waddle

Hi all, I'd appreciate your advice as to how much research experience is standard for geoscience graduate programs. I'm not too familiar with the earth sciences, and don't really know anyone who's ever gone through a geoscience graduate program, aside from my research mentor, so I humbly ask for your help. In brief, I am concerned about whether my research experience is enough to apply for Ph.D. programs in (bio)geochemistry. My research experience is as follows: ~9 months (including a 2-month gap due to an internship, below) with current research advisor at my home institution (No Name State Univ.) in isotope geochemistry.3 summers (including one summer supported by a fairly competitive summer research internship) in a lab at Big Research Univ.; the work I did here was basic biomedical bench research (cell biology, etc.), nothing directly related to (bio)geochemistry. I have no publications (not even close to publishing), but I did submit an abstract to the AGU Fall Meeting (crossing fingers). I'm still scrambling to collect data for this project, though. I'm not sure where I stand in terms of research experience among geoscience applicants. If you could enlighten me, that'd be great. I wouldn't want to be wasting my time on applications that end up all being rejected. As an aside: Do geoscience Ph.D. programs generally consider GRE scores or GPA as a factor in admissions? I know some fields tend to use those only as a threshold, and base decisions off of all the other components of the application. I ask because I was hoping my GPA & GRE could compensate somewhat for my lack of relevant research experience. Thanks! waddle

Thanks, all! I guess this just reinforces the general advice of not requesting letters from persons not within one's field. (Ah, well. I had hoped to be able to use a really strong letter from Dr. Director, but I guess that'll do me more harm than good?)

Thanks, anthrogeek!

Okay, I'll fess up. I'm not actually a geology student, just an undergraduate in chemistry wanting to go into a geologically-oriented field--isotope (bio)geochemistry. Does this mean the biogeochemists on this forum still won't have a home? I figured the "Earth Sciences" subforum encompassed biogeochemistry, but I could be wrong.

Yay, been waiting for this. Registered on The GradCafe forums as soon as I saw the new subforum.

Hi UBCbiograd2009, As no replies have been made thus far, I figured I might as well give you my opinion. I am not a grad student, just a fellow applicant in the chemical earth sciences (though I'm familiar with the various subfields of the life sciences). Stats-wise, obviously your GPA may stand out to admission committees (in a bad way), especially at some of the schools you've listed. You should dedicate some space in your SOP to explain it, although I understand it is a delicate topic. Your GRE isn't too high (relative to the average well-qualified applicant), so no advantage there either. Your research experience seems very strong, and would definitely shed some positive light on your application. I was under the impression that international applicants needed have a much more robust application than the average domestic applicant in order to be seriously considered. I can't comment on the strength of your application relative to other international applicants in zoology, but it is something to consider. Your ethnicity may be able to provide a little boost, but I definitely wouldn't consider it a crutch if I were you. Good luck!

Hi all, First-time poster, long-time lurker here. I am applying to PhD programs in the natural sciences (current undergrad), and am having a third-recommender quandary. I will be asking for letters of recommendation from my two research supervisors: Dr. Needs A. Break, Assistant Professor, major research university. Worked with him for 3 summers, the most recent as a summer intern. Caveat: his field (medicine / cell biology) is nowhere close to the field in which I am applying (environmental science).Dr. Seemingly Laid-Back, Assistant Professor, home institution (comprehensive university--i.e. a teaching institution). Currently my boss. Will have worked for him (as a part-time research assistant) for ~7 months by the time applications are due (December). His expertise is much closer to my intended area of study. I have a few choices for the third letter:* Dr. Program Director, Director of the 'Honors' Program**, home institution. I know him very well (>3 years) and work with him in a very close advisory capacity (I am responsible for advising him on student/educational policy-related issues, sometimes on a daily basis). I do not think he would be able to comment much on my research potential in the sciences, although he is very familiar with my academic record & abilities (my first course, a seminar-type introduction to the university, was taught by him, and he is my primary academic advisor).Dr. Bored W. Job, Professor, home institution. I took 3 courses with him (one was a small mixed undergraduate/graduate course in which I did very well), and have spoken with him during office hours a few times. His expertise is in the same general area as my intended area of study, so he would be able to comment on my area-specific (classroom) abilities much more so than Dr. Director. However, he comes off as a bit disorganized and does not usually respond to emails, so I'm slightly hesitant to ask him for a recommendation.Dr. Runs On Adrenaline, Associate Professor, home institution. Took two organic chemistry classes with him. Served on a university committee with him. Nice guy. Probably would write a good letter of recommendation, but I'm not sure if he knows me well enough to say much more than what I've said here. From the various comments left in this subforum, I gathered that faculty on science PhD admissions committees value references from academics working in the sciences much more than letters from non-faculty. However, whereas Dr. Director would write an effusive & comprehensive recommendation, those of Drs. Job and Adrenaline would probably be mediocre at best (i.e. "This student got the 1st/2nd highest A in classes X, Y, Z. Yada yada yada."). I'm just worried that professors on the admissions committee of the major research universities to which I am applying will discount a recommendation from a person outside their field (or outside of the natural sciences in general). So, who would you ask for the third letter? And would it be worthwhile to send in a fourth recommendation to schools that are willing to accept a supplementary letter? Any/all comments are welcome and greatly appreciated. (I'm fairly desperate--I've consulted my current PI already, but he didn't have a solution.) Thanks! waddle * I am of the understanding that the third letter is only really just glanced at. However, I do not want to risk having my application placed in the circular file for lack of an appropriate third referee. Also note that none of my referees are nationally-recognized in their fields; but it's the actual experience that counts, right? ** Not a standard honors program, but for the sake of anonymity, I can only say that it is a fairly unique program (only 4 of its type exist in the U.S.). This program was responsible for admitting me to the university for full-time undergraduate study--i.e. I was not admitted through the undergraduate admissions office as would be standard.