vnatch

Any info on the post interview acceptance chances for Stanford Biosciences (Biology)?

On a related note... I had my first interview last week, and I found that I had a hard time balancing giving firm and definitive answers while also being honest. I'm in a pretty non-mainstream field, so the truth is that a lot of questions professors asked me simply haven't been studied or aren't known for sure yet. So at first I sort of explained it that way, but midway through I would usually get worried about sounding uninformed so I would then give my own hypothesis or idea of what is happening. Has anyone else run into this problem?

Since hearing back about interviews, I've started researching the practical and financial reasons why I should choose one school over another, and I came across a really basic question. Is the stipend awarded by my program meant to be enough to completely live off of? I have been under the assumption that it is, and I've been avoiding worrying about living costs by reminding myself that the amount of money I'm granted is supposed to be enough to live independently. However, is this true? I know I won't have anything close to a lavish lifestyle as a grad student, but is it possible that I'll need to take on even more debt to make it? I'm especially worried about living in San Fransisco, since a friend of mine told me it's so expensive that the UCSF or Stanford stipend would not be enough. Similarly, do many grad students also hold part time jobs? The grad students in my undergraduate lab all seem way too busy to work outside of their research, so I'm not sure if this is common or not.

So I've been mentally practicing describing my research the way I would in the interview, and (to my surprise) I'm actually getting worried now that 30 minutes is wayyy too short of a time, especially if I'm expected to answer other questions related to the program and to listen/ask questions about their own research areas. Does anyone have any advice on how much I should aim to talk about my own work? I have been working in the same lab for 3 years now, and for 2 of those years I have run experiments completely independent of grad students/postdocs/etc, so I could talk about the various projects I've been working on for hours lol. How should I approach discussing my research in a way that is succinct? Like I mentioned before, I took part in (but was by no means the main researcher) a project that is under review for publication; but since then I've spent almost all additional time with projects (not yet ready for publication) in a related but different area, and these are the ones I know best having been the only one working on them. So I've thought about only talking about one of these, or alternatively I could very briefly describe both project types and then just ask my interviewer which project he/she would like to know more about? I think it would help me in deciding which way to approach the research discussion by having a better understanding of exactly what these interviewers are looking for. I know they want to make sure I can logically explain it and know the reasoning behind the various steps, but I guess I'm not sure which project would make me sound the most impressive. Another question I had: How exactly do these interviews result in an admissions decision? Will all of my interviewers confer later on to decide if I'm admitted, or do they write down notes and send them off to an additional adcom committee? This is out of interest more than anything else.

Unfortunately all of their interview invites have been sent... I emailed them to ask about it and they said all invitees were notified before Christmas. Sorry, also super bummed here

Yeah, I just tried emailing them but the graduate affairs office is closed for break. They did say that all invites will be sent between Jan. 3-6, so I'm not sure why they would say this if all of them were already sent? Maybe this is more wishful thinking...

I also haven't heard from Berkeley yet, but it looks like only a few people have. I'm wondering if they've sent out all of the invites? I know the official email is set to come on Jan 3 but some people have gotten "unofficial" calls from professors. I'm debating whether or not it would come off as super annoying if I emailed the program coordinator about this, it just confuses me because it seems like not enough people got the "unofficial" invites, which gives me a shred of hope that more invites are still to come lol.

I'm assuming you are only referring to publications that have been printed (i.e. that are not in press or review), right? I am an author on a publication that was just submitted for review in December, so I'm betting it won't be public access by the time my interviews happen (meaning my interviewers won't be able to ask me about specifics of the paper). You're post made me think of a related question, though. The paper I am authored on was based on some work a grad student and I did during my first semester working in my lab. The grad student did almost all of the work, but we both (equally) contributed to one experiment in the paper that I spent six months on but which turned out to be a complete failure (in the paper, its basically explained away in a single sentence). Aside from that, my other contribution was just to do some mutagenesis on a plasmid, which took about a month total. Basically, my work on the paper was pretty minimal compared to her's. My question is: when asked about the paper during interviews, do you think I should try to put a positive spin on the work I did, or should I be very honest and tell them that my work on it was not extensive (but if I did this i would still plan on knowing all about the project so I could explain it to them anyway). I should mention that since working on this project, the remaining 3 years spent in my lab have been on a number of completely different projects that I have pretty much been doing entirely independently (except my PI). So if they're looking to see if I can communicate effectively about projects that I'VE done, I would much rather spend my time talking about those. The only downside is that none of them are finished (even though I'm really close with one of them), so I'm not sure if that will negatively affect me in some way. I suppose I'm really asking if I would come off as a better candidate if I talk about the finished publication I had little to do with or the incomplete number of projects that I have been the sole researcher for. If the latter is better, how do I smoothly deflect in depth questions on the publication so I can talk more about current experiments? Thanks for your input!

