Usmivka

My partner (virology) has a unrestricted training grant with no research requirement. Even if some research is expected, the specific wording may indeed be unrestricted for tax reasons (some extremely specific "non-compensatory fellowships" are not taxed by certain jurisdictions).

MIT, for one. Most others I know of are keyed into a prof who is supporting you. But this really varies by department, and some schools have multiple geoscience departments. By word of explanation to TK and MO, this is a common approach in other some other fields where the student to prof ratio is much higher, say microbiology or chemistry--a strong student is admitted, and the department pools money to support them for the first year or two while they do rotations and before they have committed to a lab. In my program we do the same, although for the opposite reason--there are so few students relative to profs who want them, that the "strings free" funding gives them a chance to compete for students already in the program.

If you haven't already done so, please vote.

TAMU has a well regarded program, you are correct, although I've never met anyone not in ocean engineering coming out with only an MS. If you are really concerned about "experience in the field," I'd apply for a tech position with a physical oceanographer. Most will be happy to have a programmer. You can do this anywhere that is local to you, no need to relocate (seriously, there will be somebody even if you are in the Rockies or Midwest). Curtis Deutsch at UCLA might be a person to ask (more of a biogeochemist, but he does lots of modeling and will be clued into who there might want help). Also check the job listings, state schools are required to advertise for a couple weeks before hiring.

Australia has some respectable marine biology programs (which is I suppose to be expected with the Great Barrier reef). Hobart, Melbourne, Perth, and Sidney have programs that have some geosciences/oceanography component. I think Hobart is the only one that specifically does oceanography, and it is physical oceanography/modeling focused. Generally speaking the best geosciences and oceanography programs that do work in Australia are not Australian, or at least the best known. It sounds like you want to spend time in Australia, which you can do as a field work component in many US programs. A good way to scope this out is to look at abstracts from the last biannual ocean sciences meeting (2012), which represents the largest gathering of oceanographers from across the world. You'll find a couple abstracts from U Sidney (mostly biology focused) and maybe one from Hobart, but more oceanography comes from (in roughly this order) the US, Japan, Germany/France/UK/Canada, China/South Korea--Australia is pretty far down the list, for whatever reason.

I don't know about how NDSEG evaluates, I got zero feedback from them, unlike the NSF folks who at least give you a few sentences. If you are sending a transcript, it should include all courses you are currently registered for without any extra work on your part (at your Uni anyway). At least up until a few years ago grad and undergrad courses did not get separate transcripts.

I've definitely gone down a belt size or two. I'm eating more and worse than I have in years, so I'll chalk it up to all that energetically expensive thinking ; )

You might find useful. It has many folks who have or are trying to get into programs with less than a 3.0, and you may find your questions already answered. If the school doesn't tell you otherwise, round, but it won't make a difference if they have a hard cutoff at 3.0--these cutoffs are often enforced at the university level, and the departments--no matter how much they may want a prospective--get little say or ability to countermand if you fall below the standards. So you will need to target schools without such cutoffs. As for your SOP, I don't think a paragraph saying that you essentially had a full time job caring for a partner in a prolonged life-threatening situation would be viewed as trivial. Take a look in the SOP section of the forum as well for other ideas. I'm guessing you were a running start type student, and younger than most of your classmates in college, or did this happen in your freshman year? You may need to explain how this all took long enough to bring down your GPA that far--if all the shit went down in one year, and your grades improved/looked good thereafter, you should get more leeway from adcoms.

Lots of sleep! You will do better and feel better if you are well rested, even duing the study process.

Wow, still getting lurkers downvoting me here and elsewhere...I thought that was a pretty innocuous post. I'm glad the OPer got where I'm coming from! I'd encourage folks to write posts when they have different opinions...

Hi Alphonse, Your background would be desirable for a thesis based on satellite data assimilation or applied ocean physics/engineering (floats, robots, sensors). I think most modeling projects would require a better background in basic Earth Sciences topics, as rockbender started to get into. Oceanography as a field is generally less focused on MS degrees, and these are often skipped or given as a door prize in PhD programs (with the exception of ocean engineering and applied physics type programs, engineers sure do love the MS). Otherwise, a separate MS tends to increase time to graduation--some of the major oceanography programs will still put you on a 5 year track and require you to take classes, even if you come in with a MS. PIs in other programs may look unfavorably at your MS, since it means less time to train you and get useful work out of you. My impression is that the best known programs are avoiding candidates for a MS even when they nominally accept applicants to that degree--the MS in oceanography has become more like a consolation prize for people who drop out of a PhD (big caveat, this is only for US schools). If you are dead set on an MS, I think the University of Hawaii and Oregon State accept MS only students. The University of Washington may still do this for exceptional candidates, but I think is moving away from this (Scripps and WHOI, the other two best known programs, are generally not accepting MS students). URI and UConn might. Canadian schools are still big on separating the MS and PhD, so UBC, University of Victoria, and Dalhousie could all be good options. And I am not advocating for this, but you could apply to PhDs and then (without telling the program this when you first apply!) terminate early with an MS. Further abroad, the University of Bergen, Southhampton, or IFM geomar could be good options. PM me if you have more questions.

UnlikelyGrad, the point of the above was not to tweak you or prove that I'm clever with the internet. It was to answer IQs question, which I felt was a reasonable one to have given that, as you pointed out, s/he is interested in a similar research field (even if the setting is extraterrestrial). IQ is trying to follow a similar academic path, and I thought it would probably be useful for her to find out more than "I have a sister who became a prof" if she is going to learn from your sister's trajectory. That is why I gave a search term to find the desired answer based on the info you provided--I really am sorry if I offended you, things don't always come across right on a computer screen.

