MathCat

I don't know the details, but one of my professors was in engineering and didn't decide to switch to math until he did his masters. He hadn't done pure math course work until he randomly decided to sit in on one fourth year course for fun.

For all the schools that I heard from unofficially before I got the official offer, the portal remained as "under review" (or the school's equivalent) until I got the official offer. Don't sweat it.

I think A looks better, but it comes with the risk of an untenured POI... what would happen if s/he does not get tenure? Are you admitted to work with that person in particular, or could you change? Do you know anything about how their publication record is, if they've had any students, etc? You say "just started", but I don't know how recently that means. Unless your POI not getting tenured would be an absolute disaster (I admit to not being that educated about what would happen in that situation), I think it's still a lower risk option than B, where funding isn't guaranteed...

Depends on field (perhaps you're right about in economics, I wouldn't really know).

Well, as an example, three departments had professors contacting me personally to discuss my interests, fit of the program, answer questions, etc. These were not professors I had indicated on my application (I did not indicate anyone on any of them), but they were all in my stated general area of interest. Another program offered me a fellowship and said that indicated their keen interest in having me, but all correspondence they initiated was from the grad secretary only. I understand professors are for the most part too busy to be looking at applications and contacting students themselves, and usually it goes the other way (and I did email professors), but it did impact my view of the departments. I still think all are great programs, but the ones that contacted me seem like more ambitious departments that are actively trying to recruit the people they want and improve their ranking (I'm not talking just recruiting students), while the other seems to not care as much who they end up with - perhaps relying on name power, as they are an Ivy. This difference may just come down to how applications are reviewed, though. I think some of the programs review applications by sending them to the research group that you indicated, whereas others have general admissions committees. So perhaps the ones that contacted me are just because they did individually review my file, while at the other school that didn't happen. So perhaps I am reading too much into it.

I think departments should do more to actively recruit their top prospective students, but it should be more personal than "hey look at these videos". What TakeruK said about these being campus-wide is probably correct, though. Still, I think I would have been turned off by the pushy email too - all my offers have included a paragraph about how they would appreciate hearing earlier if known, but that I have until <deadline> to decide. That gets the point across without seeming pushy by sending another email. As for whether to include this in the feedback, I wouldn't, unless it is really the main reason for your decision.

I don't think there's a clear answer of which is better - both are good choices. For me, it would come down to other factors - location, cost (Montreal is much cheaper to live in!), personal preference, etc..

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. He encouraged you to go to whatever program is best for you, and people withdraw their applications all the time. I doubt he will take it personally. edit: I don't think leaving the lab early is a good idea if you're on contract for the whole summer. Do you even know if you would be able to rotate early at whatever program you attend?

Yeah the webpage lists Coast as a 2 year waiting list. So either apply for 2 years from now, or just accept that you won't get into Coast.

I'd pick some different programs. I'm more certain of my interests now, and some of the programs I applied to don't do anything like that. Others, I passed over for reasons I kind of regret now. I'd also apply to more reaches if I were doing it again. But, I think I know where I will attend in the fall, and I'm very excited about it, so it turned out alright. As for my application materials, the only thing I'd really change is writing my SOP to be more focused. But that's based on more reflection about my interests, and what I wrote at the time was completely honest and accurate about how I felt then, so it's not really something to regret. I wish I'd started studying a little earlier for the subject GRE, and if I were writing it again I would definitely focus my time differently.

Another question: why does your POI think you'll have a better chance next year? What will be different?

I just don't think it's a good idea to have a safety that isn't going to give you the career you aim for. I still chose some "safer bet" schools, and some back up (funded) Masters programs. But if you are going to commit to a PhD, it should be a program worth attending (for your own personal goals).

I don't think one should settle for a PhD program that won't get them what they want - e.g. a program ranked in the 100s is probably not wise for somebody who wants to go into academia. There shouldn't really be "backup"/safety programs like that, since I think in that situation it's better to just reapply next year. It's not clear to me what your situation is, though. What do you not like about your lower choice school? Could you defer?

Unless there are special circumstances, like being out of school a long time or something, I'd be concerned for your grad school prospects if you can't find any professors willing to write you a recommendation.

You're gonna have to be more specific.

What country are you applying in? That matters a lot. In the US I think it's more common to go straight to PhD than to have a Masters, while in most commonwealth countries I think direct to PhD is quite rare.

I thought Rita-Atkinson is only for Pharmacy and Med students?

I'm not moving as far, just from Canada, but I'll still only be taking the things I can't easily replace, or that are very small. I will take all of my jewelry, a couple of smaller items that were gifts (like a small lamp), my computer, my textbooks, (some of) my clothes and shoes. I can fit all of these things into a couple of large suitcases (although I'll probably give the books to a friend to mail to me). If there's room in my suitcases, I may take some smaller household things that could easily be replaced, but that I can also easily just pack, e.g. I could take a travel mug because it's easy to just stuff some socks in it, and then it'll hardly take any extra room. We'll see how that goes when I'm actually packing. In short, I'd only take essentials, things with sentimental value, small items, and things not easily/affordably replaced. You have to balance the cost of bringing it with the cost of replacing it.

It means you made it past the first round of rejections, and you still have a chance of getting accepted.

Yes, this is how I meant it. I don't mean to "flaunt" my score - as a math major, a good quant score really isn't much of an achievement. For others, it definitely is. I don't mean to devalue others scores, just to illustrate that people's circumstances are different, and that for some people it is not necessary or worthwhile to pay for prep services. It depends on how prepared you are already, your personal learning style (i.e. how easily can you teach yourself the stuff you don't know), and how you are prioritizing the different parts of your application. I know that my post will ruffle feathers - I don't know how to express my point in a way that won't. What it comes down to is that I disagree with the OP's tone of "I got a fantastic score, and thus I know exactly how everyone should study for the GRE. Moreover, if you don't do it my way, you're short sighted."

I would just do it again. Maybe you'll do better, and won't have to send your old score at all.

A couple of programs I applied to explicitly stated not to use a paid service to prepare any parts of your application.

Probably either continuing a research project or studying for quals (can take them upon entry at the place I'll likely attend), or perhaps both.... And I'll be moving a long way at the end.

If you're willing to leave the US, most Canadian schools don't require the GRE. Funding is more common for Masters programs in Canada as well. I don't know how many programs offer Spring entry though.

It's possible it's not indicative of his overall demeanor. But I think if that's the case, there's gentler ways of saying it, e.g. "Please continue using my title" or "Please call me Dr.<name>". The particular phrasing of it still worries me - seems like a power trip to me.