InquilineKea

http://www.myedu.com/ Wow, it is almost criminal in how well its predictions match up with the actual grade distributions of classes I've taken. It's not completely accurate, but it's still far better than anything before. For one thing, it's definitely correct about the courses that give everyone 4.0s, and also about the courses with massive grade deflation. And grade inflation too. And it pretty consistently predicts which professors are the toughest graders. I seriously wonder where it gets its data from. It has only been here for a year, but it has data all the way from 2004 (so it can't just be user input). I'm curious - do you think the site's grade distributions are accurate?

Oh okay I see

Aw okay thanks for all the responses! Yeah, it's definitely burnout that's the thing.

I'm thinking about interdisciplinary programs like systems biology and biophysics (a lot of them take in students with analytical backgrounds). And there's a computational science grad program as well Also, physics programs (I'll most likely only apply to those with merged physics/astro depts though so I think that won't be an issue here)

Okay thanks for the advice! That makes sense.

Hm though, people don't like the idea of *normal* students using them - but they're generally okay with ADD students using them.

Does anyone know how much documentation the ETS wants? For 50% extended testing time, you just need a certificate of eligibility. But does the certificate of eligibility require the material shown in the link here (http://www.ets.org/d...ocumenting_adhd)? http://www.addforums...ead.php?t=38965 shows that it's scary. Supposedly ADHD isn't enough, but you're also required to prove that you meet ADA criteria, which are more stringent. Also, it says that you need to go through cognitive testing to show that you meet the criteria (this testing is VERY expensive and there is no way that I can go through it). I was only diagnosed with ADD in college (in the past, being a teacher's pet + high intelligence really masked it). However, a nytimes article (http://www.nytimes.c...egy-t.html?_r=1) says this: Will this change the documentation needed for the 2011 tests? Is anyone else familiar with the process of getting accommodations? Thanks!

That's true, but I'm extremely introverted, and I do much prefer reading journal articles to hanging out with others. Maybe it could change, but during the few recent times where I did try to socialize with others - I just always end up staring at the clock, waiting for the event to end Okay I do have an official diagnosis of Asperger's, but I'm batshit scared of disclosing it.

Yes, I'm definitely going to stick *within* limits. That's the precise reason why I'm looking for programs that have more lenient limits, or that allow additions to the SOP. Some departments are more willing to read longer SOPs than other departments are. They may have a history of admitting applicants who have longer (and more thoughtful) SOPs. The reason why I want to explain more: I have a *huge* lapse in the middle of my college career where I practically gave up on college in order to pursue my own self-studying (also, I just needed to grow up since I was very immature). It also ruined my GPA (even in easy classes - it's easy to have a low GPA in easy classes when you're not even attending your lectures). Unfortunately, it may take a paragraph to explain, and I don't want it to take up space that could be used to describe my research instead. Unfortunately, since the lapse is HUGE, I cannot leave it unaddressed (I do not believe that it will carry over to graduate school - it was the result of immaturity more than anything else - however - I will have to convince others that it will not carry over) Plus, when you have low grades even on quarters where you retook classes, it's going to take work to explain. I got much higher grades later on when I took 5 courses in hardcore math/science (2 of them being grad-level courses) - and they're mixed in with other quarters where I only took a 1-2 easy courses and got horrible grades because I just didn't care and skipped my classes.

So... Some professors might write LORs that are specific to a certain program, such as astronomy. But what should I do if I want to apply to more than just astronomy grad programs? A LOR that's tailored to astro programs MAY help with astro grad schools, but it may also hurt with non-astro grad schools. And I don't want to ask for too many favors (i.e., it IS a strong favor to ask your professor to write a more generic LOR, especially since he would be much more happy if you stayed within his department)

As in, most people get the impression that I study too much and too hard. And that i don't have a life. Of course, being a very young-looking Asian male who carries textbooks everywhere with him doesn't really help either. The truth is, that I do waste time and have lots of fun. It's just that I have lots of fun on the Internet. I have fun reading Wikipedia and various medical articles. I also waste loads of time reading history and journal articles on animal intelligence. God, medicine is so addicting. But should I say "well, I have fun reading medical journals?" Or Wikipedia? Will they believe that? I just don't know how to respond.

I'm particularly interested in physics/astronomy programs. But there might be schools that might have longer word/page limits on the SOP, or they might let you attach a supplement to your SOP. Those schools are what I'm looking for. I'm really relying on getting into grad school through the strength of my PS (Sean Carroll of Cosmic Variance actually said that a strong PS could actually get you in - he ALSO said that most SOPs he saw were *very* cliche).

http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2008/01/getting-into-graduate-school.html Is this an unusual figure at all?

Oh okay. Well, I always appreciate examples. I actually never knew that people did cite literature in their personal statements, so I'll consider that as an idea (even when applying to my main field astro)

Hahaha thanks for all the replies, everyone! Yeah, science writing would actually be exciting. I'd actually like to see if there's a community of science writers somewhere - well - I guess the blogosphere, but the authors are always so busy with other comments. And yeah, a broad interdisciplinary major is always good too. But so few of them exist. Heh, but at least they'd be interesting low-wage jobs. As opposed to what I'd get as an alternative. I would definitely NOT want to repeat a prison-like environment ever since I quit grade school. No, not at all. == And anyways, I hope someone will find this funny: http://www.citeulike.org/user/InquilineKea (hahaha I am so unfocused)

Oh ok. Does it sort of look sketchy if you have publications without the recs? Or did you precisely explain what happened in your PS?

