schoolpsych_hopeful

Ok, since this has now become the "Worst. Rejection. Ever." thread, here's a somewhat related story that will make all of us feel better about ourselves...

A few years ago, I applied for a job with my state's Dept. of Health and Human Services. About five weeks later, I received a fat envelope in the mail. The cover sheet was a letter that read, "Dear Applicant, We are unable to consider your application to Job Code #1234567 due to reason codes A5, Q14, and R23." They also included what turned out to be a ridiculously detailed, multi-page table of all the possible reasons that your application could be rejected, categorized by letter and number. That's right: my state had not only quantified my failure, but thoughtfully included my very own TABLE OF FAIL.

I really, really should have framed it

To my mind Bread Loaf has been unfairly panned. While it does have a reputation as a "party school" - the undergraduate population is constantly baked - the ranking of its graduate program continues to rise. Academic traditionalists are sure to like its fine marble architecture and (frankly) whitebread demographics, while radicals may appreciate the role various other cultures have played in helping it grow. Don't worry about your funding kneads - its upper-crust benefactors have ensured there's plenty of research dough.

I visited and found it kind of stale. It's a wonder it's still able to fill people's needs. Hopefully it'll move away from the old mold if it wants to stay fresh. All those crusty old professors expect their incoming students to butter them up so heavily. And the weather, omg, you get toasted -- though you'll never run short of sunbeams. On the plus side, they do have rolling admissions, and the French and Italian programs are quite enticing. On the whole, it may pan out for you, but you better not go against the grain. I hope you're able to find a nice little slice of life at Bread Loaf.

Take a deep breath and slow down. Take out a piece of paper and physically write down all of the reasons you want to quit. Put it away. Come back to it in a day or two. How valid do those reasons seem now? On the back of the paper, write down all of the reasons to keep going and finish. Put it away again. Take it out in a day or two. Compare the two lists. Which one seems more valid? Take out another piece of paper. Write down what it will take to get it done - materials, tools, emotional/physical aspects, etc. Put this list away. Look at it in a day or two. Do you think you have what you need to get it done? This process may seem very simplistic and almost corny, but I guarantee it does actually work. You are giving a voice to your concerns, a name to the problem, and some space to think and reflect on everything - that will get you to a clear-headed answer better than anything any one of us could offer up to you by way of advice one way or the other.

Good luck!!

Warning: nerdy and completely useless except as game; if I didn't want to spend a totally unreasonable number of hours engaged in pointless intellectual pursuits, I wouldn't be applying to grad school My math or reasoning in general might be off; if it is; call me on it. Note also that I'm being a Bayesian about things, so read "there is x% of y" as "you should estimate the probability of y at x%."

So, you've applied to some set of schools. For most of them, Peterson's lists their number of applicants, admissions rates, and actual number of attenders from each class. How would one produce an unbiased estimate of your chances of universal rejection (and, possibly, a few other things) from just this information? (Of course if you have more information than this, you would want to make the model more complex to incorporate that extra information, and I'd love to see models that incorporate GPA/GREs, &c.)

a : the number of admissions you will actually receive
n : the number of schools to which you have applied
pi : the admissions rate of the ith school to which you have applied (the order isn't important)

Prior assumption: for the schools for which you have applied, you have no particular reason to believe that you are especially more or less competitive than the typical applicant. This doesn't mean that you expect to be exactly in the middle - if that case you know you would be universally rejected, assuming admissions rates are all below 50% - but that you expect a 1% chance of being in the first percentile of competitive applicants, a 2% chance of being in 2nd percentile or better, a 3% chance of being in the third percentile or better, and so on. If you can accept this prior, your chances of being accepted into school i is, conveniently enough, px, and the average expected number of schools you will get into is

μa = Σni=1pi = p1 + p2 +p3 + ... + pn

or the additive sum of their admission rates. However, you don't know how well these are correlated with each other. If they're maximally correlated - they all admit students on precisely the same criteria - then your chances of a wipeout are equal to the complement of the most favorable admissions rate among your schools; if they are totally uncorrelated, your chances of a wipeout are equal to the multiplicative sum of their complements; if if maximally negatively correlated, then your chances of a wipeout are min(0,1 - μa). Common sense says that they should be positively but not maximally correlated, but how much? Fortunately you know

b : the number of admittances schools in your field send out divided by their number of graduate students per year, where "field" is selected such that its competitiveness roughly reflects the competitiveness of the set of schools to which you have applied

(Sneaky assumption: the number of those in your field you are admitted to grad school and choose not to go at all is zero, or at least small enough to be ignored.)

