wtncffts

Just received a reply from an e-mail inquiry to Vanderbilt. Another rejection, though this one was by far the nicest, presumably because it was an individual reply and not just a mass notification. I'm relieved that my application season is almost at an end; have three more to wait on but would be happy to attend the one I have.

I'm one of those who received a Chicago rejection today. Looks like there were a few acceptances earlier in February, so they may be done, unfortunately.

OK, thanks. I had already assumed a rejection but I'll probably e-mail tomorrow about my status. EDIT: Oh, and welcome to (posting on) the forums!

Is the person who posted their Vanderbilt rejection here? If so, can I ask, did you receive the previous e-mails from the school? I think there was a 'happy holidays' one and the one about notifications a week or two ago. Since I received those, I presume my address is on the contact list, but I haven't heard anything. And congrats also to the MA accept at Western; perhaps we'll be seeing each other in the near future...

I would wait as well, and if you haven't already double-checked the department's website, you should do so. A lot of times they do say when applicants should expect decisions; if it's past, by all means inquire.

I have no idea, but I'm still waiting for word from NYU as well. Also Vanderbilt and their 'notification soon' e-mail earlier.... nothing. I also got that Berkeley correction e-mail. I had just come in and checked my e-mail, and was all hopeful that they'd made a mistake, but then... no. I didn't even notice the original date mistake what with the whole REJECTION thing preceding it.

Yes, that's true. I'm assuming this from the fact that some people got rejections earlier than me (I'm around the middle of the alphabet), instead of simultaneously. Still, I'm crossing my fingers for you! Here's hoping for good news.

I don't want to say no, but the e-mail is individualized (notwithstanding the generic content), i.e. addressed specifically to me, so I don't think they're mass e-mailing. Thus, the sender is probably making her way through a list.

Just an e-mail from Janet Newhall: I write with regret to inform you that you have not been admitted for graduate study at UC Berkeley's Department of Political Science. We received hundreds of applications for an extremely small number of places in the program. The pool of applicants was extraordinarily strong this year and we were therefore unable to accept many candidates with outstanding qualifications. Your supplemental application materials will be retained for two years should you decide to reapply. The application for Fall 2011 will be available on-line in September, 2010, at http://www.grad.berkeley.edu. We thank you for your interest in Berkeley and wish you the very best of luck in your future plans. Sincerely, J. Nicholas Ziegler Associate Professor & Chair, Graduate Admissions Committee, 2010

OK, just got the rejection e-mail from Berkeley. I have a simple piece of paper with the schools I applied to, where I write REJECT in big capital letters beside the appropriate schools.

Hmm... nothing from Berkeley yet for me either.

I think that Harvard yield thing, if true, has little to do with the quality of the applicants, but is probably an effect of the school's prestige and 'pull', as it were. Its resources make it such that it can and probably does match any offer, and most people, if given the choice, would choose Harvard over anywhere else. Even as prospective grad students who might be looking at other factors, it's hard not to be almost unconsciously swayed by the 'pedigree' of a Harvard degree, even as compared to Yale, Princeton, or Stanford.

Congrats! I had never heard of that program, and thought what an unwieldy acronym. Then I looked it up, and it's actually CREEES! IMO, acronyms for research centres/institutes should be no longer than 4 letters. When I see CREEES my internal voice renders it like Shatner with KHAAAAAANNNNNNN!! Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.

I haven't read the entire thread but I think I'd rather have this problem, though I haven't really experienced it, than the opposite problem: people telling me I won't get in anywhere, that I'm not smart enough for any graduate school, etc. Granted, I've never really experienced this either, but I think I'd much rather get SOME positive reinforcement and optimism in an otherwise relentlessly brutal process. How you choose to let other people's comments affect your confidence and sense of reality is up to you.

I think I would wait for the official letter, though you could let your employer know without making it 'official', so to speak. Why do you want to quit your job, anyway? I mean, what are you planning on doing between now and September? If you like your current job, I'd humbly suggest the possibility of staying on until, say, July. No harm in saving up as much as possible with the side-effect of being preoccupied with work.

I didn't actually change majors, as I had always intended to major in poli sci. We didn't have to declare majors or minors upon entering, though, so I had started with the plan of a poli sci major and film studies minor. Then I intended to change to a physics major (a result of a temporary effusion of enthusiasm), but, after a semester of not doing so well in physics and math courses, I went back to poli sci and added a philosophy minor.

Sometimes I think there's a little too much fretting here. Just keep it simple, straightforward, and honest. "Thank you for the offer. Your support of my academic goals is sincerely appreciated. However, for various reasons, I cannot take on (greater) financial debts in the form of student loans, and thus cannot attend a program without full funding. Therefore, I must decline the offer." Fancy it up a bit and make it more specific if you like, but I think that's pretty much all you have to say.

Nothing again today for me. Was about to start on my income tax return, then thought... nah.

Well, unless the OP tailored his stated research agenda specifically for each program. I don't think that's farfetched, if possibly disingenuous and somewhat cynical. Or else, his application was otherwise just so outstanding it trumped the concerns with 'fit'. I mean, if he's being sincere and he was accepted to every single program he applied to (I'm assuming this), this would seem to be necessarily the case.

As everyone's said, Canadian schools generally have later deadlines and, therefore, later decision dates. That being said, I've received notice from two of the three Canadian schools to which I applied, including one of yours (albeit in a different department).

No, that's not it, I don't think. If you look at the results page, Canadian universities in general have fewer postings, probably because there are simply fewer Canadian applicants. The results for Carleton, such as they are, are mostly for PhDs. As far as I can see, Carleton has a robust PhD program. BTW something which hasn't been mentioned is that it's in Ottawa, the capital of Canada, which may afford greater opportunities.

As far as I can tell, no Canadian schools have signed onto that agreement. At first I thought that was because they weren't members of the CGS at all, but it appears that most are.

I'm glad in my field funding isn't generally tied to a specific prof's research. Is this the norm with all life sciences/biology programs? Doesn't the department or grad school have funding or opportunities for TAing which come out of a general endowment?

Well, I guess you're not going to respond to this, but maybe you're right that I expect too much of the process. I want it to be rational, orderly, and clear cut: if a GPA of, say, 3.0, is required, then it's required. End of story, no wiggle room, no exceptions. If they wanted that room to maneuver, they should not have any policy regarding 'ineligible' GPAs.

I can't speak for anyone else, but all I expect is that programs and schools be complete, explicit, and transparent about admissions requirements and the process. I can certainly understand human mistakes, like sending the wrong e-mail to someone, e.g., sending accepts where rejects should have been sent. Although it's agony for the wrongly informed applicant, it's understandable that an admin person or even faculty might accidentally input the wrong address or press 'send' prematurely. What I find unprofessional is not stating minimum requirements upfront, taking application fees when there's absolutely no chance of admittance, going through a whole admissions process without anyone noticing the 'ineligible' GPA, or else not informing the applicant that there may be a problem, offering acceptance in categorical language ('the admissions committee has recommended you to the graduate school...'), and then rescinding that acceptance later.