1. You would of course schedule the visit with who you want to speak with if you were making a trip specifically to visit the program! 2. This is exactly what happens in the natural and physical sciences, but probably not in journalism.

As a UW alumnus and current MIT student, I would argue that the UW is a "name brand" school. It is viewed with great respect and considered something of a "public ivy." The school is immediately recognized when I say where I studied, whether I'm talking to folks on either coast or internationally--more or less the definition of a name brand school. Certainly former UW students (grad and undergrad) are overrepresented relative to graduates of other programs in climate and the earth sciences. Anyway, my point stands about the competitiveness of Hertz fellowships, and you (IK) mentioned here and elsewhere that you are concerned about grades--I think you need to decide which fellowship applications have the best return on investment given your circumstances, otherwise you could spend 80 hours a week for the next 3 months just doing fellowship apps. Also, I found UG's sis in about 2 minutes of googling ("U Washington Hertz fellowship winners climate"). It is a well known R1 state school in the midwest, unless she has a research twin out there : ).

Your PhD really just shows that you have the ability to conduct independent research. Many folks change their research focus with their first postdoc. Your course adjustment will just be a little larger than some. Best of luck.

You don't need to buy a (*flawed*) product from US News to find this out. Just call the admissions office of whichever school you are interested in and ask what the average GPA and GRE of their incoming class is. Some of them probably even have that info on their websites.

You said "getting my non-thesis masters or doing research in some lab." The above was to point out that you can't use reserve status if you don't enroll in grad school, which is what I took away from your statement about "doing research in some lab" as an alternative to working on an MS. I'm sure everyone on this thread agrees with me and the NSF that it is not possible to use reserve status to hold a fellowship if you are not enrolled in a graduate program. Regardless of that whole clarification to follow, the only way you are able to use the reserve is if you meet the NSF's eligibility requirements for the GRFP, which I linked in the first post. Next: I'd reread the specifics of Eigen's post, their comment suggested that reserving might not work in your situation. They correctly point out that using your reserve years at one institution and your active years at another could present a problem. As I recall you need to get approval from the GRFP office to switch home institutions...when I went through this process it was pretty straightforward, but I hadn't actually started my program yet, so your case might take a bit more work. Deactivating my fellowship was pretty straightforward too, so if you activate and then realize you can't meet the requirements, you can drop out without trouble. What Jema is attempting above is a slightly different scenario, since she is already on a NSF traineeship (which is specifically allowed to be used while on reserve as a GRFP fellow) and GK-12 programs are not offered at every institution. Given the limitations posed by the traineeship, I suspect a request on her part to swap institutions for her active fellowship would be quickly approved once her GK-12 commitment is completed.

Don't know if they still do this, but they let me take in a cup of water from the lobby fountain. You can keep any food or drinks outside the room to have during the break.

I'd say it probably wouldn't hurt, and could help. The potential downside would be if you showed such enthusiasm for a narrow topic that you effectively block yourself into it in the reviewers eyes. If that topic is outside the current research interests of faculty that are taking students, they may push you aside in favor of someone that seems like a better fit based on broader research interests. But I agree that it would demonstrate your familiarity with the field to use references, and that in and of itself would not cause the problem I outlined above, only if your use of references was aimed towards a very narrow field.

OK, to be fair the Phoenix usually has an agenda, and is not exactly a high quality publication (most of us in Boston politely decline when offered a copy by the distributor at the T). That said, and attitude aside, the article is factually correct and the same info will probably hit the Post and Times in a couple days and create a shitstorm.

An applicant directly impacted by the upcoming fiscal cliff posted As to electing scientists and engineers, it rarely happens. In my home district a university scientist has run unsuccessfully for a local office for something like 15 years. His politics and proposed policies are very in line with the region, and he is certainly more qualified than most of those who've won that seat. But that doesn't make him electable. Sometimes you just have to work with what you've got.

I posted a detailed explanation of how the fiscal cliff and funding have changed admissions since 2010 I'd encourage you to post on that thread and add to the discussion, it would bring in a fresh voice that can attest that this issue is having a direct impact on current applicants.

I note that you are in a swing state. I'd make that opinion known to friends and family. People don't seem to realize where those bailout funds went, since they largely paid for services and funded activities that are only now being noticed and missed by their absence. You are in a position to have disproportionate influence on how government distributes revenue, and how large that revenue stream is. Some candidates have outspoken views against current, downgraded levels of research funding and the government agencies that provide that funding to researchers and graduate students. If you don't like those views, you'd better be voting. Or if you like those candidates otherwise, you ought to be communicating to them why you think their particular stance on this one issue should be changed. 10% across the board cuts will make life proportionally worse for those of us in the sciences than similar cuts in other places, so write your US Senators and Representatives as well, they love to hear from their constituents, and you can influence where they stand, regardless of party affiliation. People like you, in swing states like Iowa, are the front lines in depoliticizing science.

Make sure you look around the area before you rent anything in Brighton. Plenty of it is fine, but other parts of it are little better than Allston, overrun with rowdy undergrads and thumping parties any day of the week. If you truly don't care about price, much of Brookline is really in a league of its own relative to the rest of Boston. I know a couple of doctors trying to rent the upper half of their house there (it sounded like a weird setup to me since it wasn't a separate unit, but I could find out more), and I think this sort of arrangement is becoming more common as the Brookline population ages--something like this might be a way to get there on the cheap. Also use the MBTA trip planner and look at bus routes, many are faster than the Greenline T, and they could really open up other neighborhoods to you.

Use the search bar at the top right and type "contact." There are a dozen good results in there for threads where this has been extensively covered. Here are a couple recent threads: