Neuro15

Well thanks for the honesty I suppose. I'm going to be blunt with you, so try to not take offense, but you seem awfully arrogant. Some of your points are valid and I agree with; there are currently too many PhDs being trained. At this rate it's not sustainable, it's simply not. But to say a PhD is not worthwhile unless you stay in academia is silly and myopic, and should someone choose industry over academia that does not make them any less of a scientist. Many PhDs are choosing industry and alternative careers simply because they find academia is not an attractive option. Being on an entirely soft money salary fighting tooth and nail for grants in order to feed your family isn't exactly everyone's idea of a stable career, and if you can't see that then perhaps you should reflect on the current climate of academia a bit more. You know what percentage of PhD graduates end up in tenure track positions? It's low. While academia was once the default path, it's quickly becoming just the opposite and schools are changing to reflect that. 
You are exactly the the type of person I am looking to avoid for rotations. I hope during the course of your training you take off your blinders, because your narrow mindedness is something that is not a great character trait. 

Well thanks for the honesty I suppose. I'm going to be blunt with you, so try to not take offense, but you seem awfully arrogant. Some of your points are valid and I agree with; there are currently too many PhDs being trained. At this rate it's not sustainable, it's simply not. But to say a PhD is not worthwhile unless you stay in academia is silly and myopic, and should someone choose industry over academia that does not make them any less of a scientist. Many PhDs are choosing industry and alternative careers simply because they find academia is not an attractive option. Being on an entirely soft money salary fighting tooth and nail for grants in order to feed your family isn't exactly everyone's idea of a stable career, and if you can't see that then perhaps you should reflect on the current climate of academia a bit more. You know what percentage of PhD graduates end up in tenure track positions? It's low. While academia was once the default path, it's quickly becoming just the opposite and schools are changing to reflect that. 
You are exactly the the type of person I am looking to avoid for rotations. I hope during the course of your training you take off your blinders, because your narrow mindedness is something that is not a great character trait. 

EXACTLY. 

Well thanks for the honesty I suppose. I'm going to be blunt with you, so try to not take offense, but you seem awfully arrogant. Some of your points are valid and I agree with; there are currently too many PhDs being trained. At this rate it's not sustainable, it's simply not. But to say a PhD is not worthwhile unless you stay in academia is silly and myopic, and should someone choose industry over academia that does not make them any less of a scientist. Many PhDs are choosing industry and alternative careers simply because they find academia is not an attractive option. Being on an entirely soft money salary fighting tooth and nail for grants in order to feed your family isn't exactly everyone's idea of a stable career, and if you can't see that then perhaps you should reflect on the current climate of academia a bit more. You know what percentage of PhD graduates end up in tenure track positions? It's low. While academia was once the default path, it's quickly becoming just the opposite and schools are changing to reflect that. 
You are exactly the the type of person I am looking to avoid for rotations. I hope during the course of your training you take off your blinders, because your narrow mindedness is something that is not a great character trait. 

Well thanks for the honesty I suppose. I'm going to be blunt with you, so try to not take offense, but you seem awfully arrogant. Some of your points are valid and I agree with; there are currently too many PhDs being trained. At this rate it's not sustainable, it's simply not. But to say a PhD is not worthwhile unless you stay in academia is silly and myopic, and should someone choose industry over academia that does not make them any less of a scientist. Many PhDs are choosing industry and alternative careers simply because they find academia is not an attractive option. Being on an entirely soft money salary fighting tooth and nail for grants in order to feed your family isn't exactly everyone's idea of a stable career, and if you can't see that then perhaps you should reflect on the current climate of academia a bit more. You know what percentage of PhD graduates end up in tenure track positions? It's low. While academia was once the default path, it's quickly becoming just the opposite and schools are changing to reflect that. 
You are exactly the the type of person I am looking to avoid for rotations. I hope during the course of your training you take off your blinders, because your narrow mindedness is something that is not a great character trait. 

