Eigen

It's pretty easy, just look at the publication record of the professors you're interested in working for- see how many papers are published per year relative to the number of grad students in the group, and whether the papers are in high impact journals or not.

I'm in the sciences, and unless you're at a top 5 school, most people probably aren't working 70-80 hours a week. We just interviewed for new faculty members (with credentials that made me worry about ever getting a position somewhere), and most said they worked 50-60 hour weeks through their PhDs and post-docs. Especially when you spend all day working with explosive or highly toxic/deadly materials, getting enough sleep and downtime to be fresh isn't just recommended, it's necessary. I think the good students here work a decent 8-6 day, and then do another 8-10 hours spread over Saturday and Sunday.

Take the time to look up the professors at those schools, find a few you might/would be interested in working with, and mention them. Shouldn't take that long, and you shouldn't apply somewhere without at least a few professors you'd want to work with anyway.

All I know is what's filtered down from people who've applied previously, which is quite honestly not much. That said, the successful applications I've seen (mostly biology) seemed to have very nice preliminary data. But I completely agree, I think that the foundation for what you're proposing (including it's feasibility with the facilities and collaborations available to you) and its potential are the most important parts. It does have to get a bit more concrete as you go up in years, though- compared to the hypothetical project with one possible professor in the college senior applications, or with 1st year applications when some applicants still haven't chosen a research group.

I submitted an application this year in Biological Chemistry- I think it was reasonably strong, but I'm a bit worried about not having enough previously completed data for the project. Since I'm applying as a second year, I think the competition leans more towards projects that are partially complete, and most of my first year was spent on a related project, with only the last few months spent on the one I'm proposing. That said, it meshes well with our previous research, and I think the letters I got spoke to my ability to get the project done by collaborators in different departments. Nothing left but to wait and see, now.

Maybe not a deal breaker to the application as a whole, but if the fellowship requires that you have a recommendation specifically addressing it, and you don't, then I'd assume it would make you inelligible for the fellowship. I'd contact the professor that you met with, and see if you can get a recommender to (as you mentioned) submit an addendum, or a separate letter addressing your fit to the training program. I assume the fellowship is only for those students who also are part of this "training program"? Not exactly sure how that program fits in, but if it's an addition to the traditional PhD program (as I read your post), then your application and your eligibility for the fellowship should be two separate things.

There are US schools that do that. I submitted my app to Penn State by 7am sometime in late October... And got a call by 12pm that same day saying I was accepted and that a funding offer was on the way. It's the wonder of rolling admissions, and as mentioned above, there are lots of schools that do them- but sadly, there are also lots that don't. And as someone else mentioned above, departments within the school can even differ on rolling admissions/not. But yeah, adcoms are out of business now until early January, imo. I know most of our prof's are taking some time off, reviewing grants, catching up on all the stuff they had to throw out of the way for finals. Most are planning to resume business as normal around New Years.

I applied (and was accepted) to Vanderbilt, Penn State and Tulane, they all had strong bioorganic programs and close medical school campuses. I remember from my visit to Penn state that they have some very good people doing biophysical modeling, but that doesn't seem as much what you're interested in. MD is an interesting field, it falls more definitely into the biophysical realm. When you say structure modeling, what exactly do you mean? Because really, all of us organic/inorganic grad students are expected to know how to do DFT type modeling of our systems, for structure determinations or electrical configurations, respectively.

Honestly, none of the places I applied even required Chem GRE scores, so I can't answer. Reputation matters.... But in graduate work, it's moreso the reputation of your PI than of the department or school- especially at big institutions like the ones you're looking at. Penn State might be a good place for you to apply- I know there are a few very interesting theoretical groups there. You're applying to Northwestern, are you interested in working on theoretical modeling of DNA based systems? I know there's a large interest there. You might also look at some of the established students/post docs of the theoreticians there.... Find out where they are, and apply. Lineages are important- even if you're working for a young PI, if they have a good lineage (PhD/Post Docs with top chemists) and still have good ties and collaborations, that's a very good thing. Our department is going through faculty hires right now, and of the top 5 candidates, it was where they did post-doc work that really stood out (school name) moreso than their PhD institution. I wouldn't look at anything out of the top 5 as a safety school, they might in fact be a much, much better option than you. My PI (and another young one that I've talked to) both went to large, top schools for PhD and Post-Doc... And they say if they had to do it again, they'd go to a smaller school for the PhD, and then hit the big schools for post-docs; that while a good LoR from one of the big schools was great, that it was insanely competitive to get one- that each prof would really only back one or maybe two out of 6 or 8 students graduating close together for the best post-docs, jobs, etc. Apply to your strengths- find the best theory guys working in an area that you're interested in, and apply to those schools. I guarantee they won't all be at top 5 schools.

I think you can get used to a lot of different conditions... I hate the heat and humidity, but I'm in school in New Orleans, the only subtropical place in the US. That said, if you really are going to be unhappy somewhere, don't go there! You'll spend most of the time in your lab, yes, and so the research and such is important- but you need to be able to enjoy something other than your school, because if you can't keep some sort of work/life balance, you'll eventually burn out.

