Jump to content

StemCellFan

Members
  • Posts

    146
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from DevoLevo in Rejected- What to do next ?   
    I don't think your numerical stats are what caused you to be rejected post-interview.  A 3.3 GPA isn't awful.  I think what you should focus on is research, securing better letters of rec if the ones you currently used aren't the best, and revising your SOP for the next round of applications.  I don't know what your interviews were like, but the fact you were invited means that despite having a GPA of 3.3, they still were interested in inviting you out and meeting you in person.  From what I've heard, from the admissions committee at my school because I asked this, is that they are looking for 2 main things when they interview someone: 1) do they really want to go to the school?  People who really want to go to the program are more likely to be successful and happy there, and 2) are they able to demonstrate that they understood their projects at a deep level to communicate about them?  What they are looking for is whether they were curious, were able to be at least semi-independent, understood the methods and significance of their project, etc.  Because that is a predictor of success in graduate studies.  They aren't looking for people who only did routine genotyping, for example, and didn't understand anything about the projects there were working on.
    Point 1 is going to come from researching the institutions and applying for programs that you think will be a good research or program fit for you.  I would think about what really excites you about science or your area of research and find a number of faculty at an institution doing that sort of research.  If you are invited, really make it clear that you want to go there.  Even if you aren't 100% sold on the program, make it clear that if you were accepted, you would be happy to consider that program.
    Point 2 will come from more research experience, and will be communicated by what you are able to convey and what your recommenders will be able to say about you and your contributions to your projects.  Conference presentations and publications will help with this too.  The best way to do this, if you are able to, would be to work as a research technician for a couple of years in a laboratory that will let you work on projects.
    If you want to do a masters degree, that is up to you, but given your GPA and GRE, I don't know if it's the best route to go because your stats aren't that bad.  I would also consider a range of schools.
    I think it does help if you work with someone who is known in the field.  I found that it helped me communicate with PIs at some of the places I interviewed at.  I know a few of my interviewers were like "oh, I see you worked with Dr. Soandso, I see you worked at this institution, I see you have experience with this, etc", and it helped open up a conversation.
    I had to apply a second round for programs with a really bad GRE and a 3.42 cumulative GPA, and with 5 years of experience and a couple middle author papers and one first author in submission and 1 other first author in preparation, I interviewed at 6/7 schools and was accepted post-interview to all of them.  I applied to a range of top 20 to top 100.
  2. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from DevoLevo in 2019 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    I would not focus on the GPA or the GRE (your GPA is perfectly fine here).  I doubt either of those two factors affecting your outcome this cycle.  I would focus on getting more research experience, getting more or better letters of recommendation, and revising your personal or research statements.  Unless you are interested in a niche area of research or have financial constraints, I would apply to more programs next cycle or widen your net (though the range of choices you have seems ok here).
  3. Like
    StemCellFan got a reaction from MLC2019 in 2019 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    I sent thank you emails to the administrator, director, and faculty I interviewed with at my top choice program.  I wanted the director to know that this was the program I really wanted to go to, and he said during the interview weekend to let him know if this was your top choice (which I also included in my thank you email).
    I did get into all the places I interviewed at, so I think it's a nice gesture but I wouldn't say it's necessary.
  4. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from curious_who in 2019 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    Any pub from a reputable (as in, non-predatory) peer-reviewed journal looks good, but a high impact, prestigious journal like Nature or Science might make the adcomms look at your application more closely.  Subfields also have their own high-impact, well-regarded journals.  If someone is really interested in the work you've done, then they might look at your actual publications and read them more closely, but overall the committee will just look at publications as a measure of your research accomplishments. 
    During my interviews, I've had a couple PIs request to meet/interview with me because they read through one of my publications and wanted to discuss the work.
    Having a publication or not won't make or break your application, and for undergrads, it's actually not as common as you may think for them to have publications--especially not first-author pubs.
  5. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from curious_who in 2019 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    Hi, I'm late to the party, but I wanted to mention that there are a number of PhD programs in biomedical sciences/biology that are waiving GRE requirements. 
