kingduck

I had a subpar GPA in econ, did an MS in stats with a perfect GPA, and got into several stats programs outside of the top 20 (ps: I didn't bother applying to the top 20)

Good luck to everyone making last-minute decision before the April 15th deadline!  I know it is stressful to make such a life-altering decision and it is easy to be overwhelmed.  Just remember that it is impossible to predict the future (even when you have a PhD in statistics!) and all you can do is inform yourself as best you can and follow your gut!

"Thanks so much for your help throughout this process.  It was a difficult decision, but I've decided to attend University X instead."  They'll understand!

I’m a first year PhD student at A&M and I like it a lot.
I go to Houston pretty often and Austin occasionally. I’m very liberal and lived in Boulder before moving to College Station. College Station is conservative but it’s not an issue. 
If you are interested in a particular professor you can ask Andrea to set up a zoom call with them. Do you mind me asking which professor you’re interested in working with? 

(They only do grad program rankings every several years (4, maybe?), so 2018 should be the most recent)
 

Not having to TA is a blessing, you should weigh that heavily, unless there’s a big difference in the department rankings.

truly an asset to this community

truly an asset to this community

I think I understand what @TroyBarnes is saying. I think the original post was about AA though, and I think its a difficult topic to address, since everyone thinks they worked hard to get where they are, and rightly so. So for admissions committees to disregard these small nuances is wrong. 
Making it a pure meritocracy does not solve the problem's that AA aims to solve. For example, my uncle worked part time while studying in school to cover life's expenses, while my other uncle had everything paid. They both later applied to the same graduate school with similar academic profiles, but arguable my first uncle worked "harder" since there was more he had to juggle.
On the other hand, admitting for the sake of diversity alone is also wrong. Some jobs use ethnic background as a proxy for AA, but we know its not solely about race. As OP may suggest in the academic setting, it may even get to a point where the department doesn't care for the student's success so long as other students are successful and the DEI quota is met. I'm sorry you're going through that OP, you sacrificed a lot of be where you are now. I hope your department takes note of your plight and does something in your favor about it.

I think I understand what @TroyBarnes is saying. I think the original post was about AA though, and I think its a difficult topic to address, since everyone thinks they worked hard to get where they are, and rightly so. So for admissions committees to disregard these small nuances is wrong. 
Making it a pure meritocracy does not solve the problem's that AA aims to solve. For example, my uncle worked part time while studying in school to cover life's expenses, while my other uncle had everything paid. They both later applied to the same graduate school with similar academic profiles, but arguable my first uncle worked "harder" since there was more he had to juggle.
On the other hand, admitting for the sake of diversity alone is also wrong. Some jobs use ethnic background as a proxy for AA, but we know its not solely about race. As OP may suggest in the academic setting, it may even get to a point where the department doesn't care for the student's success so long as other students are successful and the DEI quota is met. I'm sorry you're going through that OP, you sacrificed a lot of be where you are now. I hope your department takes note of your plight and does something in your favor about it.

@AngelaBiostats i think some places have rolling interviews. take this from the nyu comments 
"We have begun sending invitations to interview and will continue to do so until the end of February. I hope that helps! We try to interview applicants with applicants of similar interest" so its probably department specific. 
@frequentist here i am back already. gonna get blacklist this website on my firewall lol

@AngelaBiostats i think some places have rolling interviews. take this from the nyu comments 
"We have begun sending invitations to interview and will continue to do so until the end of February. I hope that helps! We try to interview applicants with applicants of similar interest" so its probably department specific. 
@frequentist here i am back already. gonna get blacklist this website on my firewall lol

Don't worry my friend, once you provide them your unofficial test scores they can at least review your application and consider for admission!

If you clicked "Submit" on SOPHAS before 12/1, that is generally considered as having met the deadline. After that point, you just need to make sure your materials are complete by the time reviewing starts, which at most programs is in January.

I don't remember the dates exactly, but I applied last year and was in a similar situation as you (my scores reached after 12/1) and everything worked out. I emailed the schools I was using SOPHAS to apply to when it became clear that my scores wouldn't reach in time just to make sure and they said it would all be fine, and in the end I was not penalized. So I think you should be fine! Relax a bit, and congrats on finishing those applications.

To your last question, it's certainly possible for programs that typically interview to accept candidates without interviews, since they may just choose to not do interviews for some or all students that year -- for instance, I think Duke used to do interviews before my application year, but I know they didn't do interviews my year (at least for domestic students) and so far as I know they didn't go back to interviewing people.  
I imagine the answer to your middle question depends on the program, although I can't pretend to be an expert.  Maybe someone else can help you with specific schools in mind.
For your initial question:  I had one interview, and for that I just got an email invitation to a "recruitment day" for top candidates, and heard something akin to an accept/waitlist/reject a month or two later.  I think I applied to one or two programs that also did interviews that year, and was aware interviews had happened at each place well before I got a decision notification (which were both rejections, as expected).  That said, this is all pre-COVID, so for all I know admissions committees still aren't sure how they're going to do things this year.  

No need to be fancy, just tell them you won't be needing a letter from them because you have a sufficient number from other faculty. Chances are, they'll appreciate that you're taking something off their plate. 

I don't know of any programs that uses an auto-rejection rule based on a hard GRE cutoff. So, regardless of the range in which they occur (within reason; obviously improving from a 145 to a 147 isn't going to make you more competitive), incremental improvements in the GRE score are likely to have similarly incremental effects on your chances of admission.

