rosebud123

You sure you’re not thinking of their biostatistics department?

I would call the office and say you absolutely need the official letter today. If they can’t do it then it’s your call but they are not treating you fairly.

I don't see how they could rescind your offer for asking. It might annoy them a bit, but probably the worst they can do is say no. If you aren't getting through to Michigan by email, I would call someone over the phone and say I want to visit this week, when can I come and who can I meet. In terms of planning the visit, I agree it makes more sense to be proactive rather than wait for an official offer, but personally I would not decline my only acceptance until I got an official offer from Michigan.

What isn’t flexible enough about the data science program at Brown?

You can avoid this issue by entering biostat*

when you say Hopkins placements have been good lately, do you have any particular examples in mind?

Does anyone know anything about the reputation of the statistics program at BU? Looks like there are some interesting faculty, but it doesn’t appear on the USNWR rankings, maybe because it’s not a standalone department

I think that more rigorous coursework would likely be seen as a positive in PhD applications, so you might want to consider that, if UNC’s reputation for rigorous coursework also applies to its masters program, which I don’t know. You could also ask the departments how they feel about their own masters students applying to their own PhD programs. I think that some give them especially positive consideration. At the Columbia PhD interview, there was at least one current Columbia masters student, and I believe there were multiple.

Is it fair to say that when people label certain work in (bio)statistics "theoretical," they mean it roughly as a euphemism for "involving advanced mathematics"? For instance, I feel like I see highly abstract work in, say, models of causal inference referred to as "applied" simply because the symbols on the page aren't terribly imposing

I have heard a few people claim casually that Harvard’s biostatistics PhD program is very “applied.” Could anyone elaborate what this might mean or whether this is in fact a general consensus about the program?

How are classes in applied differential equations and numerical analysis too theoretical?

you may find this interesting https://statsbylopez.com/2014/01/28/why-biostatistics-at-brown-was-the-best-thing-for-me/

of course your concerns are reasonable, but I think sometimes it's good to accept that other people may be able to evaluate you even better than you can evaluate yourself, especially if it is their job to do so. if you are really concerned about your ability to succeed in some places, I don't think it would be out of line to mention your concern to a professor and see what they say. if they know your application they may be able to relate their program to things you have already experienced. also, I don't think a university's higher ranking means their educational program is harder. you sound like you have looked into some objective measures of difficulty, like completion rate, but I wouldn't take ranking to be one of them. talk to students at different places and see what they think about the difficulty of the programs. in the end, one possibly less stressful way to think about it is that the most important thing you will do in grad school is learn. the amount you learn in grad school will influence your success later on whether its in academia or elsewhere. so think about in what environment you will learn the best, not necessarily accomplish the most, because I think that is harder to think about and predict. good luck with your top choice!

You aren't admitted yet and the weekend will involve interviews

my guess is it's just the first thing people see in the drop down menu. whatever it is supposed to mean, i would bet it doesn't usually mean that in the results thread.