    This link will give you more information on that:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MYcxZMhf97H5Uxr2Y7XndHn6eEC5oO8XWQi2PU5jLxQ/edit#gid=0
    I know Brown isn't on the list, but I think it's worth it to apply.  See if you can make a connection with someone there since you will be an alumnus, as BabyScientist suggested.
    I'm not familiar with your field, but other schools in the area I know of are Harvard, Tufts, Boston U, UMass Medical School (Worcester), and Northeastern U that all have PhD programs.  Whether there are faculty doing research you are interested in, I'm unsure about that.
    Good luck!
  6. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from Monochrome Spring in 2019 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    Any pub from a reputable (as in, non-predatory) peer-reviewed journal looks good, but a high impact, prestigious journal like Nature or Science might make the adcomms look at your application more closely.  Subfields also have their own high-impact, well-regarded journals.  If someone is really interested in the work you've done, then they might look at your actual publications and read them more closely, but overall the committee will just look at publications as a measure of your research accomplishments. 
    During my interviews, I've had a couple PIs request to meet/interview with me because they read through one of my publications and wanted to discuss the work.
    Having a publication or not won't make or break your application, and for undergrads, it's actually not as common as you may think for them to have publications--especially not first-author pubs.
  7. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from lmb123 in 2019 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    I'm not familiar with the microbiology field, however I think you might be aiming too high and being an international student adds another degree of competitiveness.  3 schools are too little of an amount to apply to, especially with schools that are in the top or middle/top tier like these.  When I see a small school list like this it's typically from people who contact faculty to join a lab rather than go through a general admissions process, or they apply to a small number of schools due to financial reasons or geographical limitations.  Or they have very niche research interests.  Unless you fall into any of those categories, I would highly suggest adding a few more middle-tier schools to your list if you can.  You should be aiming for 6-10 schools if possible.
  8. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from LiamG in 2019 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    So I think your information looks good, but I would consider adding a couple more schools in the mid-tier to your list if you can afford to (I know University of Cincinnati Children's Hospital has a dev bio program which I interviewed at and enjoyed it).  I would also make sure that your 3rd letter of rec writer is a strong one as well.  Are you applying to University of Wisconsin?  I'm going there for stem cell biology and feel free to ask me any questions.
  9. Like
    StemCellFan got a reaction from bio160 in School recs   
    I don't attend any of the schools on your list, but if you're not opposed to the midwest, I know there are strong institutions like UMichigan, UWisconsin, and UMinnesota.  I don't know about early developmental biology, but Wisconsin has a program in genetics, there are researchers here who do dev bio research, and I believe they do a rotation system.  I don't know if it's a semester of rotations or a year of rotations, though.  UMich has an umbrella biomedical sciences program and Minnesota has a molecular, genetics, and developmental bio program also.  WashU might also be a place you want to consider, and UChicago has a lot of dev bio researchers as well, though I don't know if they do rotations.
    I also want to give a shout out to University of Cincinnati Children's Hospital--they have a molecular developmental bio program there.  I interviewed there last year and I really liked their facilities and first years spend the first two semesters doing rotations.
  10. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from Neuro15 in No Sciences Background — PhD Candidate   
    Do you have any research experience?  The biggest thing any program is going to interested in is whether you have done laboratory/research work before.  So even if you managed to get prerequisite courses out of the way, you need to demonstrate to the admissions committee that you actually enjoy doing research work (either in a wet, bench setting, or dry laboratory work at the computer).
    I have heard of a GRE subject test being at least useful for people who haven't done an undergrad major/minor in a subject.  Though I would also look into biology/chemistry classes at a local college as another option.  I'm not sure of any post-bacc programs for coursework off the top of my head.
    I would definitely consider a masters degree before taking a plunge into a PhD program, in my opinion.
  11. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from TheScienceHoney in No Sciences Background — PhD Candidate   
    Do you have any research experience?  The biggest thing any program is going to interested in is whether you have done laboratory/research work before.  So even if you managed to get prerequisite courses out of the way, you need to demonstrate to the admissions committee that you actually enjoy doing research work (either in a wet, bench setting, or dry laboratory work at the computer).
    I have heard of a GRE subject test being at least useful for people who haven't done an undergrad major/minor in a subject.  Though I would also look into biology/chemistry classes at a local college as another option.  I'm not sure of any post-bacc programs for coursework off the top of my head.
