Vene

I could have sworn I had to make the decision prior to seeing the unofficial scores (I also did the computer test). But, I can't say my brain was working that well at the end of the examination.

I think you're misinterpreting the email. That's talking about something called the Personal Potential Index. From https://www.ets.org/ppi Their website at https://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/scores/send/still says you can send 4 free scores immediately after taking the GRE (by immediately, I mean before you know what the scores are).

As long as you don't sign anything stating that you are obligated to pay for a deposit or anything like that it shouldn't be an issue to look at more than one. If they both approve you, just tell the one you don't want to live at that you changed your mind.

Definitely check the handbook. Also, at least in my PhD program we also have to maintain a 3.0 GPA, but individual classes can be lower. However, anything below a C is considered a failing grade. So, if your program is set up like ours, then you just need to shoot for a C and you should be okay. Also, even if you do fail the class, I doubt a single screw up will mean you will be kicked out. Again, this is based on where I attend, but here you're put on probation for a semester if your GPA drops too low and if it doesn't get back to where it needs to be then you're in trouble.

Interesting, I checked out Drexel's website and couldn't find anything saying any of their PhD programs are online. They do have a couple of online masters degrees, but that's different.

I wouldn't trust it.

I've from a region of the country where a 4 hour drive is reasonable if you decide you want to visit a city for a particular event or a day trip, so that clouds my perception a bit. I was more thinking of it for networking purposes, it's not someplace you'd decide to visit on a Friday night. Ann Arbor is about hour away from Detroit.

I definitely agree that intellectual stimulation is necessary, but a graduate degree isn't the only way to go for it. Personally, I'm married to a veteran who doesn't have a college degree due to family finances. However, while enlisted she received training in linguistics, which is a specialty that requires a great deal of intelligence to even be accepted into their program.

Based on what you have given, here are my thoughts. UW You're still on the waiting list and until you are off the list count this as a rejection. Michigan Job opportunities in Ann Arbor don't matter, people move all the time, especially when they have higher degrees. There are major metros like Chicago and Cleveland nearby, and there's no reason you can move further away as Michigan is recognized as a good university across the country. The concern I'd have is doing your undergrad and graduate degrees in the same place, but it's not the red flag it used to be (and Michigan is a very good school, so there is reason to stay there). Brown If you're not interested in the degree they offer, then don't go there. Cornell At first, I was thinking this was the one to pick, in order to move to a different institution, but if Michigan really has a significantly better career placement, go to Michigan instead. Also, like with Ann Arbor, don't worry about what Ithaca's opportunities are, worry about if you feel comfortable living there for 5 or 6 years. Ithaca also is relatively close to New York City, if that appeals to you.

I don't think your quantitative score is bad for a social science, to the contrary it's good. Remember, physicists, mathematicians, and engineers also take the GRE and are expected to be far better at math than you. I've seen people in the biology forum with a Q score the same as yours get interviews and acceptances, we're not super quantitative, but still need to have some skill in it.

I don't think it's the degree that's the problem in either case, I think it's an issue of funding. There are a lot more funding opportunities for domestic students and at public universities international students are certainly more expensive for the program.

I say ask them, especially professors you interviewed with or otherwise spoke with during the recruitment process. Some professors may not yet know if they will or will not be able to take you on (depending on if they've gotten feedback regarding recent grant applications or if current rotation students want to join their lab), but showing interest isn't a bad idea. I wouldn't say you should commit to any lab yet, but reaching out and seeing what is currently available is good. Maybe in May the professors will know if they will be taking on a graduate student as well as some better information about funding. But, July will creep up fast so I do think it's a good idea to be proactive. It may not be a bad idea to get others set up, but may not be essential yet. At least in my program I didn't have the second rotation selected until midway through the first rotation and I set up my third rotation in the middle of my second rotation. Other people got everything organized in the first couple weeks.

On this, as an anecdote, when I applied I had 4 people write me letters (two from academia, two from industry). In the cases where I sent two industrial references and one academic reference I never got to the interview stage. When I sent two academic references and one industrial reference I got interviews. The two industrial references were people I did research for and I only did research for one of the academics. So, I would really try to avoid any more than one non-academic letter writer.

Not in your field, but I'd take Michigan. U of M has an overall fantastic academic reputation (not that Wisconsin doesn't) and having the higher stipend means you won't have to spend as much time worrying about your finances. Not having teaching duties also means you will be able to spend more of your time on your courses and research.

Have you looked at where graduates of each program go when they leave the university?

Getting two interviews is a good sign, so I'd say probably send out more applications next year as it is somewhat of a numbers game. I don't really know how focused you were, but the program is going to want to know that there are faculty who are searching for a graduate student that you want to work with. So, let's say you want to work on how toxic compounds travel through the brain, but the two faculty members who do that have had bad luck with grants, you're not likely to get accepted. Whereas, if you are interested in ion channel regulation and they have six faculty who do that and are graduating two students from those labs you're probably desirable.

Rankings are always only as good as the criteria used to generate the ranking. It's really difficult to actually determine which is best without knowing everything that matters to you reaching your goals as well as being familiar with each program.

That's how my umbrella program does it. We also have concentrations so that can be put on a resume/CV as could the department if you so desire.

I'd probably go A, because I like the flexibility you described and I'm not focused on high impact because I don't see myself staying in academic science. If you want to stay in academia or if you really want that job at a fortune 500, go with B.

This varies a lot, and I mean a lot (state of residence, quality of plan, household income). What you want to do is sign up for the state or national insurance exchange and see what is offered. You also may qualify for subsidies to reduce the cost of insurance.

I don't see why there's the need to keep PA residency, it's not like you can't get it right back if/when you move back there.

I know you're frustrated, but this is a tantrum. On paper, you're honestly a good candidate. On paper, you're actually a stronger candidate than I was. (3.5 GPA, BA from an open enrollment regional state university, 161V/161Q/3.5AW, 1 semester senior research project, 1 year as a formulation chemist, applied for 5 programs, got 2 interviews, 1 acceptance) Getting 6 interviews should be enough so that even by dumb luck you'll get an admit. Graduate programs aren't going to the expense to bringing you there to jerk you around. To put it bluntly, you fucked up. The simplest explanation is that during the interview process you said or did something that raised alarms. One post-interview rejection is bad luck, 6 is a pattern.

I disagree with this a little bit. I don't think it means much in academia. But, in industry, HR software does care as they often search for keywords and having the right keywords (such as the name of your degree) can help you. And even though I do think that the difference between a chemist and a chemical engineer can be pretty small at times (having worked with both), pay scales can also be quite different between the two. (not sure that this difference is present for biophysics versus computational biology) So, I don't think it's necessarily the most important reason to pick one program over another, it is something to take into consideration.

What are your career goals? If you want to work in academia, go for the higher ranking. If you want to work in industry, engineering is better. Otherwise, go with your gut instinct, it's probably right.

A TA or GA would be great if you could get one as those can come with a tuition waiver. You could ask Columbia about what sort of financial assistance is available, probably with the graduate school directly or the financial aid office before the department office. I'd check carefully into loans as I believe only subsidized loans don't accrue interest when in school and I also believe that subsidized loans are not available once you have a bachelors. But, I could be wrong about that.