Jump to content

kronotsky

Members
  • Posts

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by kronotsky

  1. On 3/3/2019 at 4:26 PM, MarineBluePsy said:

    I refuse to call professors by their first name, even if they allow it.  We have a professional relationship and the formality is a reminder of that.

    If you did this in certain departments (for example, earth sciences or physics - the ones I know about!), both the professors and the graduate students would think you were very odd, and you would likely distance yourself from the faculty in a way which would be bad for your career. Yes, I'm completely serious. This is entirely department and/or program-dependent.

    In e-mails, it's best to just use "Professor X" until and unless they send you an e-mail signed "Kathy" or "Brett" or "L" or something like that. If they do sign with their first name, I would strongly recommend just using the same address they gave you with their first name in place of yours. If they list both names, it's a judgment call - if you know that first names are common in the department, might as well use that, and otherwise err on the side of formality. In person, you will figure out very clearly what is and is not acceptable by observing how grad students talk about and to the faculty, both the ones who are advising them and others.

  2. On 3/21/2019 at 12:10 PM, kronotsky said:

    Here are my final results, for posterity's sake:

    MIT EAPS - PAOS - Mar. 21 WAITLISTED (apparently this is the Trump administration's fault - the department's climate funding went down)
    Caltech - Planetary Scence - Feb. 22 REJECTED (my LoR writer said something like "we were doing you a favor" lol)
    Columbia EESCMar. 19 WITHDREW 
    UWash - Atmos Sci - Jan. 28 ACCEPTED

    Didn't end up applying to UWash ESS.

    I think it's hard for future applicants to take much away from this, given that I received one of each possible type of result, and got rejected from Caltech in large part because I went there for UG (not that I would have necessarily gotten in otherwise, but it's not generalizable information). However, in retrospect I think it was certainly possible to get accepted to any or all of these schools. A similar applicant with a quality research experience in the earth sciences would probably have their pick. I also applied to a bunch of physics programs, and fared better there, so I'm not too bummed about this outcome.

    Ended up getting an offer from MIT. The way my department contact put it (and the timing) makes me think it was likely that some funding came through rather than that another student declined, but not sure either way.

  3. 10 hours ago, thecodemachine said:

    That's awesome. If I get into MIT for a business program, I'll see you there. Caltech is so cool. I remember emailing kip thorne years ago about his book and how it was my inspiration. I did a hackathon there in 2017 and met every one of my academic heroes in one day. The living ones.

    Why the sudden urge for planetary science? Does that ever cross paths with JPL? 

    Well, to some extent planetary science, (geophysical) fluid dynamics, etc. are conducted as fields of applied physics/math (in fact, research on them is frequently found in those departments). Speaking specifically about earth, I also really love the environment, from a conservationist perspective and a knowledge perspective, so it's really a natural point of confluence for my interests.

     

    Which of Thorne's books? I'm reading through his recent collab with Blandford now; it's quite an achievement in pedagogy!

  4. Finally heard back from MIT EAPS (in the atmos/oceans/climate program) - I was waitlisted. The e-mail mentioned that they accepted fewer people than usual from their top tier of applicants due to reduced federal funding for climate research. I got into the physics department there, however, so hopefully this is not necessarily the end of the road for me and EAPS...

  5. Here are my final results, for posterity's sake:

    MIT EAPS - PAOS - Mar. 21 WAITLISTED (apparently this is the Trump administration's fault - the department's climate funding went down)
    Caltech - Planetary Scence - Feb. 22 REJECTED (my LoR writer said something like "we were doing you a favor" lol)
    Columbia EESCMar. 19 WITHDREW 
    UWashington - Atmos Sci - Jan. 28 ACCEPTED

    Didn't end up applying to UWashington ESS.

    I think it's hard for future applicants to take much away from this, given that I received one of each possible type of result, and got rejected from Caltech in large part because I went there for UG (not that I would have necessarily gotten in otherwise, but it's not generalizable information). However, in retrospect I think it was certainly possible to get accepted to any or all of these schools. A similar applicant with a quality research experience in the earth sciences would probably have their pick. I also applied to a bunch of physics programs, and fared better there, so I'm not too bummed about this outcome.

  6. Soooooooo it's March 16th and I still haven't heard anything from MIT. Which is odd, because (1) they said that they would get back by March 15th and (2) lots of people got rejected on the 14th. I almost certainly wouldn't enter their program if I got accepted, but I'd still like to know what's up... I'm applying for AOC and I think they specifically might have missed their deadlines by a ways.

