cherubie

To add my 2 cents: I found myself belatedly in the exact same problem as the OP...except he/she has the foresight to ask about it beforehand, whereas I didn't. Even my PI (employer, not mentor), who knew how narrow my field and focus is didn't bother to tell me until AFTER I submitted my applications, but that's another story. Anyways, my biggest recommendation is broaden your focus. Yes, it's good to have a focus, but not one where you are struggling to find people who are doing the same thing (again, the problem I had). Even if you follow that list that another member so kindly gave you, you cannot guarantee that you'll be able to apply to every single PI. 1) Some of them may not be taking students 2) Some of their research focus and/or future focus may have changed 3) Some may not be affiliated with the program you want to apply to. See, after taking all these things into consideration, I ended up with one, yes, ONE PI who researched what I wanted to study, using the methodology I want to use. And to add salt to the injury, that PI also happens to be at one of the most competitive institutions for that field. Great. Even with several years of research experience, near perfect GRE, average GPA from highly regarded private institution, I got rejected flat out from half the schools I applied to, and none of the other schools but one did the type of research I wanted to do. Several PIs directly asked how can my interest align with their research, and one flat out said they don't have the opportunities I'm looking for. The happy ending to my story is that I happened to get into that one school and feel like I narrowly missed total rejection by an inch. But do yourself a favor and avoid going through what I did and just broaden your scope. In research, you will most likely not get to research what you are truly interested in any ways. Those things depend on grant availability, what's "hot" in the field, and other practical issues. On the other hand, if you are passionate enough about what you want to research that you want to take that risk, go ahead. Your passion for that topic will show (as mine did at the interview) and who knows, you just may end up being accepted to a PI that does exactly the type of research you want to do. While my advice is to tell you to broaden your scope, I wouldn't have taken that advice 2 months prior, simply because I refuse to compromise my interests for the sake of getting in. I'd rather not get in than to research something I find dull. However, I took a huge risk that could have very easily gone wrong. Also to answer Bren's question: almost every PI I emailed got back to me, and my initial email was short (less than 10 sentences), stated who I am, who I work with, where I went to school, and a sentence and a half about my research interest that is very general (i.e. I want to study XYZ in __ population ___ by [insert general methodology] ...). I did not propose my thesis question, but basically said the 2-3 things about my interest that I refuse to compromise. If the PI doesn't happen to do that type of research, I was willing to move on.

I like how they don't even have one of the most represented specialities (clinical psych) on there.

I had the exact same question as you just a week ago, and I successfully "negotiated" a higher stipend for myself. I put negotiate in quotations because I wasn't bargaining, neither was I trying to use another acceptance as leverage. I have already verbally accepted an offer to my top choice and later got an email from my second choice offering me almost 2x as much money as my first. I wrote my POI an email, stating whether there are opportunities for other scholarships/fellowship offers and also stated I did got offered X amount from another school. I kind of regretted my decision afterwards, because 1) it is VERY awkward to talk money, and 2) I didn't want to give the impression I was going to withdraw my decision (which I wasn't under any circumstances!). But we talked on the phone, I explained to my POI my point of view (i.e. that I'm just trying to look at all my options, and that I am in no way using the second school as leverage or threatening to withdraw). It all worked out, because I received an email shortly after our convo stating what my stipend would (and could) be...which turns out to be a little bit higher than before. BTW, I am a female if that makes any difference to you. The biggest thing is IF this is your top choice and you absolutely want to go there, do not use the second offer as leverage. I've been told this could come off the wrong way and annoy your POI or make you appear greedy. Just talk to him/her in a straightforward manner. For example, I mentioned I'm looking into apartments right now and I just need to know which ones I can afford. I think as long as you are honest and polite, it couldn't hurt. The worse thing that could happen is your school stays firm with their offer.

Another thing is the questions you ask about the schools should NOT be A) on the website and too superficial. A LOT of the questions i had came in with were answered within 10 minutes of the program orientation. OOF...now what? I had several pages (for multiple faculty, of course) but didn't ask any of them. All my questions were building on top of what was said at the orientation. Take notes during that time, it shows that you were listening and you're not just coming in memorizing questions for the sake of having questions.

