Bioenchilada

Yeah haha I'm already here, currently living in south philly but moving to university city (basically) in the fall.

I think your credentials are great and that the diversith in your research experience will take you very far in the admissions process, assuming that you have good LORs and decent GrE scores. I would pick your "favorite" 7-8 schools and look at their program structure and even reach out to current students to assess if you're a good match. You can have Harvard-worthy credentials but still end up getting rejected if you don't fit into what the school/program is looking for. Think about where you want to live, consider stipend and how cost of living will impact the quality of your life, and look at how much funding and resources the school has. You have a lot of fields of interest and it's hard to rank umbrella programs, so I assume you're going by reputation? Though I guess that looking at cell/molecular biology rankings is a little better for your purposes. Try to gauge your ranking opinion of the school based on NIH/NSF funding and maybe by looking at places like the National Research Council Rankings since the US News dataset is incomplete for specialties, which is what truly matters for graduate school. Good luck in your applications! If you have any questions, you can PM me Ps: You don't need publications to get into top schools.

I don't think the Verbal section effectively shows a student's ability to read or write though. Lol

First off, lol at the type of student. Though you have a lot of research experience and might have good letters if your attitude and work in lab was good, I think your GPAs will most likely hurt you significantly. I guess your GRE could be higher, though I don't think it really matters that much since everything else is literally more important lol I suggest your cast a wide net and apply broadly, hopefully your Masters will help. Also, I met a guy during my Penn interview that was 31, so don't feel discouraged by your age (And I know like 3 people back at my home school that also started their PhD pretty late and are still very motivated )

I have to disagree with your professor, at least with regards to UPenn. The environment here is super friendly, the students are happy, and every program director I've met has been extremely enthusiastic, kind, and helpful. I also think you have too many safeties. With your credentials, you can take more risks when applying to schools

The math section is more important than the verbal for the sciences;however, you can't fail the section either. Try to score >70th+ percentile on both.

Master's and undergrad GPA are scaled very differently and have different meanings. You don't take as many classes for your Master's and some programs require you to get a B or higher to pass, meaning the scale only goes from 3.0-4.0. However, given that the classes you take are supposed to be more difficult, this might work in your favor. I don't think that any factor in particular offsets another per se. The good thing about a lot of grad programs is that they don't have a minimum GPA/GRE requirement, so can technically still apply. There's nothing you can do about your GPA, so my best advice is that your apply broadly and make sure that your SOP ans LORs are amazing. Good luck!

Woops.

He's starting in the fall and hasn't moved to Boston yet.

A 2.62/2.8 is under the minimum requirements for most Ph.D programs. Do you alreay have a Master's? Is there a way to explain your low GPA? Regardless, I'd recommend you take the subject test whenever you apply but, at this poinf, your GPA is just too low for many programs, especially top schools.

What have you done to make your profile different from last year? Did you conduct research of some sort? How will you explain your interest in computational neuroscience in your SOP? How has your research experience prepared you to pursue a degree in computational neuroscience? Why are you only applying to top schools?

Your numbers are very good, but you are a little short on experience. Applying this cycle might lead to good results but getting more experience would be even better. You also only have 1 rec letter coming from a PI, what happened to the other person you worked with?

You can have relevant experience to your field of research interest via a job; however, I job is a different than research in itself. Like, working in a research lab will just enhances your criticial thinking skills and provides you with relevant techniques used in academic research, in addition to helping you present yourself in an academic setting. I would advise against making your SOP too personal, that's not what it's about. You can mention something about your personal experience briefly, but don't take up too much space. The SOP is the place to explain how has your experience (research) prepared you for a Ph.D program.

3.1 is not a terrible GPA per se. However, even 1.5 years of research experience is not much. Also, it's always preferable for letters to come from people you did research. Because of this, I'd suggest that you either do a Master's or get a tech position in a new lab, where you'll learn new techniques and, hopefully, get a rec letter from someone new.

In the United States, top schools (or any) won't allow you to do two Ph.D's simultaneously. A single Ph.D is a very rigorous degree, so it will consume all of your time. Not only this, but lab work is incredibly time consuming and it'll be impossible for you to work (or successfully do so) in two labs at the same time. Also, the requirements for Math and Biology Ph.D programs far exceed just meeting the prerequisites. Even if possible, you will need to have extensive research experience in both fields, or in a field that's applicable to both (biophysics, biomathematics). Adcoms like to see people that have vision and have a general idea of what they want to do in their lives. If your goals are all over the place, you will most likely be rejected. If you want to conduct AGING research, I'd suggest going for the Ph.D in biology since it'll align better with your desire to help your "parents live longer". However, I'd have to say that most research that is conducted does not lead to a breakthrough that'll result in solving an immediate issue, meaning you will most likely not be able to get rid of the problem. However, you could be able to consider a very important puzzle piece to the general problem. Currently, it seems like you are conflicted about what you want to do. Do you honestly just want a career that gives you more immediate financial security, or do you want to follow your passion and choose something that'll make you happy? I'd suggest you think about this more.

I am CAMB-Cancer Biology

Your research is also not typically what biology Ph.D programs look for; BUT, I'm certain that with your experience you could land a tech position that'll better prepare you for grad school.

Hmm, I wouldn't know what to tell you then. The University of Washington is a pretty competitive school and the Ph.D admissions process is very tough. I wouldn't discourage you to apply for a Ph.D, but I think your best bet would be to finish a Master's. Nothing can really fix your GPA, and competitive applicants tend to have an undergrad GPA 3.5+. They also typically have consistent research experience that exceeds 2 years for top 20 schools, and 3 good letters from people they conducted research with. The best thing you could do, if you decide to apply to Ph.D programs, would be to score the highest GRE you can, both the general AND the subject test.

What's your GPA? What kind of work do you do? From what kind of school did you do your undergrad? Are you an international student? How well did you do on the GRE? What kind of schools are you considering? Who will be writing your rec letters? The advice I can provide depends on all of those factors. I think you leaving grad school for personal reasons won't hurt you that much if you can effectively explain it in your SOP.

Lololol

Hey! I just graduated from Purdue with a BS in Cell, Molecular, and Developmental Biology and starting my Ph.D this summer. You should PM me so I can better advise you about what courses you should take and whatnot. Boiler up!

What's your GPA? Are you an international student? How much research experience OVERALL do you have? Also, you don't need publications to get into top school. Most people don't have them.

I'm one that believes that the graduate admissions process is truly holistic. They care more about what you can bring to the program, your experience, and your drive more than your numbers. Caring too much about the GRE particularly is a common mistake, IMO. Not saying you should slack though lol

Lolol I misread your post and thought you said by-passing interviews instead of reviewing rounds. My apologies. However, I still think you're placing too much importance on the GRE. It's evident that the higher the score the better, but anything above the 70% percentile on both parts and 4+ on the verbal is just fine. Harvard (DMS) and Stanford (Biological Sciences) make it very clear in their websites that the process is holistic and that they use no minimums. Of course, I know some schools, like my alma mater, have explicit cutoff for their programs; but, if schools in the top 10 wanted to use them, I'm certain they'd make them explicit.

I don't know what field you're in, but I disagree with some of the points you've made. I know plenty of people without Nature/Cell publications and a "low-GRE" that have gotten jnto top 10 programs. No one can by-pass interviews in the biological sciences. Not only this, but many programs (the majority) have also stopped using GPA/GRE cutoffs. Most of the top 10 no longer uses minimums.