Hanyuye

I just read all the helpful replies regarding the decision--the Harvard quandry--concerning the financial issue. My son has been accepted to the MPP program and is overjoyed. However, we cannot help him financially and he plans to apply for $70K in student loans for two years to complete this program. I cannot sleep at night, worried about how he will feed himself and his family with this amount of student debt (his finance also has student debt). This debt will go on for most of his lifetime, and how does one buy a house, feed a family, and purchase cars and other basics with trying to repay a loan with 6.8% interest? His father and I make a decent income but could never afford the equivalent of two mortgage payments. Is there a Kennedy alum who could talk about how does this work--does anyone take out this amount of debt and still live a decent life? He has no designs to be rich--just wants to live a decent life and very public sector-oriented. I am the only one "raining on his parade" but I am very scared for him. Any advice?
Thanks!
Worried mom

So, I just accepted my offer from Boston College last night. Here I am feeling great about my future when suddenly, an offer from Rochester appears in the mail. I'd basically resigned myself to being super poor and living in Boston, but the thought of not going into quite so much debt is really pulling at me. Boston's offer is completely unfunded, and it's a two-year program, while Rochester's is a one year and has a half tuition scholarship. My advisor has told me repeatedly that doing a one year is a massively horrible idea, but in the back of my head I keep thinking that it can't be THAT bad. And how do you tell a school that you just accepted that you've changed your mind so quickly? I'm at a loss right now...

Enjoying this thread a lot. I just got into my first choice grad program after a miserable first undergrad, where I did another one in 2 years. I think the improved performance the second time around, a year off to gain relevant work experience and a good interview helped (they asked me about my poor marks too).

Question: How many of you who got into grad programs after a poor showing at undergrad managed to secure any kind of external funding? My program is funded for the first year, but my PI is intent on me securing more for this and next year. Thing is, the conversation over my two undergrads and poor showing in the first never came up, and I wonder if it'll be a big issue when trying to secure funding. I hope his recommendation and the relevance of my thesis topic may help in terms of grants. Thoughts?

I got well below a 3.0 in undergrad and was accepted to a relatively okay masters program while working. Finished graduate school round one with a 3.4 in Aero Eng.
Applied for grad school round two this time with a focus on Mech Eng and going for the gold of PhD. I don't have any research papers at all, but I do have about 7 years of engineering experience working on spacecraft and now rocket engines. My biggest concern now is do I really walk away from a good paying job but in an area I absolutely loathe living in to go back to school. So far all signs point to yes.

Professors can write a great letter of recommendation based on a transcript. It's not up to them to decide whether an applicant is qualified to go to grad school. How arrogant of them!

I personally find overenthusiastic students obnoxious. It's like they have nothing better to do or something. As they say, you can't polish a turd.

First of all, let's get a few things straight...

1. I am not looking for sympathy from anyone; especially not you!

2. My remarks about foreign students were not snide...they were simply facts! I have looked at the profiles of current Marketing PhD students at various programs, and a vast majority of the students are simply foreign. Not to mention, after seeking some advice from a Marketing professor, without me even mentioning foreign students, he even said a lot of Business Schools are electing to admit more and more foreign students because they pretty much come with their own means of financial support. That equates to less money the schools have to dish out. I was not putting foreign students down, but I was mentioning what is blatantly obvious!

Also, I, in no way, fear foreign students...what the hell is there to fear? That was just a dumbass comment from an obviously dumbass individual. Sorry! I didn't really want to go there, but you kind of brought it upon yourself!!!

Adios, Ciao, Au revoir, good bye....

Updated my signature! Now off to find a really tall building!!!

Looks like I have been rejected from every school. I am so angry and depressed. I don't know what I am going to do. Don't even know if I am going to even waste my time or money reapplying next year. Looking at the previous classes, seems most universities are only interested in foreign students for the program I was hoping to get into.

To be perfectly honest, it is a little disheartening to not even be able to get into a school, in my own country, for a Marketing PhD. I am so through with this whole process. Guess I need to start looking for a job now! Whatever! F it!!!

--Out

The Fulbright award is prestigious. It is also a challenge in this market to land full-time, well-compensated employment, which could lead to professional growth (in the company or not). What I see in your questions is decision between:

approaching the employer with "I am so sorry, I just found out I was awarded for a Fulbright in Singapore. The grant has been a huge dream of mine to obtain, and unfortunately, I will have to withdraw my application at this time. Please do keep me in mind for future opportunities"

or

connecting with your Fulbright contact, apologize, "unfortunately, I will have to decline my research grant, I have accepted employment in the States, which is a perfect fit for me, and it is important to me to keep my word and my commitment"

...what it seems like what you are leaning towards.

That said, would this employer allow you to do the Fulbright grant and come back to start the position?

2.7 GPA and got into a decent grad school. The university also had a minimum 3.0 GPA requirement, but that was overlooked because...
Reference letters from world-famous professors
Double majored
Rreasonably high GRE score
Diverse and tough course load
Active participation in student organizations
Fluency in a second language
Several years of study abroad
A year of undergraduate research
(Okay, fine. I'm a Pacific Islander too)

Anyway, I don't buy into that stereotype that low-GPAers can't get into decent grad school. If you have the academic portfolio, then you have the credentials.

EDIT: I <3 this thread.