I think your application is pretty strong, but I would definitely add some lower tier schools to the mix. Find some theoreticians that are well known and whose work you like at some mid-level schools, and apply there- you get the benefit of a well known/respected boss (which is what really matters), but there's a little less competition. You're pretty much making a sweep of top 10 programs, which is good... But are you applying there because they're top 10 programs, or because you have specific people in your field that you want to work with there? It's quite common for people to think the rep of the school is the most important thing (and don't get me wrong, it helps a lot), when really it's the rep of your boss that is the clincher. There are some top level chemists working at smaller schools, and it doesn't make them any less well known or respected within the community- and that in turn helps their students get post-docs, jobs, etc.

I'll add that it's also fairly common to place people as 3rd or 4th authors for similar work that didn't work or was unable to be published. Especially in a young group. If the PI gave several projects, and a few were complete duds but the people worked hard on them, it's not unusual for them to be given low-level authorship on a remaining project when it goes to publication, assuming they help out some with the writing, etc. If it was going to push you out of the first author position, or if it was going to be one of the asterisked "these authors contributed equally" things, then I'd think there was a problem.... Otherwise, no one really looks at anything other than the first and last authors (the person who did the work, and the boss, most of the time). Intermediate positions are for those that contributed in some sense, including collaborators, etc.

http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1402 Seems to apply here. I think it all depends on the grad student, but I wouldn't think it particularly corny.

Think of this as preparation for graduate school, when you submit papers, grant proposals, etc. and have to wait months to hear anything back. It can be very frustrating, but it's good to get used to having to place the worry out of your mind- there's nothing you can do about it now other than wait, so getting used to managing that stress is helpful. Sometimes viewing the stress as preparing yourself for the next step helps lessen it :-D

Our program has a funding cap in place (internal+external funds), so if you get an external fellowship, your assistant ship is reduced accordingly. Thankfully, ours is very generous, and allows 125% of the top fellowship at our school in combined funding. But no, you shouldn't expect to be able to keep all of both almost anywhere, I wouldn't think.

I'm fairly simple, but I use all of these on a daily basis: MSOffice 2007 Adobe Pro (gives all the editing/creating functionality for PDFs) Endnote Adobe Illustrator (end all program for creating slick graphics for publications) Molecular Operating Environment (MOE): A molecular modeling suite (Ok, so that's specialized) ChemDraw: again, slightly specialized Firefox, Thunderbird, MS Outlook: The basics Scifinder Scholar: on it 3 or 4 times a day to grab articles And that's pretty much all I have installed on the computer.

As others have said, rolling admissions policies should be listed on the website. Tulane, Vanderbilt, and Penn State all have rolling admissions policies, best of my recollection. I was admitted to all the schools I applied to by October, when the deadlines were in January. It happens. Some of the schools had fellowships that weren't awarded until later. If the school has rolling admissions, they can make you an offer as soon as the review your application.

I've been in my office/lab for about 8 hours a day + some on weekends since a few weeks before the semester started my first year. The first few months were reading papers for hours and hours to familiarize myself with the subareas I would be working in, and then I was able to get started on some small fragments of research that I could later stitch together into a larger project. If you don't have a project yet, then you should be spending the time that you will eventually spend on the project on developing that project, keeping up with literature, etc. My first year wasn't quite as busy, but even after the first few months I probably spent close to 2 or 3 hours a day just keeping up with current literature. Get into a consistent schedule, and as you develop your project it will be more work and less lit review filling your time.

I've never heard of anyone not waiving their right. I would be quite suspicious of the veracity of any letters written for a student who hadn't waived their right to read.

Per publication, or total? I've never seen a publication list that didn't give room for a proper citation.\ But to your original post: No, papers don't count. Copyright =/= publication, for the most part. The university copyrights it to prevent your ideas from being stolen, but it's not published.

You can be a professor without having a doctorate, you can have a doctorate without being a professor. I refer to all the prof's I know as Dr. XXX (or first name, it depends), the only time I use professor is when they don't have a doctorate. I'm sure it varies, however.

Thesis (even honors ones) are citable (as mentioned), but they are specifically cited as a thesis/dissertation, etc.... Use the thesis citation format appropriate for your field. Usually it's name, title, level, adviser, year.

I think (as mentioned above), way too many prospective grad students put too much stock into GRE scores- they're a hoop you jump through, but not a particularly important one. Talking to our AdComm, scores basically fall into three categories: Didn't meet the minimum requirement, met the minimum requirement, or the "it's really high" category. These all differ from school to school, but really all that matters is meeting the minimum for the department/school. Past that, they care more about your GPA, your research experience, and your letters of rec. They realize that the GRE is a short, segmented window to show your skills. They realize that not everyone tests well. They know that essays were only written in 30 minutes. And while it's good to show that you can perform under pressure to meet specific, and convoluted goals, they're not going to base more on that 4 hour test than on the 4-5 years of work that you're showing in the other parts of your application. Just something to keep in mind.

The usual course is to apply in the middle of your last year, before you graduate. You'll be fine.

Relax. A PhD is a marathon, not a sprint. Work hard, but don't neglect the rest of your life- keep up your health, keep outside activities, and stay as well rested as possible. If you're too tired or too stressed your work will show it. If you have no outside activities or interests, you lose the ability to get an "outside" view on your work, to be able to come back to it fresh each day/week/month.