Well thanks for the honesty I suppose. I'm going to be blunt with you, so try to not take offense, but you seem awfully arrogant. Some of your points are valid and I agree with; there are currently too many PhDs being trained. At this rate it's not sustainable, it's simply not. But to say a PhD is not worthwhile unless you stay in academia is silly and myopic, and should someone choose industry over academia that does not make them any less of a scientist. Many PhDs are choosing industry and alternative careers simply because they find academia is not an attractive option. Being on an entirely soft money salary fighting tooth and nail for grants in order to feed your family isn't exactly everyone's idea of a stable career, and if you can't see that then perhaps you should reflect on the current climate of academia a bit more. You know what percentage of PhD graduates end up in tenure track positions? It's low. While academia was once the default path, it's quickly becoming just the opposite and schools are changing to reflect that. 
You are exactly the the type of person I am looking to avoid for rotations. I hope during the course of your training you take off your blinders, because your narrow mindedness is something that is not a great character trait. 

Well thanks for the honesty I suppose. I'm going to be blunt with you, so try to not take offense, but you seem awfully arrogant. Some of your points are valid and I agree with; there are currently too many PhDs being trained. At this rate it's not sustainable, it's simply not. But to say a PhD is not worthwhile unless you stay in academia is silly and myopic, and should someone choose industry over academia that does not make them any less of a scientist. Many PhDs are choosing industry and alternative careers simply because they find academia is not an attractive option. Being on an entirely soft money salary fighting tooth and nail for grants in order to feed your family isn't exactly everyone's idea of a stable career, and if you can't see that then perhaps you should reflect on the current climate of academia a bit more. You know what percentage of PhD graduates end up in tenure track positions? It's low. While academia was once the default path, it's quickly becoming just the opposite and schools are changing to reflect that. 
You are exactly the the type of person I am looking to avoid for rotations. I hope during the course of your training you take off your blinders, because your narrow mindedness is something that is not a great character trait. 

Well thanks for the honesty I suppose. I'm going to be blunt with you, so try to not take offense, but you seem awfully arrogant. Some of your points are valid and I agree with; there are currently too many PhDs being trained. At this rate it's not sustainable, it's simply not. But to say a PhD is not worthwhile unless you stay in academia is silly and myopic, and should someone choose industry over academia that does not make them any less of a scientist. Many PhDs are choosing industry and alternative careers simply because they find academia is not an attractive option. Being on an entirely soft money salary fighting tooth and nail for grants in order to feed your family isn't exactly everyone's idea of a stable career, and if you can't see that then perhaps you should reflect on the current climate of academia a bit more. You know what percentage of PhD graduates end up in tenure track positions? It's low. While academia was once the default path, it's quickly becoming just the opposite and schools are changing to reflect that. 
You are exactly the the type of person I am looking to avoid for rotations. I hope during the course of your training you take off your blinders, because your narrow mindedness is something that is not a great character trait. 

I think you have the science issues well thought out on both sides of the issue, but also think about where you want to live (not just CoL). ~5 years is a long time to spend in one place and as you said these places are polar opposites. NJ vs CA, small town vs huge city (think things to do), etc. 
The Bay Area has a ton of industry-specific opportunities, but the NJ area is no slouch either. Many pharma and biotech companies call North NJ/Philadelphia area home. 
Both are amazing institutions, and whichever you choose certainly won't hold you back in the long term. 

Merry Christmas, and Happy continual Hanukkah everyone! Hopefully this coming week brings you all good news!! 

I think because of funding it is more difficult for international applicants to get in neuroscience programs in the US. You should apply to some lower-ranking universities. If you didn't, you could apply to some masters programs to get more research experience and then apply to PhD programs again in the next year.
Or you can try to find some external funding to increase your chance. I know there was an international student who didn't get the interview invite from UC Berkeley neuroscience. However, he was admitted after he sent an email to UC Berkeley said he has got a government fellowship. It was probably because UC Berkeley didn't need to pay stipend to him and they could earn money by admitting him.

Wow. Thanks for the info. I never knew!! Nor did I set down this path with any better info than an internet forum poster could give me.
I did not solicit advice.

Buddy, it isn't even January. The best thing you can possibly do for yourself is try to relax (lol I know, right?) and enjoy the holidays. I feel like you're rushing toward the worse-case scenario, which probably won't even happen. Don't feed the stress! 

Guys, its only Dec 21st! It is easy to get discouraged when you're seeing a bunch of people get multiple invites from Harvard/Yale/Penn/etc but to put things in perspective, it has only been three weeks since apps were due, and many schools haven't even started reviewing them yet. Panic mode is for February/March ;). We got this! 

