Shostakovich

3.64 looks like a stellar GPA if you're applying as a sophomore What I learned from applying this cycle as well as talking to some friends is that the context in which you earned your GPA could be more important than the GPA itself. This would depend on things like the prestige of your institution, time to degree, and difficulty of courses taken.

I got two emails from them awhile back telling applicants not to email them about the MS decisions as they are very busy, and if I recall correctly they said the decisions should be up around late March.

I meant that OSU seems to be better known in Stats, and I could be wrong about that (but it does look like OSU is better ranked, perhaps has a bigger department, etc.). If the UIUC faculty is more approachable and you feel like the program is a better fit for you, then that's definitely a huge plus.

That seems pretty standard for an info day, 7 profs out of 22 showing up. I don't think what percentage of professors show up to the info day should be a metric for how good the program is, it could be that they are representing different research areas of the department and the 7 that showed up did a great job of covering them I've heard only good things about OSU and could be wrong but thought it has a big "name value" in the Statistics discipline. UIUC maybe not so much... Anyway I don't know too much about the two programs, but personally I'd go to OSU without too much thinking unless you're already decided on a research area that UIUC is stronger at. Good luck!

Think I'm in the same boat in terms of housing situation. I'm 50/50 between getting my own place and splitting something with a roommate or two, but really have no idea From the financial standpoint I think a small studio is slightly more expensive than splitting a decent two-bedroom with someone (provided we're talking the same neighborhood). The problem is that most of the places available in September probably won't be advertising for rent until August ish, and there could be a lot of competition and hassle to find a place then.

Why apply to Stanford in the first place then? I would probably go with Stanford no matter what, but that's just me and you'd need to decide between attending the best Statistics program and attending the school of your childhood dreams

Accepted an offer from them for PhD in Biostatistics. Driving up from LA, and same problem with everyone on finding housing!

I was about to head out for a work-related meeting. It was a phone call in November so I thought it was an interview, but the prof said "recommended for admission" so I knew it was an acceptance.

I heard from UCLA few days back, wanted to know if I was still interested.

I'd go with Berkeley personally because of the money. Berkeley is a notch below UW and Harvard in Biostats, but for your MS it shouldn't matter too much since doing well at Berkeley (which is still a very good program) will have you looking at similar career paths as UW/Harvard grads. UW has done a good job of providing funding to its MS students as well in the past, so I might make sure how the funding situation is there before deciding on Berkeley. Harvard also seems to give some financial aid, what they offered me was 10k off the tuition each year plus potentially more once I submit my financial aid application, which I am not going to do since I already decided on the PhD offer from UW. Let me know if by any chance you end up going to UW

I think the situation might not be as rosy as the program recruiters make it sound sometimes, but my position is that it's probably one of the best (if not the best) career options nowadays for someone with math/bio type of background. Uncertainty exists anywhere and the budget cuts may affect some government jobs as well as academic funding, but many statistical skill sets such as the ability to analyze large data is something coveted in many disciplines. If you're worried, I think a good idea is to look into research areas in Biostats that could be applied to other areas (e.g. machine learning). Just my conjecture and also interested in what the experts think.

I'm also domestic. Acceptance letter was dated 12/20, and funding letter was via email on 3/7. I talked to people at the visit day event (mostly or all domestic applicants, maybe around 30 people) and sounded like UNC sent out a few waves of acceptances leading up to the event. According to one of the faculty that explained funding, applicants invited to the visit event have priority for funding. Of course a decent number of them (guessing maybe half or so of the 30 that attended) were planning on almost certainly declining the offer, in which case more funding would open up for other students. I also declined the offer around the same time I received the funding letter. Noco, my guess is that the people who haven't heard back yet may be on an unofficial waitlist (or undecided list) and the department is waiting to hear from the priority guys before making additional offers (which may be funded or unfunded), so that they can control the program size/funding distribution somewhat. Hopefully they get back to you by 4/15 with a good news Pretty sure international admissions didn't follow the same agenda and may even be working off different funding sources, but I do know that multiple 22K offers have been sent out internationally as well. As for what OP could do on his/her own end to receive funding, you could email some professors who run big research programs (the ones that employ or has employed many RAs in the past) and ask if working for them is a possibility, but other than that there probably isn't too much to do. Good luck!

I think still too early to lose hope on UCLA. I know there have been a few acceptances posted here and they have already had a visit event for some early admit students, but according to some of my friends who went to the event the department was still looking at some of the files for more potential offers. If you don't get into the schools in your #3 I think I'd personally lean towards Pitt. I visited the USC Biostats department last year, and the notion that I got was that it was a small department not on the level of established programs (like Pitt). I also didn't like the school environment too much, the Health Sciences campus is actually in East LA, pretty far from the USC campus itself. Also, I don't think it's a good thing that the department is in the med school; departments in the school of public health are more autonomous and have more say in what they want to research.

