BL250604

This is normal. It depends who you are speaking with. Feel free to PM me and we can chat more.

Hi, So I have one question before I start, is your interest in statistics because you're applying to Statistics Ph.D. programs, or are you applying to mathematics grad schools and are just interested on statistics on the side? If it's the latter, the better spot for a profile review is https://mathematicsgre.com . If it's the former then I've got something! First and foremost, your GRE scores are more than fine. The main factor of the GRE is a 'weed-out' criteria, specifically in the Q section. Your GRE is more than fine so it's perfectly reasonable to include that in your application. Additionally, if you want to, I would recommend submitted your subject math GRE score along with your application. The general rule of thumb is not to submit it unless you score above 75th %ile and you clear that mark- but it is up to your discretion. As for programs. It seems that you took a very intense mathematical course load very early on. The low gpa initially is concerning, but if it can be explained, and a clear progression in your grades is there, you should be okay. It does remove the top tier of schools (in my opinion) but you may have a shot at the top 30 - 50 schools. I assume based on your coursework you had already taken multivariable calculus in high school, otherwise, you would have taken it in college. Additionally, measure theory is a rigorous course but the adcoms traditionally like to see real analysis, so hopefully that's somewhere in your graduate career (with a good grade). A statistics course or two would have been nice, but I think your mathematical background checks out. As long as you can explain why you will succeed in a Ph.D. program and how you've matured as a person and a student, you should be okay given the bumpy start. Just my thoughts. BL

What Bayes said. Well, actually what Bayes says said.

Absolutely, I think submitting a Q above 160 is much more important than the 3 points in Verbal.

Rachel, I would definitely send in the latter, with the higher Q score. If you're a native speaker, or have a high TOEFL score, the verbal section will be fine. Plus, both of your V scores are quite similar, and the higher quantitative score really is a bigger deal. BL

I've been thinking that as well. Been monitoring here. Perhaps fewer admissions offers sent out, or just a less inclined group this cycle. I guess we will see if it changes the later on we get...

serious. @bayessays It's a nice post that breaks the monotony of profile reviews, that's for sure.

As mentioned above, I would not worry about publications. Very few applicants have them. It certainly helped me to have a submission under review at a journal as it reaffirmed my research ability. However, I needed that to make up for poor academic performance one semester. I would not worry about this whatsoever. My previous recommendations and comments still stand. I'm excited to see where you end up. Best of luck!

Best of luck, I'm optimistic! Please do keep us posted.

I didn't come from a top tier undergrad (I came from a very good LAC), and got into Columbia, NYU and Georgetown for M.S. programs.

Having someone who can speak to your character as well as research ability is fantastic. I didn't get too descriptive, but I described the issue enough so they knew I was actually going through stuff for a couple years and could understand the problem. I didn't want the letter to turn into a pity party. There's definitely a good balance.

First off, thank you for feeling comfortable to share that on the page here. Yes, I think that just a few sentences, like above, are a great way to do it. I agree with you, its a fine line between making excuses and explanations. That being said, an explanation (correctly done) gives the committee insight into you and your life experience. It lets them see that you can persevere and perform well under the hardest of conditions. As for linear, I think having the person who you've done research with writing a letter on your behalf would be crucial. They can speak not only to your research ability but also to your ability using and applying your coursework. That should help alleviate some concerns. I don't think an abstract linear course is necessary. Abstract algebra requires the understanding of GL(2,R), GL(n,R), SL(2,R) and others. Additionally, many proofs involve the understanding of matrix groups being non-abelian, which is a property you learned in linear (under * matrices aren't commutative). These are fundamental concepts which reinforce large ideas from linear. While you aren't inverting a matrix by hand or rref ing a matrix you are using the big picture ideas that you will also need to be familiar with in grad school. Also, I cited some medical reasons, very briefly, in my personal statement. It seemed to work in my favor as the adComs understood my semester of lower than normal grades. It was a subtle balance but if you're brief and clear, they'll appreciate it.

One of the better applied math REU's I know about is at Clemson (Clemson, SC). They do a lot of cryptography. I'd have to rack my mind a bit to find something as applied as Clemson usually is. Most REU's are heavily theoretical (both of mine were).

Agreed with Bayes above. Usually 75/80% is the cutoff. If they ask for it after you apply (very unlikely), then tell them. It won't make much of a difference either way.