Most likely just due to staff being away. 

Hi everyone,
Just a reminder to keep our community a place where people can come to get information and support during their grad school applications and beyond. Disagreement is certainly okay but some recent actions here have veered away from constructive discussion. 
Thanks,
TakeruK

I think that person just changed his/her username. 

I am rude for telling a peer not to take things so personally? Seriously? 

Wayyy too much negativity in here for a Saturday people 

Wayyy too much negativity in here for a Saturday people 

Wayyy too much negativity in here for a Saturday people 

Wayyy too much negativity in here for a Saturday people 

I love being in BBS. It was my top choice, and the interview weekend confirmed every expectation. We have a cohort of 75, so it is not hard to find a group of friends. 
The coursework is amazing. We are required to take 32 credits of courses: eight credits are required (BBS 230 and BBS 330), 24 credits are for electives. I can take courses through any science department at Harvard, MIT, Brown, and Tufts. The lecturers are all leaders in their fields: I've had lectures from George Daley, Phil Sharp, Bob Horvitz, David Altshuler, George Church, etc. Contrary to popular belief, the teaching here is amazing. 
Everyone in BBS is fully funded throughout their PhD. There is no question about funding. Everyone gets the same funding regardless of how long they have been here. In addition, the stipend for Harvard BBS is around $5k higher than the stipend at other Boston universities. 
The lab work here is outstanding. There are over 800 labs in which BBS students can work. I can work in the Harvard Quad, Beth Israel, MGH, Boston Children's, Brigham, Broad, Wyss, DFCI, Harvard College, etc. The lab work itself is what you make it. I've completed two rotations and I am currently in my third. My first was in yeast genetics. I told the PI that I was interested in autophagy, so I was put on a project looking at selective autophagy. The PI was always available to chat, but he really just left me alone with a grad student and we went to work. I set my schedule and got good work done. My second rotation was in cancer biology. I told the PI I wanted to look at metabolism in cancer, so I got put on my own independent project looking at the role of a specific pathway in breast cancer. Again, the PI could meet whenever, but I was independent with the guidance of a graduate student. My third rotation is at MGH working on the human genetics of neuropsychiatric disorders. My PI does several things, but I told him my interests and now I am on a project doing exactly what I said I wanted to do. In short, research here is incredibly independent with enough guidance to learn what you need to learn. Many PIs want to train graduate students, not use them for free labor. I feel like I am in an environment to learn how to be a scientist.
Many BBS graduate students do great things. I know one who is the senior scientific advisor at the White House. Another is in Bob Weinberg's lab. My PI is a Harvard graduate. I'm also on the executive board for the Harvard Biotechnology Club, and many of the speakers we bring in are BBS graduates. 
There are a lot of student clubs. I am always being invited to free events with free alcohol and food that are put on by other students. Student life here is great. Boston and Cambridge are also amazing cities with a lot of culture. 
But anyway, it doesn't sound like Harvard BBS is right for you, so good luck at Hopkins! 

Can we all please chill with overwrought stereotypes of major institutions? As someone who went to Harvard for undergrad and now works in an HMS lab, and is applying for PhDs, there are great things and awful things about Harvard. Also in your stereotypes, you're making a hilarious equivalence between medical research and biological/biomedical research. It's very hard and frankly incorrect to connect research into surgery techniques to research on DNA or the cell. Also just saying an institution "was amazing in the history" ignores what it currently is, frankly when a lot of those discoveries at JHU were being made Stanford was like 20 years old, so let's all chill.
I applied to only six schools, but I applied to them because there were faculty there that I wanted to work with on topics I'm working on. Most graduate programs are defined by your PI, as I've learned working full-time in a lab the past two years. If you're just choosing for "reputation" or in spite of it, you're going to miss great opportunities.
I can tell you for certain BBS is a program that will let you do anything you want pretty much, and it is incredibly student-dependent in outcomes. In that way it's similar to the Harvard undergrad experience. But the idea that you're just a PI's bitch or not doing good science... you literally can't make such broad statements because every lab is different. Let's chill with overgeneralization plz.

Good advice, thanks!
 
On a side note, does anyone else in this thread mentally sing Kokobanana's name to the tune of that Copacabana song every time? Or am I just going crazy waiting to hear back from schools?