    I would definitely consider a masters degree before taking a plunge into a PhD program, in my opinion.
  12. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from eevee in Am I Competitive thread   
    Have you identified an area of research you're interested in specifically?  Have you found faculty at places like Harvard or Mount Sinai that do research you're interested in?  Other than prestige, what is attracting you to these programs?  Your numerical stats look good, but after a certain point it will come down to research fit, what your recommendation writers say about you, and how you structure your personal statements/statements of purpose (and if a school is a good research fit for you, that will be indicated in your statements). 
    So I think by numbers, you probably would be competitive, but it's really hard to give any definite answers because admissions is more than the numbers on the paper and is such a crapshoot.  I would also apply to more schools than just Harvard and Mt Sinai and not have prestige as your most important criteria for a program, but that's my 2 cents.
  13. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from seattleboy in Am I Competitive thread   
    Have you identified an area of research you're interested in specifically?  Have you found faculty at places like Harvard or Mount Sinai that do research you're interested in?  Other than prestige, what is attracting you to these programs?  Your numerical stats look good, but after a certain point it will come down to research fit, what your recommendation writers say about you, and how you structure your personal statements/statements of purpose (and if a school is a good research fit for you, that will be indicated in your statements). 
    So I think by numbers, you probably would be competitive, but it's really hard to give any definite answers because admissions is more than the numbers on the paper and is such a crapshoot.  I would also apply to more schools than just Harvard and Mt Sinai and not have prestige as your most important criteria for a program, but that's my 2 cents.
  14. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from antanon82 in How to email a lab you want to join   
    There ARE programs out there that will take direct admit students and those that admit students to undergo rotations.  I would carefully look at the programs you want to apply to, look at their websites, to see what their admission cycles look like.  Many programs will admit students through a process where applications are vetted by an admissions committee and your PI of interest may have no say or power in the admissions process.  Some programs, however, will only accept students if they are accepted by a PI/lab that has agreed to fund them.  If a school does rotations, you need to have multiple faculty identified who you could work with.
    If you're contacting a PI who is part of a program that admits students for rotations, there is no way they can commit to taking you on a student even if they are looking to take a graduate student, because like other applicants, your application is likely to be reviewed by an established committee.  You could ask if they anticipate taking rotation students next fall to get an idea if they are seeking students, but sometimes that is too far in advance for a PI to know for sure.
    I was advised against contacting labs during this application season because it would be 1.5-2 years by the time I would officially join a lab.  During that time, it is possible that a PI hasn't secured enough funding to take another graduate student, maybe a student they thought was ready to graduate isn't, and maybe this year they take a new student after this round of rotations and therefore don't have space in their lab anymore.  You never know.
    I'm personally a fan of the rotation method since you'll hopefully have an idea of whether you like the research you're doing in the laboratory, if you get along with the PI and the lab, and if the PI's mentoring and work styles are compatible with yours.
  15. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from mochamocha73 in 2018 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    I also only applied to programs that use a rotation system.  This is because I wouldn't want to jump into a lab for the rest of my PhD career and find out that the PI and I don't mesh at all.  I would carefully look at Harvard's researchers and see if there are any options at all in case things don't work out with this PI.  I would be more inclined to go with MIT because of the options available, but your mileage may vary.
    As far as opportunities and reputation, both are great schools and you can't go wrong with either.  Good luck!
  16. Upvote
    StemCellFan reacted to siliconchins in 2018 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    Congrats man! The nice thing about choosing between Harvard and MIT is that there are so many things in common between them (location, prestige, and quality of training). I applied to the Biology PhD, not to Microbiology, so there may be some differences in our experiences.
    Personally, I only applied to rotation based programs as I'm not entirely sure what specific research topic I'd like to pursue. When I was deciding between programs, MIT stood out to me in a big way due to the fact that they front load the coursework in the first semester. From what students have told me, it really helps to build a strong knowledge foundation, foster cohort camaraderie, and let you focus more on choosing the right lab in the spring. Personally, I think that this will let me have an easier transition into grad school as I haven't taken any classes in the past 2 years. 
