wabisabi

O M G TeaGirl, I thought I was peculiarly obsessive, but you may actually be slightly worse! I also disliked the NRC ranking interval, but it never occurred to me to get the raw data. I am fighting the temptation to do so now.

I had to get over the same issue! Thanks for sharing, it's always interesting to see other people's profiles. Uh-oh, is Pittsburgh really that bad? I'm leaning towards Carnegie Mellon myself!

I guess I'm in the minority, but I'd still be pissed. Maybe I'm naive (and honestly I don't know a lot about how academic funding works), but if I were a professor I think I would take great pains to prevent something like this from happening!

I can't stop thinking of this in the context of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmW-ScmGRMA.

I have a ridiculous spreadsheet. Advisor h-index (adjusted for years since PhD!), air quality and crime rates in different cities, university and department rankings . . . you name it, it's in there. I felt like the process of making it helped me think things through.

I looove the NRC rankings. I wish so much of the data wasn't from 2005, though. And I agree that the time to completion seems "off" for both schools. I didn't know that was the sole source of those rankings. Lame. Although, I guess, valuable in the sense that if you're going into academia, that's the population that will be hiring you! I may or may not have created an elaborate spreadsheet so I could visualize the ranges in the rankings of the universities I'm considering . . . It sounds like you're pretty set on RPI! Given the (minimal) variation in funding offers that I've seen so far, and the high cost of living in Boulder, it doesn't sound like CU has a shot. I'm leaning towards CMU, but I need to make some visits.

Hey TeaGirl, I'm also considering the ME program at Boulder (although I'm comparing it with Carnegie Mellon). Just judging from a quick look at www.phds.org, Boulder is more highly ranked than RPI (both R and S rankings), but more RPI grads go into private sector work (versus academic positions), which sounds like a factor for you. I don't have access to the full US News rankings so I don't know about the specific departments, but for engineering in general Boulder is 35, RPI is 42. Given that the difference in rankings is not what I would consider significant, I don't know if I've helped at all! I've never been to Boulder but I'll visit this month. Does anyone know what's up with the fact that according to the NRC, the median time to degree for RPI students is 12 years?? That's got to be a mistake, right?

I would be irate if someone got paid twice as much as me for the same work! Zapster, do you really think this happens frequently? Granted, I don't know how this specific situation (Masters, and this type of funding) plays out, but in my experience, departments generally just have standard stipends that they provide to students, I imagine in part to avoid things like this. If the type of work is really equivalent, then why would one student get double the stipend? OO, are you sure there's not some difference?

I'm still pretty bummed, and I didn't even think that I had high expectations of getting in. I think part of it was the rejection letter, it seemed really harsh!

I don't know what it's like at Stanford, but my impression from my school (and another university where I know people) is that getting an MS is a good way to get onto the PhD track because you have a chance to impress your advisor, and they've kind of invested in you and would want to keep you on. Whereas bringing in a new PhD student means they have to guess at how that person would fit in with the group, and then they'd have to get them up to speed on everything. I would think this would be much more likely to happen at Stanford, assuming that their MSc is research-based, whereas the MEng at MIT would be more of a professional degree. (I think this is how the two degrees work at most schools, anyway.) Since you say you're inclined towards Stanford, I'm not seeing a lot of arguments in favor of MIT here!

I don't know, I certainly saw a lot of Masters-level rejections posted! If you don't mind my asking, is the funding situation different between the two schools? I don't know how applicable this is to your situation, but the NRC S-rank of MIT's CEE (acronym-a-licious!) program is actually surprisingly low. Maybe more relevant, if you're not going into academia, US News ranks Stanford above MIT (#3 vs #6). I didn't end up applying to Stanford because there's nobody there doing the (quite specific) type of research I want to do, which was disappointing because it's such a great campus and, of course, has a great reputation. I actually considered trying to go outside of my field just to get to go to Stanford! While I had my heart set on MIT out of the places I applied to, I always had misgivings about living in Boston, which is expensive and annoying and full of jerks. Of course, I may be bitter and down on MIT because they didn't want me, so take my advice with a grain of salt.

Man, this thread got depressing with that string of rejections. But congrats, fg9011. What's your focus? MS or PhD?

Waffles with jalapeno cream cheese, followed by a pint of lemon sorbet. I'm either pregnant or I just got my MIT rejection. EDIT: and then half of a strawberry cheesecake.

PhD. Good luck to you, you're clearly doing something right judging from where you've gotten in so far!

