Neuro PolarBear

PlanB, I'm not so sure how, as an applicant, you can say these things with as much certainty as you have in this thread, and others. While GPA is certainly one factor of the admissions process, it is by no means the only one, nor is it the most important one. I wouldn't be so quick to knock it, or use it as a way to judge an applicant's chances. Research experience, publications, and letters from well-known PIs, in my opinion all trump it. While it's true that many of the people applying to some of these schools have GPAs above 3.7 or even 3.9, if the average if 3.7, than for every person with a 3.9 there could just as easily be one with a 3.5.

I applied to both, but pulled an allnighter to write my project proposal for Janelia since it was my last application. I think it was a little too tangential and outside the scope of the group leaders that I'm interested in, so they might not like it. But, then again, I didn't want to propose something that was just a slight iteration of what the teams there have already published, so I don't know.

Welp. I don't think I spent enough time on my WashU application, but I need to get in there to have a shot at Janelia.

See, two threads are twice the work to follow!

Which program is that?

A fair number of neuro people have been posting in the other thread, so I'm not sure this one's necessary. I did, however, apply to neuro programs.

MIT BCS (Neuro) sent out an email today saying they'll send out interview notifications in January.

Those scores should be fine. Aerospace programs prefer a slightly higher quant score, but yours won't be held against you. Generally, scores above 160 or >85-90% are sufficient for most programs.

Echoing what others have said, unless you're an amazing fit for them, I'd be willing to bet that many professors aren't going to take the time to check your application after you contact them. If you were really interested in working with specific PIs, why didn't you contact them in advance, provide a CV, etc.? At most schools, the admission committee rotates from year to year. If you mentioned a specific professor in your statement of purpose and you have decent stats (GRE/GPA/LORs) than it's likely that you'll get a chance to meet with them as part of interviews. Even though most applications are short, you should have had ample room to present enough information about yourself and your interests for them to judge whether you're a good fit for the program. However, since it's hard to see just from a piece of paper, that's why they invite people for interviews! If you end up interviewing with other professors, get in, and want to know whether your PI of interest is taking rotation / grad students, then you can go ahead and contact them. Contacting them now may signal that you're insecure about getting in and you're also not in a good position where you can ask a PI to go to bat for you.

I think that it's appropriate to do so much earlier in the application process in the fall, but I wouldn't do so after you've already submitted you application. After you've already been accepted and are trying to decide between places is also a good time to contact potential PIs. Additionally, if you do reach out to a PI, make sure you tailor your email to their research and demonstrate that you understand what they're working on and why you'd like to work with them.

For all the science graduate programs, research experience is the most important. How long have you spent in that oncology lab? Will you have any presentations or publications? If you only have <1 year of neuro research, you might not be as strong of a candidate. You might want to consider retaking the GRE or staying on as research assistant for a year or two after college to improve your chances.

The difficulty of the section does make a difference, so UnAltroEgitto's answer is incorrect. Missing 5 questions in the first section is not the same as missing 5 in the second section. The easiest way to see how the raw score is converted into one from 130–170, I'd use the PowerPrep II software. The Official GRE guide also has a conversion chart for the paper practice test, but this one isn't adaptive between sections. The best way to prepare for the official test is to take practice tests, especially the two from ETS in the PowerPrep II software. These should help give you a better sense of how you'll do on the official one.

For the programs that ask you to upload a copy of your transcript, yes. Many have heat-sensitive ink and other features that they understand will not be retained in the digital copy.

I did it at the same place I was an undergrad, so I just stayed ended up staying the same lab I was already in. Also, I wouldn't worry about GPA that much. The school I went to had so much grade inflation that in almost every class 50% of students got As.

I did Amgen, too, and didn't have that great of an experience with it. But maybe that's because I wasn't at Harvard... Don't worry about having to settle; I'm sure you'll have a lot of great programs to pick from.

Even though that is an impressive AWA score, most programs don't place that much weight on AWA scores at all. I'd definitely retake it to try and get both verbal and quant to ~160 since most Political Science programs require high scores in each. As U Chicago notes, "The average GRE scores for those admitted last year were 164 Verbal, 157 Quantitative," and these numbers fit with those given by magoosh here.

