BayesianLove

Does all this also apply for a job in a national lab?

This is why I plan to take Intro to Real Analysis during my first year. I'm coming with no background with proof-based math and I've got to get ready for second year (measure theoretic probability).

One grand for a laptop? Are you bankers now?

The main reason was that I liked their research and placement better, but the bottom line is that you can't go wrong with any of the two. I sent you a private message with a rather long write-up. Because there are a lot of personal/subjective reasons, I thought a private message would be better. If somebody else is facing the same situation and wants some input, just send me a message and I'll try to help.

DEFINITELY, and I don't regret it (I submitted my decision early this morning ha!). I made a list of three objective arguments, plus it just clicked for me . Anyway, honestly I think any of the two schools would have been a great place, no doubt.

I've just declined three offers, hopefully freeing some spots for those on the waiting list. Sorry it took me so long, but it wasn't easy. I wish you all the best in your graduate studies, may you all have so much fun with your research

My suggestion about a two bedroom for family housing? University family housing is full already.

We're talking about the same ISU (Iowa State U), but in my case I've got an offer from the Department of Statistics at both schools. Don't know anything about bioinformatics and computational biology. I'm sure you'll do fine wherever you land up thought!

Funny, because this is exactly how I feel and why I created the thread. NCSU seems more competitive from an objective/rational point of view, but there's definitely something subjective about ISU that makes it feel like a warmer place... perhaps it is the story of the department, or the snow, that it's making your lean towards ISU?

Is this true for both academy and industry? I've seen some good placements in the academy for ISU, for example a guy doing a postdoc at Stanford. Is the gap really that big?

Hi! Both programs have some strong similarities: large departments, diverse interests, good reputation, orientation towards application. Do you see any strong advantage/disadvantage for one program over the other? For example, NCSU is in the Research Triangle Park and the quals look significantly more accessible. I'm mostly interested in the applied/methodological side of the statistics. My interests are Bayesian stats and time series, including stuff like state space models and Bayesian filtering. I'm still open to industry and academy after getting the degree. Thanks!

I assumed (without much data to back this up) that companies may place some weight on the overall University reputation. For example, if the stats department is highly regarded but the university is not so well known overall, a company may not know the idiosyncrasy of stats/math and may discard the candidate. Especially when you have some human resources fellow doing the screening, right?

is it the same methodology than the previous ranking? I heard there's a bias for big schools (like they take into account the amount of research without normalizing for department size), but I don't find this mentioned in the current methodology.

Are quals part of your decision? I've found that coursework and quals vary widely among schools: At one school, quals include only two courses on probability theory and statistics (i.e. Casella & Berger). NCSU includes two courses on probability theory and statistics (i.e. Casella & Berger) plus two courses on statistical methods (mostly linear models, ANOVA, etc). (ST 701, 702, 703, and 705). Then there's crazy Iowa State University with an exam covering eight courses, including stuff more advanced than Casella & Berger as well as measure theory. (https://stat.iastate.edu/phd-requirements). I would assume that less coursework and a reasonable qualifying exam means that you can focus on research sooner. Isn't that a plus?

Same choices here. Looks like the "tier" system is a real thing.

This sounds like very solid advice, but it is very hard to know about potential advisors and the culture of the department. Although it is reasonably easy to gather some hard measures on the performance of the Faculty (like checking their recent work and see if they're active and publishing on top journals), I'd say that for most incoming students it is very difficult to know whether faculty with similar interests are taking students, whether they're cool people and supportive with their students, and overall whether the department has a healthy culture.

Just heard back from Wisconsin Madison: out. Hope somebody here gets to hear some good news soon!

Definitely! I received an offer from them and one top 40 school. I believe NCSU is quite a strong department from all I've researched so far, but I'd love to here if you've got any argument against the program. Do you have doubts?

Somebody in the Survey just got accepted by UC Davis. Congrats, looks like you're going to have a happy convo with the professor

I applied to Austin but never heard back. Actually, there are no rejections in the survey either. If I understand correctly, you mean that our only hope is to get a second-wave slot when some of those who already have an offer pick another school? Is that true for most schools, too? I'm still waiting to hear from a good couple.

One result from U Wisconsin-Madison in the survey........ THE ANXIETY!

Congrats !!!!!!

Just got an email from Cornell: I'm out of the game.

Looks like somebody in the Survey heard back from Cornell University.

Thanks a lot for your comments. Looks like you'll be leaving Raleigh (probably for Boston :P), let me know if you're in the city next Fall though, I owe you a beer!