Where are the functional data analysts when you need them?!
My guess is that most variance is explained by recommendation letters. Other criteria like GPA, GRE scores, and statements of purpose seem to typically be used as binary predictors, i.e. some weight is given to an application if the general GRE Q score is above 165, but if it's lower, then there's a weight penalty. Maybe the form of our relationship is something like 
P(acceptance) = 0.01*1{GRE Q >= 165} + 0.01*1{GPA >= 3.3} + 0.01*1{SoP not terrible} + 0.1*(Rec Letters) + c
where the function 1A is the indicator function over the set A, (Rec Letters) is some enthusiasm score for the letters on a scale of 1-10, and c is a bias term.
My takeaway from conversations that I've had with my recommenders lead me to believe that my admission results are mostly out of my hands now. I've already gotten all the grades I'll have before they see my transcript. I've already done whatever research I could finish before they see my CV. They're also more interested in whether my professors think I'm grad school ready than if I am. So now I'm just filling out the paperwork and hoping for the best! It doesn't alleviate all the anxiety for me, but at least I can rest assured that all of the difficult parts of applying are either behind or beyond me now.

Don't sweat it. At worst, you'll make someone reviewing your app chuckle.

@kingduckthe higher the better is the general rule but in that range you're sitting fine. The GRE is more of a weed out tool. If you will improve just by 1 point, don't spend the money, it's an expensive test and a 165 vs 166 will be virtually meaningless in the eyes of the adcoms. If it were a 159 to 160, or a 159 to 161, I get it, but not in the mid 160s-- you're fine.

Somehow I ended up with "statistics" to "statistic's" in my submitted personal statements and I don't think anyone noticed. As long as it's not something like a different school name or a whole bunch of grammatical mistakes, I wouldn't worry about it too much.

I don't think this will ruin your app - especially since this is listed on the very bottom. There are many parts to an application, and frankly, considering that both you and your recommender missed it when proofreading, the person looking at your CV might not notice either. If there's still a substantial amount of time before your applications are due (like 2+ weeks), you can reach out to admissions/your department and request them to update the CV on your application with a new one if you already applied and can no longer edit your application. Don't fret - you'll be okay.

I had an almost similar profile to you. My major GPA (econ) and gen eds are what significantly lowered my GPA. I'm in the application process right now so take my advice with a grain of salt.
1) From what I've noticed, for the masters, adcoms care a lot about linear algebra, multivariate calc, and some sort of calculus based probability. Since Dec 2021 is still a year away, so you might want to retake a more advanced version of those courses, maybe linear alg and probability at the graduate level - and really any course that you might think will cause adcoms to question your mathematical ability. Retaking the courses and doing well will compensate a bit for your lower lin alg, econ stat, and psych stat grades. Also the GRE Q will be important. Try to get as high as you can; 165+ is a good goal to have.
2) As for schools in CA, I would also add CSU East Bay. I work with several brilliant data scientists and statisticians who got their MS in Stats from there. As I'm in the application process, I am not confident of my ability to suggest some more appropriate schools.
3) I believe quite a few reputable members on this forum have mentioned in other threads, that going for a stat masters would be better for a PhD down the line, if the master's coursework is rigorous. As for applied stats, you might want to consider certain online programs or business schools that offer the applied stats MS, and I believe Santa Clara University is one of those schools (not 100% sure). It's my impression that applied stats usually isn't as rigorous as traditional statistics degrees, but in the industry, I don't think it makes much of a difference. However, I do think the math grades are what will hurt you the most in getting into a PhD program in the future, and the lack of Real Analysis.
4) Maybe also add CSU East Bay and Santa Clara. Since you already have SJSU in the list, might as well add a few schools in the area as well.
Again, my advice is just from what I've observed from lurking around here, and from talking to professors about my background. I hope I'm not spreading fake news here. YMMV, good luck.

I had an almost similar profile to you. My major GPA (econ) and gen eds are what significantly lowered my GPA. I'm in the application process right now so take my advice with a grain of salt.
1) From what I've noticed, for the masters, adcoms care a lot about linear algebra, multivariate calc, and some sort of calculus based probability. Since Dec 2021 is still a year away, so you might want to retake a more advanced version of those courses, maybe linear alg and probability at the graduate level - and really any course that you might think will cause adcoms to question your mathematical ability. Retaking the courses and doing well will compensate a bit for your lower lin alg, econ stat, and psych stat grades. Also the GRE Q will be important. Try to get as high as you can; 165+ is a good goal to have.
2) As for schools in CA, I would also add CSU East Bay. I work with several brilliant data scientists and statisticians who got their MS in Stats from there. As I'm in the application process, I am not confident of my ability to suggest some more appropriate schools.
3) I believe quite a few reputable members on this forum have mentioned in other threads, that going for a stat masters would be better for a PhD down the line, if the master's coursework is rigorous. As for applied stats, you might want to consider certain online programs or business schools that offer the applied stats MS, and I believe Santa Clara University is one of those schools (not 100% sure). It's my impression that applied stats usually isn't as rigorous as traditional statistics degrees, but in the industry, I don't think it makes much of a difference. However, I do think the math grades are what will hurt you the most in getting into a PhD program in the future, and the lack of Real Analysis.
4) Maybe also add CSU East Bay and Santa Clara. Since you already have SJSU in the list, might as well add a few schools in the area as well.
Again, my advice is just from what I've observed from lurking around here, and from talking to professors about my background. I hope I'm not spreading fake news here. YMMV, good luck.