OH YEAH

Neither school really has "brand value." I'd pick the cheaper one, unless you have reason to prefer the location/professors/classes/etc at the more expensive one.

I don't have much to say, but for future reference, Texas Tech is not a private institution

I took it, and did well. I don't know if it helped or not (I was coming from a completely unknown undergrad). The CS subject test is really hard, and a good score is something few people have. That's gotta count for something...

You've never done research before. Why do you think applying for a PhD is a good idea? A PhD is a serious commitment, and "I'll go to whatever university will take me please oh please" graduates aren't exactly hot on the market. Perhaps you could apply for a masters first?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.... yeah, sure...

Neither school is particularly prestigious, so I don't know that you are going to get any useful information by asking about "prospects." Why don't you look at the research and talk to the faculty of each school to make your decision?

"Hi. I am interested in your research because of X, Y, Z. I will be in the area at this date ________. While I'm here, could I take a tour through your lab?" I wouldn't over think it. Just state what you want, don't be awkward about it, and if they turn you down or don't reply back no harm done.

Word of mouth or the "Google Scholar test" (find someone who is famous/teaches at your dream school, and then compare their publication/citation statistics to faculty members from the school you are unclear of the ranking of). After a few iterations of the Google Scholar test you can pinpoint about how good the department is, I like to think of it as Newton's method for CS rankings

Unfortunately, I don't know the nature of your work so I can't comment. For instance, I worked independently, read stuff, and made design choices when I worked as a professional web designer, but I restricted my discussion of that to about 3 lines in my SoP. If you were improving on the state of the art, it sounds good, but I think the best person to ask would be the professor you worked under--if they think they can comment favorably and realistically on your research potential based on your work for them, then I think you're fine. (Of course, you might not get a straight answer, so take what they say with a grain of salt)

Anything over a 3.5 is fine, nobody cares about your GPA.... I don't think anyone will care unless the class led to interesting research problems that you worked on. No, it doesn't matter. Your research experience and, more importantly, what your letters of recommendation have to say about your research potential are the only things that matter.

I don't think you have a very good chance at getting into MIT, CMU, or Berkeley at the moment. Things like "top of class", "projects in coursework", "internship in industry", "published a book for children", "participated in contests" are great, and I'm sure you've learned a lot from the experiences, but they don't really count for much in terms of PhD admissions: the currency of PhD admissions is research *with other people*. The most important part of your package is letters of recommendation from people who can attest to your research potential. My advice is to try to find a professor to work under over the summer. You can do your own stuff (that makes it all the more impressive ) but it is crucial that you have a mentor watching the progress of your project so you can get a good recommendation letter from them. Good luck!

I applied to only top 20 programs. I'm going to give the opposite advice of the person above: only apply to schools you want to go to. Sure, apply outside the top 10 (there are some great top 20 schools), but I see no point in attending a "safety-ranked" school unless you want a "safety-ranked" job afterwards. Don't worry about being a "prestige hungry person." Academia is tough, and you want the best possible for yourself. My opinion is that there is a dramatic difference between good schools and "safety" schools -- in terms of professors, in terms of your peers, in terms of job opportunities/collaboration opportunities... I can imagine money not being an issue, but don't kid yourself and say that time won't be an issue. It takes a long time to write statements of purpose. If you're gonna do 15, at least order them in terms of importance so you know how to allocate your SoP time appropriately.

I'd go with the cheaper one

What are your goals for after the PhD? What range of schools would you ideally like to get into? I'm confused: most people don't mention "PhD" and distance education in the same post. It sounds to me like you don't really know what you want to do, which is totally OK! Just don't think that distance education will help you get into graduate school (or more work experience, for that matter). What would *really* help you is more research experience and better recommendation letters, which you won't get from a distance program. Did you make friends/do a good job at UMass? Can you e-mail the professor you worked under and volunteer to do research for free for them? If you take the job, is there an active research university nearby that you can volunteer yourself out to? I agree that retaking the GRE will help your chances a lot. Normally I think people have the wrong priorities if they retake the GRE, but I wouldn't be surprised if your scores get you trashed immediately. I wouldn't take a PhD offer if it wasn't funded, especially at a 3rd tier school. Please don't get certifications. Steve Yegge says it better than I do: Good luck If you want to reapply next year, I'd be happy to review your statement of purpose.

The summer before joining the program isn't the time to study for a far away exam. At least wait until you've taken a few courses so you know what's expected of you... If you want to get a head start, why don't you e-mail your professors of interest and get started on research?

If you want to go to a good school in the US, work on your English. It is very important to be able to communicate effectively.

It's really hard to evaluate your chances when all of you provide are basic statistics! Journals are not the primary means of publication in CS -- which journals did you get accepted to, and how prestigious are they? Is there any reason you guys didn't submit to a conference, especially since cloud computing is such a hot and quickly moving field? Your research: were these your ideas? Was your job to swab the decks, or did you do stuff worth talking about? I did two REUs, and while I didn't get published because of them (for various, unfortunate reasons ), I went into it with the expectation of publishing a paper. Why are you aiming for just a poster presentation (these don't count for much?) It's good that your LoR writers are well known, but that doesn't really say anything in and of itself. How well do you know them? How long have you known them? What do they think of you, and how would they compare you to others in your cohort? Which schools are you interested in (based on the professors, not their USNews ranking, although that is important too)?

Paying for a PhD is a very bad idea! Plus, "out in 4 years" isn't necessarily a good thing -- you won't have time to relax, explore interesting research directions, take classes, etc. Finishing as quickly as possible is not advantageous.

Seems dead to me. I wouldn't want to work in that lab. When your adviser (who is 90) kicks the bucket right as you get your PhD, who is going to write your recommendation letters?

Princeton fully funds (and pays a stipend to) all masters students. I think UIUC does something similar?

I'd go to UPenn.

Do you mean University of Minnesota -- Twin Cities? I believe the usual abbreviation for that is UMN. (No clue about their MS program though)

I agree, and I also think people shouldn't prepare for job interviews either. It would make life a lot easier for me

What? Are the natural sciences THAT much different than mathematics/computer science?

Princeton's ML department is pretty small, but high quality: Blei just won an ONR young investigator award and appears to be one of the rising stars in the field -- I don't know of many junior faculty with a paper cited 2700 times. Of course, Schapire is one of the most cited CS researchers in any field (I'm taking AI with him this fall, I hear he is a great teacher too). I don't know much about Yael Niv. We don't have anyone doing computer vision from what I know, but the graphics group here is pretty solid -- Funkhouser, Rusinkiewicz and Finkelstein are all heavily cited. I love it here. If you have any specific questions, I'd be happy to answer them!