omicrontrabb

I agree with @bayessays. I had a profile very similar to yours. (But with a 168Q on the GRE and a B in real analysis.) I was accepted into three of the top six biostatistics PhD programs this year, so I think you should have similar results. There does seem to be a lot of randomness in the decisions. In addition to those acceptances, I was rejected by two other top five programs and also Boston University. So, If I were you, I’d apply to basically all of the top 10 programs and you should definitely get in some of them. Also, for what it’s worth, I think all of the top biostats programs are in schools of public health, except for Berkeley, which has a weird interdepartmental set-up.

It seems like many people in my program do internships the summer after their first year since they're not studying for quals and haven't yet started dissertation research. Do many companies prefer PhD students with one year left? Yes. But so many companies are desperate for statistics/data science/machine learning talent that virtually any competent stats PhD student should be able to get an internship at a brand name company. I'm currently interning at a very well known company the summer before starting my PhD program. If you wanted to do an internship every summer, you could certainly find places to hire you. That being said, I haven't met anyone that interned every summer. Most students spend most summers doing research and only intern once or twice. Many students interested in academia don't do any internships. Do you have 12 month or 9 month funding? It seems like most biostats programs do 12 month funding and generally expect students to stick around during the summer, while many stats programs only do 9 month funding and may have less expectations. Also, does your program have quals? And if so when? You should spend the summer before your quals mainly studying and not interning. It seems like internships have quickly become way more common among stats/biostats PhD students. At top ranked programs I visited, most students interested in industry had interned in tech/pharma/banking. Part of the reason for that is that you can make $25k+ for a summer internship, which can basically double your PhD stipend.

@bayessays @Lp_space Are Canadian and American universities really treated that differently in admissions? American universities ranked 701-750 by QS are places like Alabama, Clemson and Kansas State. It seems like students from those types of American schools with a math major, 3.95 gpa and high GRE scores would have a really solid chance of being admitted to a PhD at Ohio State, Iowa, Rutgers, etc. I’m not questioning your knowledge. I’m more curious.

@Peter Huynh I will say that withdrawing from a class and retaking it doesn’t seem to affect your application that much. I also withdrew from linear algebra, retook it for an A and was then accepted into some top 10 PhD programs. However, that’s mainly besides the point for the reasons mentioned above by others.

Also @gradschool2020 you might want to spend some time thinking about what your goal actually is. A masters in analytics is a completely different degree than a PhD in statistics. I am not familiar with Northwestern in particular, but analytics degrees are usually very applied and cover statistical theory at around the advanced undergrad level (CLT, random variables, etc.). Many of them are structured more like MBAs, with designated cohorts and industry practicums, etc. In a statistics PhD, you would be doing measure theoretic statistics and virtually all of your classes and research would center around statistical theory. I would not recommend getting a PhD in statistics unless you’re really interested in statistical theory.

@MrSergazinov Research experience isn’t nearly as important in statistics PhD admissions. Does research experience help? Absolutely, especially for the highest ranked schools. But math ability seems to be the most important criteria and you are very strong in that area. I went to visit days for several top 25 programs PhD programs and there were some admitted students there with no research experience. The admissions committees generally don’t seem to value applied stats research and there simply aren’t that many opportunities for theoretical stats research for undergrads. Don’t get me wrong, most admitted students (myself included) had research experience, but it was not everyone. Since you’re an international student at a school that’s not at the level of Harvard/Peking/ETH Zurich, you probably don’t have a shot at Stanford/Chicago/etc. But you might get admitted somewhere in the next tier down, like NCSU, Wisconsin, Penn State, especially if you do well on the GRE math subject test. With your math background at a good US university, I’d be pretty surprised if you didn’t get into at least one top 30 stats PhD program.

I agree with what @Stat PhD Now Postdoc wrote in his post. You have a solid overall background and are clearly capable of completing a PhD in statistics, but admissions are just super competitive for international students. Applying to schools ranked around 20-40 sounds right. Something to keep in mind is that admissions rates also depend on the size of the program and the “general prestige” of the school. Small programs tend to be more selective and programs at well known schools seem to draw more applications than their rankings would suggest. I would suggest applying to NC State. It’s easier to get into than their ranking would suggest since the program is so large. I also suggest Ohio State for the same reason. I would avoid applying to Northwestern or UVA, which are both extremely selective.

@J456 I went to Cornell’s visit day this spring and all of the admitted students were from super well known schools. The American students were almost entirely from Ivy+ schools. The admitted international students were from places on the tier of Imperial College London, Tsinghua University, etc. I don’t want to say it’s impossible for you to be admitted, but your background would not be typical. I am not as familiar with Stanford or Columbia, but I would assume it would be similar there since they are ranked even higher.