Sorry for the delay, Saturdays are my day to get ahead on work and studying. First off, I would say that it sounds like you have a bit of a story. Admissions committees want to see that you have the ability to persevere. The ability to endure hardship, stay focused and motivated and finish strong. It sounds like given your less than traditional experience in college, it is worth mentioning in a few sentences in a SOP or PS. For me, I am most concerned about your grades in applied statistics and linear algebra. Linear algebra is a necessity, and fundamental understanding of linear algebra is essential to success in a Ph.D. program. I will say that given your stellar grades in difficult mathematics courses (including real analysis), that the admissions committees might be able to overlook those two lower grades I mentioned. Hopefully that is the case. Second, I would say you definitely should retake the GRE. The goal would be to get your Q score in the 160's. At that level, it won't really be used as a screen out, as it may be in the 150's range. I think you should absolutely look at the University of South Carolina, I think it would make a solid addition to your list. In the same region you may want to consider Auburn and maybe Alabama (Applied Statistics Ph.D.). It sounds like you want to be near Texas, so the above may not apply. I am not totally sure about schools that will be realistic for you. At first glance the 3.03 is worrying, but you have a story. You have very solid math grades and a great turn around with the 3.47. I think if properly explained, you may have a solid shot at some of the schools on your list. Hope this helps a bit! If you have any other questions, let me know.

sounds good, feel free to tag me in it. I usually don't check in too much on the weekends.

It is primarily a cutoff tool used to weed out a first round of applicants. That being said, it can also be used to compare two applicants who have very similar profiles. It would be helpful to see your full profile and list of programs you are considering to give you a holistic answer.

Plenty of information for you! I would say that Michigan does not discriminate between applicants in terms of MS or not. I know plenty of people who got in straight from undergrad. Everyone I met during my visit actually came straight with a B.S. or B.A., so I would not let the dissuade you! As for South Carolina, funding is for your full program. Assuming you meet the requirements for for teaching (TOEFL, etc.) as an international student, you shouldn't have a problem actually teaching. For students who did not meet the proficiency requirements, they do grading. The department is very proud to say that it fully supports its students for the full term of their Ph.D., and actually supports a number of masters students as well!

If your school isn't #1, I think you'll be okay if the name carries weight, in my opinion. As for your list, I think you may be underselling yourself a little bit. I would look at adding a few more mid - top tier schools. Schools like Michigan, Penn State and Minnesota may not be bad to add. Personally, I can speak a lot to South Carolina. I think it is probably a safe bet given your profile. Currently, my brain is split between a proof I was working on yesterday and writing this (damn your Dirichlet distribution!) so I'm sure I'll write a follow up later with more schools. Hope this helped a little.

I think omicron is spot on with their recommendation. Given your math background and clear passion for health and medical areas, I think epidemiology might be a more suitable and interesting choice for you. I may be wrong, but I think that your overall background is also better suited for that path, unless you have taken (at a minimum) calculus (through multivariable) and linear algebra.

It would be nice to see a mathematical statistics sequence (Hogg, Tannis, or similar), but I that shouldn't be a dealbreaker. I actually have a 19 y.o. in statistics Ph.D. cohort and she didn't have a mathematical statistics sequence as her undergrad didn't offer it. In my opinion your math background is adequate, and a CS background is certainly not necessary. Being familiar in computer science is undoubtedly helpful (my own python and R experience has been tremendously helpful) but it will not be looked upon negatively. Kudos to you on taking the initiative and having the drive at such a young age. I wish you all the best in your application process and into the future.

Absolutely, imo the more you see the better off you'll be. Best of luck and keep us posted!

the experience is different for everyone. I understood algebra intuitively, and did have a very solid background in pure math. the mathematical rigor comes solely from the "theorem, proof" style in which most texts are outlined. the concept of a binary operation and a collection upon which you're working is not too difficult.

It certainly can't hurt. I did the same thing. I did okay in linear algebra, and then got an A in both abstract algebra and group theory. It definitely helped alleviate concerns. Additionally, I personally think that seeing more math helps. Thinking of things algebraically does help make certain topics more intuitive. It also helps you understand and reinforce concepts like bijections (for isomorphisms) properties of matrices (non commutative, i.e. non abelian), etc. which will surely come up in graduate school, albeit in a different way of thinking.

Plenty of courses! It's always good to see (in my eyes) some extra high level math classes to show your understanding and ability to succeed in high level proof classes. There's certainly nothing you need. Only thing I can think of is grad school level courses. Something like a measure theoretic probability or linear models. These are certainly not expected and would be very impressive if you did well in them. There's nothing you need but if you do well in high level, high powered statistics courses, your application will be that much stronger. Hope that helps.