Vene

I'd contact the departments you want to enter and ask them what they want you to do.

Something being your opinion doesn't mean it can't also be wrong.

I agree completely with this. I have worked as a researcher in industry and I am taking a large pay cut for graduate school. I'm hoping that it will work out for me as an investment, but at the same time I'm going to be doing work for somebody else. Even if it is "my" project, the work will contribute to scientific knowledge just as much as if I was a technician working under a PI's grant. The difference is that university will put more effort into training me. But, to compare to an industrial position, they do the exact same thing to talented workers. I worked with a technician who had an AS and the company was paying for her tuition to complete a BS while still paying her her full salary. I'm not seeing a huge difference between this and a university waiving tuition for a PhD student while paying them for their work as an RA except that the pay in industry will actually be higher.

Yes, but I am willing to say it doesn't have to be the duty of a university, but from society as a whole as the society benefits from having an educated populace. A society also has an interest in nurturing the talents its citizens have regardless of whether or not they were born to the right family. A brilliant child in a poor village in West Virginia deserves the same chances as a brilliant child growing up in a wealthy suburb of DC.

I understand this viewpoint, but I think this creates a serious problem for academia where it's not the best and brightest who enter a PhD program, but instead people are going to be constrained by financial limitations. There are a lot of people who are already severely strained during their undergrad years, I see no reason to add to that suffering, especially since the top schools are typically in high cost of living areas. Supposedly academia wants to encourage diversity, well, to do so they have to acknowledge that real financial barriers exist which prevent various demographics from seriously pursuing an advanced degree.

I don't think a 4.5 AW score will harm you and I don't think an increase to it will help you.

Negative, I am a meat popsicle.

Do the programs actually require you to take the subject GRE? If you graduated at the top of your class I see no other good reason to bother with it. Maybe spend a little more time familiarizing yourself with the quantitative section just in case you apply to a program where your current scores don't meet some cutoff or other.

I'd imagine it's the button for academic programs, you're applying for a MS or PhD, right?

I would say all projects need to be mentioned so it's known that you have the experience, at least if they've been under different people. If you've spent the last three years doing research I don't know that it's vital to include the two weeks you spent helping a postdoc optimize their assay. But, you don't necessarily have to go into detail. You could say something like 'I worked on a project where I investigated x with Professor Y. I also worked with Professor Q on project p. Afterwards, I assisted Professor W with her work on z. Some highlights from my research include [text]. From my experiences I decided I would like to focus on such-and-such subject because reasons.'

I'll add my opinion, but it's nothing more than an opinion from some guy on the internet. 1) Name can help, but isn't everything. I highly doubt that training and prestige from NYU is worth 5 times that of Queen's College. If they can provide you assistance of some kind that'll change things, but I wouldn't personally go with them 2) In my experience employers don't care about the exact program you're in. If your program has a concentration or focus it's also completely legitimate to list that on your resume. 3) I do not know which of these is the most viable option. I think some of it has to do with what skills you learn and how you can spin them during an interview. 4) If you get the chance to learn anything about regulatory affairs do it. It is a constant concern in industry and my impression is that it is something students rarely learn in academia. 5) This depends on if I want a geneticist, a biochemist, or a neuroscientist and on how strictly I want somebody to do that role. It also depends on the rest of the job application submitted. All of those universities have good reputations.

Congratulations on everything and I'm sorry that my home country was being so stupid with DOMA. Thankfully, we're slowly starting to see reason.

Your GPA is decent, not great, but high enough to get you past most cutoffs (don't listen to Fun_Cookie). You have good research experience, which will help a lot especially if you get strong LORs. I don't think anybody cares that you didn't stick with a single lab in undergrad, it's the best time to explore different fields to see what it is you want to do. You are looking at prestigious schools, which does mean you're going to face a bit of an uphill battle. If I was in your shoes, I'd hedge my bets and try for a few of the schools on your dream list as well as funded MS programs at lower tier universities because a good record during a MS does help. I would definitely talk to professors you did research under at the Ivy universities, assuming you are interested in the program and what they do.

Making a lot of assumptions there. Have you ever actually had a professional level job? It's not uncommon for people to leave to get more education or to try and get a higher degree while working. And when you can maintain a good relationship wtih your non-academic supervisor that means you know who to call when you graduate from your MS or PhD program and you're looking for work. Springing it on them at the last minute (or when you put in 2 week notice) makes it a lot less likely for you to retain that contact than if you used your employer as a LOR.

As long as you're comfortable with burning bridges. Sometimes it can be the best career move, other times it can damn you. Some of it depends on how you handle the situation with the people involved and you're going to have to use your best judgement. Personally, I can't fault you for doing such a thing, but I'm nobody of importance.

Yes to sleep. I made it a rule to get a good night's sleep during undergrad and to always get a full night's before an exam. I don't believe in all-nighters, I think they do more harm than good.

You could contact the programs to see about getting the fee waived if you're low income.

Have you actually talked to anybody in the university about what happened? I imagine you have an advisor assigned to you and that would be a good place to start. It's going to depend on the school itself for how such a thing is handled and if anything could be done about the grade.

I sincerely doubt work experience will be enough to get a grad degree in software engineering. You're going to need the coursework one would get from a BS in computer science or related fields. Your biology degree doesn't overlap and switching fields makes your academic record all the more important because you're going to have to learn 4 years worth of engineering before you can hit graduate level work. If you really want this I sincerely believe you will have to go back to undergrad.

A 2.2 GPA and mediocre GRE scores do not bode well for you, unfortunately. Also, if you want to start a company why not just start a company?

Absolutely everything said here is spot on. Some graduate schools will care deeply about GPA, others will just want you to surpass a minimum expectation and there is no correlation between this attitude and which programs are the best. Graduate schools look at the whole package, a single grade below your standard isn't going to reflect poorly upon you at all.

I wouldn't say never, I got an excellent LOR from a supervisor and it came up during the interviews. It was also a lot easier to get letters submitted on time from my industry LOR writers than from my academic LOR writers. Some people are dicks and people will be dicks both in academia as well as in industry.

I didn't even think about rescinding a LOR. Can that even be done at this point where you have the acceptance in hand? I could understand a school saying no if you actively lied, but I don't know if you can be held responsible at this point for the actions of a LOR writer. Edit: And going above the heads of people like that is a really, really good way to piss them off, as he has clearly demonstrated. I hope everything works out well in the end, I've had to work for bad bosses and it's draining.

A lot of my information is second hand from conversing with those who have been as I'm starting this fall. But, I think Eigen's 50 hours between studies and research sounds reasonable enough. I've heard horror stories of people putting in 80 hour weeks and I want absolutely nothing to do with those labs. Ultimately, I think it depends upon the student's disposition as well as the PI's expectations.

I've read some work on hours and productivity and there is a reason why 40 hours became the norm. When people are worked for more than 40/week they make mistakes and actually reduce overall output. For creative workers diminishing returns come even quicker. I can't say what the ideal number of hours is for graduate school, but if somebody is spending all night and all weekend in a lab I sincerely wonder if they're doing good research. Here's something interesting out of Stanford about programmers and "crunch time".