Pitangus

Not exactly the same situation, but I was "second string" for the college fellowship I received. I get the self-esteem thing, really I do. I thought I was competitive for the fellowship and was discouraged when I didn't make the cut. But now, I have it, and that's great. It really doesn't matter to me that others were offered it before I was. Most people will have no idea when you got your offer. And the few who were involved in the admissions process have dealt with so many applicants that I seriously doubt they are going to remember your acceptance timeline for the rest of your time in the department. And that timeline may not really reflect your perceived potential anyways, as emmm suggests. In the end, if they accepted you, they want you. I'm sure they rejected plenty of qualified applicants, waitlisted or not. I wouldn't dismiss a program, fellowship, or anything just because I wasn't the top/earliest pick. I wouldn't want to deprive myself of options.

It's so nice to get the 'yes' and be done with it! Congrats!

I only had one interview, so I can't say I feel exactly the same, but I understand the let down feeling that comes when someone says, "Your application was superb and your letters were excellent, but we can't accept you because ----" Perhaps it was actually better that I heard it up front rather than after an interview... If you thought your interviews went well, then the rejections likely had nothing to do with you, but were rather based on funding issues or a departmental decision to only accept people with certain research interests or certain POIs. I know that doesn't help with the feeling of being led on though. Congratulations on your acceptance! That's really all that matters in the end.

I'm thinking that there must be a few professors in the O&E/EcoSci divisions of ESPM who do micro work with environmental applications. There is a separate Microbiology program though, which is why it's confusing. Berkeley's departments are confusing in general. There are EEB professors in both ESPM and Integrative Biology, and maybe other departments as well. I went with ESPM because that's where my best-fit POI was, but I was interested in IB as well. Unfortunately Berkeley only lets you apply to one program per year.

I would think Berkeley has a micro program within their Plant & Microbial Bio department. ESPM seems like a pretty broad program though, so who knows. I emailed the department with an unrelated question way back before apps were even due, and I got an automated email that said ESPM decisions will be made from late Jan - late March. Historically, the rejections all seem to come out the first week in April though. I gave up on Berkeley awhile ago, but I figured I might as well just wait for the rejection than try to withdraw my app. I think most programs send you a rejection after you withdraw anyways, to tie up any loose ends.

Of course. But if you are deciding between two great options, which many people are, it doesn't hurt to consider other angles! It seems like magicwinkler is in this situation as well. Edits galore today, my apologies.

I completely agree with you that, ideally, hiring decisions should not be made on assumptions. But what I've read suggests that there are often so many applicants that, even after removing the clearly unqualified applicants, search committees will come up with subjective reasons to whittle the interview group down to something manageable. I can't point to any specific threads at this time, but I know I have seen posters on CHE forums express concern about applicants moving to their "middle of nowhere" schools. Maybe my professors have witnessed similar things (I know one had previously worked at a university in one of the less-talked-about states). It's an annoying thing to have to think about, but I figured if someone is debating about whether to move for their graduate degree or not, it might be helpful to consider mutiple aspects/consequences of either decisions and decide what is most important.

I am just relaying the advice passed on to me by people who have actual experience with faculty hires. Search committees can get hundreds of applicants who are all very well-qualified. They can only pick one. Just like with graduate programs, there is a lot of focus on "fit." What determines fit is up to the committee. Browse the Chronicle of Higher Education forums and you can get an idea of how important fit is to professors and how they make judgements on who has the best fit. There is plenty of subjectivity.

I don't know if you can add a poll to a pre-existing thread. One thing no one has mentioned so far: you say you have already accepted the offer to attend UCR. If you are going to withdraw this acceptance, then you should do so soon, because UCR thinks you are coming and is therefore saving you a spot and possibly not offering a spot to someone else. It is within your right to withdraw; they can't force you to attend, but usually people do not accept an offer unless they are certain about attending. People do occasionally accept and then change their minds and withdaw, but most do so with much trepidation (and there have been several threads with opinions on this).