    The shorter rotation times (4wks vs 8-10wks at other programs) also appealed to me as I think that this system really emphasizes the fact that you should spend the time focusing on fit rather than trying to complete a small project. If I don't mesh well with a lab, I definitely would not want to be stuck there for longer than necessary, and I think that fit can be well-determined during the course of a month. 
    While there are a lot of opportunities for industry work, I definitely didn't get the sense that the program was biased in any way. I think that the program provides a lot of support and training whether you decide to pursue industry or academic work after the PhD. 
    Are you worried that the lab at Harvard will not work out? Is it relatively easy to find a new adviser if things go south? In the end, it's the mentor that matters, but I personally wouldn't feel comfortable without having at least 2-3 potential advisers in a program. 
    Either way I don't think there is a wrong choice here. See you in Cambridge/Boston!
  17. Upvote
    StemCellFan reacted to Molecular_nutrition_2018 in 2018 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    Committed to Columbia Metabolism! Ayyyyyye thanks for everyone’s help along the way! It’s definitely more harder than I thought as being an international student. But I guess I am lucky enough this year, I’m more than grateful to get in Columbia and start my new journey!!! 
  18. Upvote
    StemCellFan reacted to LiaLuver in 2018 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    Congratulations to everyone!!!!! 
    I have finally and officially committed to the University of Missouri-Columbia Biochemistry program.  Very excited to get started this summer!!!!  
  19. Like
    StemCellFan got a reaction from devbioboy in 2018 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    Congratulations!!!  Cinci was my second choice after Wisconsin, and it was really hard for me to say 'no' to them.  I loved my visit there and the facilities/core at the Children's Hospital is amazing!
  20. Upvote
    StemCellFan reacted to devbioboy in 2018 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    I've officially committed to Cincinnati's MDB program! I feel like a huge burden has been lifted off my chest!
    @BiomedicalPHD123 You have a very hard decision ahead of you! Make sure that you take into account your gut feeling about a place. If you're really interested and committed to cancer cell bio for your graduate training, then I'd go ahead with GSK. If you think that you may want to venture out into other fields, then I'd say go to Harvard because they are pretty good, if not excellent, at many things bio-related. I'm a little bit leery about the rotation/class thing at GSK personally, but if that works for you and seems to be well-liked by the current students, then go ahead and do it!
  21. Like
    StemCellFan got a reaction from happy-cat in Ask questions about the PhD application process!   
    I've been in this situation before.  I worked as a research tech for a few years after applying and not getting in anywhere.  I think it helped me to A) bolster my overall research experience and publication/presentation record, letters of rec, etc.  and B ) help me define my research interests so I could find the graduate schools in which I felt I would be a good research fit.  Research fit is so important, so this helped me tremendously when I tailored my SoP for the programs I applied to.  I noticed during my interviews that an overwhelming number of fellow interviewees were either in a post-bacc program (NIH IRTA, PREP, etc) or in their first or second year working as a research tech.  There were some straight from undergrad, but not many.  I definitely would look at research tech positions where you can work on a project as independently as possible (not doing routine labor or bench work) or look into post-bacc programs that give you this experience, and then re-apply next year or the year after when you're ready.  If your goal is a PhD, I don't think a masters is necessary in your case.
    I noticed you are working in your same lab.  Maybe consider looking into other labs to work in if you need an additional letter of rec from someone who can vouch for your ability to do research and succeed in graduate school.  All of my letter writers were individuals I worked with in a research capacity and they spoke highly of me.
    Get some more experience under your belt, really research the schools you want to go to, make connections, and if necessary, retake the GRE.  I think you'll have better luck the next time around!
  22. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from factanonverba in 2018 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    Congrats on your acceptances!!  I can only tell you things that stand out to me as I would make my decision.
    1.  I'm not all that interested in classroom teaching as much as I am into research and mentorship, and I think a TA would distract me too much.  Therefore I would prefer a program that doesn't have a TA requirement.  Stanford would win for me.
    2.  Coursework is probably the least important factor for choosing a program since I don't see it as that important.  The only classes I care about is probably a grant writing course and maybe an ethics course.  I would probably go with the one that's either more flexible or doesn't have a lot of coursework I'm required to take.