  7. I also haven't heard from Caltech at all, nor have I heard of anyone who has. Same with Columbia EESC.

    I just spoke with a professor from MIT EAPS who says that the department is pretty far behind its typical admissions schedule. He sounded positive about my application status (I couldn't quite make out what he said when he talked about that part lol), and said that he/the department would likely get back to me next week. This was an Atmos/Oceans/Climate person; not sure if he was referring to that or all of EAPS.

  8. On 1/14/2019 at 10:54 PM, kronotsky said:

    Undergrad Institution: Caltech
    Major(s): Physics
    Minor(s): (we didn't have minors, but I almost finished the math major)
    GPA in Major: 3.88
    Overall GPA: 3.86
    Position in Class: top-ish
    Type of Student: dwm
    
    GRE Scores (revised):
    Q: 170
    V: 170
    W: 6
    Physics: 990 

    Research ExperienceOne year of research at a national lab after graduation, in computational soft matter physics. Paper under review, not close to first author. 

    Special Bonus Points: I took a bunch of graduate classes in physics and grad/UG cross-listed classes in physics and math. One of my recommendations comes from a very famous planetary scientist, and I think it will be very strong.

    Applying to where:

    Only one MS/MSE school! 

    Harvard SEAS - Applied Physics (Biophysics/materials/fluids)

     

    I can't figure out how to edit this; if it's possible someone please tell me how and I'll delete this post.

    I got ACCEPTED (woo) to work with a computational mat sci professor. I didn't list him on my SoP, but we did have a skype conversation a few weeks ago that went quite well.

  9. 22 hours ago, Ternwild said:

    This is for existing Grad Students in physics who have already been accepted to their programs or are already attending:

     

    What format did you choose to write your SOP in?  What I mean is, I know that a lot of people tend to write in the following way:

    1 Story about their childhood/reason for becoming a scientist

    2 Their research in under grad

    3 Why this school

    I've been wondering what format seemed to have worked for you.  I was thinking about cutting out the whole "personal story" thing and just focusing on previous research and what research I hope to do there. 

    I'm not sure.  I'm curious to see what other people did.

    I have only been accepted to one physics school so far (a top 15/20, yet to hear back from another 7 or 8 more highly ranked), but I have spent a lot of time thinking/reading about this, and I think I have a handle on the principles of writing an SOP for a physics school. 

    1. Don't write about a personal story unless it answers a potential question about your academic history (why did you take this year off? why are you switching subfields?), and if you do, make sure you write the minimum amount necessary to answer the question. Generally the chronology of your SOP should never begin before your first serious exposure to physics, which for virtually all applicants (>99%, I would guess) occurs after their freshman year. The crucial reason why you should not write about earlier experiences that sparked your interest in physics is that the only relevant information they convey is that you are passionate about physics research. But the committee will already assume this if you did research as a UG and are applying to grad school, so you are wasting space on the page telling them about something they have already assumed to be true. The exception, then, is if there is something in your UG career that might give them pause about your commitment. For example, I did not do research until after my undergrad, so I briefly discussed some reasons why not. But you should keep this short, and it possible, focus on why it might make you a better or more unique candidate. If you were originally a math major, for example, spend a sentence on how that helped you later in your advanced physics coursework.

    2. The SOP is the only place where you get to talk about your research in your own words. What specific contributions did you make? Instead of "our lab discovered X abour Y" - something that can be gathered from an abstract - write "I built Z for W purpose, which was vital to A observation or B insight." Also talk about what you learned and, if possible, how it led you to your particular interests in your chosen subfield.

    3. I think "what" is better than "why." What does the school offer? Its research labs! Find the ones you want to work in, and explain why. If you have the chance to make contact with PIs ahead of time and discuss some concrete future directions, definitely do that and feel free to write a few sentences per possible direction. Otherwise, it's probably best to briefly describe the topics that they are working on that are most interesting to you. If you have written a cohesive narrative about how your undergrad experiences shaped your interests, it ought to be clear why you want to work on these topics, but if it isn't, that's all right. Try to explain the source of your interests as best you can, but don't spend a lot of time on it. Sometimes things are interesting to you for reasons that are inscrutable, and it is very common to learn that you are interested in something else in grad school anyway. The point of this part is to signal your particular interests and show you understand what the department is working on. 

    I also think it's good to write an intro that answers the SOP question very specifically - as in, what kind of research do you want to do here (CMT, biophysics, etc.) and what is it about this place in particular (interdisciplinary faculty, large theory department, good observing facilities, etc.). 

     

    Anyway, bottom line, there's no need to swing for the fences. Write clearly and correctly, address your past and future research directions, and provide information that the admissions committee will find useful. Also, don't sweat it too much - it's hard to do something meaningful in this 2 page format, so focus instead on conveying information and writing well.

  10. 16 hours ago, rocksandstuff said:

     

    Hi! Excuse me if I did this wrong, it is my first time posting on Grad Cafe. 

