hippyscientist

I think it's invaluable to get current student perspectives, but I've only been in touch with ones who the PI has put me in touch with. I've introduced myself as a prospective new student, and asked them if they can shed some light on the programme from a student perspective. Stick to asking simple, straightforward questions (e.g. do you find the stipend liveable, what is the PIs mentoring style rather than what's the programme like). If you have specific concerns (I've got a really low GPA) I wouldn't necessarily ask these questions initially. Good luck and let us know how it goes!

I'm sorry that I cannot offer more constructive comments, but it is the situation that you have described that has me applying to US schools for my PhD. The accepted and shoved in a cupboard for 3 years analogy seems harsh, but I've seen many many students go that way. It appears to be all too common in the UK that a PhD is not time dedicated to training you for the profession, rather "here do this project and don't bug me, then when you graduate take the name and reputation and go be successful". This is an overgeneralisation, but I did want to say you're not alone! I hope somoene else can comment with more constructive feedback for you.

If you already have a masters from the UK, why do you want to get another one from Columbia? Your verbal GRE is too low in my opinion and your quant isn't stellar for someone with an engineering background. I would seriously reconsider retaking GRE if you are serious about an MS at Columbia, although I can't really see the point in getting another terminal degree in the same discipline at the same level (you may know something I don't).

My grades, compared to American students, aren't jaw-dropping, but the universities acknowledge that coming from Europe, grades are lower here. I stayed away from online converters as they were pretty shoddy at accurately converting - the schools you'll be applying to will have their own way of doing things anyway. They're definitely your best bet, and they're used to international students applying. Good luck!

I personally have made sure my personality shines through all email communications with PIs and anyone who may be on an admissions board. You need to want them as much as they want you, so trying to put on a face for admissions purposes just seems silly to me. As such, I've been told multiple places that I'm the most "real" applicant they've had in a while, because I've been me. So maybe that? (I don't know, I'm not in anywhere yet!)

I personally didn't find it accurate - it converted me about .5 lower than what I actually am (according to 3 different schools). However, if you're happy with it's conversion... Have you tried using a few different GPA calculators and seeing if they're comparable? Additionally, email the admissions contact for each US school you are applying to with your grades from Australia and ask if you meet the cut/what is their GPA conversion policy (this is what I did from the UK and everyone replied saying I was good, and with their own school converted GPA which is a lot more accurate).

I also wanted to add that while this website has been incredibly helpful, it made me doubt myself as an applicant as everyone seems to have such high numbers, and advice really is course specific. For my courses above 50th percentile GREs and a 3.0 and grades don't matter - I was repeatedly told LORs will be the main decider. Of course, this only relates to the three programmes I visited.

Okay why did no one tell me how pretty state college is? As a farm girl in the UK - there's so much to do!!! (But I get that if you're a city person it might not be your cup of tea)

Hi Everyone, I just got back from a 2 week trip visiting 3 different schools in the US, looking at their PhD programs in Kinesiology/Biomechanics. I figured I'd write a little about my experiences for anyone who's interested. My first school trip was 2 days after I arrived in the US, giving me a little time to get over jetlag and get to the school in question. I was emailed an agenda the day before, and it was packed full of meetings from 8am through til 5pm. I met with various faculty members, current grad students, my POI and attended a seminar. I also had a tour around the labs, campus, sports facilities and was taken to breakfast and lunch. It was such a useful visit, I got a real sense of the department dynamic, the thinking and style of the POI and answered so many questions. The second school visit was a few states down (flying and driving took all day), and I had unfortunately planned this trip on labor day (N.B. Intl students - make a note of holidays!) but the POI here was in the lab and willing to show me around. This should have been a red flag - there were other comments made, and combining with the atmosphere, the location and my gut reaction I learnt that this school is not for me. My third school was another plane ride away, and I had previously skyped this POI. It was great to meet in person, and we had organised a two day visit. My days were a little shorter here, but I learnt a lot. The lab(s) were amazing, students very friendly, POI a little forgetful but all in all very informative. All schools fed me lunch, allowed 1-on-1 time with grad students, POI and other faculty members. This really helped me to get a clear picture of each of the schools, and I've come away with my preference order re-evaluated. Each POI gave me invaluable information to add to my SOP, as well as a strong idea of who they are and what they expect from their grad students. I know it's frequently said on this forum that visiting before submitting an application isn't worth the money, but I think this is very field- and your own finances dependent. This trip has really helped me, and all three POIs said I was their top choice out of the prospective PhD applicants that they were talking to (and it was genuine - not a flattery while I was there thing).

