etherealhav0c

How is everyone going about their decision making process? What factors are you looking for? Criteria? How are you prioritizing? I understand that having the right mentors is really important so I wonder how people are evaluating their advisors/mentors as well... 

I was rejected last year from three schools that I applied to (Harvard post-interview, Hopkins, and Columbia). I asked my interviewer at Harvard what I could do to make myself a more competitive applicant for the next round and I think the insight he gave me is really applicable to every research oriented PhD applicant. 
1. Publish. First author publications in fairly decent impact journals are a huge boost. The PhD is all about training to be a researcher and to produce publications, so showing to the admissions committee that you have successfully published and can do research is a big deal. 
2. Have GRE scores at a certain percentile threshold. You really can't do anything about GPA at this point, but you can do something about your GRE score. Some schools have basic minimum percentiles for applicants to be considered (like 50th percentile) but most competitive applicants will be in the 75th percentile and above. Having a score below that may be a tie breaker point when deciding between applicants that seem equally qualified but only one spot can be given. If you're going into a heavily quantitative field like Epi or Biostats, it's important to demonstrate a strong quantitative background and you can do that in part through the GRE quantitative section. 
3. Contact people from the department/school before applying. It helps to put a face or voice to a name and to have some recognition of that person before admissions committees review the applicants. It also helps you craft and refine your personal statement to fit the resources and interests of the department. By talking to the faculty there, you'll get insider knowledge as to what the department values and would be looking for in a good fit candidate.
4. Choose letter writers well. If you have a well known scholar in the field as your letter writer who can vouch for your potential as a scholar, that's going to carry you a long way in getting recognized as a strong candidate by the admissions committee. If you don't know any prominent professors then it's important to make sure you have letters from professors who know you well and can talk more concretely about your skills, ability to produce as a PhD student/researcher, and probably something about your personality. 
 
In the end, it's about how good of a fit you are for the program/department and if you have a publication/research track record that suggests you'll do well in the future.  GPA/GREs need to meet a certain acceptable minimum. Great LORs will carry you a long way, especially if they're from prominent scholars in your field of interest. 
 
As I said before, I applied last year to Harvard, Hopkins, and Columbia and wasn't accepted by any of the schools. This year I applied to UNC, Minnesota, UW, Michigan, and Berkeley and have received interviews at all schools except Berkeley and been accepted into two programs thus far with multi-year funding offers from both schools. Still waiting to hear back from the other three, but I've felt very successful so far after following this Harvard professor's advice during my second round of applying. 
 

I was rejected last year from three schools that I applied to (Harvard post-interview, Hopkins, and Columbia). I asked my interviewer at Harvard what I could do to make myself a more competitive applicant for the next round and I think the insight he gave me is really applicable to every research oriented PhD applicant. 
1. Publish. First author publications in fairly decent impact journals are a huge boost. The PhD is all about training to be a researcher and to produce publications, so showing to the admissions committee that you have successfully published and can do research is a big deal. 
2. Have GRE scores at a certain percentile threshold. You really can't do anything about GPA at this point, but you can do something about your GRE score. Some schools have basic minimum percentiles for applicants to be considered (like 50th percentile) but most competitive applicants will be in the 75th percentile and above. Having a score below that may be a tie breaker point when deciding between applicants that seem equally qualified but only one spot can be given. If you're going into a heavily quantitative field like Epi or Biostats, it's important to demonstrate a strong quantitative background and you can do that in part through the GRE quantitative section. 
3. Contact people from the department/school before applying. It helps to put a face or voice to a name and to have some recognition of that person before admissions committees review the applicants. It also helps you craft and refine your personal statement to fit the resources and interests of the department. By talking to the faculty there, you'll get insider knowledge as to what the department values and would be looking for in a good fit candidate.
4. Choose letter writers well. If you have a well known scholar in the field as your letter writer who can vouch for your potential as a scholar, that's going to carry you a long way in getting recognized as a strong candidate by the admissions committee. If you don't know any prominent professors then it's important to make sure you have letters from professors who know you well and can talk more concretely about your skills, ability to produce as a PhD student/researcher, and probably something about your personality. 
 
In the end, it's about how good of a fit you are for the program/department and if you have a publication/research track record that suggests you'll do well in the future.  GPA/GREs need to meet a certain acceptable minimum. Great LORs will carry you a long way, especially if they're from prominent scholars in your field of interest. 
 
As I said before, I applied last year to Harvard, Hopkins, and Columbia and wasn't accepted by any of the schools. This year I applied to UNC, Minnesota, UW, Michigan, and Berkeley and have received interviews at all schools except Berkeley and been accepted into two programs thus far with multi-year funding offers from both schools. Still waiting to hear back from the other three, but I've felt very successful so far after following this Harvard professor's advice during my second round of applying. 
 