Here is another view in favor of not getting mutiple degrees at the same institution: I've had faculty members urge me to attend a graduate school outside of my home state/region because it shows geographic diversity, which may be important for anyone considering becoming a professor. The competition for tenure track positions (and most faculty positions really) is very competitive for almost all fields. An applicant can expect to look all over the country for open positions, especially when positions tend to be much more specific than "history professor." Search committees want to make sure an applicant is not only qualified for the position, but that s/he will fit in the department. This "fit" includes the willingness to move to the area and be content there for the long term. Of course, an applicant can explain to the Midwestern U committee how excited s/he is to move to Small Midwestern City, but this might seem less convincing coming from someone who has spent his/her whole academic life so far in NYC, for example. I think this would be a minor factor, but several of my professors (who have served on faculty search committees) thought it was important enough to mention, so it's something to consider.

Yeah, I don't see the point of just showing us the very top programs. Let's see...Berkeley, Harvard, Chicago, Stanford... how informative! I don't know if there is a longer list behind a paywall somewhere, but either way I prefer the NRC rankings as well. I like the NRC because they give seperate rankings for different measures, and they are supposedly less reputation-based than US News. I know some people don't like that the NRC rankings are given as ranges, but I think the ranges are informative without being so unrealistically definite (Program A is #1, Program B is #2, etc). The big issue with NRC rankings is that they take a long time to be released. The 2010 rankings use data from 2005-2006. This site provides the rankings in tables by field: http://chronicle.com/article/NRC-Rankings-Overview-/124698/

Aw, I doubt that you offended him though. Either he is too busy to respond right away or he just doesn't respond to thank you notes. I'm sure some people are extremely friendly or polite, so they respond to every message they get, but others might read a thank you note for what it is, appreciate the sentiment, and move on. Unless the note included a question or prompted further contact, I don't think it's unreasonable to view it as the end of the conversation. It's nice to be reassured that your message was received; on the other hand, if people sent thank yous for every thank you, the cycle would go on forever! You did the polite thing; don't worry about it.

Haha. I think there's some truth to that actually. Even though many people think attending grad school means delaying real life and a real job and whatnot, they are often intrigued by the idea once they hear some actual details. I think the research conducted in my field often interests outdoorsy people, for example.

I will echo the above responses and say that taking time off can indeed be useful for both building experience and refreshing yourself before diving into school again. I also agree that obtaining LORs after graduation is not a problem if you keep your writers informed about your plans. I graduated in Spring 2011 and applied this season, so technically I only had a few months between undergrad and applications. But even in that short time I completed two seasonal internships in my field, which I think improved both my applications and general skillset. I am currently taking time off between my fall position and the spring position I will be starting soon. It was nice to take a mental break, and these few months of not working have cemented my desire to start grad school because I am now becoming bored out of my mind! The only con I can think of is that taking a gap obviously delays the start of the grad program, which might be unappealing if you are anxious to get started. And of course a gap year will not help your applications if you don't do anything productive with the time. You should start looking for internships and such now to get an idea of what will be available next year (assuming that's when you'll be starting your gap).

I agree with emmm that a course is something to consider if you think you'll have trouble setting aside time to practice. I took the ETS Powerprep tests and I thought I did fine, so I got just the Barron book for the vocab list and math problems. I did a bit of studying, but I did not feel the pressure to do as much as I originally planned to do. Fortunately I did fairly well overall (1440, in case your definition of "well" is more stringent than mine ), but my Quant score could have been better. I think taking a course would have given me needed structure, since I had not made improving my score a priority on my own. I also think you should try to take as many practice tests under timed conditions as possible. I think one of my problems with the Quant section was that I didn't pace myself correctly. I was afraid of running out of time at the end, so I went too fast through some of the early questions - a big no-no on the old test, which was computer adaptive within each section (meaning your performance on early questions determined the difficulty of of later questions in that section, and wrong answers early on had a greater impact on your score). I believe the new test is not computer adaptive within each section and is instead adaptive between sections of the same type (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). In any case, it will still be helpful to practice pacing yourself under the test conditions.

"So you're basically going to school to hang out in the woods and play with animals." Basically. But there'll be some other stuff too. Some not so fun stuff, unfortunately.

My prospective advisor recently sent me two emails with the same message. The second one had an extra line apologizing for possibly sending it twice after having problems with the email client. Weird email stuff happens to everyone.