I fly tomorrow to visit a few schools, and I'm excited at the prospects of seeing the campuses, meeting POIs, seeing the labs and talking with current grad students. Anyone got any invaluable tips, tricks, things they wish they'd done when looking? (I'm an international student who's only familiar with the American system through others and trying to convert my grades!)

Most programmes have a minimum requirement of a 3.0 GPA. You might want to look at other posts on this forum from people who have successfully applied to grad programmes with a lower GPA. The schools you've listed (from what I can gather) will not even bother to look at you currently, mainly due to your GPA. Sorry if this comes across as harsh, I think you need to be a lot more realistic about your chances.

Thanks for the feedback fuzzylogician. I have already asked all my LOR writers if they would be happy to provide this, and all have been enthusiastic, although the professor in my MSc has suggested using someone from my undergrad - I'll explain the situation once I'm there. All my programmes require 3 references, and I personally would want one from my MSc as I think it looks a bit dodgy otherwise!! Thanks for the reply

I have two incredibly strong LoRs - my undergrad thesis supervisor (who is also the lead on a project I've been Research Assistant for and is getting a lot of media attention - the project that is) and the guy I took most of my final year undergrad courses with (with whom I'm incredibly close, and who is also American, he knows my work really well and is pushing my thesis supervisor to publish it). My issue comes with the third. The PhDs I'm applying to require a reference from the most recent institution attended - and for me that will be my 1-year MSc school. However, by the time application deadlines come around I will only have been there a month (deadlines are in November and I start last week in September), not have any grades and they won't know me as well as my undergrad course leaders. I've been in email contact with one of the professors there as he got his PhD from one of my top choice schools and we have similar research interests, so I've been trying to build the relationship. I'm worried this will be too weak a reference to really make my application "pop". I'd appreciate any thoughts or comments!

Duck_Masters I think you've got nothing to lose by getting in touch, remind him of your work and you, and say you're contemplating applying to programmes and starting to think about references, but don't immediately ask him to be one. Work up to it! I'd also add that I hate Oxbridge, I've seen too many passionate, intelligent people get disillusioned there. It works well for a lot of people but there is no way I'd be happy there (and I'm certainly Oxbridge material - I was offered a full scholarship at undergrad). Different strokes for different folks and all that. In the UK at least, there are better unis for different subjects (Oxbridge doesn't even offer my area) but they do not have the international cache that Oxbridge does. I've explained in my SOP that my undergrad and MSc universities are the oxbridge of the field in the UK (I mean seriously - they're ranked 1 and 2 every year as long back as I can remember). Wow okay sorry...I got lost on a tangent there.

I hated stats when I studied it at school, and through my first years at University. However, when I got to my final year and realised exactly how much the stats can be applied, made sense of and brought my research to life I loved them! As ginagirl said an Applied Math PhD sounds like a good fit as you're not completely sure. In my field for example we have a lot of researchers who come from math backgrounds, who do analysis on our volunteers data, genome analysis, helping us out with our own stats, and many other applications. I know for a fact that I couldn't have completed my research on injury risk factors for athletes across a variety of sports without help from the resident departmental math genius. Most of my professors are either applied maths, statistics or mech eng backgrounds who have made the transition into sport and health research. There's a lot of applied math there.

The interpretation above is pretty good but I'd like to point out that it definitely varies across the board. For example my school at undergrad had the following: Below 40 - Fail 40 - 50: You need to review this material as you haven't got a good understanding 50 - 60: Hey you're getting there, good work. (The equivalent to about an A-) 60 - 70: Your work is publishable, you're incredibly competent and you understand everything Over 70: Unheard of. Literally our grade scheme stopped at 70. I graduated with an overall 62%, and one of my old lecturers is actually an American professor now. He said everything we had covered is equivalent to the first two years of a PhD, and he would hire any of our graduates getting over 50% in a heartbeat. Now trying to explain this to adcomms in the US is infuriating as I've got a very good degree, a good grasp on advanced concepts (I've already covered the content for my MSc - I'm basically doing it to ensure my grades translate and get some extra research experience), and am more than capable at the PhD level. They see my transcript and see high 50s - mid 60s and think somethings wrong. AGH!

