twocosmicfish

You are not too old - I'm 33 with a wife and 2 kids and I'm just now starting my PhD. As to the other issues, you really need to decide how much of them you need to address and how to do so in a positive way. You need to answer the questions of why you want to go to grad school, at least for yourself, as well as why you would make a good researcher and scholar. Without knowing the first, it is hard to answer the second, and impossible to integrate your story.

Your verbal is a little low - I would normally say that (for the STEM degrees) 500V is good, 450V is okay, and 400V is trouble. I am not sure about biomedical, but for STEM degrees a 700Q is actually kind of low - not catastrophic but you may want to look at retaking the exam more for that than anything else.

NERD FIGHT!!!

In general, working in multiple labs is a benefit during admissions provided you have glowing LOR's from them all. However, it is far better to have a single long research experience than to have several short ones. The longer experience provides a better relationship with the PI, and gives you the possibility of presentations and publications.

I think it depends on why you went to both places. If you went to college to party or for the "college experience", undergrad will be a lot more fun. At grad school you do not spend as much time at parties or doing extracurricular activities, and there is a lot more work and stress involved. If you went to college to learn something, grad will be a lot more fun. You get to focus on this one thing that you claimed really excited you. Your classes are more collaborative and less arbitrarily graded. Your classmates are generally people who share your passions and skills, instead of a bunch of idiots taking the intro course for the 4th time.

I think other posters here have addressed this pretty well, but I will add a couple of comments. 1) The GRE is one of the least important parts of the application. If you need to focus on numbers, focus on gpa. 2) AW is essentially meaningless as long as it is 4.5+. Lower scores are not killers, but they can raise eyebrows depending on the rest of your application - if the only evidence they have of your ability is a 3.5 AW score, it will hurt you. If you have a decent SOP, TOEFL writing score, or publications they will probably overlook it. 3) Low AW + High Verbal = professional exam taker! Not literally, of course, but the lopsided scores indicate someone who has studied the vocab and other items for the Verbal but could not seem to transform them into a coherent essay. Again, this is not a killer, but it raises concerns. 4) No one can give you a good recommendation for a school without knowing your speciality. For example, Berkeley is widely regarded as one of the top schools in my field (EE) but has essentially no faculty in my specialty of computational electromagnetics - they would not admit me even if I was perfect and I would have no good reason to go if they did. At the grad level "fit" is very important.

Add me to the list - My studying consisted of taking a practice test the night before (my actual score was within 10 points both sections).

They understand - I just contacted my professor recently without problems. They really just want to make sure you are selecting courses in conjunction with your advisor.

You have me on the home prices - they have fallen considerably compared to a few years ago, but may not be done falling yet. The question then becomes "are they going to fall TOO much?" With the 10%/$8000 tax credit for buying this year, plus the low low low interest rates, I still think it a good idea, especially if you are going one of those places that has seen the biggest drops in housing prices. If you are going to a college town like State College or College Station it is a bit tougher - they have not really seen much drop in the market due to the captive academic population. For those with downpayment issues, you may want to check out the USDA Rural Development and FHA loan guarantees - they require 0% and 3.5% down respectively, and at least one will usually apply in any given area.

I would not bother. I have yet to see a single EE department that accepted the Math GRE, so it would just be a line in your "other accomplishments" or SOP. Besides, an 83% competing against actual math majors is pretty good, so it should wow them about as much as you need.

I have seen this happen - the departments sometimes have "top-up" fellowships they give to their top applicants. Since these are awarded at the department level, "fit" doesn't apply and it usually comes down to your numbers. One school offered me $5k over their normal stipend, another school I didn't qualify. Any deparment (or above) - level funding usually works like this.

How amenable is the archaeology field to doing your research and dissertation off campus, and can anyone speak from personal experience? Due to my work requirements, my wife would have 3-4 years to start her doctorate on campus, but we would then relocate elsewhere - conveniently near the geographic area of her intended research. Understanding that it may take an additional 3-5 years to finish her thesis, has anyone seen problems with doing the remainder of her work off campus? I am not asking about school regulations - I am asking about personal opinions of practicality, difficulties to expect, etc.

Can anyone give me any insight into the historical archaeology group in the UIUC Anthro department? How competitive it is, or how well regarded? I would especially appreciate any of the stats - typical gpa/gre, typical time to graduation, etc.

It is something people should be aware of going into PhD programs - completing the program does not guarantee a job! The more people get this message, the more people will skip the PhD and the easier life will get for those within. It's like being a profesional dancer - if you are not really really good at it, don't sell everything and move to New York! Even if you are good at it, make a plan, work your ass off, and always keep a contigency plan open that does NOT involve the same industry - for PhD's this means something outside academia. If people took the time to be aware of the labor market before getting into programs, fewer people would go into them but those who did who see better pay and working conditions both within and without academia. Currently, it is a hirer's market, and has been for decades.

This is generally incorrect - most schools require that you have a non-educational reason for being in the state before they grant you residency. You need to have lived there for other reasons (work or parents usually) for a year or so before they will consider you "in-state." In some cases, this makes it worthwhile to defer admission for a year - move to the area and get a job so that the next year you qualify as in-state.