On the distance thing: My undergrad school is two miles away from my house. Two miles. I hate driving, and I've never been away from my family and SO for longer than 10 weeks. And yet, none of the graduate schools I've applied to are closer than 14 hours away by car. They are all strong programs with labs doing the research I want to do. I decided that this was more important than than being close to "home." Am I going to be nervous as hell driving on unfamiliar roads and highways? Probably. But I'll get over it with practice. Will I miss my family and SO? Definitely. But I'll have email/skype. And my SO will probably move in with me, eventually. And in any case, I'll likely be too busy most of the time to get homesick. And I'm excited about getting to experience a new part of the country, finally. So don't underestimate yourself. If you're committed to graduate school, and this program has what you want, don't let the unfamiliar aspects deter you. If you you enjoy what you're doing, then you can deal with the rest. And not all change has to be bad. Maybe you'll end up liking the weather in Michigan! I've heard people say they prefer places with four distinct seasons (including winter). Besides, if you intend to become a professor someday, it's quite likely that you will have to look for positions all over the country. Better to get used to the idea of living in a new place now. Plus, I've been told that it looks good to have degrees from different parts of the country, because it shows you are not geographically limited.

Haha. I've stopped scrolling over those red diamonds because I can't stand seeing the rejections paired with my stats or very similiar. I know stats don't tell the whole story at all, but it's hard not to feel the connection.

My spin on The Most Interesting Man in the World: Hang in there, everyone!

I know as with anything this probably varies among schools/programs, but the faculty I've talked to have viewed the MS favorably. In fact, my POI at one school suggested a preference for applicants with MS degrees because of the greater experience and publications these applicants often have. So if you already have substantial experience and publications coming out of undergrad, then the MS might not do much for you. But if not, it's something to consider. Why are you not crazy about your MS or other PhD offer? Is the research fit not as good as at the unfunded program? Is the unfunded program ranked higher or in a more appealing location? Again, I would be very reluctant to take an offer without guaranteed funding. I would rather attend the lower ranked program or live in the less ideal town, but then I am assuming I didn't apply to any programs I wouldn't seriously consider attending in the first place. But if something changed so that I now knew I wouldnt fit in at the other programs, I would either defer at the unfunded program or apply again next season. Actually, you could probably do both if it turns out the unfunded program will stay unfunded; I think it's not uncommon for students to defer and then end up not attending. You'd have to see if you would need to sign any contracts about attending.

I'm sorry that you've been put in this awkward situation. While it seems no one promised you anything, it's still unfortunate to feel led on by a program. I would personally be very reluctant to accept an offer with no financial support, and I'm not trusting enough to be swayed by a "maybe next year" claim. Have you talked to your POI about this? Does s/he currently have a big grant project going, and if so, has s/he mentioned the possibility of an RA position for you? You say that you have been nominated for fellowships at other schools, so does this mean you have been accepted or at least could be accepted to these schools? I would only take an unfunded offer as a last resort. Honestly, I would rather wait and apply again than take an unfunded offer. But of course I am not you, so I don't know if no funding is the deal breaker for you. Could you support yourself with no funding? Would you have to take out loans, and if so, would you be willing to? Only you can decide if the program is worth it to you.

Thought this thread could use some paranoid parrot:

I contacted my POI after receiving the acceptance, but I don't know what the standard protocol is (if there is one) for fields where prior contact with POIs is not expected or encouraged.

I don't think professors' listings get removed because their ratings are terrible, if that is your concern. I've never seen a removed listing, but I would imagine it would only happen if the professor changed schools and someone notified the site, or someone fought really hard to get the listing removed (most professors dislike RMP, but only a few care enough to try to get their listings removed, usually without sucess though). So I don't know what a removed listing would really say about a professor, if it says anything. I don't put too much stock in RMP though: it mostly just attracts the whiners, and professors themselves have admitted to writing bogus entries on their own and other listings out of disdain for the site. Yes, you can sometimes sense a trend if a professor has several pages of comments that say the same thing, but with negative ratings it's often the same dumb complaint. I've never made any decisions based on the ratings. If anything, I check after the fact to see if my experience matched the comments. Often it didn't.