LadyL

I have been pretty calm during the application process (this is my third round so I felt extremely prepared). But now that I'm waiting on interviews my paranoia is getting the best of me. I was invited for an informal interview at a school I think would be a great fit. During the meeting, the head of the program told me that I would "probably be one of the top applicants to the program." He explained the funding options in depth and asked about what labs I was most interested in. He even showed me what desk he'd have me sit at if I was accepted to work in his lab. At the end he told me when the admissions committee meets, when the interview dates were, and asked if I'd be potentially interested in coming back to visit again during interview weekend. I left feeling great about the program and my chances of at least being seriously considered as a candidate. In a follow up email he said that he'd "be in touch once the admissions committee has had a chance to meet." So why have I convinced myself that it was all an elaborate joke and I'm not actually going to get an interview there? I mean, the adcomm met 6 whole days ago and I've heard nothing, obviously they hate me. But seriously, there are so many logistical issues that could come up, like maybe there were tons of competitive applicants within my sub field or huge budget cuts or something. Even worse I have evidence that this thinking is not totally paranoid, because last year I got a positive email response from a professor at another school encouraging me to apply and agreeing to a meeting, only to have him back out of the meeting last minute. I never did get a formal interview for the program. This year I found out that that program gives professors a list of GRE scores and names to go through as a first pass, so I suspect that my above average but not steller scores got me thrown out in the first round. This prof. seemed enthusiastic about my experience initially but that was obviously not predictive of anything. I also had an informal phone interview for another program that went well, only to be later waitlisted and then rejected due to funding issues. I know all too well that just because someone likes you doesn't mean you're getting in. I don't mean to sound like I feel entitled to an interview or anything but I just don't want to be led on. It's pretty mortifying to get excited about connecting with a professor only to have it fall through completely. And I'm sure I'm not the only one plagued by huge self doubt right about now. If anyone else is freaking out in ways they know are probably irrational but seemingly impossible to avoid, I'd appreciate knowing I'm not the only one .

I have had great experiences with several schools: -University of Vermont, where a potential mentor immediately suggested a phone interview after my initial email contact, and then spent an hour telling me all about the program. Also, to their graduate coordinator, for seeming genuinely excited for me to come interview there and making me feel welcome before I've even arrived. - University of Massachusetts Amherst, where another potential adviser wrote me a detailed email explaining why I should apply to not just the psychology program but also neuroscience to increase my chances at admission - "insider info" that she had no obligation to mention. - The folks at CUNY who helped me decide between two different programs. Between my five contacts there I spoke to one on the phone, two by email, and two in person. The first in-person meeting went well over the allotted hour and included an hour chatting with students in the lab, a complementary lunch at an awesome greek diner, and a general hospitality that went way above and beyond what could be expected considering I hadn't even applied to the program at that point. - A potential adviser at Tufts University who took the time to speak to me on the phone, answer my questions when I attended a conference there, and then when funding didn't come through for her to take me as a student last application season, actually apologized and asked me not to take it personally. Because of her friendliness towards me Tufts is still one of my top choice schools.

This is what made me actually take the GRF seriously. I didn't/don't think my chances of getting it are great since I'm not in a grad program yet, so I applied as a sort of exercise in mini-grant writing and so that it would look good on my applications, with the intention of reapplying. But then I realized that if I get in nowhere but win the GRF, it could be my ticket, even though I think it's dangerous to even contemplate winning it. Does anyone know what percentage of award recipients are in a grad program already vs. not? My impression was that it is awarded more to people who are already in a program because they can more convincingly show that they have the resources to do the work.

My partner of 5 1/2 years, who I currently live with, will be moving with me. He was planning on looking for a new job soon anyway since his company cut his hours, so right now he is biding his time for a few months and will start looking for a new job in whatever city the school I (hopefully) get into is in. I am really lucky that he is flexible about the idea of picking up and leaving our area - we both really like it here but need to go where opportunity takes us. I did feel guilty asking him to move but he is kind of ready to move on regardless so that helps.

LOL My cousin in law is in some for profit chiropractic medicine program and goes on and on about how she's going to be a doctor. And how the medical field is conspired against her field which is why her program isn't accredited. And how chiropractic medicine can cure autism. ....yep.

See my previous post - the "meat" of my broader impacts was tutoring at-risk students and mentoring lab volunteers. The volunteer work was just thrown in for good measure, in case a reviewer might find it to reflect my character or work ethic. My application format was based off of the format of a successful application from someone in my field. They mentioned a leadership position in a field-unrelated extracurricular activity in their application, I think to just show general leadership skills and motivation. It didn't seem to hurt them so I took a similar approach.

