braindump

I have never heard of anyone being discriminated against due to needing a fee waiver or even that this was a legitimate concern. I'm pretty sure it's common for applicants to get fees waivers as they need, especially if they got the reduced GRE fee. I got fees waived for almost all of the schools I applied to and I didn't see this hinder me at all in the process. Most of my application costs went toward the GRE and sending scores/transcripts. I'm wondering where the person who told you this got their information, or if they're just making assumptions.

I agree with the above replies. Plenty of people don't go into academia after they graduate and plenty of people seek out graduate schools with the intention of following into industry/government. As long as you can explain why a PhD would be helpful to your career goals, you will be fine. You also want to be sure that the program you attend has the appropriate resources for you to go into government rather than academia. This is also something you should look into when you are on visits and interviews.

I'm glad to hear it went well All the best to you two in the future!

I agree with this, but it's because we don't have enough information about triangle WSU, not because we don't know how much greater RS is than ST. If we were given that WSU was isosceles with W as a midpoint of RV, then I'm pretty sure we could know angle WSU > 60. It wouldn't matter how much less; RS being just a fraction larger than ST would still make the angle > 60, if even by a fraction. I just wanted to point this out because, at first glance, I made the mistake of assuming WSU to be isosceles and immediately went "it's A" before I realized my mistake.

I didn't have a single letter from a professor in my dept. Granted, I'd been doing research related to the field I plan to join, not the field I'm currently in. I think it matters less where they come from and more the context they know you in. I definitely agree with the others that you should be getting letters from professors who know you in a research context rather than professors who can say "yeah he got an A in my class."

Gonna have to agree here. Found the above post to be an overly negative generalization of what CrucialBBQ thinks your love life should be. No matter how much "experience" (congrats?) someone says they have, relationships are not clear-cut, step-by-step processes; everyone is different and you shouldn't base your relationship based on what others are doing with their lives.

I spent the summer (2-3 months) going through Magoosh videos, reading through some prep books and getting a good idea of how the exam works (this is as, if not more so, important than knowing specific mathematics formulas and so on). My summer research internship had free GRE courses twice a week, which was super helpful. I basically just used this time to lightly familiarize myself with some math I may not have seen in a while, learning how to do the problems quickly (this was the worst part for me), and doing vocab. I think vocab is the most important part to start early, because it's not something you can do overnight. Get the Magoosh vocab app (free), and go through the decks slowly. A few minutes at a time, while you're on the bus, waiting in line, etc., a couple times a day. Nothing hardcore. They separate the words into decks based on how likely you are to see them on the exam. A few weeks after I finished a deck I'd go through it again to refresh, repeating this over and over. Unfortunately I never made it through the whole deck because I got too busy. So I spent the summer just doing a light review, couple times a week, maybe. Nothing too intense, but I went through at least a few different prep books. Then maybe two months or so (not sure, maybe less?) before the actual exam (mid/early fall) I started studying a little more hardcore. I didn't always keep up with it because of applications and classes, but I tried to do as many problems as I could, learn new words, and take practice exams. The latter is really important, especially the (also free) ETS exams online. They're exactly like the real thing and you should treat it as such. No distractions, no breaks, time yourself, get comfortable with the format of the real exam. A lot of people skimp on the essays; I did too, but for these practice exams I actually did them and I'm really glad I did. All in all, I spent probably 5ish months studying, give or take, but a lot of it was inconsistent depending on how busy I got. Hardcore studying was probably less than 2 months. It's great that you're taking it so early; I really wish I didn't wait to take it the same semester as applications, because that was rough. Plus you'll have time to improve if you aren't satisfied. Anyway. I got 165Q, 159V, 5.5W (I think). Not spectacular but I got into some really great programs and I'm now attending my top choice. I was just on the cusp of (what I thought to be) too low to be "definitely safe" and too high to justify going through the stress/time/money again to retake it. So only took it the one time but it was good enough for me. I'm a chemical engineering undergrad and I've always been pretty good at math, average at vocab. Great at taking tests, but not so much standardized tests where time is a huge factor. Did pretty mediocre/above average on my SAT/ACT because I didn't study or care much after I did well enough to get into my undergrad on my first try. Just remember that GRE isn't everything, nor is it the bulk of your application, so don't stress it too much.

