PC99

Deadline to respond is approaching and I was wondering if anyone had any insight into the virology work done at these two institutes (Scripps in Florida and UTMB)

Ah fair! Thank for letting me know and congratulations! ?

Heya, Are international students eligible for funding from BU? I had emailed them pre application season and had got a vague response to apply for a loan and so I didn't end up applying to the programme!

Just got a strange email from the Skaggs-Oxford programme telling me to apply to the Oxford DPhil in Biochemistry. I was wondering has anyone else heard back and know what the process and timeline for this second stage of application is like?

Yeah, I did ask and my PI was happy to provide a ref in the end!

I haven't heard back from this programme but when I emailed I got this response: Unfortunately, we had one of the largest applicant pools on record, and you weren’t selected for our first round of interviews. While many applicants have already been rejected, the Admissions Committee decided to keep your application on file and it falls into group that would be revisited depending on the responses and timing of the first offers. However, any further consideration would not happen until late March. Sorry for the news, and please do let us know if you want us to keep your application under consideration. I was wondering how this works and what the timeline for this is considering I haven't been interviewed? Do they send out more interview invites in late March? Will I realistically get into the programme or am I better off placing my bets elsewhere? Thank you!

Has anyone heard from UC Berkeley's Immunity and Infectious Disease (IDI) programme? I haven't even heard back from it for interviews! Also, any insight into UTMB vs Scripps, Florida for virology?? Am extremely torn between the two!!

Thank you! That is some good advice

Has anyone heard back from the Infectious Disease and Immunity PhD programme? It's one of my top choices, but I haven't heard about interviews either? Has anyone been interviewed yet? I was told we'll heard end of Feb/early March, but I don't know if these are interview calls or decisions without interviews??? Thank you!

Hey, I'm interested in virology and want to stay in academia. I've offers from Scripps in Florida (not the CA one) and UTMB, Galveston. Which would be better for grad training in virology? Which is more prominent/reputable? Additionally, can you transfer between Scripps campuses? Thanks!

Hey, I'm interested in virology and want to stay in academia. I've offers from Scripps in Florida and UTMB, Galveston. Which would be better for grad training in virology? Which is more prominent/reputable? Thanks!

When should I send out enquiry emails to potential grad schools if I want to apply to the programme? Should I send them out as soon as the programme starts to accept applications or even earlier than that? Thank you!

Hiya, I am applying for microbiology/virology PhD programmes in the fall. Most applications require a minimum of 3 referees and a maximum of 5. I am on an integrated masters programme in the UK. I was wondering what the split between professors who have taught me (one to one teaching, so know me very well) and research supervisors? At the time of the application in Dec, I will have been about a month in into my masters year research project (start first week of Nov, Covid delayed everything). Should I ask my lab PI who is supervising my masters to write me a LoR despite the fact that he would have known me for a max of 1 month? Any advice would be appreciated!!

Hiya, I am a student studying in the UK, looking to apply to virology/microbiology/immunology programmes in the US and Europe. I am unsure of how competitive applicants are the in the US and am afraid I my application isn't too competitive which is making it hard to figure out what sorts of schools and grad programmes I should be looking at. I'm interested in tropical infectious diseases (think dengue, chikungunya) but haven't actually had any research experience working with them. A bit of stats: I'm a integrated masters student in Biochemistry leading to a MBiochemistry degree from the University of Oxford. I'm on track for a 1st class degree (equivalent to 4.0 GPA) But GRE is 163V/160Q/4.5AWA, no subject test taken In terms of past research experience: at the time the application is being made, I will have completed two summer placements (the third one got cancelled due to covid-19) and an Easter vacation placement and I will have just about started work in my master's year lab (will be about a month in around Dec 2020)--by the time I graduate I'll have about a total of 10 months of research experience. One summer placement was in a virology lab, although I worked on technique establishment in healthy blood and the lab hopes to use it for HIV infected blood. My masters project is on Covid-19, but I'll be only a month in at the time of the 1st Dec deadline. The past research placements have been more focused on learning techniques rather than a grand scientific question that I was answering. Oxford doesn't allow you to work-study during term time so there was not much I could do to gain more research experience on campus. Any advise on the sorts of programmes I should be looking at and how to make my application more competitive would be helpful!! Any thoughts on taking a year out and taking on a research assistant/tech position and applying next fall?

Hi everyone, I'm new to the GradCafe and have just started prepping for the GRE and am having an exceptionally hard time coming up to ideas for the issue task. Here is one of the essays I have done recently, please feel free to criticise and give me feedback. "Claim: The best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint Reason: Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does on really discover the value of that idea." Being able to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint would be the best test of an argument in most scenarios, however, this may not always be the case. When rational logical arguments are being made in order to build up one’s case and when both parties in the debate are well informed, this would hold true. An argument’s ability to convince someone should always be tested on a person with an opposing viewpoint, otherwise it would be a discussion of an argument with people who share the same belief and are more likely to be biased and open to the argument. However, putting forward the argument to someone with an opposing viewpoint, it opens up the ground for debate, doubts and a discussion of different views. The person with the opposing viewpoint would most likely be convinced only if the arguments put forward are cogent, coherent and logical. Often, I have found that talking to some one with an opposing view point results in a realisation about how little we think we know about the topic and hence extensive research can be done to build up a case. However, this may not be true in all cases. For example, on matters that are about ethical and moral decisions, convincing the opposition is not so black and white. Each person would be reluctant to change his or her views based on the argument despite what is being said. For example, is euthanasia humane? Some would say it is for terminally ill patients while others would say that this is murder. Everyone has valid and completely true arguments for each case, however, convincing or not being able to convince someone of the opposing viewpoint does not mean that the argument is flawed or that is it not a “good enough” argument. It would just imply that there are other things that have lead a person to take such a state point and the logical cogent of the argument is not at fault. Being forced to defend one’s idea against contrasting and contradicting views may well be a good way to discover the value of the idea however that does not make it the best argument. For example, political party support. Everyone has different core values and different socioeconomical values. I may be a big supporter of one party whose biggest policy concerns itself with education while my friend might be the biggest supporter of another part whose biggest policy is concerned with health. These ideas are not contrasting or opposing but still, we are in support of the opposing party. Any argument I may make for my party would not reduce the validity or value of the opposing party and so in this case, the best case of an argument would not be to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint. On the whole, the best test of an argument would be to be able to convince someone of the opposition opinion. However, this should be thought of like the gold standard of what a good argument looks like. But the reality is more black and white than that, as this would not necessarily hold true in all situations. Thank you so much!