iheartscience

I see you all stress-refreshing, and that was me last year (and in 2017, and 2016), so I thought I might drop a few details from my own experience in case it helps quell some nerves:
1. I applied 3 times to the Stanford GSE - CTE Ph.D. - waitlisted following an interview (2016), rejected without an interview (2017), and accepted without an interview (2020). My POI told me that different programs have different approaches to interviews, and though my subgroup (Science Education) *often* does interviews, they don't always. Based on my conversations with other doctoral students here, it seems all over the map whether admitted people were interviewed and inconsistent year to year even within program subgroups. 
2. When I got my acceptance, I heard from one of my POIs first by email, and I think the official email from Stanford came later that day (Feb 14). I don't think there's any rule that professors reach out first, but it seems like a frequent - but not uniform - practice. I know when someone posts here that they just got a POI email and you haven't, it can feel like a sign - but I wouldn't read too much into the promptness or not of POI replies.  
3. I hear some nerves about age and parenthood - the current cohort of first-years is maybe ~1/4 parents of little kids, and a number of doctoral students in the cohorts above us are also parents. The ages in the cohort range from just completed undergrad in their early/mid 20s to close to 40 (I might be the oldest this year, but I'm not sure - but starting in your mid-to-upper-30s is not uncommon). 
If you are admitted this year, feel free to reach out - I'm happy to share what my experience has been like through this unusual first year! And if you aren't admitted this time and your heart is set on Stanford, know that people do reapply - successfully - even after not being offered admission multiple times.  
 

I'm not sure if this is helpful, but...
I was in a similar spot many years ago applying to Neuroscience PhD programs, with similar stats (and perhaps slightly more research experience - I graduated in 4 years, was involved in lab work each quarter, TAed several courses, and completed an honors research thesis). I did take the general GRE and Psych Subject GRE, scoring >95%. I took a research assistant position in a lab after graduating because I wasn't sure what I wanted to study in a doctoral program and thought RA work would give me more time on my applications. In contrast to my positive bachelor's research experiences, this lab sucked - it was a toxic and rigidly hierarchical, and my former thesis advisor and other research faculty later told me that research lab was known for being toxic and "a factory." I didn't have the wisdom to ask around beforehand about the culture of different labs, and I didn't have a sense of what I was hoping to learn there, which I think is part of why I stayed so long. Anyway, I applied to graduate programs while in this toxic lab and didn't get admitted anywhere except one master's program. I had also applied to RA in other research labs (this time doing the legwork of asking around about lab culture in advance...) and was offered another RA-ship in a much more positive lab environment. The story has a happy ending - I decided to decline both the M.A. admission and the friendlier RA position and changed fields to science education, which I had a nagging interest in. It turns out that I love science teaching (and science teachers), and after several years in the field, I will starting a doctoral program in Science Education at Stanford this fall.
Even though my research assistant job was a terrible experience, I am really glad I took the slow path instead of diving right into a doctoral program. The RA experience gave me some clarity about what it was that I loved most about doing science, and I realized that even in a positive lab environment, the nature of the work that excited me most was central to science education in a way that Neuroscience research was not.
I suspect that main reason I was not admitted to Neuroscience doctoral programs, despite having strong grades/scores/research experiences is that I didn't have a strong statement of purpose. Specifically, I hadn't developed a strong purpose for what/why I wanted to research and how that connected to both my professional goals and the work at those specific programs.
Reading the list of qualifications that you shared, I wondered:
What are your reasons for wanting to pursue a neuroscience PhD? How have your prior experiences (in research and in life) inform your goals and ready you for doctoral study?  What are you excited about researching, and why does that matter to you personally, your goals, and the world?   How does that match the research and mentorship available at the programs you listed? Your compelling articulation of those ideas will matter most to your chances of admission, this year or in the future.
You didn't mention what your role was in your previous research experience, but it sounds like you are thinking that a year or two of RA work might provide deeper opportunities for research experience. My undergraduate thesis advisor (a neuroscience faculty at Stanford) told me: "If you are getting all As, you're not doing enough research," so I think it is reasonable to assume that the depth of your experience will matter for admissions. Additionally, the question that might be more important than "Do I need more research experience to get in?" is "Would this experience help me sharpen my understanding of what I want to study/learn in a doctorate?" 
I know several people who are now happily Neuroscience faculty who took a couple years to work as RAs or lab managers post-baccalaureate, not because they needed to compensate for grades or undergraduate research experience, but because the experience helped them refine their skills and professional interests, build connections (both mentors for strong recs and a network of insights into the social landscape of the field), and seek out the best match for the long haul that is a doctorate. A PhD is a (poorly paid) job as much as it is an education - 5-7 years of training as a research scientist to prepare you for a research career. Taking a couple years to try out full time lab life, particularly in a positive lab culture with strong mentorship, can be a way to test out whether that (sub)field is the one you want to commit most of a decade to, and to learn in advance which PIs to seek out as mentors (or avoid). 
TL;DR:
Your stats sound strong but your purpose (articulated in your statement of purpose) grounded in your prior research experience is most important to your application. Sometimes the "slower path" to starting a doctorate can lead to a more purposeful, positive doctoral experience.   If you do decide to seek out a fellowship/lab work first, definitely ask around to find out where the happy labs are at (and whose labs to avoid).   
 
