Vene

That much I can believe. We do typically get funded by grants, but the work the grants pay for is what we use for our dissertation.

I don't know, science and engineering does pretty good with funding. It's rare for a science PhD student to not be funded (even if it's through TAing).

Depends on the university, I'm sure, there are people who get into PhD programs with less than a 3.0 GPA. We had a big thread about that last year.

Sub 3.0 GPAs. I'm not saying it's common, just that it has happened. Regardless, I maintain that applying for so many high prestige programs was a big mistake. Either do a masters and get near a 4.0 or aim lower.

With cancer biology? Totally no applications to real world problems at all.

I'm from outside your field (saw this under newest threads) so take my advice with a healthy dose of skepticism, but I don't think a masters is the way to go. If you can get a funded program, that's one thing, but is it really worth paying when it sounds like you application only has the one flaw? Study your math so you can retake the quant and try again next year. Working in a lab for a year would be great (and doing full time work in your field will give you a different perspective than doing it as a student). Otherwise, try and get a job that is at least halfway related to your field to pay bills as you prepare your application next year.

I liked telling people I was going to go to the one that paid me the most money. At the least it got them to shut up.

It basically means that you've made it past some number n rounds of screening and are still somebody they are considering, but they may not be done with the selection process. So, let's say that a program gets 100 applicants and wants 10 new students. They may interview 30 and accept 20. Getting to the interview stage means there's still a chance of rejection, but there is a much smaller chance and the list of students being considered is shorter. Therefore, you're on the short list.

I would not tell them a thing. If you do decide to attend, I'd suggest taking the honeymoon starting August though so you can finish the rotation (alternatively, once there, work it out with the professor). They only really need to know about it after you're a student and if there is a conflict.

This is very true. Even if you are 100% admitted these may be the people you'll be working with daily or have on your committee, a favorable first impression goes a long way.

I don't think that'll be a problem.

Doesn't Texas have relatively low humidity?

I don't know about physics, but in the biomedical sciences, at least, an interview is practically a required step to getting an admit. This is probably very good news and you're on the short list of candidates at this point.

I wish, I don't even think moving expenses are tax deductible (if it was a job I believe they would be, but I'm not an accountant).

Damn, you're young. I don't know what my program would do with somebody under 21 as even our recruitment events include open bars.

That's kind of what I assume. We want to court those we like and make them happy during interviews and such. So, they get top priority and if you're rejected, well, that's a low priority and can be put off after people working on admissions get a break from recruits, current grad students, and faculty concerns.

The key word there is might. I think you aimed too high for a PhD and are somebody who may need to do a masters. It can be tough to try and tell somebody to their face that they're not good enough. Also, I know people who have gotten in with low GPAs and done very well in their doctoral program. There may be some funded masters programs out there, especially if you work as a TA. And I do think the work at MIT was the right thing to do, it's just that admissions can sometimes be a lottery.

You signed a document?

If you really want snow days you're looking for lake effect. So, I guess that means looking for a university in the shaded area.

Then I wouldn't really worry about it, but try to drink a little less in future interviews.

That sounds pretty reasonable to me. The goal is just to look professional, not that you have to be dressed like a manager. And if the program's website explicitly states that they expect more colors than blue and black that's a good sign they don't want everybody showing up in a suit.

I'm inclined to say that reputation in your field is most important as that is what will determine the resources the program has as well as the size of its professional network. Who cares if random people know how good it is if your colleagues do know? Also, I don't know that 60th overall is really that mediocre. It's not top, but that's still pretty respectable. I mean, Clemson and Syracuse are around that ranking and they've got solid reputations.

Here's my advice, worry less about what they will ask you and instead prepare some questions to ask them. That's the best way to show you're interested and engaged.

Not as a UC, I'm on the east. However, when I was applying to programs I did my research on them and they definitely provide stipends for their PhD programs. I could see an unfunded masters, but masters are very much a minority. Hell, my program only offers a masters if you fail to complete a PhD as you cannot be directly admitted into it.

I also attend a state university and all of our bioscience grad students are funded. Undergrads pay tuition, but not grad students.