As someone doing the reverse (doing my MSc in the UK and applying for PhDs in the US) most of the UK lecturers aren't even aware of the GRE so it really doesn't help your application. Your GPA seems fine to get into most masters programmes - they normally require a 2:1 entry (which ranges from a 3.3 - 3.7 depending on where you convert, and each uni looks at these differently). At the postgrad level, university prestige is less of a thing - look for where you'll be happiest (research, course content, location etc). We tend to require two letters of recommendation - when I was applying I asked my personal tutor and my dissertation supervisor. Have you had a professor you've taken multiple classes with? To be honest, a distinguished professor isn't going to help your case if they don't know you. You need to have that personal connection, with someone who knows you, knows how you work, and knows your capability for continuing on with academia. You're fine with the research experience - I was accepted without any experience at all, no publications either but I did have very strong LoRs. Basically, my experience is that as long as you can prove you're capable of the work required for the masters you should be fine to get it. It's well known that international students get priority over local ones at the MSc level over here, just because they pay more (hey I may be wrong, but that's the general consensus). Hope that helps a bit.

1) You're fine to take the GRE in October...provided you don't need to retake. The reason most of us take the GRE earlier is to allow time to retake if we're dissatisfied with our scores. As for 2) I'm not sure exactly but by April I will be in the midst of my MSc finals and thesis hell. I too am an international student and will not be able to get to school visits then. However, I should be able to take a day to get to the embassy for visa interviews which will be essential. Theoretically you could be accepted as late as April, but from what I've gathered on these boards, most people find out their acceptances earlier (provided they're not waitlisted). Also, if a school needs you to visit them, I'm sure explaining that you're recovering from spinal surgery would be a good enough reason to not do a transatlantic flight! Just my 2 cents.

Oh I feel ya! Thank god for Netflix because I'd have gone up the wall otherwise. It keeps me company when I work from home

Thanks so much for the reply! It's frustrating with the international differences - half of what I've covered in my undergrad I'm covering in my masters, and it looks like I'd be entering the PhD programme in the US having covered a lot of the required course content. Irritating but I'm okay with it - allows me to find my feet. There are so few research assistantships in the UK for BSc students - I ended up with the one I have purely through luck and having proven myself in my undergrad thesis. I just wish "translating" experiences and opportunities was easier!

1. Olympic team sports biomechanist (swimming or gymnastics...or anything) 2. NFL team sports biomechanist 3. Marine biologist 4. Military rehabilitation scientist 5. Just generally preventing injuries and shortening the rehab time for athletes, military, police, firefighters etc 6. Adventurer - I'd love to do this full time. Sail around the world, climb mountains, surf unknown breaks, hike continents...just need some means of funding it all! I'm on my way to getting the qualifications for the biomechanics & sports injury stuff. In the UK at least, you have to be a researcher/lecturer and do consultancy work for sports teams as there's not the funds for them to take on Sports Medicine staff full time that aren't medical doctors. Hoping this might change within the next decade! Theoretically I'm qualified to be an adventurer, just need the finances!

Okay so I'm hoping you guys can clarify something for me. Terminology seems to vary from country to country and maybe even school to school and it's super confusing! As part of my undergrad degree I had to conduct an original unique piece of research - idea conception, experimental design, data collection, data analysis and the write up, with minimal guidance from a supervisor. My university called this a research project, but from what I've read in this forum and elsewhere, is this more like a "thesis" in the US? I will be doing something similar, although in slightly more depth for my MSc project too (also called a project in the UK), and discussing this with American colleagues tends to receive a slight dismissal until I explain my project. I've had to write millions of lab reports too - where the experiment has already been designed, but I had to do the data collection, analysis and write up. What would this generally be called? I've worked as a research assistant in the UK for a major study (working with England Rugby all the way down to grassroots level sport), but it seems that this may not be the same sort of stuff that a research assistant may do in the US. I've been predominantly delivering training sessions to clubs, collecting data and analysing it, but it's not lab work - more computer-based collection and analysis. Sorry if this seems trivial but I want to call all my research experience the right thing, so as not to discredit myself!

I start my masters in 3 weeks and I just got all my IT credentials. Want them to update the timetable so I know where I'm going to be when!! Cannot wait to start - but first I got a trip to the US to visit potential PhD schools and see the boy. Exciting times ahead.

I'd like to add that as tough as it is not to have family member's support, at the end of the day it's your life, your career and your choice to go to grad school. Many of us do it without family finances and at the end of the day we're adults. What Exponential Decay said about how to talk to people when they disagree with our opinions is true - no one will take you seriously if you're stamping your feet, just as we don't take our detractor's seriously when they behave childishly. The best outcome is that no one falls out over your decision to go to grad school. Sometimes easier said than done, but don't let family opinions stop you if it's truly best for you.