I'm not sure if you already had your interview, but I just got back from a 2-day interview with 12 faculty total. My strategy consists of the following: 1) You don't have to memorize 16 different bios. The faculty that I met with (other than my POI) did not even mention their research, and clearly did not expected me to know it either. I was actually the one to bring up questions about their studies. They didn't quiz me on their methods or anything at all. So you don't have to worry about memorizing all 16 bios. With that said, I did walked in having SOME idea of what they do. This not only makes you feel more confident, but if you get tired of getting asked all the questions, you can turn the table and ask THEM about their research. The faculty whose research someone matched my POI's, I did read a paper or two and asked questions pointed to that topic. But again, from my experience, they definitely do not expect you to memorize their research as long as it is not in your field. 2) Know YOUR stuff. A lot (if not all) of the faculty I met with really just wanted to see how much of a fit I would be with my POI. They are all colleagues, and they may know things about your POI that you don't. This may include research, personality, working style, etc. They just want to see whether you will be a good fit given their knowledge. In doing this, half the faculty asked very pointed and specific questions about my research. One even asked me what my hypothesis is or what I expect to find on a certain topic based on what I said I wanted to research. So if you want to study the effect of X on Z, it would be wise to have at least a running hypothesis based on the current literature. My answer wasn't field changing or ground shattering, but I was able to say something along the lines of "based on the current trend/XYZ results, my hypothesis/guess would be I would find...". Know every poster/paper/experience you have on your CV. One faculty "grilled" me on a very specific method and challenged it (in a friendly way) because she was interested in incorporating it into her work. 3) Many questions will be similar. While it seemed like each faculty I met with assessed me from a different angle, a lot of the questions were very similar. One asked how am I a fit with the POI and what can I bring to the table...pretty typical question to expect, but you should also have a good answer. So even though I met with 10+ people over 2 days, it wasn't like each interview was so vastly different that I had to prepare for each of them in entirely different ways. Some things I did that i think helped me (I received an offer shortly after, so I think my strategy helped...somewhat -C.O.N.F.I.D.E.N.C.E.! I was nervous before the interview, my heart was racing and I had no idea what to expect. A lot of the feedback I got from grad students about what to expect from each faculty was vague and didn't settle my nerves (in fact, it made it worse even though they all mean well). But once I sat down on the "hot seat" I felt like I'd be able to handle any question they throw at me. In fact, on multiple occasions as I talked about my own research/ideas, I told them straight out that if they have ANY questions, ask me at any time. To me, this shows I am ready to handle their questions and that I'm not just yapping on to waste time. -DETAILS. Most of my answers were very detailed and I tried my best to show that I did my research on the school, and I know more about my own background than just the surface. It's good to spit out a bunch of smart words and jargons, but can you back it up? -Everyone is human. Faculty is not god, they are not magical beings in some realm of magic science. They are human. They have personalities. They may be rude, nice, tired, uninterested, etc. Imagine interviewing 20+ applicants over a span of 2 days! That's a lot of work! So don't analyze every blink of an eye, every twitch in their seat, every time they check their email while you're talking. Just be yourself and know that they have been through this before as well. BTW, I found that a lot of professors/people I met with didn't care much for talking about their research. They usually turn the question around at ME. I think what helped me is that I had specific questions about their research...or questions related to the field I'm applying for. For example, if someone works on cancer research, it's one thing to say "I understand you're working on the ABC transcription factor in hyperproliferating cells (just made up that word), can you elaborate on it"...BUT I also feel it's very important to follow up with "what do you think about this process in the transcription process, how does a muted allele for XYZ RNA affect the proliferation of cells". Obviously, I made this up...but the point is, if you're going to talk to them about their research, make sure it's not just you getting them to talk so you don't have to. Okay GOOD LUCK!