 

Hi,
This was a bit of a blow and knock in confidence, but telling myself it's ok because it was important to try anyway. I wish you all an amazing future and journey. I hope that it will work out brilliantly and maybe even more so as a result of a rejection.   
Will most likely not check gradcafe after this but just to say appreciate you all, take care ❤️ 

Even when my journey this year has ended, I still keep coming back to this forum. I think I will keep doing that for the rest of the year. I have decided to apply again in 2022. I don’t know what I will be doing till then. Pop in and say hi here whenever you have the time. It was lovely meeting all of you. The support you provided helped me get over the sorrow. ?

It depends on the program and what kind of research within education research you are interested in!
Several science education programs, like the Science Education program at Stanford, are nestled within "curriculum and teacher education" programs, and may require classroom teaching experience to apply. Other programs, like Berkeley's SESAME program, may have doctoral students working on K-12 science teaching and learning, but also attract researchers interested in teaching science in higher ed - this program doesn't require prior K-12 teaching experience, but encourages applicants to have gained a masters in a math or science field (or, be willing to obtain a content-specific masters while at Berkeley). If you're more interested in the more cognitive-sciencey side of education research, then getting involved with research opportunities in education research (as it sounds like you are) or related psychology research is a great direction. 
I'd encourage you to get involved in some way with science teaching - whether that's tutoring or TAing peers in college, or volunteering with a science after school program, or doing work/internship at a science museum. Any experience that gives you more context to think about science teaching and learning will help you notice interesting puzzles worth researching AND build a deeper understanding of the context in which science learning happens. 
What matters most in your application is your statement of purpose and being able to articulate a story of the experiences that shape your current goals, thoughts, and questions about science learning. Recommendation letters that can add third party perspectives that align with your SOP are perhaps the second most important piece. If you want to get a jump on this, consider practice writing regularly about the things that draw you to science education, what puzzles pique your curiosity, how those connect to your own past experiences, etc, and seeing what themes emerge. You might notice evolution in your thinking over time and gain some insights about what is most profound to highlight in your ultimate SOP. 
Lastly, start reading research and noticing what excites you! Don't be afraid to reach out to researchers or organizations doing cool work to share your questions and ask advice on what to consider next. There's also a lot of science education researchers on Twitter, which is a surprisingly good way to get a sense of work in the field and connect to others engaged in this work. 
Best of luck!  
 

Depends on what you're looking for? You can look through the results page of Grade Cafe under Education as well. I also applied to NYU and Colorado University-Boulder. Columbia - Teachers College has a great reputation too.

CTE, focus in Science Education.
 
@jk25 this is the first I've heard from anyone.  I have two schools I've heard nothing from and an interview for one school next weekend. I wouldn't be surprised if everyone is much behind on their timeline.

