DC1020

Aside from probability you look to have great, or at least good enough, statistics for top programs. Two recommendations as someone who just went through this: - LORs: It sounds like you would be on much stronger ground with meaningful recommendations from work rather than from undergrad professors who barely know you. Would your boss be willing to write an enthusiastic letter? A client? Another option is to take a relevant night class (perhaps statistics/probability?) this summer and have that professor write a recommendation. - Statement of purpose: This is likely to be what makes or breaks you given how many applications are being sent into these programs nowadays. I'd start writing it now and plan to revise over the next few months. What's unique about your past? What do you want to do with the degree? Why do you stand out? If you have an SOP that could have been written by a couple dozen other applicants (I want to work in big data, data is the future, I'm smart, pick me) then it's hard to imagine they will pluck yours out of the haystack when the others making the same case have 4.0 GPAs and glowing recs from professors.

"Should" is not quite the same as "must" - the results board shows a few sub-3.5 admits over the past few years. They are few and far between though. You will probably have to be an absolute superstar with a very compelling story and application in order to get in with a low GPA.

12 units is a normal load so I don't see why this would be a problem.

Ouch (not me thankfully) 0a/0w/27r. Bad season. What's the probability of such a rejection rate?

Your score may be 80th percentile overall, but as you have heard from the horse's mouth, it's below average for many of the programs you are applying to. Overall, for people who declare an interest in "mathematical sciences," the average Q score is 162 and nearly half score 165 or above. More than one in ten get a perfect 170. Those numbers are going to be even higher at top programs - for example, Duke masters admits had an average Q GRE of 168 two years ago and 167 last year. https://gradschool.duke.edu/about/statistics/statistical-science-master-s-admissions-and-enrollment-statistics There's no answer to what is "good enough." If Duke has an average of 167, that means there are a lot of people who got in with scores in the low to mid 160s. However, the rest of their applications were probably bulletproof. Given that your GPA is marginal, that means you need AMAZING letters of recommendation and statement of purpose to overcome grades and test scores.

I'm happy to be able to add a story to this list. I had multiple false starts at a very highly ranked undergraduate school. I wasn't going to class, wasn't doing homework, wasn't engaged at all. I took a year off, came back, was recommended to take some time off. Tried to come back, again had to leave. My overall GPA was 2.0. After officially flunking out I worked for a couple years and somehow managed to get them to readmit me. Upon return I had a 3.5 GPA the rest of the way - an improvement but it was far from perfect, with a couple B-'s. My overall GPA netted out to a 2.5 and I graduated four years late. Once I decided to try for a master's degree I spent nearly a year putting together my application. - Most important, I have spent six years in industry at a unique, interesting job that was relevant to the kinds of programs I was applying to, working in a relatively senior role. - My SOP told an understandable and likely unique story about what I planned to learn and what I wanted to do with that knowledge. - I didn't dwell on past failures but included a separate paragraph in the SOP addressing them forthrightly. - I got a really great GRE score. - I took two night classes relevant to my field and got an A in both. - My LORs were strong and spoke to my ability from different perspectives - my boss, a client, and a professor at a reputable university (from the night class). In the end, I thought my application was pretty strong and only applied only to top programs. I was rejected from some that I expected to get into, for reasons that are unknowable. But I got into my top two choices, one of which had a 3% acceptance rate for the program I applied to. I was fortunate to have very high test scores and a degree from name brand undergraduate institution, even if my record there was abysmal. But everything else - work experience, SOP, LORs, and additional academic experience - came from a lot of hard work. If you had told me I'd be going to this school 10 years ago I'd have said you were crazy. But I'll be there in the fall

They are pretty much all cash cows for their respective departments! Three separate people I talked to used the term "cash cow" without prompting to refer to the #1 program on the US News list. But that doesn't mean a masters is not worth doing if it fits your academic and career goals, or even that those cash cows aren't selective and difficult to gain acceptance into.

That's a helpful post.

Where did you apply? Where were you accepted, rejected, waitlisted? Stats? Any thoughts or wisdom for people applying next year?

You can feel the desperation start to sink in on the results board, at the same time others are celebrating their acceptances and making plans. What a process.

Me too.... womp womp. Congrats to those who got in!

The year before that they came out in late March... still waiting here.

I applied to eight schools with a pretty clear top three priority ranking. I got into my #2 a month ago, which was really great for my peace of mind, and got rejected from my #3 yesterday. Now I get what it means when people say it still stings, even when it doesn't really matter to what you ultimately do. There was almost no chance I'd go to #3 but that doesn't mean it's fun not to get in!

I'm having some serious whiplash watching my first admitted student webinar. This has been a year-plus-long process of putting together a package to get people to want me... and now the tables have turned. "PICK US!"

2015 Stanford PhD: Feb 4 2015 Stanford Masters: March 4 2016 Stanford PhD: Feb 3 2016 Stanford Masters: Guess we'll have to keep waiting