The best advice I can give (based on 2 in person interviews and 2 semi-phone interviews) is CONFIDENCE. You can't possibly prepare for every single question you'll get asked. Of course, know your stuff (if there's something on your CV you can't at least say a few sentences about, it probably should't be on there in the first place) and know their stuff peripherally (they won't grill you on their work). But on top of that, come in with confidence. I come in with an attitude of "I may not know everything, but I can definitely learn." Another thing is to make sure you have questions. I prepared a page+ of questions per school, and didn't get to really ask most of them. Most of my questions stemmed from the conversation itself. With that said, be prepared with some initial questions. Don't ask anything that is already on the website (i.e. match rates), don't ask anything to shows you didn't do your homework either. I got asked a ridiculously out there question from 2 people during my interviews, but the biggest thing is knowing how to take a step back, think, and answer to the best of your ability. I also had another interview with the director where I was asking all the questions. I even asked him if he had any questions for me and the answer was pretty much no. So be prepared to have a discussion and to be able to lead that discussion if need be. Lastly, even though the advice I received and read is that you don't need to know other faculty who are not your POI's work, I find that having a brief understanding of their work helps. It helps as a conversation starter if anything. Plus, by the end of the day after meeting with 5 people, you do get tired of repeating the same thing over and over. Good luck to all of us!

Okay, I'm bored so, here goes (true convo, btw): Person: Oh...you're applying to grad school, where? Me: I really want to go to California. Person: Where in Cali? I applied there. Me: Uhmm...I'm looking at UCLA, USC and some others Person: Hmm..and you think you're gonna get in? Me: I don't know, I know it's competitive, but I really like Cali. Person:You want to go to UCLA? I applied there, I didn't even get an interview...so.... Me: My future conversation with this person (in my head, this is how it'll play out): Me: Hey, I got into UCLA Person: Me: You mentioned you applied and didn't even get an interview right?...so.... I have a feeling this scenario won't happen either A) i won't get in or B ) I'm not that vindictive.

That sounds like a pretty lame situation. To make you feel better, I already told my lab i'm leaving regardless, so at least you still have a job!

My comment wasn't meant to bring out any insecurities. I was just responding to the OP, sorry if anyone got offended by it.

I agree with the first part of this response. My main "fear" is disappointing myself, and ultimately, it comes down to prestige. Numerous people ask me "what" I am (i.e. my role in the lab), and somehow, the words "graduate student" sound more prestigious to them, and more worthy of their time. My family is counting on me to get in, as I am a first generation college student. When I was in high school, all they wanted was for me to go to college. When I went to a prestigious college, all they want is for me to graduate. Now? All the way is for me to get into grad school. I'm sure after that happens, "all they want" is the Nobel prize! I also don't want to tell my lab members that I "failed". So this whole process is more about self-esteem to me and narcissism than it is about fear of not knowing what to do with my life. In college, I thought that not getting into med/law/grad school would mean I somehow vanish into thin air. Now, I realize there is a thing called a job and bills. Not getting in won't kill me, but it sure will hurt my sense of pride. From reading everyone else's responses, it seems that is the most fundamental fear...the fear of failing. Doesn't matter failing at what- it is just the fear that you actually TRIED and you're still not good enough. Note: how many people in these forums actually "own up" to a poor GPA or poor GRE? Most people have an excuse like they didn't study enough, or that math was never their strong suit, or they somehow got screwed over. We don't have that luxury in graduate school applications. There is no excuse here other than you're just not good enough for the program.

Well they are all great schools, and wish everyone the best! I think we've deviated a bit from the original question, however.

Since typing doesn't include any intonation or other nonlinguistic aspects of speech, but I wasn't trying to insinuate anything. If you know where you want to go, even better.

It seems you only applied to 3 schools? I thought I was undershooting at 8 schools.

Exactly the reason why I'd rather not be an RA if I can find something else in the business sector. Try something new.