    Congrats @kronotsky on getting accepted to UWash! :D I was wondering if you've heard from Caltech GPS at all (or know anyone that has?), given that you did your undergrad there? Also, who are you looking to work with there? I ask because it's my top choice and it's the only school I haven't heard a peep from them since applying.

    So long as I'm commenting, I will fill out my profile. I hope it doesn't give anyone anxiety, because I've heard from 4/5 schools already... I visited and had interactions with every school except Caltech well before the deadlines so that is probably why I heard so soon!

    Undergrad Institution: University of Wisconsin
    Major(s): B.S. Geological Engineering, B.S. Geoscience
    Overall GPA: 3.585
     

    Graduate Institution: Texas A&M University
    Major(s): M.S. Geology
    Overall GPA: 4.0

    Type of Student: White Female
     

    GRE Scores (revised):
    Q: 166 (92nd)
    V: 159 (82nd)
    W: 5.0 (90th)

    Research Experience: 3 years of oil and gas geology work experience for a mid-size oil and gas company. I was identified as a more "academic" geologist and have been put on a lot of more research-based projects involving chemostratigraphy, geochemistry, sequence stratigraphy, petrography, core description, etc. I worked on my MS at A&M on nights and weekends during the past 3 years. My company let me use their data for my MS thesis research and also let me publish it. So I have 1 accepted (AAPG Bulletin), first author paper and 1 in preparation second author paper. 

    I also did 2 years of undergrad research at Wisconsin in structural geology of serpentinized ultramafics, was awarded several grants for that, did field work in Greece, and wrote a senior thesis. No publications from that work. 

    Applying to where:

    I have zero planetary science experience but a lot of skillsets that lend themselves well to planetary science. I'm interested in using my knowledge of chemostratigraphy to paleoenvironments from interpret Mars rover data and branch into the remote sensing world. I'd also love to work on Earth-based geologic analogues for Mars.

    Here is where I applied, and the interactions I've had so far:

    Caltech - GPS Geology Option - I spoke with PI about research opportunities on the phone in October. Have not heard anything since applying.

    Brown - DEEPS Planetary Geoscience Group - Visited back in October, went very well, received an email in very early Jan (5th maybe?) from PI saying that he intends to admit me and that I can come visit again if I wanted (I declined the return visit since I'd already visited for a full day). We are "catching up" on a phone conversation tomorrow, where I anticipate a more formal offer.

    Rice - Visited several times in the fall since I live down the street. Formally accepted Jan 15thish with full funding offer. Will be visiting Feb 5th.

    Stanford - Geological Sciences - Unofficial admittance from PI last week, scheduled a visit for the end of Feb.

    Stony Brook - Geoscience - Accepted, full funding offer, visit will be March 7th. 

     

    Really just waiting on Caltech here... but super super thankful that I have lots of really good options! If I don't get into Caltech, my decision will be very very difficult (but good!). Caltech is my top choice not only because of the program but also because my partner has a lot of opportunity in LA. 

    Good luck everyone!!

     

    Hi @rocksandstuff ! Unfortunately I'm totally out of the loop, so I really don't know anything more than what I've learned by scouring the internet. It seems that some people have heard back this cycle, though I've only verified that one of these people is real (a geophysics admit last Tuesday). You're not the first to ask me about the PS option, and it seems as though there are people waiting to hear back everywhere I look, so I hope that means they're not done yet haha. One of my recommenders is from the department, but I'm a little scared to ask him what's going on... Anyway, best of luck! Hopefully the few of us waiting on them will get good news this week.

  11. Undergrad Institution: Caltech
    Major(s): Physics
    Minor(s): (we didn't have minors, but I almost finished the math major)
    GPA in Major: 3.88
    Overall GPA: 3.86
    Position in Class: top-ish
    Type of Student: dwm

    GRE Scores (revised):
    Q: 170
    V: 170
    W: 6
    Physics: 990 (it was free to report it alongside the general GRE so I did)

    Research Experience: One year of research at a national lab after graduation, in computational soft matter physics. Paper under review, not close to first author. 

    Special Bonus Points: I took a bunch of graduate classes in physics and grad/UG cross-listed classes in physics and math. One of my recommendations comes from a very famous planetary scientist, and I think it will be very strong.

    Applying to where:

    MIT EAPS - PAOS
    Caltech Planetary Scence
    Columbia EESC 
    UW Seattle - Atmos Sci - ACCEPTED Jan. 28

  12. Undergrad Institution: Caltech
    Major(s): Physics
    Minor(s): (we didn't have minors, but I almost finished the math major)
    GPA in Major: 3.88
    Overall GPA: 3.86
    Position in Class: top-ish
    Type of Student: dwm
    
    GRE Scores (revised):
    Q: 170
    V: 170
    W: 6
    Physics: 990 

    Research ExperienceOne year of research at a national lab after graduation, in computational soft matter physics. Paper under review, not close to first author. 

