katalytik

I have to agree with point #2. I think its best to hedge your bets until someone actually gives you the official acceptance. I have an interview coming up to find out if the fit is right. I have no idea what that means, but I'm gonna need to be careful. I like the PIs work, but I hope he does not trap me by asking me that "if we give you a spot, will you come here" question. Its hard to say anything until I have a acceptance, and I would be happy at any of the places I applied for. Just getting into one of the places would make me happy, but I don't want to lean. Anyone have a good idea about this? Two questions: 1. What sorts of "fit" questions are asked? 2. If they trap you with the "if we give you a spot, will you come here" question, what do you guys do with it on the spot?

Agreed. Two can play that game!

You apply for PhD in public health also? Which subfield?

"why does this guy want another degree?!?!?!?"

I have to agree with you that GRE scores only matter when they stand out from the other competitive applicants. Good way to saying this. My emphasis is on information technology, quality improvement, and health policy. IT has become huge in healthcare recently with all of the federal stimulus, and all the programs I applied to are either highly interested in the field or are already at the cutting edge of the field. Fit it seems will be an important consideration and I am glad I took a dive and told them exactly what I see for my career and research. BTW, I sent you a PM.

It is interesting to see this. I think my program is more numbers based, but fit seems to be quite up there for you. UofM is certainly top tier in general, but even there you are unable to find a fit? Or have you found good people in each school you applied to?

sounds like Brown is the place you want to go! i hope you get in......good luck

If you are looking at the top programs, it may help to go to a masters program (a good one) and then apply to the PhD programs. This would minimize the importance of the undergrad GPA. Perhaps a masters in MIT? And then apply for their program afterwards? Of course, you will need to do well there, but having done that.......I think they will look at you positively. Yes, btw, premed courses can really hurt a GPA. I took them and honestly they stink.

Even though the programs say that "masters is not required", the reality is that the entering class has almost everyone with masters. This is definitely the case in the places I applied to. What about the rest of the programs? Is it required? Or is it an unstated requirement? I am not sure if the masters is as important as relevant research or work experience.

Nice to know what we think about our adcoms thought processes. Which factors are used to rate our applications? 1. GRE and/or subject test 2. GPA 3. Relevant work experience 4. Research publications 5. Research topic and fit with program 6. Essays: SOP etc. 7. Funding availability 8. "Brand name" of undergraduate school My view is that they use 1,2,8 to screen applicants After the screen, weighting is as follows: 2,3,5,4,1,8,6,7 I listed 7 last because we may be offered spots without funding. A couple of assumptions about the poll: 1. The applications make it past any "screen" the department may have 2. I know weighting may vary by dept, school etc. 3. This question is about how the adcoms think, not what our opinion of how it should be done. So please vote accordingly Any other views?

to the original question, definitely yes. i had a promotion at a job a couple of weeks ago, and i told the coordinator who said she will add that as an addendum to the application.

The frustration of writing my SOP would probably add up to most of my frustration I had at work for about a year...........i completely understand!

Ah the social nature of forums! I wouldn't read much into it. I commented on one thread and people shot me down for having an opinion.........its not a problem. Feel free to express yourself! We are anonymous here.....

two of my programs have GRE averages on their websites. Even though my major is quite quantitative, the verbal scores for the programs were well into the 90%. So I think they expect both to be up there. I got completely scared when the average at UMichigan was so high for entering students: 740 Quantitative 720 Verbal These are just averages!

i have to agree, it depends on what you want with your career. If academia, then you may want to reconsider. But then again, do you want to teach in the top schools? Or closer to home etc? Probably need to ask yourself these things before you decide....

NEVER too late to learn or to make a significant impact.......

Never turn down the opportunity to meet in person. Human nature will always focus on being positive with people they have met -- if you make a good impression. A lot of decisions are non-numbers based do if you make a good impression, then it can help you. no easier way to leave a good impression than to do so in person.

How often do you guys catch yourself rechecking your submitted application? I do this a lot!! 1. I check to see if I made mistakes 2. Read on this forum about mistakes and positives, and try to make sure that I did the recommended things also. 3. Check the department website, as if something changed in the one day i did not check it. Man, I am getting obsessed, possessed.........I am sure i can argue for either most of these days!

really depends on your program in terms of how long it takes and how they get in touch. it seems the options are limited: 1. If rejection, either email or a link to check your account online. They will likely follow this up with a written letter. 2. If acceptance, then email or phone call seems to be the way to go for immediate notification. And then the paperwork in the mail. My programs are still reviewing, but it seems many of the others have already started, and it seems some have finished........especially biology related programs.

not conceited in my view.......just new information about yourself.

You can ask if he has played a role in admissions before and how faculty have a role in admissions even if they are not on the adcomm. you may start with vague questions, and he may end up offering information if he feels comfortable. the adcom will probably ask him his view about you anyway...... in my case, i am working with one faculty at the school i applied to, and he is not on the adcom. however, he said the committee will likely ask him. so i don't think it is a complete loss even if you don't actually ask him. you may luck out, and he may say he will at least shoot them an email about your candidacy. that would be great for you if you can get that done. also, try talking to the existing grad students and see what they think about this idea of approaching your prof.

only one exception: if you know this prof. very well, and he feels strongly about your candidacy. otherwise i agree, it will come off as being too pushy. you can try telling him indirectly if you like.......i may try that if you are sincerely worried. i really can understand your worry though....

Dear Schools, Please stop this thread.......its too much.

My vote is the masters, and building direct relationships with people you want to work with. I would stay focused on your goals rather than trying to broaden at this point.

This is one where experience counts. I apply mainly to NIH grants and have applied twice already; didn't get the first one. There are seminars that may help, but also asking others who have been successful works. The NIH, at least, needs to have a very focused idea and it depends on the type of grant you are applying for. Its like you have to connect all the dots because reviewers are likely not exactly from the same field. BUT once you get one you will have a good idea of how to work it. I am still waiting for the results of one more submission and gearing up for another couple of submissions in the spring.