Thus we know that a randomly chosen applicant in your field - someone, by the first prior, who is as competitive as you - should expect, given that she is accepted into any schools, to get into b schools on average. If, as would be convenient, her expected total number of admittances including the possibility of wipeout is the same as yours, μa, then your/her chances of a wipeout, p(a=0) are

μa = 0*p(a=0) + b*(1-p(a=0))
μa/b = 1 - p(a=0)
p(a=0) = 1 - μa/b

If you haven't applied to the typical number of schools

However, this randomly chosen applicant, who is as competitive as you, isn't necessarily applying to as many schools as you - she's applying to n̄ of them, which might be more or less - although by assumption we suppose the schools she applies to are as competitive as your own. So in fact her expected number of admissions, μā = μan̄/n and

μan̄/n = 0*p(ā=0) + b*[1-p(ā=0)] = b*[1-p(ā=0)]
μan̄/bn = 1 - p(ā=0)
p(ā=0) = 1 - μan̄/bn
n̄ = bn * [1 - p(ā=0)] / p(ā=0)

If we knew n̄, we could know p(ā=0) as well - or visa versa - and thus

p(a=0) = p(ā=0)^(n/n̄)
p(a=0) = (1 - μan̄/bn)^(n/n̄) or p(a=0) = p(ā=0) ^ { p(ā=0) / b[1 - p(ā=0)] }

Can we produce n̄ or p(ā=0) independently? Unfortunately I don't see a way to do so, limiting yourself to the Peterson's data. Choose a number that seems reasonable for one or the other based on anecdotal evidence, or find some publicly available data (and post it here, ideally.) But either way an estimate of one should get you to p(a=0). This should also give you B=μa|a>0, the expected number of schools you get into in the event that you get into any schools at all:

μa = 0*p(a=0) + B*[1-p(a=0)]
B = μa / [1-p(a=0)]
p(a=0) = 1 - μa/B

Revising in light of results

All of the above assumes that you haven't heard back from any schools yet. If you get an acceptance or rejection, how should that affect your expectations of getting into other schools? Unfortunately the ratio of acceptances to grad students doesn't tell us what the distribution of acceptances among the admitted is.

Suppose you hear back from your first institution, University Q - an acceptance. Will you get into another? According to Bayes' theorem,

p(a>1)|into Q = pQ|a>1 * p(a>1) / pQ

Only pQ is a known constant, so we need to guess pQ|a>1 * p(a>1).

pQ|a>1 is the chance that, given that you got into more than one school, one of those schools was Q. This is equal to

pQ|a>1 = (pQ - pQ|a=1) / p(a>1)

so

p(a>1)|into Q = [ (pQ - pQ|a=1) / p(a>1) ] * p(a>1) / pQ
p(a>1)|into Q = (pQ - pQ|a=1) / pQ

(One intuitive, but clearly wrong, estimate of the chance of admittance to Q given only one admission is

pQ|a=1 = (pQ / μa) leading to
p(a>1)|into Q = [pQ - (pQ / μa)] / pQ
p(a>1)|into Q = 1 - (1 / μa)

This implies that an acceptance from one school is nearly as good a signal as a decision from another, and in fact that getting into an easier school should revise your expectations up more than getting into a harder school - prior to learning anything, you have a higher expectation of getting into at least one school other than your reach than getting into at least one school other than your safety, but in fact getting into your reach and into your safety brings their chances to the same level. In fact if there's any overlap between expected admissions at all then the chance of being admitted to an easier program but not a harder program is not only more likely than the reverse, but in a way that exaggerates their independent probabilities.)