^Yup, you're definitely getting the point across. I have a really weird sort of masochism. And the correlation between my GPA and # of credits taken in a quarter is actually quite positive (it would be a negative for most people). I often give people the impression that I'm a REALLY hard worker. I *can* be a really hard worker, but my variance is much higher than that of most people.

What if it's simply massive fatigue? (despite sleeping more than most college students do?) I have reason to believe that I have the http://en.wikipedia....cognitive_tempo subtype of inattentive ADD (but this isn't even in the DSM-V yet, so it would be irresponsible for me to mention it). Surprisingly enough, if I omit ADD, then I'm pretty much *forced* to write a paragraph about what exactly happened to my early years. Which would make me sound a lot more whiny than if I simply mentioned (in a single sentence) that I had ADD and that I did well after getting meds for it. But my ADD was coincident with this strong fatigue (although it's not diagnosable yet), and the medications helped so much with the fatigue (so that I can finally be able to focus). It's actually pretty obvious (to everyone around me) that I have major issues with fatigue/alertness, although they always think it's caused by sleep deprivation.

Bump, I'm interested too. Although I'm more of a scientist. Speculative research, though, is very common, and is a point of concern (there are some adcoms who will *definitely* be concerned about those who do speculative research, especially since they often have to fight off the speculative research of others).

Okay, I know that the personal statement really does not contain much space at all. But what if you have a *very* strong command of the research literature in, say, cognitive science or psychopharmacology, and wish to apply to cognitive science/psychopharmacology grad schools with a background in a highly theoretical field? (math/CS/physics). The math/physics/CS experience should be sufficient to prove aptitude, and the strong command of the research literature could (for me, anyways ) prove a willingness to stick *to* the field and to contribute novel ideas to it. So I'm thinking that a very strong command of the literature of the field could result in a strong personal statement (one that is not easy to make up at all), and that this could really help with a grad school application (especially if one does not have research experience in that field - research experience in fields like cognitive science are often VERY difficult to find in most schools, and is also often closed off to non-majors). Of course, describing your research experience and research skills is often important, but that can often be communicated through the letters of recommendation instead. The main concern here is that the adcoms may believe that the applicant is not a "good fit" for the department due to his nontraditional background, and I'm believing that the personal statement is the only way to get around that, and the only way to "prove" it can be to discuss the research literature, in a way that cannot be faked (so it has to be somewhat extensive).

And if so, how did it happen? And what did you do? Did you still mention the research you did in your personal statement, or did you have to entirely leave it out?

I'm so unfocused. I think EVERYTHING is so interesting. And whenever I commit to something, I ALWAYS find something even more exciting. like this "hm I want to do astro. OMG MATH BIO SEEMS MORE INTERESTING "hm I think I want to do math bio. no, OMG, NEUROBIOLOGY SEEMS MORE INTERESTING" "hm I think I want to do neuro. no, OMG, ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES SEEMS MORE INTERESTING". "hm i want to do atmospheric sciences. no, OMG, ASTROPHYSICS IS MORE INTERESTING" "hm, i want to do astrophysics. no, OMG, THEORETICAL ECOLOGY IS MORE INTERESTING". truth is, I've always found ALL of them more interesting. I just find them MORE interesting when I'm not even studying them. =/ I want to learn everything in science. And I always end up reading journal articles in fields that I'm not working on. Yesterday, to satisfy some morbid curiosity of mine, I read A LOT of research articles about the survival rates of gunshot wounds to the head (and what factors correlated with them). =/ And then I read HUGE numbers of research articles about amphetamine neurotoxicity. All saved as pdfs. And then I read pdfs of animal attack rates and their correlations (what types of animals are most likely to attack humans?) Or cetacean interspecific interactions. Or avian intelligence. Seriously, I love ALL the pdfs here: http://www.biosci.un...nel/diamond.htm And then I love reading Nick Yee's MMORPG pdfs too: http://www.nickyee.c...x-daedalus.html And then I love reading all the pdfs that come out of the NOAA. And then atmospheric evolution. And then HUGE amounts of social science (especially demographics). And then cardiac arrhythmias. And then anything that comes out of http://www.gnxp.com. My course load is very erratic. I regret majoring in math, but I did it at first because I thought it was important for everything. Yes, it is, but stat and applied math are really what's important, not pure math. in reality, almost no one uses real analysis or abstract algebra. I tried majoring in math at first, but I was never interested in it because I was always reading the pdfs of some other field. I know that phds require a focus on something. And I'd much rather have a PhD than a perpetual cycle of low-wage jobs (which is the likely alternative for someone like me). I love learning, after all. I'm just horrible at focusing.

http://depts.washington.edu/qerm/ Are there any other departments like that?

Okay, well, masochism is obviously subjective. But lots of math/physics courses is certainly going to look masochistic to a "soft science" department. As are quarters with 5 courses or over 18 credits. Masochism could also show up in the LORs. Maybe the student works so hard that he sometimes sleeps in the department computer lab (i've done that before). And masochism is a pretty desirable character trait in grad students. The masochism of the protagonists on phdcomics is obviously a strong reason why the comics are so funny. At the same time, though, it can be associated with burnout. Not all masochists burn out, of course, but there might be a perception that the chance is higher than average. Of course, they might look for evidence of possible burnout from the LORs. But has "potential of burnout" ever come up as an issue on a graduate application?

I heard that a student at MIT hacked them and took them down. But does anyone know when they'll ever go back up again? And if the archives are still preserved?