Shostakovich

Those US News rankings were a bit confusing, didn't seem to do a good job of distinguishing between the Stats and Biostats departments (you have to dig into each school page to actually find out which dept the ranking refers to).

Seeing an interview from JHU and an acceptance to UCLA on the results...

Preferences. Would be tough to know your chances unless I was on the admissions committee

Is faculty the only reason you're choosing among those 5 schools? What are the other 5 schools you applied to? I think it could be a good idea to do maybe like 2-3 reach schools, 3-4 realistic schools, and 1-2 safety schools. If I had to choose 3/5 from that list (without knowing anything about your personal preferences) I'd choose UConn, U of Iowa, and Michigan State.

At least in Biostats many schools seem to release results quite arbitrarily. I've been told many schools have a system similar to rolling admissions where applicants who submit their apps earlier have slightly better chance of being considered (similar to an early action app for undergrad admissions). I actually heard from UNC right before Christmas (funding to be decided later in a separate process), and haven't heard from Emory yet (didn't do their video supplemental) but in any case not too interested in their program anymore. Good luck on UNC!

If I recall correctly, Berkeley was a bit weird in that they require you to have a masters degree to apply to the PhD in Biostats, so you have an advantage there. Their average PhD student GPA's seemed a bit skewed too at least for the class entering in 2011 (far below the other top 6-7 programs typically reporting 3.75+), maybe this was because they only accepted 9 students. Here's what I found: Fall 2011 Admissions Statistics: Admissions Ratio: 9/58 (15%) Average GPA of admitted applicants: 3.34 Average GRE scores of admitted applicants: Verbal: 620 (89%); Quantitative: 790 (91%) http://sph.berkeley.edu/students/degrees/areas/biostat1.php

Harvard is probably a longshot for you if you haven't gotten an interview from them yet (and it is for almost any typical applicant really, I didn't even apply to their PhD) and I have similar doubts about Berkeley since their program is so small. I think you have a solid shot at UNC since their program is very big and the applicant caliber is probably not as strong (although probably similar I agree) as Harvard, JHU, and UW. How come you didn't include more schools below the top 4-7 or so (but higher than Pittsburgh) on your list? Do you prefer Pittsburgh over those schools?

My phone battery seems to go out so much lately just browsing this site...

Ah I see now, the Biostats dept just forwarded your message to the Stats dept. Don't think the Stats dept has rejected anyone yet looking at results.

I think this is a good sign since UW's already released a bunch of rejections and you're not included in that list. Shortlist might be a good guess like you said. Did you only include one recommendation letter with your application? Because their site says applications with 2/3 recommendations is considered complete. From http://www.biostat.washington.edu/pro/faq "NOTE: applications with 2 out of 3 recommendation letters will be considered to be complete but it is to your advantage to have all three letters."

Haha yeah it was hurting me by something like .15 if I remember correctly. I'm not sure if the numbers themselves are really important though, many program websites mentioned that grades in relevant courses were much more important than the actual GPA itself.

I meant before entering the program. My 2nd undergrad RA course covered measure theory, but I haven't seen it officially listed as a prerequisite for applying to Stats PhD programs. Maybe I didn't look closely enough.

I've never heard of a Stats PhD program that *requires* a real analysis course covering measure theory. Can I ask which program you have in mind?

I meant to say it's kind of weird how Biostats is in Public Health but we don't really post on that forum With regards to hearing back, I've heard back from 3 schools so far and still waiting on a dozen more.

One problem I had with SOPHAS was their system used a weird way to compute my upper division GPA. They just considered anything after my 2nd year "upper division" and anything before that "lower division" even when I specified the course type for each course. I emailed them to say they got it wrong, their reply was something like "We didn't know you were using a different method to compute your GPA, we'll take a look." They did fix it in the end, but yeah just saying...

Pretty sure most biostatisticians post almost exclusively in Applied Sciencs & Mathematics.

I also thought it was fishy, but didn't want to jump to conclusions. Everyone I've talked to got their UW decision by email, and the earliest survey result for JHU PhD acceptance in the prior years seems to be from late February. Seems statistically unlikely...

That's good to hear. Looks like you're building a good background, and since you're just a sophomore you have a lot of room to improve. 3.42 from Davis is a decent academic record, could very well be enough for Berkeley or UCLA depending on your "softs" (math background like real analysis/lin algebra/probability, letter of recs, GRE, research background, etc.) but I'd try to get it up to a 3.5-3.6 to be more competitive (looking at the results page that's what their incoming class typically had). The upward trend in grades will be viewed favorably as well... When I was doing research for my own admissions, it seemed to me that other UC's generally didn't have educational programs in Biostats. If you need a backup school to apply to, I would consider USC as well as some schools out of state, although it would be in your best interest to stay in-state for tuition purposes. I doubt you'll need to apply to Cal States, but can't hurt to do so for safety measures. Good luck!

Seems like there are two posts on the results page with identical stats (presumably the same person) with acceptances to both UW and Hopkins today, both by postal service. So I guess UW sent some of their acceptances by email and the rest via postal service? In any case, congrats to whoever that was!

Nothing for me from Hopkins yet. According to previous years' results, did that notification always mean a rejection? I'm not sure if they have rolling admissions, but I find it weird that their deadline was something like 1/15 and reach a decision on your application this fast.

Hi XDzard, I'm not sure what exact situation you are in so it's hard to give specific advice, but I'd say don't let a few bad grades discourage you from applying to programs you like. Even if you are not interested in pursuing a PhD, I think it would still be in your best interest to attend at least a somewhat reputable program as it will obviously make you more competitive for the job market. Also, are you interested in just Statistics, or are you open to going into Biostatistics as well? If you choose the latter the barrier to entry may be a bit lower for many of the masters programs at decent schools (and in the end it's still very much Statistics, just that you're mainly dealing with the health/bio applications of it). As far as schools in California I'd look at UC Berkeley, UCLA, and UC Davis for the UC's, and Cal State East Bay has a MS in Biostatistics program that they advertise to be great for finding a job. I was also told that Cal State LA has a masters program in Statistics, although their program seems to be a bit heavy on the Econometrics side.

This exactly. The person answering your email probably doesn't have too much input in making the actual admissions decision, it could be that they just handle administrative work (including answering applicant emails). Perhaps you could phrase your email nicely, with something like "I was wondering if I could get an update to my submitted application." Good luck!

I think I misunderstood the first part of OP's question (as OP obviously meant Cal States). My apologies for that. As for the comparison between doing your masters at a Cal State versus a UC, a MS Stats degree from some place like Berkeley or UCLA will obviously be considered more prestigious than a degree from a Cal State. This will open more opportunities, including better chances at admission into PhD programs as well as better prospects for finding a job. I think the above is especially true for PhD admissions, where you will be at a disadvantage coming out of a Cal State program (versus other candidates with more reputable degrees). However, if your priority is to find a job you may still be competitive with a MS from Cal State (based on # of job openings in your discipline, which I was told is decent in Statistics).

About the survey also be sure to filter out the International (marked with I) apps, they have a way higher bar for admission and these days they make up the majority of the applicant pool.

http://www.thegradcafe.com/survey/