I can explain a little bit since one of my close friends just graduated from the program few years ago. Columbia is more of a finance department, and many students/faculty there have an industry mindset. What happens to a number of rejected applicants in the financial engineering program is that the school will offer them the MA in Stats, and the applicants take the offer since they could still add the Columbia brand name as well as a quantitative masters degree to their resume. Also seemed like some faculty also like to rotate their time between industry and academia. So yeah, what my friend suggested is that it's a good program if you're set on going into industry, but not as great if you want to go into academia. He still doesn't really know how to use R and SAS (could be wrong about R but did complain about lack of SAS and programming in general).

I think you should still be okay if you manage to get into a good program and do well. I don't think the number of offers being made by top programs will necessarily budge too much, but what will go down is the acceptance rate at those programs (as suggested in the recent years).

Columbia has a better reputation in Biostats and a bigger alumni network due to the size of their program, but those things should matter less in industry like Noco said. As far as the job market goes for Biostatisticians, couple people in the field have told me that it's pretty good.

Hi biostat_prof, Thanks for all of your advice so far. Do you think it would be possible to outline some areas to look into for a prospective student (who is undecided on research area) at a top Biostat program (perhaps UW/Harvard/Hopkins/UNC)? I think this could really help some of us decide on where we want to go as April 15th is fast approaching. Thanks!

I also disagree that you would be limiting yourself to only Biostats positions coming out of UW. The theory sequences are identical for Stats and Biostats students at UW for the first two years, so you get a theoretical flavor unseen at most (if not all other) Biostats departments. There are also faculty members with joint appointments in both departments with varying levels of orientation in theory and application. Perhaps you won't be as competitive as a Yale graduate in a Pure Stats department though... I believe cyberwulf is right about Asia as well. While Yale may be a more prestigious institution overall (I know this stereotype can be huge in Asia from growing up there), most sources suggest that the people who matter (people giving you jobs) know what's going on overseas and regard UW as one of the top Stats departments (perhaps behind Stanford, Berkeley, Harvard, Chicago). Also for me personally I'd also consider 'soft' factors such as the weather and living environment, which I feel would be better for many people at Seattle (as opposed to New Haven). Congrats on your acceptances, and good luck on your decisions! Let me know if you have more questions about UW or decide on it, but I think I'm biased since I didn't really apply to Stats departments and I had a large dose of 'Why UW' from their visit days

Haha yeah funded PhD (tuition + living expenses) at a reputable institution would be very difficult to pass up for me as well. But in situations where I'd be in debt either way at the MS programs mentioned I personally wouldn't be able to justify not paying more for an opportunity at Michigan. That's just me though and I agree that considering other factors is important as it is a big decision.

Also vote for Michigan. At least for me this would be a very easy decision. Even if going to Buffalo is completely free (which doesn't seem to be the case) I'd still be choosing Michigan. 80K is definitely a big investment, but the qualification and flexibility you would have coming out of Michigan will be just so much better than coming out of Buffalo. It is true that brand name matters less in industry as it does in academia, but in my opinion the perks of successfully coming out of Michigan should outweigh a 5-figure investment in the long run. And also, there is a possibility that going to Michigan would ultimately cost you less than 80K if you could allocate a RA'ship once you get to Michigan (not sure how likely it is at Michigan, but I've been told that people have been successful at doing this in other top programs). The top programs have a lot of funding which they will allocate to students who have the skill set (which you will acquire after taking data analysis courses) so personally I would email some people at Michigan (faculty, current students, and administrative staff members) and find out what kind of funding opportunities you could run across while going through their program even if you enter without funding. Hope this helps you in making your decision, and congrats on Michigan!

Try Veronica Stallings, she is in charge of the administrative stuff at the department and usually responds promptly to emails.

I've talked to multiple people who were considering offers from their PhD program in Stats (applied).

There has been many threads of rankings, but ultimately your choice of program should also depend on things like: 1. Research interest and faculty (programs specialize in different areas and faculties have varying interests) 2. Placement (will you like the jobs that you will be trained for) 3. Funding (also compare to living standards in the area) 4. Location (proximity to things you like and where you will be happy as a person.)

Update for those waiting on Michigan. Got offered funding via postal mail, looks like about $2300 a month for two years. No indication on how many more offers will be made, and also seems like there will not be reimbursements for visit days (at least for the MS/PhD students anyway).

Agree with above posters. Biostatistics is a great option if you want to go the Applied/Computational route (and probably fits your background the best out of different types of Stats depts). And don't worry about "not being able to study theory" you will definitely see a heavy load of theory if you get into a top Biostat/Applied Stat department.