One obvious method is to use recursion: imagine someone, as competitive as yourself, who applied to every program but the one you've just heard back from, i.e. μa2 = μa - pQ, n2=n-1,n̄ remains constant, and her field is your field, such that

B2 = (μa - pQ) / [(1- { p(ā=0) ^ [ (n-1) / n̄ ] }]
p(a2=0) = 1 - [ (μa - pQ)/B2 ]

In that case, p(a=0) - p(a2=0) = pQ|a=1, and - if we want to write out a big ridiculous equation -



p(a>1)|Q = {1+ pQ + {(1- [ p(ā=0)(n-1)/n̄ ](μa + pQ)}/(μa - pQ) - p(ā=0)n/n̄ } / pQ


p(I made some sort of obvious arithmetic mistake or worse) > 0.5, so the above is most likely nonsense. If it's right then calculating how to update your chances in case of a rejection should be trivial.

A pamphlet, you say?

Presenting!

a preview!

Front side
Back side

I am - Chi Phi, University of Tennessee. Just curious to see who else is with me.

I need someone to proofread and critique my CV; I'll proofread yours. PM me if you are interested. Thanks!

so this is from the grad advising office of my undergraduate alma mater who handle the graduate admissions. I got an acceptance very late and the standard email put the decision date within a week so I just walked in to talk to them about getting an extension and they seemed happy to help me out and told to send the records person an email so they have a written request of the action. So I do that and I get an email back saying it was ok and also telling me that if I end up accepting I would need to fill out an international student verification form. I am not an international student nor have I ever been, I applied as domestic and not only that I did my undergrad there and they have my records and documents, I am of asian descent and thus have an asian name (that's pretty much the only international thing on my app). so I went in to tell them that I am not international and the lady looks at me and says "so what are you then?". I then asked if my application was processed as international as it changes my eligibility for funding options (international students have to taken english proficiency exams in order to qualify for TA-ships among other things) and instead of answering the question she just tells me it doesn't effect funding when in fact all of the application materials say that it does.

We really should provide the community with a pamphlet, "When Someone You Love is Applying to Grad School". We can include sections like "Just Because Your Loved One is Smart, Does Not Guarantee Acceptance" and "How Adcoms Hold Your Loved One's Future in Their Hands" and "Why Telling Your Loved One to Look at the Bigger Picture is Frankly Insulting (No One Goes to Grad School for the Lulz)".

This just happened to a (ridiculously qualified) friend of mine earlier today. I went with "That doesn't make a damn bit of sense" and "I have bourbon in my desk."

I honestly don't know what I'd want to hear if/when this happens to me. I'm a talker, so I'd probably just want someone to nod sympathetically while I whine and cry for an hour.

And yeah, I hate all that "that just means it wasn't meant to happen" bullshit, too. Uh, thanks. Mind telling me what is meant to happen?

"Well this just means you can get a real job and become a productive member of society." <------my parents, I'm sure.

-You didn't want to go there anyway.

-You'll get in somewhere else.

-That just means you weren't meant to go there.



Any more?

I'm going to give you the same pep talk I gave myself this morning:

It will happen when it happens, and not before. If you wake up every morning saying, "this is the day!" or looking for signs of your imminent success or failure, then all you're really doing is setting yourself up for disappointment when you don't meet your own arbitrary deadlines. You cannot spend every day between today and April 15th doing this to yourself. That is crazy, and you will be miserable. Hope for responses, but don't let the presence or absence of a response dictate your day. Acknowledge your anxiety, but don't obsess over it and make it worse. Think positively, but realize that this decision is out of your hands.

Because I want to know which schools are sending out offers as they go out

So far I have gotten interview offers from:

University of Arkansas
Penn State

No word from:

Yale
Vanderbilt
Temple
Binghamton
University of North Carolina Greensboro
Boston University


What do other people have so far?

The University of Houston's economics Phd program made me an offer of admission. AFTER I HAD ALREADY MOVED TO HOUSTON AND JUST A FEW DAYS BEFORE CLASSES WERE TO START IN FALL 2009 IT REVOKED THE OFFER OF ADMISSION. I COULD NOT START IN FALL 2009 BECAUSE IT REVOKED THE OFFER OF ADMISSION BUT I HAD ALREADY MOVED TO HOUSTON AND PASSED UP OTHER OFFERS.

THE CLAIM WAS THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAD MISUNDERSTOOD THAT I HAD ATTENDED JOHNS HOPKINS ADVANCED STUDIES M.A. IN APPLIED ECONOMICS AS THE DOCTORAL TRACK ECONOMICS PHD COURSES. THE MISTAKE WAS COMPLETELY THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS SINCE I DID NOT MISREPRESENT MYSELF IN THE ADMISSIONS PROCESS. THEY DIDN'T CARE IF THE MISTAKE WAS THEIRS AND THAT I HAD ALREADY MOVED TO HOUSTON.