If i don't get in, I'll be leaving my full-time RA job for who knows what. I actually want to look into the business side of psychology. I'm tired of being everyon's b**ch as the RA and doing wayyy too many things. My job description includes multiple bullet points, everything from managing undergrads to preparing manuscripts (which yes, includes writing) to data analysis, to sending out emails. Is this normal...? All for an income that would actually qualify me for section 8 housing. I know compared to someone who can't find a volunteer position, I'm complaining way too much.

There's one at university of Connecticut

Neither. I don't know what percentile a 3.0 is, but I have heard that the AW score really doesn't matter. If you want, send in a writing sample that you feel better reflects your writing abilities. Do not explain any of the things you mentioned, you are just planting ideas in their heads that they probably otherwise wouldn't even have. Also, as an aside, I like how you're discrediting the GRE in some ways (not being able to adjust to their style...?) for the AW and verbal, but seems to perfectly accept the ETS' (positive) assignment of your math skills.

I don't think that telling adcoms that you did enough to get a C at a community college and then stopped attending classes due to TBI is a very good idea. That really sounds like a terrible excuse rather than a reason. Why did you even take classes if you needed to recover so badly? IF you were not in the hospital every day while you were taking classes (obviously an extreme situation), why couldn't you have at least made a B...in community college courses? Finally, why is it that you were told they won't transfer, and now they are? And if they were not going to transfer, why'd you take them? As you can see, all these questions are against your favor no matter how you answer them. If I were you, I would briefly mention the TBI (i.e. in a sentence or two) and then say how you learned from it. Don't make it into a sob story, or a pity tale. Your grades are fine as they are. It's a 3.5 vs. 3.3, really, I don't think it makes that big of a difference either way. You obviously seem to know that you're an excellent applicant or else you wouldn't apply to the schools you listed. Furthermore, you also seem to know that you have awesome clinical/research experience. There's nothing you can do to change your freshman year now, so just relax and go on with your application. With that said, maybe you should have some backup schools on your list, since I'm sure anyone applying to Harvard/Yale/etc. will be very competitive as well.

You're applying to top BME schools and left out Hopkins? Maybe you should do a little more research instead of just picking IVY leagues. A quick glance at the infamous ranking site USNews doesn't even list any of the schools you mentioned at the top 5. But I'm not in your field, so who knows?

I've been contacting professors since mid August, and the latest email was sent out last week and I've gotten replies back from all but one of them saying they are either planning on taking students or definitely taking students. Some professors even go so far as to give me the link to various programs and Universities (one had changed institutions). So whoever told you now is a bad time to contact professors may or may not be correct, but the worse that could happen is they do not reply back. The best that could happen is they get interested in you, or tell you they're not taking students so you don't waste your money applying. Note: Yes, I realize the poor grammar in my post.

Thank you for all your responses. When I wrote that entry, I was kind of freaked out since LORs are such an important part of your application, and it seemed like I screwed up in that area. To answer the question regarding projects- I'm involved in every project (except 1) that has gone on in the lab since my time here. There are numerous projects going on at once, and since I'm the lab's RA in general, I do a little bit of everything in the lab, from data-entry to training undergrad/grad students, to writing protocols to using statistics to analyze data, and more. In undergrad, I did a number of internships/volunteers, but unfortunately, I didn't keep in contact with them, and they are about 5-6 years ago (I graduated 3 years ago, and some of the internships are in my freshman/sophomore year. But since writing this post, things seem to be working out a little better. I contacted a professor from college, who got back to me. So I think I will end up with 1 letter from this lab, 1 letter from a professor (either from my alma mater or from a summer class I will be taking shortly), and 1 letter from a hotline I am currently volunteering at. Thank you all. It's good to see things in perspective!