I will start by saying that I am more familiar with PhD admissions than masters admissions, but I don't think that you need to be quite so worried. For your specific questions: 1/2.) Waiting would definitely improve your chances of admission. Doing well in those math classes is really important and would significantly boost your profile. It's your opportunity to show that you can do advanced math. I agree with @bayessays . If you get good grades in those classes and get a 165Q on the GRE, you should be able to get in anywhere you want. Depending on your financial circumstances, you could apply to programs this year and then just wait and apply again if you don't get into ones that you are happy with. It's possible you'd get in somewhere very good and I don't think that they penalize you for reapplying. So that would depend on how okay you are with potentially wasting hundreds of dollars. (I personally would wait and just find something fun to do for a year.) If you really want to start a masters next year, you could apply to somewhere like Michigan (currently ranked 5th for biostats). Last year their acceptance rate for the MS was about 80% and they have a January 15 deadline. (Even still, there's still a decent chance you wouldn't get in without having grades for lin alg and calc iii.) I'm not sure how that would affect your job prospects versus going to say, Harvard or UW. 3.) I don't think working would benefit your application. It's difficult to get a job doing something relevant to biostatistics without a degree in statistics/biostatistics. The advantage of waiting would be having your grades for prerequisite math classes. Do something you'd enjoy. 4.) Definitely prioritize doing well in those math classes. Biostatistics admissions committees don't seem to care that much about applied research, especially in other fields. It shows you're a hard worker, can help you form relationships for LOR, etc., but isn't a qualification in and of itself. During visit days at top 10 biostat PhD programs, plenty of admitted students had basically zero relevant research experience. Math skills, on the other hand, are crucial.

@Bonferroni_Correction It mostly depends on how interested you are in academia. If you want to become a professor at a top stats department, where you go matters a lot. It's generally difficult to get a professorship at a school ranked substantially higher than your PhD program/PostDoc. Higher ranked schools have more well known professors who would help you land post-docs, etc. It's possible to work with a well known researcher at a lower ranked school, but going to a school with the goal of working with one specific (in demand) professor is pretty risky. If you want to go into industry, it doesn't matter nearly as much. Basically every ranked stats PhD program seems to place a lot of people into large banks/big pharma/big tech. That being said, super prestigious companies like Google/Amazon/Goldman Sachs/etc. seem to recruit more heavily from the top schools.

How did you pick those schools? You seem to have a lot of Ivies and other schools with general prestige, which tend to be more difficult to get into than their ranking would suggest. Brown, for example, has an extremely small program, so I don’t know if I would call that a match school. Why don’t you apply to Minnesota or Wisconsin or Iowa biostats? Minnesota, for one, is very strong in biostats, and has an acceptance rate of around 25%.

Your undergraduate grades are fine. A lot of applicants will have a B or two on their transcripts. But regardless, your math GRE score is super impressive. I doubt anyone will question your ability to do advanced math if you scored in the 90th percentile for the subject test. My understanding is that score would look good at many math PhD programs. Based on your profile, you will almost certainly get into NCSU. As for the other schools, you should be competitive, but the admissions are just so selective. I would recommend applying to some lower ranked schools as well. It sounds like you have very specific research interests, so I would just pick programs at different tiers that do that research. It sounds like you’re mainly interested in probably theory, so I would suggest, for example, UNC instead of NCSU. Cornell also has people working in many of those areas and is less selective than Berkeley/Chicago.

You mentioned you want to get statistics research experience before applying? Is that so you have a better idea of what a PhD in statistics would be like? Or to improve your application? It would be helpful to see what a research statistician does, but isn’t necessary for the application. You are right, your background is probably too light on math courses to get into a top statistics PhD program. But otherwise you have a stellar application, good grades at an Ivy, extensive comp sci experience, GRE scores. There are not many statistics postbacc programs. Few people have done meaningful statistics research before applying to PhD programs. I would take linear algebra, real analysis and a probability class at a reputable university. I assume you’ll do well, which will satisfy the prerequisites and show you can handle advanced math. Alternatively, if you’re highly motivated, you could self-study math and take the math subject GRE. Those two options would save you a lot of time/money compared to getting a masters. Lastly, depending on what exactly you want to research, you could also consider CS PhD programs. I’m not personally familiar with their admissions processes, but you do seem to have a strong background in CS. Some topics, like machine learning, etc, are researched by both CS and stats PhD students.

Most biostats Phd programs don’t teach measure theory, while all stat ones do. Most biostatistics don’t spend their time proving theoretical properties of estimators, like asymptotic efficiency, while many statisticians do. So theoretical math is emphasized more for stats. Biostats programs also seem to be a bit less competitive for admissions in general. Top biostat programs, like Michigan and Minnesota, admit around 25% of applicants, while comparable stat programs seem to have single digit acceptance rates.

They have the same prerequisites generally, but biostats programs tend to be more lenient. For example, top stats PhD programs basically require real analysis. However, you could probably be accepted into a very good biostat program without real analysis, if the rest of your application is strong.

