Biostat_Assistant_Prof

Thanks for the update Shostakovich. I'll certainly be anxious when checking my mail the next few days, fingers crossed. Biostatdude, I emailed the department a few weeks ago with some questions similar to yours. I didn't get any stats on the number of MS/PhD students that actually make the transition to their PhD program, but I was told that MS students (even the ones on a "fast track") DO have to re-apply to the PhD program, but they are given preference/priority over other applicants.... Now, this next part, don't take what I say for fact, but it sounded as if a MS/PhD fast track student finished the MS coursework with satisfactory progress, it's more than likely they'd be accepted into the PhD department.

For Biostat, I have 5 rejections, 1 interview/campus visit (next weekend), and a MS acceptance at a top choice, but funding not decided on until March (without funding, it might as well be a rejection)..... Still waiting on 4 schools, but I'm beginning to freak out a a little bit.

Thanks for the response. It's interesting, Im also coming from a Biology degree and I'm transition to stats.... If I may ask a couple follow ups, how long ago did you get admitted and was their any indication about the number of students receiving funding offers?

When and how were you offered funding from UMich... And if you don't mind sharing, what are your credentials: GPA, GRE, research? I ask because I applied to UMich PhD and was accepted to their fast track masters program. They said funding would be decided in early March and I'm trying to get an idea of my chance at getting it.

As JZappa said, their biostat department is what is ranked 42nd.... From what I know about their biostat departments is that it is known as a decent program, but not top 10 (Biostats).... I'd guess they are around 12-15ish for Biostats

It's likely. Most of UMich's Acceptances thus far have been via mail and followed up with an email... At least that is the case for PhD applicants who were admitted to the MS fast/track

I sent in my app to Brown in mid-December (along with all the ones that were due on Dec 15th). I received one of the unfortunate rejections today - just a basic letter saying (paraphrasing), "thanks for your interest. We receive many capable and qualified applicants and can unfortunately only accept a select few. Unfortunately you were not selected for admission for 2013-2014. Good luck." It's unfortunate and I'm a little disappointed, but I knew ahead of time that my chances at any one school could be low, and Brown especially has a small department. Oh well, that's why I applied to 11 schools... Still waiting on Yale, Boston, Pitt, Vanderbilt, and UNC.... And on that, Im still surprised I haven't heard anything from UNC yet given multiple admission posts on the survey. I can't imagine they haven't reviewed my app yet having submitted it 2 months ago... At least I can hold on to a little hope until its final

I don't think there is any clear it system, but these tiers are just kind of arbitrarily defined and accepted by the (Stat/Biostat) academic community; there is room for argument about specific programs, but the bulk of it is a pretty good guideline. Just from what I gather having been reading this forum over the past year, I think they are mainly based off off things like faculty research/recognition and student placement in academia after they earn their PhDs..... I remember reading a few months ago a post Cyberwulf made bout biostat Tiers; I'll repeat what I can from memory.... Good grads from Tier 1 departments will find positions at other Tier 1s, Tier 2s, and so on. Excellent grads from Tier 2 departments may find jobs at Tier 1s, but are most are more likely to find jobs in tier 2s, tier 3s and less. Outstanding grads from Tier 3s may find positions at tier 2s, but more likely tier 3s and less. Tier4/everyone else will rarely find academic positions in 1-3 tier department, and will usually have positions at other un-tiered schools...... For industry, it matters less. ....I've spent way too much time on these forums this past year, lol

I've considered emailing a few departments that I've yet to hear from (Specifically UNC, as I've seen a few results posted on the survey)... But I'm holding off for now because It's still only mid-Feb. Other than UNC, none of the schools I'm currently waiting have any (PhD) acceptances this year reported on the survey, so I'm not worried yet (Those being Brown, Pitt, Boston and Yale). Come the first week of March, if I still havent heard anything, I'll probably send out some emails to the departments I would have expected to hear.

I freaked out for a momeny... for clarification....this is referring to Stats, not Biostats (given that there weren't any new posts for Biostat)

I've seen a few acceptances reported in late February and March in years past. I'm hoping I'm on some unofficial wait list...

JZappa, do you know if the same holds true for the Biostat department? I've seen quite a few admission postings in the results forum, but I'm yet to receive any notification...

I feel like I'm a bit younger than most other people. I'm 21 and will be entering grad school literally days after my 22nd birthday. I feel like most students are 24 or older.... Im curious as to how us younger students are perceived by the older ones? I feel like we may be subject to not being taken as seriously as the older, more life experienced students.

Thanks for the info Shostakovich! Did you call the department? I emailed the department last week, but never received a response. I may have used an incorrect address, but I think I may call for an immediate response.