I just feel like humanities students are the most pathetic forms of people. Humanities are easy and pointless and that's why the field is so flooded. Sciences (such as physics) are what really impacts the world and changes things and helps people. What do humanities really do?

The students are pathetic too. They are miserable because they tried to do what they loved but society hated it. Society hates them because they are just writers and 99.9% of writers are pathetic too. Even the Simpsons hates grad students. Those poor grad students, they can't even watch the simpsons to escape their woe!

Idk, I loved humanities and thought they were great but now I realized that I was wrong to enjoy them and that writing, and humanities are bad, their practitioners are pathetic and that sciences are the only way, even if you don't enjoy them, because they are the only way to actually do things.

Maybe I'm just cynical.

Or maybe you're just pathetic.

On a completely random note, is it kind of strange that I've not really thought too much (tried to think too much!) about Edinburgh when I suddenly get a dream about living the life in U of Edinburgh--mixed in with bear attacks!? Bears of Edinburgh, come and see the cute maulings of ancient Scotland...

I got into UChicago and IU with a 3.84. My GRE quant was 57%, my verbal 90%. I'm going into public policy, so it might be different. Admissions told me they were looking for "well-rounded" candidates.

my laptop webcam has 0.1 megapixels. It's total crap

Endnote.

By far the most robust citation software I've tried, and also one of the most widely used. I will, however, recommend that in the sciences, you use what the rest of your research group/advisor use. That gives you easy imports of their citation libraries, and makes co-writing papers a heck of a lot easier.

For data plotting, Origin is what I use, although I'm thinking about trying out Prism.

For writing, Scrivener is great for getting thoughts on paper, but I end up doing most of my actual compiling in Word still (again, it's what other people use).

For everything, a full copy of Adobe is a godsend. Managing almost everything in PDFs is really easy with it.

For figures, I make most of mine (painstakingly) in Illustrator- CS5 has a lot of nice upgrades over CS4, imo.

Otherwise, see what your department provides, and your advisor/labmates use.

Next year might be too soon. Given that you applied to 8 universities and got in 1, I'd say that it's unlikely your app fell through the cracks. You want to send a better app in the next time around. If you can get research experience and collect more recs preferably from well known people in your area, then that will improve your app.

I remember a person who posted on the GradCafe results who had applied and got rejected at most places in 2011 and got accepted to most (including most of the Big 4) in 2012 (I think they were in Gaming or something related). So it's definitely possible.

As for self-funding in PhDs, it definitely makes a difference if it's some sort of fellowship. I'm not sure how much though.

I applied to top universities (8 in total) and only got in to one school, UPenn, ranked around 15 in CS. I graduated from a top 10 engineering school with a double engineering major but very low GPA (~3.05) and received my master's from a top 20 CS school. I have no research experience but two to three years of industry experience in a reputable large engineering company. I also have my own funding for my PhD (side question: Does this make a difference when it comes to admissions?)

When I applied to the schools I just wanted to get in to any school on my list but now I am having second thoughts.. I keep thinking since I had gotten in to UPenn, what would happen if I reapply next year? Is this the best I can do? What if my application fell through the cracks and professors at my top choices (MIT/Harvard) did not really read much in to it?

Did anyone go through this? Should I just accept what I have so far and go for it or keep pursuing my dream of getting in to my top choices?

Thanks

Look into MetroPCS. They have International Calling Plans.

I just meant that a taught Master's rather than a research Master's is more acceptable for an applicant to PhD programs in the UK than the US. In STEM fields, US PhD programs care most about research experience, they expect more research experience from an applicant with a Master's than they do from an applicant with a Bachelor's, and as a corollary they tend to view taught Master's as terminal degrees, particularly at the caliber of US PhD program to which you aspire. This doesn't mean you shouldn't try.

So, I wondering if anyone could provide advice. I have recently been admitted into Oxford for graduate school, but I have not yet received their offer letter with information on costs and financial aid. If I don't get any grants or assistantships, I don't think I will be willing to drown in debt. I have also been accepted to Teach for America but their deadline to accept is April 25th. If I don't hear back from Oxford before that date, I truly don't know what to do. I can decline TFA and wait for the best, and/or similarly defer TFA for the duration of Oxford's 2-year program. Or accept TFA and then re-apply to Oxford and other programs in a year. I also am waiting on a fellowship to work in the Senate or House in D.C. for a year and I'm waiting on that deliberation as well. Decisions, decisions. Thanks for any advice you may have.

computer science undergrad, political science phd

I did my undergrad in Liberal Arts (Great Books Program) and I am going into a BioMedical PhD program in Genetics and Cancer. I did two internships in Genetics and Bio Medical while completing my undergrad- which probably helps.

My fiance also did the same great books program, and is now going into Urban Planning, she also did 3 urban planning related internships during the summers.

Our course load was heavy in everything, math, science, social sciences, philosophy, language, etc. However, we are still going in completely different directions from our undergrad.

My program difference isn't much of a leap, but I did an interdisciplinary degree in English and Gender Studies in undergrad and was just accepted to a Public Policy program for my masters. When I finished UG, I got started in local politics and made my way up to campaign management, so this was applicable experience for a public policy degree. I feel like the discipline is different, but the analytical nature of an english degree provides transferrable skills, so it isn't too different.