I think prestige can help, but not having a LoRs from widely known PIs won't be held against you, either. Moreover, a positive letter from a professor that admissions committees are less familiar with is probably more beneficial than a lukewarm or even negative one from someone that they do know. In your case, it seems like you have a nice variety of letter from three faculty who can all speak about different aspects of your experiences and help your application. Additionally, I think people know that PIs don't have as many opportunities to get to know you over a single summer, so I wouldn't be too worried about it. Best of luck!

Still finishing up my last few applications but I'm getting bored of tailoring my statement of purpose so: Undergrad Institution: IvyMajor(s): BiologyMinor(s):GPA in Major: Not sure? 3.89-3.91, depending on how you calculate itOverall GPA: 3.944 (but on 4.33 scale, and I'm not sure if I should recalculate it)Position in Class: Top 15%, magna cum laudeType of Student: Male, domestic.GRE Scores (revised/old version):Q: 170 (98%)V: 163 (92%)W: 5.0 (93%)Biochemistry: 81%, but not submitting it since I got a low score in cell bioResearch Experience: 2 years in neuroscience lab at undergrad institute, summer SURF program in developmental neurobiology at another institute, Fall of senior year–Present (graduated this May and stayed on as a technician in the lab) switched to another neuroscience lab at undergrad institute. Current PI is ex-HHMI, chair of dept. Potential concerns: No major presentations or publications, but these labs don't publish as frequently and I think my letters (from each of these three PIs) should still be strong. One postdoc I worked with is currently preparing a manuscript, but I haven't mentioned this since we haven't submitted it yet and it's not my main project in the lab.Awards/Honors/Recognitions: Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude, Dean's list, Amgen Scholar (2013).Other info: Did well in some graduate-level neuroscience courses with prominent faculty (but don't have a LoR from the prof) as an undergrad, was a TA, but I don't know how much weight this will hold. Got a few promising replies from potential faculty I've reached out to, but they might just courtesy replies. Applying / Applied to neuroscience PhD programs at: UC Berkeley UCSF Columbia Harvard JHU / Janelia Joint Program WashU MIT BCS NYU Princeton Stanford I hope to see you all at interviews! I'll be anxiously waiting starting on Tuesday.

Doesn't NYU require the Statement of Purpose to be shorter than what you have? This page suggests to limit it to 1,000 words, so I'd try to trim it down further.

A letter from anyone you've done research with, even if it was through a collaboration like yours should be helpful. Long-distance collaborations are common in many fields, and he'll be able to speak to the work you've done and your research skills should be fairly self-evident in the papers you've written with him so I don't see the concern. You could use your other letters to speak to more personal characteristics that he might not know about?

Yes, get a letter from him. He should still be able to speak about how fruitful your collaboration was.

Hi Pali, I think your still have a decent chance at some of the schools you're applying to! Your GPA is definitely not low at all, especially for an engineering program. Additionally, GRE scores are only one part of the application. I would, however, focus more on your SoP and LoR. Is there a reason you're getting letters from both the PI and a research scientist from the same lab? Normally the PI should be sufficient and a recommendation from a research scientist doesn't hold as much weight. Then, again, DWIC letters may not be as ideal. Also, I don't know how much your past research experience matches with the programs you're applying to. If you primarily did research in chemical engineering but you're applying to BME programs make sure your SoP helps clarify why you're choosing the programs that you are, your career goals, etc.

I put the administrative assistant's email down for one of the PIs who submitted LoR for me. For the other, even though I put the PI's email down, he forwarded them all to his assistant. I don't think it really matters, as long as the professor's name is on the actual letter.

I wouldn't worry. On their website they say you can scan an official copy and upload it, so if you email that to the admissions office like you already did I'm sure they'll be okay with it. Most programs don't ask for an official one until you've been admitted.

No, you're not aiming too high at all. You look like a strong applicant to all the programs you're applying to. Even if your GRE quant score is a little low, the rest of your application more than makes up for it. As for Cancer Biology, Vanderbilt and MD Anderson are certainly quite strong. That Columbia program is more of an umbrella program, but they definitely have some strong faculty, especially in Systems Biology, as well.