I know interviews are still about a month away, but I wanted to prep at least a little during the winter break before I get swamped with school again. I'm not sure exactly what approach to take when I'm getting ready for these, does anyone who's been through the process before have any advice? From what I've heard about interviews so far, I think I'm going to spend a lot of time reading papers and lab websites for the professors I am interested in working with, and I'll be sure to come up with plenty of questions for them. I also plan on going over my research and making sure I can explain it sufficiently to them and hopefully that I can answer any questions they have about it. Finally, I was going to go over some standard job interview questions, the stuff everyone hates about my biggest weakness, time I had to take charge, etc. Am I missing anything? I also had some general questions about the interviews themselves. If it helps, I am interviewing at umbrella programs in cell/developmental biology, biochem, and genetics mostly. How many interviews can I expect to do over the whole weekend for these programs? Some of the invites I've already received want me to give a ranked list of 5 faculty I want to speak to, does this mean I will have to interview with all 5 of them or will I not know until the day of? Also, since I will be reading about them a lot beforehand, is it appropriate to jot down my questions for them ahead of time and bring a notepad with me so that I can continue taking notes and also so I can remember what I want to ask? Finally, am I only interviewing with faculty, or do I have to interview with other adcomm members who I am not interested in working with? If this is the case, what kinds of questions will they ask? Thanks in advance for clearing some of this up!

Does anyone know the status of the Harvard MCO apps? Based on the previous messages I guess the BBS program is done sending invites, but has anyone gotten any MCO invites?

This may be a pretty specific request, but does anyone know anything about the interview weekend specifically for the UCSF Tetrad program? It is my very first interview but also one of my top choices, so I'm feeling a bit nervous! Any info about the post-interview admission rate would also be greatly appreciated. I read on some other forum that UCSF's acceptance rate after interview is actually a lot lower than normal, but I'm hoping this isn't true. Has anyone heard anything about this before?

Any updates on Berkeley MCB? I know official invitations are being sent on January 3rd but I've been praying for an unofficial phonecall!

I also applied to both of those programs, heard back from UCSF but not Berkeley as of yet... Do you have any idea about the chances of admission after the UCSF interview? That's my first one so I'm a bit nervous! Also, have you heard back from Berkeley MCB yet? Saw on here that a few people got calls from professors on Friday, I'm hoping that wasn't the only wave of interview invitations lol.

Does anyone know if Berkeley MCB is sending out any more phone calls/emails? There have already been a few people getting calls on Friday.

I basically thought i had my SoP all written and ready for me to send out, but last week my PI informed me that he is publishing on a project I did about a year ago and that I would be an author on the paper. This is my first publication, so I'm obviously super excited, but I'm wondering if I now have to change my SoP to mention this? Aside from the headache of having to rewrite half of my SoP, I'm a bit concerned because I did not do this work by myself (I was actually only a minimal part of this paper) and the topic doesn't fit in super well with what I'm researching now. My current draft is written so that I have a paragraph dedicated to my current project, which (even though it isn't finished) I think is a good one since all of the work is completely independent. In other words, I'd rather not get rid of the bit I wrote about my current project. Alternatively, I could mention the publication in a sentence or two before my current project, but I feel like the Adcom might want me to explain more about it. My main question is, will it hurt me if I don't mention the publication at all? They will be able to see it because there is a separate section where I list publications, but will they be suspicious if they see the publication but I don't discuss it in the SoP?

I am in the midst of applying to grad schools in developmental biology, and I'm noticing that some of the schools I'm applying to have really specific diversity-related prompts for the Personal Statement (about how I will bring diversity, how I have demonstrated appreciation for diversity, etc.). I don't fit any minority status at all aside from being gay. Now my normal opinion on bringing sexual orientation into an SoP or Personal statement is that it probably won't do much good, especially since I haven't really been involved in any LGBTQ organizations or anything like that and I've heard it can be a pretty controversial thing to write about in a statement. However, seeing how central diversity is to some of these prompts, I'm wondering, would this info be okay to include? It wouldn't be the focus of my essay obviously, I will mostly be talking about how I got into my field. But I think bringing up my sexual orientation would probably be the most direct way to say why I will bring diversity and also why I can empathize with other people from diverse backgrounds. PS: my worry isn't really that I will be discriminated against if I include this, since the schools I'm referring to that have these prompts are UC Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz, and UC Davis, all of which I would assume have a pretty progressive atmosphere. I'm just wondering if doing so would be inappropriate

