theduckster

I'm in the unusual position of having gotten into Berkeley's MA program despite only having a 3.3 major GPA in Engineering at the time of application (it's 3.5 now). My only remaining classes are engineering ones and one math class (including a graduate class), but I think it's highly likely that I may get all B's in my engineering classes and possibly one C (though I will work like hell to make sure the latter doesn't happen). Am I at risk here? Do you think Berkeley will care, given that my track record in engineering classes hasn't been stellar to begin with? Lol.

In addition to what hnn12 said, I will mention that Chicago's program is two years long and has both a thesis requirement AND consulting, whereas Stanford's program is ordinarily one year long and has no thesis requirement. If you don't already have research experience, Chicago is hands down better for a PhD IMO - it will give you a fair amount of experience that will help you get into some very good schools.

I've heard that UChicago's program is pretty grueling, but in a good way. It is hands down the best way to get strong research experience in Statistics (since you do a thesis as well as capstones), and their program often places students into top PhD programs in statistics. If you are interested in all that, then UChicago is a no brainer so long as you can afford it and aren't horribly allergic to cold weather. If not, then UW's program seems pretty solid for industry; if you are interested purely in industry, then you can't go wrong with either (but Chicago does have a little more brand recognition, and this might help if you are interested in finance or something).

@Bayequentist I'm a pretty unconventional applicant so perhaps my previous post was only 90% honest. With regards to your comment, my heart says PhD but my brain says Master's. Maybe next time!

Didn't get accepted by UChicago for an MS, which is totally fair. But not even being waitlisted despite having As in Real Analysis and Measure Theory, as well as some research experience? Also not shocking, but gotta say that stung a little. Could it be because I only have one statistics class (Probability Theory)? Blarg. Life goes on.

Speaking of rolling admissions, does anyone know what's up with the University of Washington MS (Advanced Methods) program? They seem to be giving acceptances & rejections all over the place...

@Monte Carlo You're scaring me. Care to put a Bayesian probability on this and explain your choice of prior? ?

This might seem like a dumb question but I'll ask it anyway: Does UIUC have rolling admissions for their Statistics Master's? I've seen a couple of admissions on the results page even though their deadline is way out (in April).

Rejected by Yale for MA Statistics. @ducky500 hopefully you have better luck!!

@StuartLittle I'm in the same boat as ducky500. You were mentioning something about different "waves" of acceptances for Yale MA Statistics; is it really typical for there to be multiple waves like this, and if so how are they spaced apart? Thanks!! Looking through the "Results" thread it seems like most previous admits received their acceptances late Jan/early Feb, so I'm not too thrilled about my chances at this point...

@fireuponthedeep I'd be careful about making implications like "PhDs dominate the top of X industry" ==> "Getting a PhD will help me climb up X industry". Lots of correlation vs. causation issues here, plus confirmation bias. Most billionaires have somewhat eccentric backgrounds, but doesn't mean we should start emulating them in that regard! The biggest cost with PhD is opportunity cost. Those are six years where, if you had stayed in industry, you could have gained valuable experience, a fair amount of money, and moved up the corporate ladder. But if you truly love research and want a research-based position, then going for a PhD makes complete sense.

I would also be shocked if Microsoft didn't help fund your PhD (conditional upon your return to Microsoft as research scientist, of course). They clearly want you and see your potential as a researcher, so it would be a winning strategy for them to hire you up front and incentivize you to join them after completing your PhD. Seems like a no brainer to accept the job, but that's just me

Wow. If UC Irvine got 400 applicants, then how would they be whittling that number down? Over-accepting using predictions based on yield, or just having a historically low acceptance rate and pulling people off the waiting list later?

Basically, I am asking if I have the green light to go full "Senioritis".... ....All joking aside, the reason I ask is so that I can see how to prioritize the various things I might have on hand for the remaining semester (such as internship apps and extracurriculars). Is a B the end of the world? What about a C? None of my remaining courses are math/stat courses, to provide additional context for answering the question. Thanks!!

