clairedare

I don’t know much about applied math, but I’ll add something anyway. I do know that Courant probably has the best applied math program in the country. Columbia does have more lay prestige because of Ivy League etc., but I frankly wouldn’t consider NYU to be any less in terms of general prestige either.

Michigan is a great program, but I would personally not recommend it unless you are super interested in genetics. All their funding + energy is devoted to genetics. And their PhD qualifiers are very hard as well, so I’ve heard. Reapplying to PhD from the MS is an added stressor IMHO. You may want to consider average graduation time as well. UNC’s is on the higher side, about 5.5-6 yrs, Mich is about 4-5 years after the masters. I’m not sure about Denver, but I would hazard a guess that it’s easier to graduate from there than the other two.

Yup. I'm going in with a master's, and do have some experience in record linkage/missing data stuff. Which is why I'm thinking Brown is a good match.

About recommendation letters --- how important is the stature of your advisor? Say he is a late assistant/early associate professor, will there be a *significant* disadvantage in working with him over, say a full/distinguished professor?

May I ask if you chose UT Austin in the end and are happy with the decision?

Ok, I am not sure about that. So you may be right, fast-track students probably may not have that problem and are in a good position to continue to their PhD.

They were funded. I know 2 people who had to switch to other places for a PhD because UMich rejected them. And from what I know of them, I am pretty confident they had a good record.

The Michigan part is very true. They assure transfer to the PHD program, but I personally know people with stellar records in their MS who couldn’t transfer.

Thanks y'all. Really appreciate the help. Some quick questions, @bayessays, are there any specific disadvantages of going to a large department (other than being a small fish in a big pond sort of of a thing)? Also, if I want to work at non--pharma/biotech places like Amazon/Apple etc., would a PhD in biostats (rather than stats) be a hindrance?

I am genuinely confused, and would appreciate any help/opinions. I have offers from well-regarded biostat departments (UNC, Minnesota) and a good stat department (NCSU). I also have an offer from Brown biostats. I have a very strong interest in what faculty at Brown do ( particularly record linkage) which is not really represented in those other departments. My question is, is it worth giving up on rankings and going to Brown simply because I’m more interested in what they do? Or would it be wiser to choose higher ranked places and pursue other research directions? If it’s relevant, I plan to work in industry after my Phd, but don’t want to completely shut the doors to an academic career.