I am in the process of writing my SoP's and had a question regarding specificity and how it relates to my interests. From all of my classes and research experiences, I have learned that I have three pretty equal research interests: (1) post-fertilization development, (2) mitosis/the cell cycle, and (3) apoptosis. Now I know for the SoP I should include specifically what I want to research, but my question is whether I should include all of these areas as specific areas of interest or if I should only pick one of them to write about (and maybe mention the other two briefly). Basically, I want to be able to show that my interests are variable and that I am open to learning about new research areas, but I also don't want to come off as vague or non-specific. I have the same question when it comes to talking about faculty I want to work with. For one school for example, I have been in contact with professors who study each of these three things. I'm worried that if I single out any one of them and only talk about their area of research that the other two will be less inclined to take me for a rotation. However, I'm not sure if I want to waste space writing about all three of them. (Also, I know in most cases professors don't read the SoP. However, one of the people I contacted told me to let him know when I submit so he can find my app--I'm assuming this means he'll look it over). Does anyone have any advice on whether I should mention multiple professors/research interests or just focus on one?

I am currently a senior applying to a variety of PhD programs this cycle. I am having a hard time deciding my coureload for next semester, and I was wondering if anyone could tell me how it impacts my grad school chances. Basically, I have already completed my biology major and only need one additional course to complete a second major in Statistics. Additionally, I am a member of the Distinguished Major Program for Biology, which means I have to take a seminar and write a thesis/give a presentation on my research. Since I only need to take the one statistics class and the DMP seminar, I could potentially be a part-time student during my final semester. The benefits are that I would probably save about half of the cost of tuition, and I would have a LOT more time to commit to my lab. I already spend a good deal of time researching this semester, but over the past summer I got to work there full time and I would really love the opportunity to be researching many more hours than I am doing at present, which I could definitely do if I was part time. Since I will be including this information in my SoP's for graduate school, my main question is if this will somehow impact my chances, or if this will be seen as unfavorable. I would think that they wouldn't mind me cutting out a lot more time to pursue research, but on the other hand I feel like admissions committees may view this as a bad thing since I am not taking nearly as much coursework. Does anyone have any opinions about this? (Note: the opinion of grad schools won't necessarily be a make-it-or-break-it in my decision, but I think it would be a good factor to consider.)

I am applying to PhD programs this cycle for entry next fall, so I thought I would also apply for the NSF Graduate Research Fellowships Program. After looking at the information available for this fellowship, it seems that they are really interested in students who demonstrate really strong and motivated research interests, have a concrete plan to carry out their goals, and also have strong leadership qualities. Based on what they are looking for, I am trying to ask for recommendation letters from people who can write about this. Obviously my PI will be my first writer, and I also have a second writer planned out since I have done very well in three of his classes. However, I wanted some opinions about my third writer choice. The attribute I really want highlighted (that my other two writers may not address) is the leadership. I feel that it is pretty difficult to show any leadership qualities in the lab setting, since basically everyone works in a lab with other people and are overseen by graduate students or their PI. I was toying with the idea of having my employer write my third letter. She is my boss at a job completely unrelated to science (it is in a branch of the library), so she would have nothing to say about my research or scientific pursuits. However, I have been working there for almost four years now and she recently promoted me to a supervisor (one of two, who oversees an additional ~30 students year-round). She would be the obvious choice to talk about my leadership qualities and motivation, but is it a bad idea to have a letter from her since it is not part of a scientific field? Any thoughts are appreciated!

