel like doing so. Finally, I feel that I have to note that I disagree with @aberrant's analysis of what is important in computational biology. Computational biology, at least by what I believe to be the most standard definition, requires a lot of knowledge of statistics and computer science, not chemistry or physical chemistry. Chemical or physical chemical knowledge is much more important when doing research that involves simulations of biomolecular systems, which typically falls into the field of computational biophysics or computational (quantum) chemistry, depending on what you're doing.

Welcome to the application season, future class of 2016! I wish you serenity, patience, and good fortune throughout the application process. I am a soon-to-be second year PhD student in the Center for Biophysics and Quantitative Biology at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and I will be monitoring this topic throughout the year for posts with questions/concerns that I may be able to answer/address. If you have questions about any of the programs I applied to (especially my current program), my field, graduate school in general, or anything you think I may know about, please feel free to get in touch with me. A copy of my stats as they appeared in my applications can be found on my profile. Finally, in case I decide to change my signature at some point in the future, a copy of it can be found below: Attending: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign - Biophysics and Quantitative Biology (1/10, email; 3/20-3/22) (1/10, email) (4/10, website) Applied (8/8) - Interview/Visit Offered/Attended (7/8) - Rejected (5/8) - Accepted (3/8) - Admitted (1/8) Carnegie Mellon University-University of Pittsburgh - Computational Biology (1/22, email; 2/20-2/22) (2/28, unofficial email; 3/18, official email) Johns Hopkins University - Molecular Biophysics (4/11, email) Princeton University - Quantitative and Computational Biology (12/30, email; 2/6-2/8) (3/11, email) Rutgers University - Computational Biology and Molecular Biophysics (2/18, email; 3/26-3/27) (2/18, email) University of California, San Francisco - Biophysics (1/13, email; 2/13-2/15) (3/3, website) University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center - Molecular Biophysics (1/2, email; 1/9-1/11) (1/13, email) Washington University in St. Louis - Computational and Molecular Biophysics (12/19, phone, email; 1/30-2/1) (3/12, email)

Yep, it's been great! And you're right. We do three five-week rotations in the fall and join our thesis lab at the end of the semester, unless we need an extra rotation (or, very rarely, two), in which case joining our thesis lab is pushed back a few weeks. Good luck with your research!

The short answer is yes, we can! In my case, though, the poster for the first conference was only made because my advisor wanted me to go to that conference, and, as a rule, he does not allow his students to attend conferences unless they have something to present. So, that poster really just contains some preliminary results that are of limited interest. However, the talk for the second conference was on an interesting result, and that result is also the subject of my publication. I was able to obtain this result so quickly basically because I got lucky, and the first thing I tried to obtain the result worked. It's usually not that simple.

Woo! Final grades are finally in! I ended up with 4 A+'s, 3 A's, and 3 S's for the year. I haven't had a 4.0 GPA or the opportunity to earn A+'s since high school! Also, I passed my qualifying exam, presented a poster and gave a talk at two conferences, and I'm working on my first publication. It was definitely a great first year, I'd say!

I also have this in the form of my qualifying exam...next Friday. It's scary stuff!

Lea Michele was in New Year's Eve with Halle Berry Halle Berry was in Die Another Day with Judi Dench Judi Dench was in Quantum of Solace with Oona Chaplin Bea Arthur, Danny DeVito

Ellar Coltrane was in Boyhood with Patricia Arquette Patricia Arquette was in Holes with Shia LaBeouf Shia LaBeouf was in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull with Harrison Ford Harrison Ford was in Extraordinary Measures with Brendan Fraser Brendan Fraser was in Crash with Sandra Bullock Sandra Bullock was in Miss Congeniality with Michael Caine Michael Caine was in Interstellar with Matthew McConaughey Matthew McConaughey was in Dallas Buyers Club with Jennifer Garner Jennifer Garner was in Juno with J. K. Simmons J. K. Simmons was in Whiplash with Miles Teller Henry Winkler, Marion Cotillard

freshwater aquarium

Molly Ringwald was in The Breakfast Club with Emilio Estevez Emilio Estevez was in Bobby with Shia LaBeouf Shia LaBeouf was in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull with Harrison Ford Harrison Ford was in Extraordinary Measures with Brendan Fraser Brendan Fraser was in Crash with Sandra Bullock Sandra Bullock was in Gravity with George Clooney George Clooney was in Ocean's Thirteen with Al Pacino Ellar Coltrane, Miles Teller

Viola Davis was in Doubt with Meryl Streep Meryl Streep was in Mamma Mia! with Amanda Seyfried Amanda Seyfried was in Dear John with Channing Tatum Benjamin Bratt, Holliday Grainger

Carrie Fisher was in Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope with Harrison Ford Harrison Ford was in Extraordinary Measures with Brendan Fraser Brendan Fraser was in Crash with Sandra Bullock Sandra Bullock was in Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close with Tom Hanks Tom Hanks was in The Da Vinci Dode with Ian McKellen Ian McKellen was in X-Men with Anna Paquin Charlie Cox, Courteney Cox