Bioenchilada

I would REALLY try to get a befter GRE scores. They don't make your application, but they can definitely break it. If you had a better score, I would say you have decent chances, though, as I've said before, having only one research experience weakens your app in two ways: LORs from people that have supervised your research are the ideal scenario, and SOP-writing could be more difficult when you only draw out from one lab. I would suggets not applying to only those ultra competitive schools, and adding more top 20/30 schools Note: Cornell's website states that GRE scores below 153 on the verbal section and 308 combined typically leads to rejection. Take this as you may when making decisions.

Your credentials are excellent both number and research-wise, I'm certain that if you write a well-crafted SOP, you'll get plenty of interviews from the places you listed. The SOP is a crucial factor for admission, more so than GPA and GRE in my opinion, so make sure you spend plenty of time writing it and that you get plenty of feedback from people that are familiar with the admissions process. Also, I honestly don't think 4 letters are necessary, but you can keep it in there if you feel like it's important.

That's good then! Hopefully that additional PI letter is very positive and helps you get plenty of interviews

Ah ok, I don't know what impact your age will have relative to your research experience, but only 1 LOR from a PI is kind of risky. Also, SOP writing might turn out to be more difficult as well.

I'd try to see if your former PI is still willing to write a letter for you. Ideally, your letters should come from people you have worked for in a research setting since your ability to do research is primarily what the adcom is looking for. I had missed the last part of your post. How long ago did you graduate from undergrad?

Which part of cell and molecular biology are you interested in? Regardless, I think you are competitive for most of the programs you applied to. Your performance on the GRE might enhance or weaken your application depending on your math score, but your biology subject test score is stellar. Who will be writing your LORs?

I mean, you can format your SOP however you think you'll get your point across. I don't think you'll get rejected over citing work, I'm just saying that it can be a little off-format. In research presentations (power points), you tend to cite figures only because they show experimental data that does not belong to you; however, you don't cite every single bullet point even if you didn't discover what you're talking about and lay the foundational knowledge. Documents can be called the same and still require different formats; however, I don't think a GRADUATE SCHOOL SOP is the best place for you to talk extensively about foundational knowledge that requires citing. Could it be seen as disingineous? Perhaps, but it is only a formatting matter--though I understand your stance of citing everything that does not belong to you. In the end, as I said earlier, you do you booboo.

Dont put references on your SOP. Also, I wouldn't cite your own white papers nor unpublished work. Maybe you could mention your work if it's in the process of being published, if you mention it at all. Also, most interviews are in mid January to mid February.

How is your application different this year than it was before? How did you pick your schools? Why did you do so? A safety is relative based on your own perception of your chances, and you should still be interested in attending that school. I don't think any of your schools are safeties particularly, if that's what you were asking.

Universities don't tend to disclose the reason why they rejected you in the first place, so it's hard for the applicant to know what actually went wrong. Also, a lot of schools don't reject a student simply for not having one course on two, given that there's been a strong push for students conducting interdisciplinary work. Based on @StupidVivian's school-choice, I'd say that their problem was MOST LIKELY not course-related, at all.

Though I don't think your credentials are particularly bad, you sure are applying to insanely competitive schools. Your GPA is also on the low-side, though an upward trend always helps. Do you think that the quality of your letters will be great? Also, what was your basis for choosing those programs?

The admissions committee wont care about the classes that you take next semester since interview invites are sent either late this year or very early next year. As long as you graduate, they don't care about your spring classes. Heck, even not doing research next semester won't even matter, they just want a proof of degree completion before you enroll. I also don't know if it's a good idea to talk about coursework in your SOP, most times it just ends up being a waste of space since they just care about your research experience and how they impacted your decision to pursue a PhD.

I feel like there's a limit to how much you can get prior from your interview, where they bombard you with what makes the program great. Prior to applying, I think it's good enough to be pleased with the program structure and location, and that you feel you have plenty of options to choose from in terms of PIs, even in fields or topics that are not particularly of interest. If you feel like you would want to explore other fields or would like a lot of crosstalk amongst faculty and research, make sure that your program supports doing rotations in different topics and actually promotes interdisciplinary work. Umbrella programs are typically great at doing this. In my opinion, I wouldn't apply to schools where the fit is just okay. It gets hard to choose interviewers and to keep your motivation going, which could show and kill your chances during the interview. I didn't enjoy the interview weekends at the schools where the fit was decent, but that might just be me. Just make sure that you can write something about, lets say Harvard, besides saying that it's Harvard and it has PIs you want to work with. I, for one, focused on outreach an diversity groups in some schools or emphasized how, in my field, being in a school where there was a lot of collaboration would lead to the best learning experience, opportunities for translational research, etc...