As others will tell you, you should always go for the professor/faculty member that has directly worked with you and can say something strong about you. If a letter is just reiterating your transcript or CV, then it will probably be next to useless (unless the letter writer is a really good embellisher). Just make sure that at least one of your recommenders is a tenure-track professor (or academically-known individual) in a quantitative discipline. It seems like you've already got that covered, so no worries here.

UIUC is very well known by large tech companies. It is a top 5 school in computer science for crying out loud!

Agreed with bayessays. Also, if a school explcitly asks you for your fall grades and you omit them, then it might look like you are deliberately hiding something (like a semester of Fs). It's not worth that risk over one B+.

Congrats to everyone who has gotten acceptances already, and for those of you who haven't keep your heads up - you'll get them soon! I have to admit that I am more than a little jealous as an MS applicant that you folks are getting your results in so early

Is there any specific reason as to why you want to do a Master's in Math? Perhaps a Master's in Applied Math may suit you better, since you performed better in more applied-type classes. The latter is far more applicable in industry anyways, whereas the former only brings to mind PhD dropouts and those who want to go into math education. To be honest, I'm not familiar with the competetiveness of these programs but I think you almost certainly have a shot at some mid-tier schools, most likely the ones that are cash cows. Find those mid-tier programs that advertise themselves ad nauseam and you'll probably get in. If you want to improve your odds, I'd strongly recommend studying for the GRE Math Subject test and getting a percentile of at least 70%. This might convince a couple ad coms that your grades in math are to some extent flukes, and that you are actually qualified for a Master's in the subject.

It's tough to say, but I think you have a strong chance at all California schools except Berkeley and Stanford. UCLA would normally be tricky (since they apparently get a lot of applicants), but since you already did undergrad there and did so with a high math GPA I would be shocked if they didn't accept you. I think you may also have a shot at Berkeley and Stanford. Do you have strong letters of recommendation as well as an A in Real Analysis and/or grad-level quantitative classes? Or perhaps an elite data science/tech internship? Any one of those (especially the first and last) would help tremendously with getting into the top MS programs. Edit: I just looked at your earlier post. Congrats on improving your GRE scores! And you should definitely still apply to Berkeley/Stanford, as I still think you have a shot.

Stat PhD's answer is great. I want to add that if you are set on joining industry, prestige matters a lot more than it does in academic hiring.

Many of my apps allow applicants to update materials, but I am a bit concerned that since my Fall grades are only posted around the 28th, programs might not consider them that late in the cycle. A minor concern, of course, but a concern nonetheless.

It's hard to say that any school will be "off the table". The B in Real Analysis will be a major ding for the top PhD programs (and a minor ding for other programs), but nothing that can't be overcome with strong letters/research. You already have strong math grades elsewhere (including in proof-based classes) as well as a 170 on the Quant section of the GRE, so I think you will almost certainly be competetive at good programs provided you have sound letters and some research experience. For an MS? A B in a Real Analysis will almost certainly be considered as a plus by all but Berkeley/Stanford, who will at worst view it neutrally (or slightly negatively). Nothing to sweat about here. And some words of encouragement, if I may: You should hold your head up high for getting a B in Real Analysis. It's a difficult class (even for most pure math majors), but you chose to persevere through it despite not technically needing to for many programs (especially MS programs). Keep your head up high and know that you are on track to getting into some very respectable programs, something that most people won't be able to say for themselves!

Like everyone here has suggested, do whichever one interests you more. I will break from everyone else and say that a class in functional analysis can actually be quite useful in serious statistical research, as functional analysis is very relevant in the areas of statistical learning theory as well as - surprise surprise - functional methods in general (nonparametric regression, various kernel methods, etc). Do take a gander at those subfields of statistics and see if they interest you enough to the point where a class on functional analysis class seems useful. However, even then it probably won't be necessary. You'll probably be served just fine with coursework in (graduate) real analysis if you want to pursue serious research in these areas.

I agree with bayessays. Adcoms for statistics care disproportionately about Q. If you got a 170 in quantitative but only a 150 in V and a 3 on essay, many if not most schools would be a-okay with that (so long as the rest of your app is decent). Or at least that's the vibe I've been getting.