I was basing the mediocre/average score off of the theoretical 150 being exactly the 50th percentile, but it seems that the actual 50th percentile is usually like 151-153, so the middle ground score could definitely be subject to a different interpretation. Also, this was a general breakdown as an average across all programs. Obviously, it's all relative to your field of study. For me, applying to Biostatistics programs, quant scores if very important. An acceptable/average quant score would be in the 160-164 range, and anything less than 155 would be considered poor.... Whereas, in a field such as literature, I can only imagine anything around 150 is acceptable ( or possibly less)

I'm curious about how significant the affects are for the graduates of those schools... I mean, what advantages would a PhD grad from a Tier 1 school have over a Tier 2, or Tier 3? Would job prospects for someone with a PhD from an unranked program (or program not included in any of the classified tiers above) be significantly less than a grad from a Tier 1, 2 or 3? What actually separates Tier 1 institutions from Tier 2, and Tier 2 from Tier 3, and so forth? Lastly, is there not some sort of ranking for all the schools outside the listed tiers above? I mean, the number of schools with stat/biostat programs not listed in the Tiers above outnumber those that are listed, so how do all the unranked schools compare? Is it the case that once you get out of the top ranked programs listed above, the lesser schools are all so close, within the margin of error in rankings, that it really doesn't matter? My guess is that grads from more prestigious programs have better opportunities for faculty research positions after earning their degree, but I don't really see how it greatly affects those who plan on going into private industry where the focused is more applied. In this latter case, the approaches to solving problems/formulas/uses of statistics should all be the same across institutions, ranked and unranked; using biostats as an example because thats what Im more focused on, why would a student from Harvard or Hopkins (Tier 1) be better suited to work in private pharmaceutical clinical trials than a student from Boston or Pitt (unranked), because they should both have the same applied statistics skill sets, right?

I'll play... Very poor: <140 Poor: 140-145 Mediocre/Average: 145-155 good:155-160 very good: >160

I'm curious as to why they haven't sent out email's regarding admission decisions if they have already been made? The impatient side of me is inclined to email UNC about my status as well, but given that I wont be making a definitive decision until March, I'll probably wait it out for a formal notification. It's irrational, but up until I read that e-mail, hope is still alive!

I'm not an expert and no much less southern west coast schools than the east coast, but I think UCLA is higher ranked than UC Davis

Thanks. I'm still hopeful for funded offers for Brown and Yale because I like options and funding for UMich isn't guaranteed yet. The survey from past years indicates that Yale tends to send out results late, so there is still hope there. With Brown, I guess I always feel hope until I see an official results. Yea, The MS/PHD fast track seems similar to something like that. Its possible I can get full funding though it wont be decided until March (fingers crossed). Also, it looks like it allows the students to start taking PhD courses while still in the MS program, thus still allowing them to finish in 5 years... I could be mistaken, but after reading through a bit on the UMich department website tonight, this is the way it seems to me

Bayessays, I know both UNC and UMich are both fantastic schools and about equal (4-5) in the rankings. Assuming equal offers, I would lean UNC for 2 reasons: 1) Because, at this point in time, my goal is to work in Clinical Trials after graduation and the location of UNC in the Research Park Triangle is a more ideal location than Ann Arbor for this, and 2) UNC is simply closer to my hometown, allowing more frequent visits with family and friends. However, that isn't to say I will definitely choose UNC over UMich in my situation. If UNC admits me to a Masters without funding, of course I'll take a funded UMich offer. Even if they accepted me to PhD with say, only half funding, I'd still take UMich if fully funded.... Also, In terms of methodology, I'm extremely interested in Bayesian Statistics and I think UMich leans slightly more Bayesian than UNC, so that's also something I'd have to take into strong consideration... Overall, it's still too soon. I'm still waiting on decisions from 3 schools (UNC, Brown, and Yale) that could potentially be more enticing (depending on the offer made) than UMich... Also, I still have a paid interview/campus visit to a lesser department I haven't written off yet either (especially if I don't get funded for UMich). Overall, I am still absolutely thrilled to have been accepted to UMich's fast track MS/PHD. If I do in fact get funding, it will be very hard to turn down.... Although I just received the offer literally 3 hours ago, I've already started looking at plane flights to visit in March! Good luck with your decision!

I'm incredibly relieved and excited! Although I was admitted to the fast track MS/PHD program, if I get funding, I'm pretty sure I will take the UMich offer over PhD offers from Boston, Pitt, Vanderbilt, and Medical University of South Carolina (if I get accepted), given the strength and reputation of their program compared to the latter 4 schools. Do other people think this would be wise? If I manage to get PhD offers from Yale or Brown, it will be an even tougher decision. I know UMich is ranked higher, but would a funded fast track MS to PHD be a better choice than a guaranteed PhD offer at Brown or Yale? The only for sure thing that would have me choosing something else over UMich would be a funded PhD offer from UNC.

I wanted to update this. I received a decision from Michigan today via Postal, so check your mailbox.

I have not. I just checked my app status and there is no update, but if they're reviewing in order of submission, I did submit mine just before the deadline in December. Edit: If history is any indication, the results forum shows most Michigan decisions have been sent out in mid-late February, with only a few oncoming this early.

I would, without a doubt, take Minnesota if I were in your position. From my understanding, Minnesota is actually higher in the realm of Biostat rankings than Berkeley is, and a PhD program offer there is a far better offer than a Masters from UC Berkeley. Also, the cost of living in NoCal around Berkeley is probably higher like you mentioned, and with UMN offering you even more per month, I wouldn't hesitate to take it between these two choices!