wabisabi

Just noticed there isn't a thread for this yet. Anybody else applying? I count as a non-first-year grad student so I'm frantically trying to figure out how to make my case that "receiving a Fellowship would result in exceptional leverage in the kind and quality of [my] graduate work, including [my] ability to pursue promising new ideas."

I wouldn't be worried. If UCI thought you didn't have enough statistics background, they wouldn't have admitted you! Also, pumpkinspiced latte, who sounds like they know more about it than I do, doesn't think it will be hard to make the switch.

Adventure + funding + sun = Irvine is the obvious choice. To me, anyway! I was considering UCI for a while, and it seemed like a good place to be. My brother lives in Irvine and likes everything about it other than the high cost of living. The other consideration is that if you're getting a PhD eventually, you might as well do it all at once rather than pay for a Masters program now. If I were you (instead of being a random internet stranger!) I would go for the adventure because I think I would be much more likely to regret NOT choosing it, if that makes sense.

Austin all the way. The funding is better (what, $78,000+ difference over a 2-year program? where "+" is whatever you get for the RA), they obviously really want you there, and if you're going to do public policy you have the rest of your life to live in D.C. and get sick of it. Before I went back to school for engineering I started off thinking I would do policy work. I lived in D.C. for a summer and it was just . . . weird. I mean, obviously I didn't like the field I was in, hence the switch, but I didn't feel like I really got a lot out of living in D.C.

I just wrote those emails this morning. Well, I just sent them this morning after like a week of mentally composing them! There were two schools that I turned down that I really could have seen myself attending . . . it was tough. I think had some good advice and examples of wording, and this is an interesting post by a professor about how she prefers students to write. I followed iowaguy's basic format, but I was warmer and expanded a little more on how much I loved the program and how much I regretted having to decline. I made sure I didn't sound like I thought I was some amazing prize that they must be devastated to lose, but rather that I was disappointed at losing the opportunity to work with them. I've already received three very nice responses, and I don't think anybody is upset about it. Professors see a lot of potential PhD students, and they can't expect them all to attend!

The only thing in the CGS resolution that's at all related to this is that "an offer by an institution after April 15 is conditional on presentation by the student of the written release from any previously accepted offer." The whole point of the CGS resolution is that schools can't force you to decide early, right? So maybe after April 15 it turns into a big free-for-all. The Scripps system says "For applicants admitted before March 25, the Graduate Intent to Register decision is due by April 15. Applicants admitted after March 25 must submit the Graduate Intent to Register decision within three weeks of the date printed on your Certificate of Admission." That's the only place I've seen any mention of anything like that, though. I'd guess the deadline varies by university.

Well, I finally visited CU and it was pretty awesome. The mechanical engineering department has really been expanding in recent years -- they've doubled their number of PhDs since 2007. All the profs I met were friendly and welcoming and working on interesting things. The grad students seemed really happy, and nobody thought Boulder was super-expensive. I was told I'd definitely receive a funding offer soon, so I'm waiting for details . . .

Man, am I glad that I actually visited CU Boulder! Turns out Boulder is a nice town, my POI is a baller,* and the mechanical engineering department is going through a big expansion right now. All the students seemed happy, the faculty have a ton of interesting projects going on, and with NOAA, NCAR, NREL, and NIST nearby, it's like this little science mecca. And I really like the University of Colorado's campus. I had been kind of turned off by the fact that they alone didn't offer to pay for me to visit . . . I thought that was an indication that they weren't enthusiastic about my coming there. That turned out to be totally wrong, and they did in fact cover my expenses. It's going to be a tough decision. * actual quote: "Well we have our own cluster, of course, but for big things we'll also get you an account on the NASA supercomputers."

Interesting question! I think zabius covered the general topic quite well, and I don't have much to add to that. I just wanted to say that I've been checking out a LOT of academic profiles (just getting a sense of what trajectories look like in my field), and the only two professors I've seen do all three degrees at the same school have come from Harvard (now a prof at MIT) and MIT (shoot, now I can't remember who this person is or where they ended up). I also randomly know an English professor who was 3/3 Harvard and is now employed at a fairly low-ranked private liberal arts college. No idea if the possible inbreeding factor hurt him, though.

My offers have varied from only one year of funding, to having it guaranteed for the duration, to not specifically mentioning a time period. I'm not at all worried about the one-year offer, since it's a well-funded department and my POI is awesome. I just can't see them cutting me off after a year! My impression is that professors won't take on a student unless they think they'll have funding to see that student through. Depending on the wording of the letter you got, you might ask for clarification/reassurance, I guess. Maybe ask current grad students there too, to see if they're happy with their funding? There was some discussion of this in an , too, if that helps.

I've found that atmospheric science program rankings, at least, don't translate well into US News Earth Science rankings. Colorado State has a very well-regarded program, but is ranked #69 by US News. The rankings for Scripps also don't line up well with US News putting them at #17. Some of this effect may be evident in rileydcat's field, maybe? I think the broad US News ranking really can't capture nuances of individual programs. rileydcat -- If you've only looked at US News, you could maybe also consider the NRC program rankings (Duke and USF). Maybe talk to some other profs? I know the university/dept prestige issue is weighing on my mind too lately, and I've heard two conflicting things. One school of thought says it's all about where you got your PhD, the other says it's much more important that you publish a lot. So I don't know what advice I have, other than to look beyond US News.

lol, Kimolas, it doesn't sound like you had high hopes of getting in anywhere! I was too pessimistic about my chances (I was honestly worried that I wouldn't get in anywhere). Below is how I would have ranked my chances, from most- to least-likely acceptances. The schools are color-coded with acceptances and rejections (I withdrew my application from UC Irvine). UC Irvine \ Colorado State } somewhat confident UC Davis / -------------------- CU Boulder \ CMU } borderline UCSD/Scripps / -------------------- MIT } tiny bit of hope -------------------- Harvard } as soon as I clicked "submit application," I smacked myself for wasting all that money -------------------- EDIT: I forgot about the "what you learned" part of the question. I need to think about that some more!

I don't know what this says about my mental state at the moment, but I would find that really interesting. I, um, have a spreadsheet comparing my stipend offers and have them adjusted using this. EDIT: I found data! (Comparison of stipends in different departments as reported by 42 universities. Would have liked to see some plots, though. Also, the cost of living thing is still an issue.)

I was wondering about this too. I think I saw someone post like $32K somewhere here. There's also the possibility of stacking an outside fellowship, but policies seem to Sounds right. My offers so far have ranged from $25,500 to $28,800 per year. (The one on the high end has no TA requirement, but I think all the others require something.) At least two of my schools give students a "raise" of about $1,000/year after passing quals. If you subtract out fees and health insurance, the offers are between $24,600 and $25,800. I answered the poll using the stipend amount from the school that I think I'll accept for my PhD. That being said, I'm in an MS program right now and get a $7,650-per-9-months RA, plus whatever TA's I manage to scrape up. My last TA was a class with 30-40 students and I got $1,900 for that. Right now I'm a grader for a 13-person class and will get $400 for the term (ugh). I make it work with extreme penny-pinching, late-night Mechanical Turk work, and an elaborately constructed series of new zero-interest credit cards among which I rotate my (fortunately minimal) debt.

Sweet, thank you!