goosejuice

Graduate admissions are different than undergrad. I'm sure you know this, but specifically what I mean is that a bachelor's degree from a well known university can open doors for you in industry, but graduate programs mostly look at your academics. Lots of people get into big name graduate programs from smaller named schools simply based of their performance. If you truly can graduate with all of that, with a good GPA, GRE scores, research experience, and letters of recommendation, you'll be fine. Get to know your undergrad professors. Work I'm their labs. Get into internships over the summer. I should mention this as well: those schools you hope to get to for grad school are well known and highly ranked, but graduate school is about the program, not the school itself. When you start looking into grad programs, look specifically at their departments and faculty. Look for the specific professors you'd like to work with. Compatible research interests are the most important part of finding good grad programs. You may find that an overall "lower ranked" school has a really stellar program for your research interests.

It is nice to read the stories here! I don't come from an educated family, whatsoever. I barely graduated high school. I often think about how lucky I am to have ended up where I am now. If high school me knew exactly what kind of day-to-day work I was involved in right at this moment, he wouldn't have believed it for a second. I'm grateful for the external experiences I've had growing up that actually prevented me from excelling in school and going to college right away, because it all has allowed me to not take it for granted when I finally did attend. Navigating it on my own has been quite the experience. I wouldn't have gone to college (and soon a PhD program) if I didn't learn how to seek out government financial assistance on my own, attend a community college, and work a few years in food service/retail (no disrespect to the hard workers out there, but working at a grocery store is what really motivated me to give higher education a chance. Always be nice to your cashiers and clerks!). My parents don't understand college very well and have no understanding of graduate school. They are supportive and happy for me, but I am proud to say I got here on my own.

Build strong rapport with the people you hope to work with. Email them, schedule a phone/video call, meet them at a conference. Talk about funding. If a program you are looking at cannot support you financially in any way, do not apply or attend if accepted. Talk about research goals and interests. Ask about their advising philosophy. Talk to their grad students. Apply to as many places as you can, within financial means. Be mindful of the location in relation to your happiness. Spend extra time looking at non-top ranked universities, even if it means just googling a state in the country and listing all of their universities. While the luxury of clout comes with rank, your happiness is what is most important. Remember you are applying to a program and/or a single individual to work with, not an entire university. Your statement is your opportunity to tell the best academic story you can possibly tell about yourself. This, in conjunction with your letters of recommendation, can be huge. Speaking of, your letters should come from professors who know you well enough inside the classroom or in a research environment. Internship letters are fine, but I'd still aim for people who have spent the most time with you overall. Take a hard look at your application as a whole (GRE scores, GPA, research experience, letters, statement) and really think about how competitive you will be at your top choice, which will most likely be a competitive one. If one of those five aspects is a deficiency, plan to make up for it with another part of your application. Grad school applications are much more competitive than undergrad. You are potentially vying for a single open position against others who most likely have great applications, too. Depending on your major, you should be aware of any subject GRE requirements you need. Magoosh is a good GRE study tool, I'd recommend getting the several month subscription. Aim for at least 50th percentile, bare minimum, if possible. The GRE is honestly the biggest crapshoot of the application. Some places value it as a cut off point, some don't care for it at all. Some programs will not value it themselves, but the university admissions will. I personally don't believe the GRE represents a student's capability to perform well as a researcher, but unfortunately, it is a necessary hurdle to account for in America.

I'm pretty sure publications both independent and co-authored with a student are fairly important to a new professor seeking tenure. Part of your job as a professor involved in research is to produce new literature through your students. At least it is in my field. Yes, this is absolutely right and one of the main concerns. One of my main focuses in building initial rapport with my advisor was inquiring about their style of advising students. Their response wasn't very different from the general response I get from more senior faculty. How they go about it may be new to them and myself, but, again, since they went through the process as a student themselves (fairly recently, too), I have more confidence in their ability to know what their grad student would expect or work best with.

Thank you for the response! I'm glad to know I have been thinking about the right things. Regarding my advisor's history in their PhD program, my value for that comes from them knowing what it took to be successful in that program, and that will hopefully translate into what they may expect from me to be successful in this field. I know they will be thinking of what they did in their program when advising me, and I think that is the next best thing to getting into the program they were in to begin with. Relevant anecdote: last year, I applied to a program to work with a fully tenured professor who told me that they were moving to another university and bringing their whole lab with them, which sounded bizarre to me. I have learned since then that tenured faculty moving to other universities is not out of the ordinary, nor is bringing old lab members with you. Thank you for the advice. I thought I asked a lot of great questions when I visited initially, but since that visit, I have come up with so many new questions that I wish I had asked when I was there. One thing I was told by older faculty at the program I will be entering, however, was that working with new faculty is exciting in a lot of ways. You get to take part in building their lab and group, which I look forward to.