    3.  Stanford seems like the winner here.  The fact you've started making connections with some of them and building such a good rapport is a good sign!
    4.  For this, my inclination is that you want to do your graduate work in a lab with a PI who can provide the right amount of guidance you need.  Some of the powerhouse labs with legendary PIs are very busy and maybe aren't conducive to the mentorship you need to succeed as a grad student.  From what it sounds like here, Stanford is the better pick for your graduate studies, and then moving into one of the legendary PI's labs for your post doc (if that's where you see your career going).
    5/6.  Eh, Boston/Cambridge would appeal to me more because of how expensive Palo Alto is and I would like to live off campus.  This would almost be a deal breaker for me, but I prioritized cost of living, location, and stipend compensation over some other factors (and why I didn't even consider applying to anywhere out of the midwest).
    7.  I think MIT and Stanford are pretty comparable for prestige.  You can't go wrong with either, really.
    Other things to consider is if you fit in with the culture of one program vs another.  Did you get along better with the students at one or the other?  The faculty?  Are you more social or non-social, and would one program give you more opportunities for social events?  Also, does one have better student outcomes than others and can you see yourself having a successful career?  MIT and Stanford are both amazing programs/schools, so I can see students being successful at both.
  23. Upvote
    StemCellFan reacted to devbioboy in 2018 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    Just got an acceptance from the Molecular and Dev Bio program at UCincinnati and Cincinnati Children's Hospital! It's been my top-choice throughout the process, but I have a lot to think about before committing.
    Good luck to everyone who is still waiting to hear back or getting ready to decide!
  24. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from siliconchins in 2018 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results   
    Congrats on your acceptances!!  I can only tell you things that stand out to me as I would make my decision.
    1.  I'm not all that interested in classroom teaching as much as I am into research and mentorship, and I think a TA would distract me too much.  Therefore I would prefer a program that doesn't have a TA requirement.  Stanford would win for me.
    2.  Coursework is probably the least important factor for choosing a program since I don't see it as that important.  The only classes I care about is probably a grant writing course and maybe an ethics course.  I would probably go with the one that's either more flexible or doesn't have a lot of coursework I'm required to take.
    3.  Stanford seems like the winner here.  The fact you've started making connections with some of them and building such a good rapport is a good sign!
    4.  For this, my inclination is that you want to do your graduate work in a lab with a PI who can provide the right amount of guidance you need.  Some of the powerhouse labs with legendary PIs are very busy and maybe aren't conducive to the mentorship you need to succeed as a grad student.  From what it sounds like here, Stanford is the better pick for your graduate studies, and then moving into one of the legendary PI's labs for your post doc (if that's where you see your career going).
    5/6.  Eh, Boston/Cambridge would appeal to me more because of how expensive Palo Alto is and I would like to live off campus.  This would almost be a deal breaker for me, but I prioritized cost of living, location, and stipend compensation over some other factors (and why I didn't even consider applying to anywhere out of the midwest).
    7.  I think MIT and Stanford are pretty comparable for prestige.  You can't go wrong with either, really.
    Other things to consider is if you fit in with the culture of one program vs another.  Did you get along better with the students at one or the other?  The faculty?  Are you more social or non-social, and would one program give you more opportunities for social events?  Also, does one have better student outcomes than others and can you see yourself having a successful career?  MIT and Stanford are both amazing programs/schools, so I can see students being successful at both.
  25. Upvote
    StemCellFan got a reaction from saddybenzene in Ask questions about the PhD application process!   
    From what I've heard, publications are not the end all be all when it comes to graduate admissions.  Have you at least presented your research at a conference in a poster or oral format?  If you feel you are ready to apply next Fall (and it sounds like you have a bit of research experience under your belt), I think you have a shot.  I have a couple first author pubs in preparation right now, and I just mentioned it in my personal statement, and during my interviews, my interviewers seemed impressed when I talked about it.  So even if the paper isn't actually published, you can still mention it as in preparation, in submission, in review, etc.
    For lit reviews, I haven't done one of those, so I'm not sure what that all entails.  But I imagine getting anything published in a reputable journal would be difficult without a PI backing you up.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use