I got my first interview invite yesterday (yay!) and I have a few questions. -They have offered to pay for travel and lodging. I would like my partner to come up for part of the weekend since he will be relocating with me if I attend the school and he hasn't seen the area before. We can pay for his travel on our own obviously but is it a faux pas to see if the hotel room could be booked for two people? I feel like it's slightly more awkward since we are unmarried. -The interview is for Neuroscience but I am also applying for the Psychology program at the same school. Should I let the professors I talked to in Psychology know I'll be on campus interviewing for the other program? When I spoke to them last they indicated that it was likely that I'd get an interview for Psychology as well. I feel like it would be awkward to not mention that I'll be around. I am also secretly hoping that I could interview for both programs the same weekend to cut down on travel but I suspect that's not going to happen, oh well.

I would imagine that if you write and explain the technical issues they will probably be ok with it.

One of my letter writers never got the notification email and was MIA the day the letter was due, so I didn't realize the notification I re-sent never made it to him. He missed the deadline and I freaked out! After lots of phone calls and emails and waiting, NSF was kind enough to add his letter to my application today. Phew! I couldn't believe that after all that work and getting everything else in early that one bungle could derail my app. It stinks relying on other people and technology!

My understanding is that there are so many logistics, from who else is in the applicant pool to what prof. has funding, that it makes sense to apply to work with several professors. If both profs. want to work with me, then I don't see why that's a bad thing, or my problem. They can flip a coin for all I care, I'd be happy working with either of them. I guess I just don't think it's realistic for anyone to lay claim on me at this point. I haven't even applied yet, I could be a C- student with a 400 on the GREs for all they know . I mean, I am glad there's interest in me as a candidate, but I don't want to be involved in a departmental tug of war if I'm not even part of the department yet.

Thanks everyone for the input/reassurance. With some time to digest, I realize that I was projecting other work related frustrations/paranoia onto this exchange.

Here's the deal: at all the schools I'm applying to, I've emailed multiple professors to see who's taking students. Two professors at one program both invited me to meet in person. I set up a meeting with Professor 1, head of the department, for a morning date. Then later prof. 2 invited me to meet so I suggested the afternoon of the same day, mentioning I'd already be on campus due to the meeting with Prof. 1. Today Prof. 1 sends me the following email: I received an email from [Prof. 2] mentioning that you will be meeting with her at 2 PM, and that you would be meeting with me beforehand to discuss the program. Since it sounds like your interests are more aligned with [Prof. 2], and also because [Prof. 2] can discuss the program with you, it might make more sense for you to meet with [Prof. 2]and to cancel our meeting. Let me know if you would still like to meet with me regarding the research in my lab. Am I nuts or does it seem like he's upset that I set up this other meeting? I in no way have ever indicated that I was no longer interested in his lab, or was more interested in Prof. 2's lab. I sent a short reply saying I was still interested in his lab and meeting with him and was he still available, and he wrote back to say yes, he is still free to meet. Do you think he was just feeling out where my interest lies? Did I commit some sort of faux pas by not being more transparent (I thought I was by mentioning my meeting with #1 to #2)? Why is prof. #2 emailing #1 about me, isn't it weird for them to even care that much about someone who hasn't even applied yet? I sort of hope I'm just reading too much into this - but I am really wondering what made #1 think my interest in his work had diminished. Maybe he talked about my background with #2 and it was their conclusion that I'm a better fit to work with her? Thoughts please!

Some schools, like Columbia, are open about having a cutoff. The average GRE score is 1199 so most cutoffs seem to be in the 1200-1250 range. However, not all schools have a cutoff. Also, if you can contact professors and generate interest in you as a candidate, you may be able to convince them to at least consider your application despite your GREs. However, I would recommend retaking them since it's a logical way to try to improve this weakness in your app.

Definitely before. If a potential mentor isn't taking students it could affect your whole application, and you want your name on people's radar before a stack of applications is on their desk. Some professors are less interested in chatting until they've seen your app, though. They don't want to waste their time in case you're a C student who got a 500 on the GRES or something.

I definitely second the approach of saying you are considering applying and want more information about the program/ that person's lab. I switched over to this approach (instead of definitively stating my interest in the program/lab) and went from getting perfunctory or no reply, to getting much more personalized responses. 2 professors even suggested a phone call and one requested my CV. I don't know if it's because I seem more desirable if I'm not definitely applying or what but it feels good to get any sliver of interest from a potential mentor!

My understanding is that SOME schools use a hard cut off to weed out applications. This may even vary by cycle and competitiveness of applicants. For what those cutoffs are likely to be, I have heard 1200 quoted the most (Columbia admits to using this: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/psychology/graduate/prospective/faq.html#N10091). The average GRE of students accepted into APA accredited programs is apparently 1198 so it makes sense that schools want students who are average or better. I have seen 1250 quoted for some high tier schools, and an average GRE of 1300+ for students in super competitive programs. My GREs are not bad and not great (1270). I hated the test and didn't retake it because my adviser said that with a 1270 it was not likely that a school would cut me early based on that score. I just hope that my high analytical writing score (6) and psych GRE (720) will stand out as examples of my competency at taking stupid standardized tests..