So I'll be honest. I was a low key wreck yesterday and the day before after seeing acceptances and rejections start rolling onto the results page. Someone in results said they reached out to their POI to get an update because they felt GSE was taking too long? So I gathered up the courage to email my POIs to see if there was any sort of update I'd missed out on (or if they could at least tell me I'd been rejected so I could rip the bandaid off). 

The reply was along the lines of advisors/department have done their part, it's now in the deans office, "results go out late Feb-early March". We'll update you if anything changes.

[insert manic laughing and internal screaming]
So I thought I was done for. I decided to reply back to at least thank them for letting me know what the situation was today, but I've recently gotten a reply back saying they received an update from the admissions office and I'll get an official notice that I've been accepted.
I've been accepted. ?

So lots of things are happening in lots of different ways. Don't give up. Even if it doesn't happen this year don't give up.

I got in!!!! thank you for all of your support!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I had to go check - and yes, they did identify the names of my advisors in the acceptance letter. Between the admissions offer and accepting an admission, I had a number of contacts with these advisors and their other graduate students to help admitted folks make their decision, so one would definitely know and have spoken with one's advisors (and their current advisees) before starting the program. Honestly, it would be a big red flag if that wasn't the case. That is a really important part of the process of deciding where you want to spend 5-7 years of your life - getting a strong sense for what it is like to work with your potential advisor(s) and the experiences of other graduate students they work with is probably the most important part of the "post-admissions deciding phase," in terms of ensuring a positive graduate experience. 
FYI, it seems like the Stanford GSE has moved to a 2-advisor system, with a primary advisor one works most closely with and a secondary advisor who provides added perspective and support. Both of my advisors are known among the graduate students for being super supportive, which is an important message to listen for when making matriculation decisions. 

?‍♀️??

Good morning guys...So, as usually these days,  the first thing in the morning to check my email, and this forum...
I have nothing in my inbox this morning again..so I think what will come is a rejection letter.
Last night, before going to sleep finally, I was reading about unconditional love to yourself. It was written there that I have to treat myself well and to value myself no matter what happens in my life (victories, failures, etc).
In all those changeable variables, loving yourself must be a constant thing?. Reading that helped me a lot. 
This morning I realized that I am tired and exhausted of feeling like that: feeling miserable in waiting of whether I will be assessed as "good enough" or "not good enough". 
I am always good enough. For myself. So, I am going to have my tea and my good breakfast! Whatever comes, is ok.
 

Thank you very much for the detailed reply...I appreciate this so much???

You are so kind to hop in here and share your experience with us hopefuls. Thank you for being so generous with your time and advice! 

Letters of grief ???. 
 
I am glad that @iheartscience cleared a few things up though. It’s good to hear from someone with the experience. And it’s nice to know that a rejection is not necessarily a reflection of our application, but rather various other factors that come into play. 

To be honest, I haven't talked to anyone that seems unhappy with their advisor at the GSE, but I've probably also had fewer opportunities to talk with more advanced students across different programs than I would have in a normal year where we would be on campus - I don't have a global pulse on GSE student experiences yet. 
In any case, it's always worth talking to a few different advisees of a POI to get a sense of their communication/support style and their strengths/areas of growth as an advisor, and feeling out if that match might support you personally to struggle productively through the challenges of graduate study. You're absolutely right - a long and important relationship! 

I had to go check - and yes, they did identify the names of my advisors in the acceptance letter. Between the admissions offer and accepting an admission, I had a number of contacts with these advisors and their other graduate students to help admitted folks make their decision, so one would definitely know and have spoken with one's advisors (and their current advisees) before starting the program. Honestly, it would be a big red flag if that wasn't the case. That is a really important part of the process of deciding where you want to spend 5-7 years of your life - getting a strong sense for what it is like to work with your potential advisor(s) and the experiences of other graduate students they work with is probably the most important part of the "post-admissions deciding phase," in terms of ensuring a positive graduate experience. 
FYI, it seems like the Stanford GSE has moved to a 2-advisor system, with a primary advisor one works most closely with and a secondary advisor who provides added perspective and support. Both of my advisors are known among the graduate students for being super supportive, which is an important message to listen for when making matriculation decisions. 

I had to go check - and yes, they did identify the names of my advisors in the acceptance letter. Between the admissions offer and accepting an admission, I had a number of contacts with these advisors and their other graduate students to help admitted folks make their decision, so one would definitely know and have spoken with one's advisors (and their current advisees) before starting the program. Honestly, it would be a big red flag if that wasn't the case. That is a really important part of the process of deciding where you want to spend 5-7 years of your life - getting a strong sense for what it is like to work with your potential advisor(s) and the experiences of other graduate students they work with is probably the most important part of the "post-admissions deciding phase," in terms of ensuring a positive graduate experience. 
FYI, it seems like the Stanford GSE has moved to a 2-advisor system, with a primary advisor one works most closely with and a secondary advisor who provides added perspective and support. Both of my advisors are known among the graduate students for being super supportive, which is an important message to listen for when making matriculation decisions. 

I see you all stress-refreshing, and that was me last year (and in 2017, and 2016), so I thought I might drop a few details from my own experience in case it helps quell some nerves:
1. I applied 3 times to the Stanford GSE - CTE Ph.D. - waitlisted following an interview (2016), rejected without an interview (2017), and accepted without an interview (2020). My POI told me that different programs have different approaches to interviews, and though my subgroup (Science Education) *often* does interviews, they don't always. Based on my conversations with other doctoral students here, it seems all over the map whether admitted people were interviewed and inconsistent year to year even within program subgroups. 
2. When I got my acceptance, I heard from one of my POIs first by email, and I think the official email from Stanford came later that day (Feb 14). I don't think there's any rule that professors reach out first, but it seems like a frequent - but not uniform - practice. I know when someone posts here that they just got a POI email and you haven't, it can feel like a sign - but I wouldn't read too much into the promptness or not of POI replies.  
3. I hear some nerves about age and parenthood - the current cohort of first-years is maybe ~1/4 parents of little kids, and a number of doctoral students in the cohorts above us are also parents. The ages in the cohort range from just completed undergrad in their early/mid 20s to close to 40 (I might be the oldest this year, but I'm not sure - but starting in your mid-to-upper-30s is not uncommon). 
If you are admitted this year, feel free to reach out - I'm happy to share what my experience has been like through this unusual first year! And if you aren't admitted this time and your heart is set on Stanford, know that people do reapply - successfully - even after not being offered admission multiple times.  
 

I was emailed by a professor I had mentioned in my essay, but not the primary person I'd been in contact with up to that point.
And yes - luck has a lot to do with who gets admitted each cycle! My current advisor mentioned to me - some years the pool is more/less competitive, some years they don't admit anyone for a subgroup because one of the area professors is going on sabbatical, some years a POI already has a lot of advisees and can't take on more till someone graduates, some years the funding is earmarked for a student studying X or Y specific topic, etc.
Acceptance or rejection doesn't tell you anything absolute about whether you're "qualified" or "ready" or would thrive in a doctoral program - so much of it is luck, and happening to match whatever the context of admissions looks like for that program *that year.* The same person with the same application might be admitted one cycle or not the next. Whatever news you get this year, know that you are worthy of taking on this work and the field needs you. This admission cycle doesn't determine the overall journey. Best of luck! 