I will be applying to PhD programs in molecular/cell biology programs this cycle, and I have heard that it looks good if grad schools see that I have taken a grad level class. Does anyone have any more information about how much this actually helps or hurts people during the application decision? Additionally, I would assume that taking a grad class is only helpful for the application if it is in a field related to biology. Would schools not care if I have graduate credit in a different subject? Finally, even if I take a grad level class this fall, will schools get to see this? They will see it on my transcript when I apply but the grade won't be in until after the deadline has passed, so I'm not sure if the schools would even get to see it. I am asking because I am currently deciding between a few options for my schedule this semester. Basically, I am already done with the bio major so I don't technically need any more classes in it. Additionally, I have a second major in statistics that I still have classes for. I also want to devote as much time as possible to the lab I am a part of. So my three options are to (1) take one less class and devote the extra time to my research, (2) take a graduate level class in statistics (which would count toward my major), or (3) take a grad level bio class. The major con against the bio alternative is that none of the classes offered are really related to cell bio, most are evo/eco or behavior type classes. I should say, that no matter which of those three options I choose, I will be taking a 2 credit Distinguished Majors Program seminar and 2 credits of independent research (in the lab I mentioned before). I'm not sure if grad schools all know exactly what this program is, but basically it's a research-driven honors program in the bio department. If anyone can give me some advice on this, that would be great!

Thanks for the reply. One other question I had: what is the proper time to send my emails out, if I want to submit my applications in November? I could start sending them out now, but I'm worried that if I send them too early these professors won't remember me by the time applications are due.

I am applying to a number of Molecular/Cell Bio PhD programs this fall, and I'm finding it pretty confusing to try to sift through all of the differing information given about financial aid and funding. I was hoping someone could explain it clearly for me. I'm obviously concerned about the costs associated with the PhD, so my first question is: is the annual stipend given by most schools enough to live on? Pretty much every school I'm applying to would come with tuition fully paid, plus health insurance and a stipend of between $30,000 and $40,000 a year. For an idea of my cost of living, I would be going to school either in Boston or San Francisco and I will have a roommate. I would think that these schools factor in the cost of living and give an amount that is enough to live on, but after taxes is it likely that this stipend will really be enough to cover all my expenses? I also had some questions about fellowships, assistantships, grants, etc. Many schools say on their websites that there are a good number of these available for people to apply to. Are these for the purpose of personal and living costs, or are they meant as money to fund my research? Additionally, when I become part of a lab at my university, why would I need to apply for funding money if the lab itself gets funded by various sources?

I am applying to PhD programs during this admission cycle, and I wanted to email two or three professors (whose research I think is really interesting/whose labs I want to consider) from each school I'm applying to, but I'm having trouble formatting my emails. I'm sure they receive a ton of emails like this every year, so is it standard to just include a brief background on my academics, what I'm doing in my current lab, and then why I'm interested in their lab's research? Is there any other important information I should include? Also, I wasn't sure about if I should attach a resume and/or cover letter to these emails. Is that standard to do, or should I send that in a separate email if they respond to me? Part of my confusion about this is that I'm not exactly sure how the admissions work on the school's end; for example, if I email a few professors will they actually remember who I am? And will this affect the admission committee's decision to accept me or not? Also, when I go for interviews, will I get a chance to speak in person with the professors I emailed so we can talk about possible lab rotations?

I am entering my senior year of college, and will be applying to PhD programs in molecular biology this fall. All of my applications open in late August/early September and are due around the beginning of December. My question is, is there any substantial benefit to applying early to these programs? I know for med school all of the applications are rolling, so the earlier you apply the better chance you have of getting accepted. I haven't heard much about rolling admissions for grad school apps, but I have heard some people say that it is generally better to apply earlier than later. The main reason for my concern is that I currently have no publications to include in my application, but I am hoping to have something in the works by the early fall. Obviously being able to include this would help my chances and strengthen my application, so do you think it's worth waiting until the end of October or even beginning of November to do my applications?

Hi, I'm a junior, and I've been thinking/planning for grad school apps for about a month now. I just took my GRE Biochemistry subject test yesterday, and lets just say it was harder than I expected. Obviously I won't know my score for about a month (and I always tend to be too hard on myself after exams) but I'm trying to plan for whether or not I should report this score. This thinking led me to a few questions: What is considered a "good" biochem score for applying to PhD programs? I know that the raw score in itself doesn't matter much, and the percentile is much more important, but I have no idea what the threshold is for looking like a strong applicant. This probably differs somewhat from one school to another; but generally, I am applying to a number of top tier programs (Stanford, Berkeley, Penn, etc.) and also a few middle tier schools (UC Santa Barbara, Boston U, Northeastern). I read somewhere on the Internet that anything about 70th percentile is considered great, but that seems a bit low to me. Also, how bad would I have to do for me not to report my score? I've heard conflicting stuff on this as well....None of the schools I'm applying to actually require this subject test, but they say its recommended. I've heard then that a bad score can't hurt you but a good score can help you. I've also read that no matter what the score, its better to report it and show them that you at least tried than to not report it at all. Can anyone validate this?