I was hoping I could start a discussion for those who will be working with (or are considering to work with) newer faculty. For a few reasons, I consciously made an effort to reach out to younger professors when searching for programs to apply to this year. Of course, this meant being open to working with newly-hired faculty. Going into this, I did some preliminary research into what this experience could be like. Relative to older and more tenured professors, newer professors are likely to be - more eager and excited to conduct research and publish - more knowledgable in the newest, cutting-edge techniques and resources in your field - more invested in the success of their students (mainly because their position advancement depends on it) - more personable, both as a younger person (assuming you are younger, too) and as a more recent PhD graduate There are also some downsides, of course. They may not have a more established network of resources and contacts, and they may not be as encyclopedic in their knowledge, but I think I value the interpersonal benefits more than the luxurious ones, if that makes any sense. There is also the possibility of your advisor not advancing their tenure and choosing to move to another program early in their career, leaving you to follow them or make some drastic decisions where you are at. This is a risk I am willing to take. During my undergrad, I was involved in research under a well established and respected scientist in my field, but I also had some experience working with newer faculty, which I greatly enjoyed. The person I will be pursuing my PhD under is a brand new hire and I will be their first student. Our research interests and methodology overlap very well. During my visit, we got along well and I feel comfortable with the idea of working with them and the department as a whole. My advisor did their PhD at a top program in my field, at a very prestigious university (something that I value greatly). However, the department I will be in is relatively small--but it is very formidable and rapidly growing (my visit and my cohort size confirmed this). The research I will be involved in will be completely new to the department and university. The university is semi-prestigious and well regarded, as a whole. Is there anyone here that has had a similar experience to this in the past, or are currently experiencing this, or will be in this position next year?

There really isn't a solid answer for this because it often has to do with the cost of living in certain places. In addition, some programs just naturally give larger stipends than others (primarily STEM vs non-STEM). Grad students are never raking in money, that's for sure.

Ah, sorry I assumed otherwise. Not uncommon. Earth science departments, in my experience, tend to be pretty laid back. Maybe it has to do with the beer stereotype....

You know, I don't think I've paid much mind to this sort of thing as I should have. I'm curious about your undergrad experience with this, since we both come from earth science backgrounds. In my department, unless you were addressing them in class or speaking with them for the first few times outside of class, everyone seemed to be on a first name basis. I was pretty involved with some of my classwork and research interests, so I would talk to my professors quite a bit, and as a result I quickly became more comfortable with them outside of the classroom setting and thus referred to them by first name. In addition, I would be around their grad students a lot, who would always refer to them by their first name. I don't think I've ever consciously made that decision, though. It just seemed natural. Regarding your last point, I think that if someone introduced themselves to you as a certain name, it would be fine to call them as such. I'd also find it weird that if a professor signs their emails with their first name, they would expect to be called anything but.

Excitement: I was recently accepted to a program I almost didn't apply to. It went from not being on my radar, to being a potentially decent option that I applied to on a whim, to being invited to visit, to being one of my top choices. Now there is a very good chance it might be the one I attend. Crazy how these things work out. I am very relieved to finally be rid of the uncertainty of acceptance, especially after being completely shut out last year. Worries: I am hoping I can control myself from just accepting my one offer and moving on with my life. There are still a couple of choices I could hear from that, if offered acceptance, would make my decision very difficult. They say having to make a tough decision with multiple exciting offers is a good problem to have. However, my anxiety is pretty much over it. I just want to have the outstanding decisions sent out already. If I get rejected everywhere else, at least my choice will be easy and I'll be happy with it. If one or two specific choices end up accepting me, I am not looking forward to the stress of weighing options. I am aware of my immense privilege to be saying this, but I don't know how much more of this feeling of accelerated aging I can take.

I think this is a really important point for those who are on their first cycle. If I had gotten accepted to most of the programs I applied to last year (top tier for my field), I wouldn't have had the opportunity to be more open minded to the many other programs out there that I never bothered to look up. I can say with absolute certainty that the entirely new batch of programs I applied to this year have me way more excited than last year. Most may not be the same caliber as my first choices last year, but they are formidable and are actually better fits for my specific research interests in the long run. I don't entirely agree with the notion some people have of admittance to a top program being the only way to have a successful career afterward, even outside of STEM. You're defined by your research, not the program you come out of. Doing good work is paramount to academic success.

Haven't heard a thing.

Thank you for this information! End of March is a while away, but I guess not out of the ordinary.

Ah, I see. I'm not sure how it works. It's not unlikely to have been offered a personal visit by your PI, if that is what happened in your case. I was just under the impression that a "formal" visit organized by the department wasn't happening, based on what I was told.

Wait, really? Was there a formal email that was sent out for this? I had an interview a while ago and was told there wouldn't be a visit weekend this year....