I see you all stress-refreshing, and that was me last year (and in 2017, and 2016), so I thought I might drop a few details from my own experience in case it helps quell some nerves:
1. I applied 3 times to the Stanford GSE - CTE Ph.D. - waitlisted following an interview (2016), rejected without an interview (2017), and accepted without an interview (2020). My POI told me that different programs have different approaches to interviews, and though my subgroup (Science Education) *often* does interviews, they don't always. Based on my conversations with other doctoral students here, it seems all over the map whether admitted people were interviewed and inconsistent year to year even within program subgroups. 
2. When I got my acceptance, I heard from one of my POIs first by email, and I think the official email from Stanford came later that day (Feb 14). I don't think there's any rule that professors reach out first, but it seems like a frequent - but not uniform - practice. I know when someone posts here that they just got a POI email and you haven't, it can feel like a sign - but I wouldn't read too much into the promptness or not of POI replies.  
3. I hear some nerves about age and parenthood - the current cohort of first-years is maybe ~1/4 parents of little kids, and a number of doctoral students in the cohorts above us are also parents. The ages in the cohort range from just completed undergrad in their early/mid 20s to close to 40 (I might be the oldest this year, but I'm not sure - but starting in your mid-to-upper-30s is not uncommon). 
If you are admitted this year, feel free to reach out - I'm happy to share what my experience has been like through this unusual first year! And if you aren't admitted this time and your heart is set on Stanford, know that people do reapply - successfully - even after not being offered admission multiple times.  
 

Yes! This time last year I was SO sure that I had been rejected again, based on not having heard anything back since submitting my application. 
 

I see you all stress-refreshing, and that was me last year (and in 2017, and 2016), so I thought I might drop a few details from my own experience in case it helps quell some nerves:
1. I applied 3 times to the Stanford GSE - CTE Ph.D. - waitlisted following an interview (2016), rejected without an interview (2017), and accepted without an interview (2020). My POI told me that different programs have different approaches to interviews, and though my subgroup (Science Education) *often* does interviews, they don't always. Based on my conversations with other doctoral students here, it seems all over the map whether admitted people were interviewed and inconsistent year to year even within program subgroups. 
2. When I got my acceptance, I heard from one of my POIs first by email, and I think the official email from Stanford came later that day (Feb 14). I don't think there's any rule that professors reach out first, but it seems like a frequent - but not uniform - practice. I know when someone posts here that they just got a POI email and you haven't, it can feel like a sign - but I wouldn't read too much into the promptness or not of POI replies.  
3. I hear some nerves about age and parenthood - the current cohort of first-years is maybe ~1/4 parents of little kids, and a number of doctoral students in the cohorts above us are also parents. The ages in the cohort range from just completed undergrad in their early/mid 20s to close to 40 (I might be the oldest this year, but I'm not sure - but starting in your mid-to-upper-30s is not uncommon). 
If you are admitted this year, feel free to reach out - I'm happy to share what my experience has been like through this unusual first year! And if you aren't admitted this time and your heart is set on Stanford, know that people do reapply - successfully - even after not being offered admission multiple times.  
 

I was emailed by a professor I had mentioned in my essay, but not the primary person I'd been in contact with up to that point.
And yes - luck has a lot to do with who gets admitted each cycle! My current advisor mentioned to me - some years the pool is more/less competitive, some years they don't admit anyone for a subgroup because one of the area professors is going on sabbatical, some years a POI already has a lot of advisees and can't take on more till someone graduates, some years the funding is earmarked for a student studying X or Y specific topic, etc.
Acceptance or rejection doesn't tell you anything absolute about whether you're "qualified" or "ready" or would thrive in a doctoral program - so much of it is luck, and happening to match whatever the context of admissions looks like for that program *that year.* The same person with the same application might be admitted one cycle or not the next. Whatever news you get this year, know that you are worthy of taking on this work and the field needs you. This admission cycle doesn't determine the overall journey. Best of luck! 

I was emailed by a professor I had mentioned in my essay, but not the primary person I'd been in contact with up to that point.
And yes - luck has a lot to do with who gets admitted each cycle! My current advisor mentioned to me - some years the pool is more/less competitive, some years they don't admit anyone for a subgroup because one of the area professors is going on sabbatical, some years a POI already has a lot of advisees and can't take on more till someone graduates, some years the funding is earmarked for a student studying X or Y specific topic, etc.
Acceptance or rejection doesn't tell you anything absolute about whether you're "qualified" or "ready" or would thrive in a doctoral program - so much of it is luck, and happening to match whatever the context of admissions looks like for that program *that year.* The same person with the same application might be admitted one cycle or not the next. Whatever news you get this year, know that you are worthy of taking on this work and the field needs you. This admission cycle doesn't determine the overall journey. Best of luck!