I agree with noojens - thesis is preferred for PhD program, but most companies do not care that much unless they are looking for that specific area of research. Doing the thesis makes you an expert on that area - it is tougher and less certain, and may take longer if things do not play out just right. But it also leads to a deeper level of understanding. The coursework option is easier to do (IMO) and simpler to plan, but you also get much less out of it. At least, I got little out of mine.

Some things to remember right now - both prices and rates are at or near historical lows, there are big federal incentives (up to $8k in cash!), and many homes have been on the market so long that people are falling over each other to cut prices even further. If you are going into an area with a reasonable market, you may be able to find something, and that cash form the government can be held onto as a reserve against maintenance costs.

It all depends on your intended area of research - a lot of research areas are interdisciplinary. Figure out your area(s) of interest, and how much ChemE they involve: 1/2 or more ChemE: Why not apply to ChemE? 1/4 or more ChemE: Solid case, because you show a foundation in a highly relevent area. At least a little ChemE: Weaker case, but still okay provided everything else is good. Zero ChemE: Hmmm... still possible but tough, and if accepted you will probably have some "remedial" work to do. They want to see a strong, mature student with good academic preparation and research credentials. The issue with changing fields is that the value of your academic preparation diminishes, as they do not have as good a feel for your grasp or talent for the material.

I visited both schools for EE - the atmosphere is pretty different in both places. Urbana-Champaign is mostly a college town, relatively laid back and spacious, but out in the middle of nowhere. The climate is temperate, snow in the winter, warm in the summer, infrequenct tornados. UIUC has a lot of quality and a nice campus, although I know nothing about your department. Austin is the state capitol, busier and more expensive, with a vibrant urban life and a great music scene. It is HOT and pretty muggy too - the last time a cold spell put 1/8" ice on the road there were 200+ car accidents (The ice lasted all of a few hours). They also get the occasional tornado. UT is again a great school, a little more frantic in my opinion. In 2006 UT was my top choice, but in 2009 I chose UIUC instead - so I guess that would be my vote.

It depends on the wording of the assistantship and the scholarship. Either one can have language reducing or eliminating the award in the event of duplication, but otherwise you get both! The only other potential limit is that your total financial aid is capped if you have student loans, so if you receive some combination of aid that exceeds this cap, your loans get reduced to bring the total down. Please note that this pretty much never happens to grad students, it's generally an undergrad issue.

Most engineering programs allow a lot of inter-disciplinary work - a lot of research needs to be. You need to keep a focus in your department, but you can apply that focus to other areas. For example, MIT's plasma science and fusion center has NucE's, EE's, Physicists, and Mathematicians all working together doing mostly the same stuff, but their theses use the skills of their own departments to answer questions related to plasmas and fusion.

Wow, that is quite a disparity - 5th best or 195th best! In general I would say to go where the funding is, but given your choices there it is hard to pass up PSU. It would depend a lot on your tuition bill - if you are a Pennsylvanian, I would say to take PSU, or even perhaps if you are American. If you are international I would pick Miami - PSU is good, but not worth $30k+ a year! If you are US, not PA, you may want to see if they will defer for a year - get a job in PA and establish residency before going, cut your tuition in half! As far as the school goes, you should not have any problem finding an advisor, I am not sure about funding. PSU EE always tried harder to find funding the closer you were to your degree, so you may only pay out of pocket for a year or two... maybe.

I would not look at the job as a way to "keep your foot in the door" - you will have 2 masters degrees when you graduate plus experience in the field, you should not have problems going back to a library! I would keep the job only if you really need the money and/or really enjoy the work. As you experienced before, job + grad school = extra stress. If the job does not give you something you really need, I would focus on doing a fantastic MA which will help you get into the PhD - your ultimate goal.

From a former Penn Stater: At Penn State I would say second semester is still pretty rough, but after that it should get much easier - they try to fund the later years as much as possible. Sure. It happens. Remember that TA's are dependent on your relationship to a teaching professor and your ability to execute, RA's the same plus they depend on the professor obtaining funding. Talk to your prospective advisors' grad students and ask them about the funding situation - they will know whether your guy is getting the cash or is perennially strapped. Penn State for engineering. There is a sizable alumni base, and the rep is solid. Tough call - if you are instate, I would say heck yeah, out of state I would say probably, international I would say probably not. And that is betting on second YEAR funding. Your school should have a process for this, but they all generally require you to have insurance when you arrive - if the school cannot provide, arrange it before getting to the school. If you are coming straight from overseas to campus, set it up before you leave! Good luck!

First of all, this depends on what the schools are - the closer you get to the "top" the less of an issue it becomes. Few people will criticize you for staying at Harvard or MIT all the way through. For many people at these schools the cost of going somewhere else would be high: If you liked Harvard, Yale might not be a good match, and maybe the next good match is a top-20 school. Most would be happy with that, but few people like going "down" the rankings. For all the rest of us, staying too long at one school limits your exposure to the field at large, and makes you look too much like a quirk of that school - i.e. you fit in there but nowhere else. You can get away with 2 degrees from the same school no problem, but 3 can be an issue. I would not personally worry about the undergrad-grad or student-professor transitions - most schools have these happen regularly, and people get over it. Most will not care that you had previously been in a subservient role, and the few who do can be avoided.