I've been out of school for 3 years now, and have not kept in contact with any of the professors or internships I did in school. I am an independent worker, and never really bothered to go to office hours or really got to know a professor. Well now that I'm planning on applying next cycle, this is coming back to bite me in the butt. I've been working at my current lab as a full time RA for over 2 years now, and I'm extremely close with one of the researchers, and got great feedback from my PI also. My question is: Is it frowned upon to have 2 of 3 letters come from the same lab? This is not only my most significant research experience, but I also became much more sociable after college and so actually effortlessly started to develop a friendly-professional relationship with the researchers in my lab. I plan to have one of the writers emphasize the clinical (running experiments) side of my experience here (which my PI doesn't really see), and have my PI emphasize the more administrative and statistical contributions I've made. I plan on getting my third letter either from a professor I'll be taking (I'm able to take undergrad courses for free since I work for a University) or from a hotline volunteering director. Everyone has been telling me this is a bad idea to get 2 letters from the same place, but I don't really have a lot of other options. I've reached out to 2 professors from college, and so far, no one (understandably) responded. Please someone tell me this is okay and I'm not risking having my app thrown away simply because I didn't suck up to my professors enough (not trying to be offensive, but I think this whole thing is just ridiculous).

Do you mind if I ask what your master's was in? I think my concern is not necessarily the crossing over from clinical to I/O, but just whether my research experience (which is not I/O related) will be a detriment to my application. However, based on what you said, I shouldn't have much to worry about. If any research experience is valuable, than I think I'll be okay...I hope. Thanks for the SIOP site, I've definitely been looking at that quite a bit as well.

For the past 3 years, my goal was to apply to a clinical psychology program, and thus undertook volunteering/work opportunities geared towards this field. However, recently, I've also been considering a career in I/O as well. It doesn't seem like there is as much graduate school admissions info. out there for I/O programs than there are clinical programs, so if anyone could help me out, that would be great! First, some numbers/background: GPA: Overall: 3.54 (pre-med in college) from a "big name" school Last 2 years: 3.7 Cognitive Science major, psychology minor GRE: 1500 on the unrevised exam, 800Q, 700V, 5.0 writing Research experience: in addition to brief stints as an undergrad, I've been working as a full-time research assistant in a cognitive neuroscience lab for 2 years, handling everything from subject recruitment to helping write papers, managing undergrads, training people, and a lot of data handling as well as statistics. I have my name on 2 publications & 2 conferences so far, none are first/second authors. I also expect to be a second author on some papers by next year. In addition to this, I have also worked at 2 other labs in college (neurosciences & beh. modification), 1 publication not from my current lab (again, not first author or anything major), and hotline volunteering. Now here's my question: My research has NOTHING to do with I/O. It's mostly physiology, a little social psychology (questionnaires), and genetics. However, because I'm the only RA for a relatively big lab, as mentioned earlier, I handle a lot of things, not just data-entry. I also am primarily in charge of taking in undergraduate students, interviewing them, training, and then managing them. This is the main part of my experience that I believe relates to I/O. So my concerns are as follows: My research experience isn't in an I/O field I have no business background I'm interested in being able to practice (consulting) and some teaching/research after I obtain my degree. Thus, I don't want to go into a program that focuses on just research, with little chance for internships. Are my experiences going to work against me in applications? Thank you everyone in advance for your help!

Just to add more support to the tons that you've been getting: As others have said, focus on one thing at a time, not necessarily "I have to do well on this homework or ace this quiz", but just think you want to do well semester-by-semester. Although my freshman and sophomore GPA was slightly higher than yours, I developed a major upward trend and did it by simply focusing on one semester at a time. At one point, I wrote little sticky notes of support for myself and posted it all over the room. It really helped get me through my finals week and boosted my moral. (I would write things like "I want to do well on this exam because I want to get honors," although it sounds stupid, I did ended up doing well because I reminded myself of that everyday.) Eventually, it went from "I want to do well on this exam" to "I want to graduate with a 3.X, and my goals were realistic. Honestly, going from a c+ to a A average in 1 semester is impossible (unless you take 50 credits one semester or something), so set your goal to be reachable. As far as someone's comment about grad school not caring about grades as much as research only applies to a certain extent. Depending on what kind of psychology program you're applying to, there will be people who have a great GPA AND great research. Not to freak you out more, but unless you have tons of first-authored papers under your belt (again, unrealistic mostly), you need to boost your GPA as well as get that research in.