Congrats! You were deciding between two fantastic options so you really couldn't go wrong. I'm sure you'll have no trouble at all succeeding at Stanford. Best of luck to you! P.S. Looks like we'll be sharing a campus!

Yeah, I'm not convinced that ivies value sports. Big state schools do, but not private ivies. Are you talking about graduate programs? I really don't think that playing sports is going to give you an "edge" over applicants with relevant research experience.

The best thing to do would be to call the department and ask them to clarify.

Congrats! I know it's not easy - I just turned down a school whose visit I LOVED, and even though I'm attending my "dream" uni, I was still super sad to send that email. As for the rest of your decision, I think that I would have to truly believe an unfunded program to be 10x better and so much more worth it than my other options to choose it over a funded program. But that's just me - I'm pretty sick of stacking up student loans.

Normally I would not recommend staying at the same institution, but in this case, it seems like that might be the better option for you. I don't say this just because of the whole "same institution" stigma (which, as you said, probably doesn't matter as much if you aren't interested in academia) but because I think it's best to be in a new environment with new perspectives. That said, if you are planning on getting an entirely new cohort staying at your uni then you might be getting a reasonable amount of that anyway. Most important in a decision such as this is fit, how much you love the program, and what it can offer for your future. In these things, it seems like your current institution is the best bet. I think it's unwise to attend someplace you aren't truly excited about - if you don't enjoy your work and the people around you, you likely aren't going to succeed. I do agree, however, with the other comment in that you shouldn't base your entire view of the school based on the few people you met. But the fact that you're more excited about your current uni, and that it's a better ranking, and you're more likely to get involved with industry, tells me that it'll be much better for your future (particularly the last bit). And, again, I completely agree with the comment above me: I highly recommend not making this decision based on a few thousand dollars. Yes, you might have more money to spare, but unless one of the programs is not giving you enough to get by (make sure you're taking cost of living into account), then I strongly recommend not being swayed by money. A few thousand might seem like a nice luxury now, but is it really worth altering such an important decision? I think that if you enjoy the research at your current uni, you have connections to industry, and you attend a better-known school, you will succeed and more than make up for it in the long run. I say this especially since you mentioned you weren't really considering the program until they offered you the bonus, which tells me you aren't all that interested in the other school, just the money. Don't lose sight of why you're here: to get an education, not to make money. Just my two cents. Best of luck!

I agree; I think it would be better for you to be in a new environment. Go and see what else is out there rather than being stuck in the same place for 10 years (this is a long time..). If you're still unsure, maybe talk to some of your professors and get their opinion? I think they're going to tell you the same thing, though.

It's very interesting that you say that, because when I had my interviews at Stanford, people who had also interviewed at Berkeley said the opposite: better, closer-knit environment at Berkeley. I guess it must be very different between our fields. Back to the original topic, I want add that I think you should focus less on what the degree says (math vs. stats) and more about what the classes are and what sort of research you'd be doing. Which ones interest you more? I also agree that you can't make a bad choice, because you have two really great options.

Just having read your post, and not knowing a whole lot about the field, it sounds like Stanford is your best bet. First off, I don't think it's ideal to stay at the same institution for all of your degrees (not just because academia views it that way, but also because I think it's important to get a fresh perspective in a new environment). It might matter more if you plan on going into academia, but that, plus your job market bullet point, plus the fact that Stanford is the #1 undisputed stats program, tells me that Stanford might be better in the long-term. I also think it's risky to attend a program with only one professor you'd be willing to work with, because you never really know what can happen. If he can't get funding, or he leaves, you might be stuck. Points to Stanford for having several people you're interested in. To be perfectly honest: I know they're both fantastic schools, but I'm not seeing much in your post that tells me why you're having trouble deciding. Unless there's other significant factors you haven't mentioned, it seems like everything points to Stanford.