I think your PhD applications were a bit top heavy. Most of the Big 10 schools are good stat schools and their PhD admissions are very competitive. (I had a 4.0 gpa at a top stats school, 168 GRE-Q scores and still was rejected to some of them.) As I mentioned above, UVA is also highly selective. I don’t know what your GRE scores, exact grades, LOR, etc. were. It’s possible that if you applied more widely at their level of Michigan State, U Mass, etc, that you could be admitted to a PhD. Otherwise, I would go to UMBC and try to get good grades and research experience. Then reapply for OSU level schools.

@danny1997 What sort of school did you attend? Public flagship, directional, SLAC, etc? Also, which PhD programs did you apply to? Its possible that changing your application strategy could prevent you from spending time/money on a masters degree.

People on this forum have said that getting a masters degree does not generally drastically change your admissions profile, unless you’re changing fields or other special circumstances. What is your background and profile? What PhD programs did you apply for? You mentioned that you were waitlisted at UVA. I know that UVA isn’t ranked very highly for statistics, but their program is very small, which results in it being extremely competitive. I don’t think the masters at BGSU will help you much in PhD admissions. It is very applied and you would only take two stat theory courses. Stat ad coms generally don’t care that much about grades in applied courses. I did not see much information about the masters at UMBC online, so I cannot speak to the value of that without knowing more about the curriculum. What stat/math classes did you take in undergrad? Did you take real analysis, linear algebra, math stat, or probability?

@Monte Carlo You were accepted into their PhD program, so they clearly think you can succeed. I wouldn’t too much about being under qualified. That being said, I wouldn’t start a stats PhD program unless you’re pretty confident you would enjoy it. It is a long process and you have like doing stats research. You could always get a job and apply again later when you’re more sure.

If I were you, I’d email UVA and ask for information on their past placements. Then you’ll know what you can realistically expect for job opportunities afterwards. Your choice also depends on what your goal is. Do you just want a high paying interesting job? I’m sure you’ll be able to find that from either program. Industry generally cares much less about rankings than academia. Finally, getting a MS first won’t necessarily help your chances for PhD admissions very much. Everyone tends to get good grades in masters programs. So paying for an MS at Duke and then doing well is unlikely to drastically change your profile.

Consider UCSB. On their website they list admission statistics from 2015. https://secure.lsit.ucsb.edu/stat/d7/sites/secure.lsit.ucsb.edu.stat.d7/files/sitefiles/Grad/Forms/admissionsaverages.pdf The average undergrad GPA for accepted students was 3.83 and GRE-Q was 167. Also notice the acceptance rate was 5%. That is extremely competitive and has likely only become more so since 2015. You have done well in your stats classes, but admissions committees generally care more about your math grades than grades in applied stats courses. So right now, your overall math record is mediocre grades and a mediocre GRE-Q score. That doesn’t show the admissions committee that you have the ability to succeed in math heavy graduate stats courses. A B or even a C here and there won’t ruin your chances. I got a B in analysis for example. You’re also at a disadvantage, since ad coms won’t be familiar with your school and the rigor of the classes. The key is to show that you can handle advanced math. I second bayessays advice, try to improve your GRE, which would demonstrate your math ability, then apply for masters degrees. There are funded options, but that would limit your choice of schools. I am personally not super familiar with masters admissions, but know they also are not super easy. You definitely need to work on that GRE score. Also, you said that you want to become a professor. Your path to that seems to be get a masters, do well, get a PhD from a 50ish ranked school. From there you could probably become a professor at a regional school.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you aimed way too high with your applications. For example, I just attended Cornell’s visit day and all of other accepted students attended Ivy+ schools for undergrad and had stellar grades. Even at Ohio State, all of the other accepted students I talked to had very strong grades in math/stats courses and substantially higher GRE scores than you. Even with improved GRE scores, I think it will be difficult for you to get into the stat PhD programs you listed. The competition is extremely tough. I’m not familiar with lower ranked stat PhD programs, so I can’t speak to whether you would have a shot at those. What are your career goals? Why do you want to get a PhD in stats?

No, I don’t think you should give up. Besides your grades, you have a very strong application. I was admitted into two top 10 biostat PhD programs this cycle and I had less research experience than you and almost the same GRE scores. You’re also an URM. I would take some math courses and get As, then write your personal statement talking about your academic journey, i.e. “I didn’t understand the value of education in undergrad, but I’ve grown and learned how important it is” or something like that. I think should be able to get in somewhere decent with that record. There aren’t rankings of biostat programs that go all the way to 30-50 that I’ve seen, but I would recommend applying to biostat masters at research universities that aren’t big names in biostats. For example the big state schools in California that aren’t Berkeley, UCLA or Davis. I would also apply to some of the higher ranked ones and see if someone would take a chance on you, since you do have a unique application.

Maybe you could start by retaking some of those math classes and doing well, then write your personal statement about your academic growth. It’s going to be very tough to get in with those grades as is unless you have an extremely compelling personal story.

I’m only familiar with NCSU, but I will say that compared to other similarly ranked programs, the vast majority of their graduates go into industry. I got my undergraduate degree in statistics from NCSU, so I’d be happy to answer questions about the department/area.