Are you only applying to those four schools? Also, you have two Master's? I don't think your stats are bad, but they're also not stellar. Your GRE could be a bit better, but I don't think that'll really matter in the grander scheme. Do you only have two years of research experience though? As in, did you get that from your Master's? Like, if you've spent a significant amount of time in school and academia and only have two years of experience, it might raise some eyebrows. Do you only have one letter that is coming from a PI? I feel like having someone that knows you but hasn't really supervised your research can't really provide much accurate information about YOUR skills as a scientist. The fact that you did Master's level research might help you, especially if it was full time, since it obviously shows your commitment to science, which is excellent. However, if you've only been in one lab, that might come back to bite you when writing your SOP and with your LORs. I don't think it's impossible for you to get into the schools you're applying to, but those are very little options and very competitive programs.

Lol a lot of techs actually DO NOT work for minimum wage. In fact, some get paid even more than the actual grad students. Also, some techs actually have their own meaningful projects instead of just running someone else's gel, so I don't know if "lab monkey" is a fair term to use. With respect to your actual situation, I don't know what to say. Maybe taking a gap year won't really affect you that much, a lot of medical students do and they end up doing just fine.

I think your profile is pretty solid as well, just make sure to write a good SOP. You list looks good too based on your profile, though I'd advice against adding more schools (maybe even take one off).

You don't have to know details, generally. Interviews are more about you.

Are you applying to only 5 schools? Also, I must say that a "safe bet" is hard to find when it comes to grad school. You should try to diversify a bit when it comes to interests since 2 PIs if really not much if you're basing school selection on that alone. Schools look for an interest in them beyond just PIs, since those can move or not be taking students. Aim for at least 5 people you would work with, or more, and look for reasons to apply to schools besides the PIs.

Are you applying to these schools simply based on reputation? You seem to have really good credentials otherwise, assuming your LORs and GRE score are good. Your SOP will be very important, credentials can only take you so far.

I feel research experiences should always be mentioned in the SOP and put in a bigger picture with respect to the impact it had on the applicant's decision to attend graduate school, especially if there is not a separate research statement. (I think only Penn had a separate research statement in the app) Note: I was told to mention my experiences by many professors at my internship sites, some of which were involved in admissions.

Most of my schools did not require a research statement; however, interview experiences might change from one person to the next. I'm just talking about my personal experience. My original point was that if you don't have anything good to say about the reasons underlying your gap year, don't bring it up. I'd rather have something be subject to speculation, or not noted, than weakly justified. Having been interviewed people that personally reviewed my app, if they want to truly something, they'll ask.

I think you have a good balance of schools. But, if you're choosing schools simply because they're highly ranked, it'll affect the quality of your SOP. Choose schools where you feel you'll belong based on the research being done, the environment, program structure, etc. Of course program strength (i.e ranking), shouldn't be ignored, but it should also not be the main factor that leads you to apply. I am not an international student, so I don't know how admissions works for that applicant pool. However, I do think that one year of research is typically not enough to write an excellent SOP, especially if only at one lab. I might be wrong though. I know international students at top schools, but I'm not familiar with their credentials. PS. I was admitted to Cornell's BBS program, so I could give you some insight as to how the program and interview process is structured.

Wait, how many will you have? Anything more than 3 is not really good in my opinion. More letters don't compensate for potential deficiencies. I guess having letters from the professors in charge of these practical courses would be equivalent to asking anyone other professor for one. PS. Do not write what you learned in these courses in your SOP, it's not the right place to list all the techniques you've learned

Who would be writing your rec letters? How many rotations did you do? I just think that one year of research experience will make it very difficult to write a SOP that doesn't get too technical or redundant. Your numbers are good and publications certainly help. You also have a good school balance, so that's also good.

I can take a look at your SOP, just PM me