okayandgo

Well, it took them an incredibly long time but rejection email just arrived from their statistics department (sorry, not that helpful probably for all the English majors...)

Besides Berkeley (rejected 12/15), I'm still waiting to hear from the other UCs. I know as a Masters student, I heard back March 12-March 13 from UCLA and Berkeley. Now I'm waiting on a whole slew of UCs, and I'm awful at it! I know the really strong candidate acceptances went out in February, but I wonder how long I should wait for a normal acceptance/reject. Different departments have different timelines, but even so, has anyone heard back from their UCs? Any information at this point would ease my impatience.

Weird, weird way to word it. I agree it's positive though. You should show that you're interested in the program. Follow up with questions/ask for a phone conversation/ask when you might visit/tell them what you'd be really interested in seeing. I had a preliminary response too but was more directly told that I was on the shortlist of candidates and that the department was trying to gauge my interest in the program.

There is still some slender hope. One of my friends who had survived the PhD process said that he found no correlation really between time and acceptance. I do know that Universities extend their star acceptances early, but I think they also sort of "waitlist" people as well. My friend got an acceptance from UPenn in late March/April after he thought his application had been lost down a black hole.

If your goal is a PhD, definitely first figure out how difficult it is to continue to a PhD from a Master's at Stanford. I know it's very difficult to go from a Stats Masters to a Stats Phd at Stanford or Chicago for instance (both top 10 programs). From a friend, however, I've heard it's very easy to go from an EE Masters at Stanford into their BioE PhD. Industry/career-wise, I always feel like Stanford is a great place to start a career, particularly in tech/in the bay area of course. (If you want to get jobs in Southern California, UCLA wins on so many levels: funding, career, PhD...) I agree with the post above though that stated that a PhD was a PhD no matter where from. Or at the very least, UCLA is actually pretty prestigious. The credentials gap between UCLA and Stanford seems smaller to me than the gap between a PhD and a Masters.

This isn't really ranks, but Yale is the most theoretical school, Wharton (surprisingly) is (so I have heard from a Yale stats grad) the second most theoretical, and Columbia is also quite theoretical. Generally, I think if a school focuses on applied research, it's better for industry, but if a school focuses on theory, it's better for academia. Columbia is apparently going through some financing issues right now. They will pay for your entire 4-5 years, but it's said that what they pay isn't enough to live in New York, where everything is just incredibly expensive. Harvard is great all around I think because research opportunities abound there, and professors at other schools esteem Harvard. Stern seems like it would be good for industry preparation, but I think speaking with the department and seeing what they focus on is helpful.

I agree that you should tell them your situation. Once they've accepted you, they are not likely to retract the offer just because you're waiting for other schools. If they think you're a really desirable candidate, they may try to make their offer more appealing to you. I told a program I was accepted to that I was waiting to hear back from other schools and they have been very accommodating.

A friend of mine got into their Physics PhD program the first or second week of February if not even earlier. I believe he was a very, very strong candidate. I have not head back from the Stats department yet.