I was rejected last year from three schools that I applied to (Harvard post-interview, Hopkins, and Columbia). I asked my interviewer at Harvard what I could do to make myself a more competitive applicant for the next round and I think the insight he gave me is really applicable to every research oriented PhD applicant. 
1. Publish. First author publications in fairly decent impact journals are a huge boost. The PhD is all about training to be a researcher and to produce publications, so showing to the admissions committee that you have successfully published and can do research is a big deal. 
2. Have GRE scores at a certain percentile threshold. You really can't do anything about GPA at this point, but you can do something about your GRE score. Some schools have basic minimum percentiles for applicants to be considered (like 50th percentile) but most competitive applicants will be in the 75th percentile and above. Having a score below that may be a tie breaker point when deciding between applicants that seem equally qualified but only one spot can be given. If you're going into a heavily quantitative field like Epi or Biostats, it's important to demonstrate a strong quantitative background and you can do that in part through the GRE quantitative section. 
3. Contact people from the department/school before applying. It helps to put a face or voice to a name and to have some recognition of that person before admissions committees review the applicants. It also helps you craft and refine your personal statement to fit the resources and interests of the department. By talking to the faculty there, you'll get insider knowledge as to what the department values and would be looking for in a good fit candidate.
4. Choose letter writers well. If you have a well known scholar in the field as your letter writer who can vouch for your potential as a scholar, that's going to carry you a long way in getting recognized as a strong candidate by the admissions committee. If you don't know any prominent professors then it's important to make sure you have letters from professors who know you well and can talk more concretely about your skills, ability to produce as a PhD student/researcher, and probably something about your personality. 
 
In the end, it's about how good of a fit you are for the program/department and if you have a publication/research track record that suggests you'll do well in the future.  GPA/GREs need to meet a certain acceptable minimum. Great LORs will carry you a long way, especially if they're from prominent scholars in your field of interest. 
 
As I said before, I applied last year to Harvard, Hopkins, and Columbia and wasn't accepted by any of the schools. This year I applied to UNC, Minnesota, UW, Michigan, and Berkeley and have received interviews at all schools except Berkeley and been accepted into two programs thus far with multi-year funding offers from both schools. Still waiting to hear back from the other three, but I've felt very successful so far after following this Harvard professor's advice during my second round of applying. 
 

I agree with this advice 100%. Last year I wasn't accepted to any of the programs I applied to but this year I've been accepted to two great programs so far with full-funding and waiting to hear back from four more schools. I genuinely believe my success has been largely because i reached out to POIs at each school beforehand. The sense I've gotten from conversations with admissions committees, faculty members, and students is that most schools look for one major thing "goodness of fit". Grades and GPA typically have minimum cut offs (top 10 schools seem to generally want their applicants in the 70th percentile and above for GREs and GPA above 3.0), but ultimately you have to show the admissions committee how good of a fit you are for their program. The best way to do that is to become more intimately familiar with the department and the faculty members' work and then tailor your statements to reflect how you fit into the grand scheme of things. Websites and reading research articles from a professor can only take you so far. Talking to your POI makes a huge difference in getting your name recognized before the admissions process and in getting insider information on how to better craft your statement of purpose. 
Good luck to you all! It's a stressful time, but try to not let it consume you because this isn't the only thing in the world that defines you as a person. 

I agree with this advice 100%. Last year I wasn't accepted to any of the programs I applied to but this year I've been accepted to two great programs so far with full-funding and waiting to hear back from four more schools. I genuinely believe my success has been largely because i reached out to POIs at each school beforehand. The sense I've gotten from conversations with admissions committees, faculty members, and students is that most schools look for one major thing "goodness of fit". Grades and GPA typically have minimum cut offs (top 10 schools seem to generally want their applicants in the 70th percentile and above for GREs and GPA above 3.0), but ultimately you have to show the admissions committee how good of a fit you are for their program. The best way to do that is to become more intimately familiar with the department and the faculty members' work and then tailor your statements to reflect how you fit into the grand scheme of things. Websites and reading research articles from a professor can only take you so far. Talking to your POI makes a huge difference in getting your name recognized before the admissions process and in getting insider information on how to better craft your statement of purpose. 
Good luck to you all! It's a stressful time, but try to not let it consume you because this isn't the only thing in the world that defines you as a person. 

I agree with this advice 100%. Last year I wasn't accepted to any of the programs I applied to but this year I've been accepted to two great programs so far with full-funding and waiting to hear back from four more schools. I genuinely believe my success has been largely because i reached out to POIs at each school beforehand. The sense I've gotten from conversations with admissions committees, faculty members, and students is that most schools look for one major thing "goodness of fit". Grades and GPA typically have minimum cut offs (top 10 schools seem to generally want their applicants in the 70th percentile and above for GREs and GPA above 3.0), but ultimately you have to show the admissions committee how good of a fit you are for their program. The best way to do that is to become more intimately familiar with the department and the faculty members' work and then tailor your statements to reflect how you fit into the grand scheme of things. Websites and reading research articles from a professor can only take you so far. Talking to your POI makes a huge difference in getting your name recognized before the admissions process and in getting insider information on how to better craft your statement of purpose. 
Good luck to you all! It's a stressful time, but try to not let it consume you because this isn't the only thing in the world that defines you as a person.