Did anyone else feel "dirty" bragging about stuff like experiences working with minorities or volunteer work? I wrote about tutoring at risk college students from low income backgrounds as well as students with disabilities, and that wasn't so bad because I did learn skills from that that were relevant to the application (i.e. connecting science to real life). But I also wrote about my volunteer experience, and that was harder. I never include that information anywhere since it's usually not required, and the point of volunteering for me was never to bolster my resume. It feels a bit exploitative to use it to help me win a financial reward. The work I did was pretty personal (habitat for humanity/katrina disaster relief) so to put it out there as an example of how I'm so awesome made me feel like one of those people who does things just so that they'll look better on paper. I decided to do it "just this once" because if I get the fellowship, I actually will make good on contributing to education since it's a genuine interest. But I still felt dirty. Anyone else?

It is not plagiarism to resubmit your own work. Grants are resubmitted with only minor edits all the time. I would definitely check if any revisions or updates are needed but yes, if the essays are still solid you can use them.

Thanks for the input, that's quite a relief! They really should make that part of the application more flexible towards people not in a program yet so that people like me don't freak out .

I am applying for the NSF GRFP and graduate programs simultaneously. The application seems to require identification of a school where you will do the work you are proposing. How am I supposed to fill in that information prior to getting into graduate school? Does anyone know if you can submit the application with this field blank? Also, how to address this in my research plan? My plan is designed so that I could do it in any of the labs I'm applying to with any population, so it is feasible at all the schools I'm interested in. I don't know if I should point this out as a strength, or avoid drawing attention to the fact that I am not in a program yet. I feel like this is a huge weakness in my app., that I cannot conclusively demonstrate that i have the resources to do the work. Right now I've been filling in the information for the school and adviser I think I'm most likely to get in to work with (based on prior correspondence with that person and the fact that I was wait listed at the program last year but didn't get in due to funding). But obviously it's not a done deal until I have an acceptance letter, and I wonder if I should be notifying them that I've identified them in my application as the person I hope to work with? I don't feel like it's such a bad thing to be like "I'm applying for this prestigious award and if I get it I want to work with you." Especially since it shows that I'm seeking my own funding to get around the departmental funding issues that prevented me from working with them last time. But my worry is that they will see it as presumptuous that I'm assuming they would want to work with me and would automatically take me just because I got my own funding. Gah, this is so complicated! Thoughts would be really really appreciated!

I think in order to frame the experience as "overcoming adversity" in a way that is more sanitized for the SOP, you might want to focus on the medical aspects of things - i.e. that you were dealing with a brain injury. I hate to say it but the rest is probably too "heavy" for an SOP and there is sadly still a stigma about mental illness out there (and some adcoms would have legitimate questions about whether you are psychologically stable enough for grad school). IF you frame it as basically overcoming a disability it may actually make you a more appealing candidate because it shows perseverance and resourcefulness. Also, I am sorry for what happened to you and admire your motivation.

I don't see why it would be a problem. They're awarding funding to you, not the project.

I have heard a few sources say that a 1200 on the GREs is a common cutoff (about a 600 in both sections). Sometimes I've heard 1250 or even 1300. You haven't mentioned your relationship with your recommenders but that's a key part of the process. Not all schools require both, but the psych GRE can help you if you do well on it, and if you have taken a good cross section of psych courses IMHO it's not that hard a test. There aren't really "levels" of accredited programs - it's more like 12-15% acceptance rates vs 1-2%, so "levels" are relative. I'd focus more on how good a match you are for the program in terms of your interest and experiences.

Interesting point re: level of involvement in projects vs. authorship on pubs. I guess I was looking at it as the pubs validate my claims about level of involvement (i.e. that I can independently analyze data). As for how my involvement has changed - I am gaining experience on another study right now with a different scanning protocol, more involved neuropsych assessment, and a different disease process (cardiovascular) so if anything I will have more diversity of experience on my apps.

Hi everyone. I am a previous applicant to psych ph.d. programs (cognitive neuroscience research programs mostly). The main thing that has changed/improved about my applicant profile is that last round, I had maybe a couple posters and a bunch of hypothetical papers mentioned in one of my letters. This time, I have one paper third authorship, one poster first authorship, and six other poster third authorships. I am hoping to have 1-3 more papers come application deadlines, *maybe* a first authorship if I get lucky but more likely a 2nd or 3rd authorship, and at a minimum 1-3 more posters. I guess I have no idea if this is even that big an improvement or not. I mean, my CV looks a lot less anemic, but I have heard of applicants who basically work in paper mill type labs who have a dozen paper co-authorships while applying. I guess I am wondering, if there are any people who got into programs here, how many pubs you had and how much you think that affected the process? And for applicants, how many pubs do you have/anticipate having and what feedback have you gotten about how crucial they are to your app? Also, some of my posters are different analysis of the same data, does this make them more like "fluff" and count for less?