    Special Bonus Points: I took a bunch of graduate classes in physics and grad/UG cross-listed classes in physics and math. One of my recommendations comes from a very famous planetary scientist, and I think it will be very strong.

    Applying to where:

    Only one MS/MSE school! 

    Harvard SEAS - Applied Physics (Biophysics/materials/fluids)

     

  13. I applied to the Applied Physics track with interests listed in biophysics, materials science, and fluids (not an official category). No interviews no nothing so far; it's one of my top choices but I am feeling pretty pessimistic at this point. I wish I had realized that the program was so PI oriented; I treated it like a physics application and I think that will get me rejected.

  14. 3 hours ago, help_needed said:

    Hello!

    I think you are fine to apply anywhere and everywhere. I would assume that for most people when switching from physics or some other field to earth science the statement of purpose probably would matter, but with your GRE and high GPA I wouldn't worry. People also know that the PGRE is a hard test so I think you made the right choice by sending it. From reading this forum for the past week or so, it seems like GRE does matter in Earth Science. The feeling I get is that high GRE may not get you in, but it will for sure make you a good candidate everywhere. What I mean by this is that it seems that GRE scores are used as a preliminary threshold to cut out students. The most selective programs may only look seriously at people with a combined score of 330 or higher. Because of this, I think you would be seriously considered everywhere and with your good GPA, you will likely get into all the schools you apply.

     

    I would be interested to know what schools accept/reject you because of your different background and GRE. It would be a good gauge for other users on this forum to see what certain programs are looking for. 

     

    As far as the SOPs, just be truthful to why you are trying to make the switch from physics to earth science. Speaking to this will give the admissions committee security in your commitment to the program more so that just applying for fun.

    If your still curious about more admission stats and finding other students who are similar to you and where they have gotten in, here is the link to the 2018 profiles:

     

    Good luck with the rest of application season and be sure to check in with the forum to let people know how it turns out for you!

    Thank you for responding! This is definitely encouraging to hear. I also appreciate your advice about my SoP; I think I was a little too worried about it! I've rewritten the ones for MIT/Columbia/UWESS to focus more on why I am specifically interested in earth science research. I'll be sure to check in here again once I hear back!

  15. Hey all,

    Here's the copy/paste profile, to get it out of the way:

    Undergrad Institution: Caltech
    Major(s): Physics
    Minor(s): (we didn't have minors, but I almost finished the math major)
    GPA in Major: 3.88
    Overall GPA: 3.86
    Position in Class: top-ish
    Type of Student: dwm

    GRE Scores (revised):
    Q: 170
    V: 170
    W: 6
    Physics: 990 (I don't know who would care, but it was free to report it alongside the general GRE so I did)
    How important are GRE scores for earth science programs? For physics, the pGRE was a nice boost but I don't think my general scores would ever tip the scales in my favor. Does doing really well help at all?

    Research ExperienceOne year of research at a national lab after graduation, in computational soft matter physics. Paper under review, not close to first author. 

    Special Bonus Points: I took a bunch of graduate classes in physics and grad/UG cross-listed classes in physics and math. One of my recommendations comes from a very famous planetary scientist, and I think it will be very strong.

    Applying to where:

    MIT EAPS - PAOS
    Caltech Planetary Scence
    Columbia EESC 
    UWashington - ESS, and also Atmos Sci

    So, obviously this list is incredibly stupid, but to put it in proper context, I just finished applying to 9 schools for physics, and at many of them I was forced to choose between earth sciences and physics. Now, I didn't even think about applying to earth science schools until really late in the process, so I have communicated with nobody at any of these places in advance. I have no coursework in the earth sciences, and no research experience in the earth sciences, but I do think I would go to at least a couple of these schools before the majority of the physics programs I applied to. 

    Mostly, I'm just wondering if there's any way to tell what my chances are. I am very qualified for physics programs, but I have no idea how that translates to the admission committees in the earth sciences. How important are statements of purpose? Mine are not very in-depth, but I tried hard to find people who do work that's compatible with my background, and to tell a cohesive story about what I want to do. I also don't even have hyper-specific interests in the earth sciences, having minimal exposure to them outside from reading a few papers here and there in my spare time. I think I am a good candidate for the Caltech PS department because one of my recommenders is a professor there, but I really like these other three-ish programs and I would like some input about what to expect. Also, I'm still writing my Columbia and UWashington ESS SoPs, so if anyone has general advice about what to say it would be much appreciated.
     

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use