A letter from a high school teacher is a big no. Job supervisor, maybe. Try sending your old professors an email. They might actually remember you. (Try trawling the forums for previous threads from people who have lost contact with professors.)

If you're applying to any of the programs I have listed below, here's my advice:

1) Show up drunk. I don't mean have one or two at the bar before you show up - I mean start drinking at 7am so that you're absolutely blitzed when you get there. This will help with the nerves and make the faculty like you.

2) Who doesn't like t-shirt tuxedos? Wear one. And shorts - jean cut-offs if you have them. If not, Umbros are pretty fancy. You're dressing for success here and you want to let them know you're serious.

3) Mock the professor while they ask you a question. Repeat exactly what they're saying to you in a stupid voice while making crazy facial gestures. The faculty will eat this up. Who doesn't want a jokester in their program?

4) Disregard fuzzylogician's advice. If you don't know, it's time to turn the BS on. This will show them you're prepared for the wide world of academia. As long as it sounds convincing, you're home free. Another tactic is to answer all questions with "That's what she said."

5) Also concerning fuzzylogician's advice: if you don't understand their question (or even if you do), just answer one nobody asked. As long as you use the field's buzz words, you're bound to hit on the right answer somewhere. When the professor tries to stop your speech, don't take no for an answer. Hold up your finger or wave your hand dismissively, then sit back in your chair, gaze at the ceiling, and continue with your monologue.

6) Talk about the great offers you just got from the other schools on your list. Tell them a small fee might be able to retain you.



If you're applying elsewhere, I suggest disregarding my advice entirely.

OMG that one is so annoying! Or the alternate version (frequently deployed by clueless men at bars): "OK, so, like, analyze me right now. What am I thinking?" (Well, *I'm* thinking you just proved yourself unworthy of my superior mind-reading skills. MUAHAHA!)

And I love when people try to launch into a debate about Freud when the overwhelming majority of the field had discredited 95% of what he said/thought/wrote/believed/ate for lunch by the mid-1970s.

grad_wannabe, that sounds so frustrating! What is it with people being so freaking clueless about studying art??

NO!! DO NOT put any title in front of the name except Dr or Prof.. even if the prof is an assistant/associate, write Prof (or Dr). Although the truth is that they are assistant/associate profs, the adcomms might not take it nicely. Most profs have PhDs, so writing Dr is probably the best idea.

This question is really frustrating to me. I understand that it's really just a diversity statement, and I'm not diverse in the way that it's currently politically correct to be diverse, so I wish I could just ignore it.

That said, I'm planning to discuss how my family brought me up understanding how important education is. I'll talk about how my mom teaches at a Title I (economically disadvantaged) school and how my dad valued his own education so much that he worked full time to pay for it while he attended. I'm also going to mention some of the financial hardships I had in school that caused me to have to work for a large portion of my degree. Beyond this, I don't really know what to say about it. My research topics aren't exactly relevant to improving education for minorities, so I can't go anywhere near that.

I'm having a lot of difficulty as well. I've tried several different approaches, and the best one focuses on a hardship that isn't really listed in the prompt. Also, I can't really tie it to why I'm pursuing a ph.d...I mean, there are so many ways to answer the question, 'why do you want to get a ph.d. in ____ field?' and it's difficult to tie them directly to having a hardship in your life. How are you guys coming along with this?

i am having the same problem, bro. I will simply igore others' part and focus on myself.

I know this has been mentioned before, but is anyone else struggling with this one?

Please describe how your personal background informs yourdecision to pursue a graduate degree. Please include information on how youhave overcome barriers to access opportunities in higher education, evidence ofhow you have come to understand the barriers faced by others, evidence of youracademic service to advance equitable access to higher education for women,racial minorities, and individuals from other groups that have beenhistorically underrepresented in higher education, evidence of your researchfocusing on underserved populations or related issues of inequality, orevidence of your leadership among such groups.




Why the huge focus on others' access to higher education? I understand you are not expected to address every one of the subquestions, but this prompt is frustratingly specific!