Wow, you're way more on top of things than I am. I'm 99% certain I'll be coming to CMU for civil engineering, and I'll be visiting in a couple of weeks, but I haven't even started thinking about where to live. I've got a partner, toddler, and dog, so we may be looking to just buy a house, given what appear to be really low prices in Pittsburgh. I know absolutely zero about the area, though, so if anyone out there wants to weigh in with advice, feel free!

I applied with an environmental focus and just got my rejection this morning. I posted in the results board, looks like someone else did too.

Got my MIT rejection this morning. Not surprised, but still super-disappointed. Updated stuff below. Undergrad Institution: 1) Elite liberal arts college 2) Low-ranked state school (currently in MS program at UG Inst. #2) [long story about this whole journey] Major(s): Environmental Engineering, Civil Engineering (double-majored, as they're separate programs) Minor(s): GPA in Major: 3.8 Overall GPA: 3.4 Length of Degree: 5 years Position in Class: ? Type of Student: Female Domestic GRE Scores: Q: 165 (92%) V: 170 (99%) W: 5.5 (96%) Research Experience: Yes, both undergrad and grad Awards/Honors/Recognitions: XE, two big undergrad scholarships, I feel like I’m forgetting something here but I kind of never want to see my CV again after obsessing over it for so long, so I'm not going to check Pertinent Activities or Jobs: 3 terms of TA work, started a campus chapter of an engineering association, did freelance work requiring computer skills that evidently are useful to two POIs, tons of volunteer activities that probably don't count for much Any Miscellaneous Accomplishments that Might Help: Well, I’m getting an MS right now, so I have that going for me. Very famous advisor. One conference presentation. Firm plans for thesis submission to journal. Have had good interactions with profs at seven of my eight schools . . . four in-person meetings, three phone interviews (not super-official interviews, more like discussions of research interests). My undergrad GPA was hurt by some youthful nincompoopery, but was 3.87 in my last two years. Decent amount of non-engineering work experience. Applying to PhD programs: UC Irvine: Mechanical Eng. U Col. (Boulder): Mechanical Eng. [2/15: accepted, told that they'll decide funding based on visits in March. Probably won't bother.] Colorado State (Ft Collins): Atmospheric Science [1/31: accepted with good funding; 2/15: visited, loved it, great people, nice facilities] Scripps: Climate, Ocean, & Atmosphere program [2/15: unofficial email from POI] Harvard SEAS: Env. Eng. MIT: Civil Eng. [2/28: sad, sad day. Didn't realize how much hope I was holding out for this.] UC Davis: Civil Eng. [1/25 email from POI offering to pay for me to visit 2/8] Carnegie Mellon: Civil Eng. [2/22: accepted, full funding plus nominated for an additional $5,000/yr university fellowship. Visit days are end of March and beginning of April]

No, and I'm totally losing it!

The two that I've found that have information for small towns as well as major metro areas are: www.bestplaces.net (Sperling's Best Places . . . link at the top "compare cost of living") http://livingwage.mit.edu/ (MIT's living wage calculator)

I think your assessment is probably right. I've heard that the majority of places admit in waves, so the people who are definitely in will get accepted first, then there's some discussion about the remaining pool of applicants while they wait to see who gets external fellowships and whatnot. I'm also fearing that 3/1 will be "reject day." I didn't have really high hopes in the first place, but this waiting is killing me because MIT is my dream program*. I just want to get the rejection pain over with and move on with my life! There's a Civil thread on the Engineering board where somebody posted that they got a scanned MIT acceptance letter circa 2/20/13. They were in Mechanics of Materials and Structures. That's the only thing I've seen outside of the results page. * mine and everybody else's in the world, I know!

Yeah, I only see one person from Env. Eng. I was including all the SEAS folks in my assessment of results notification method, since it seems like they'd all be notified the same way. The prof I mentioned was Daniel Jacob.

whoops! Okay, I have no idea what your funding will be like then.

I'm pretty sure that 95% figure comes from the NRC graduate school ranking data, so it would apply to PhD students. The MIT website actually seems to have pretty specific information about funding for your field: http://cee.mit.edu/graduate/mst/admissions

I saw somewhere that the Harvard SEAS visiting day is 2/28, and since it's 2/24 and I haven't heard anything I assume that means that I'm not in the running. I found this information on the website of a Harvard professor who's takes students from both SEAS and EPS: "The application folders get to the faculty by mid-January (I don't see them before then!). Decisions on admissions are made in early February and applicants are contacted immediately after the decision." It looks like the people who have posted on the results page that they've been accepted have received notice via email, and everybody who was rejected last year seems to have received actual letters in the mail in late March.

Heard from CMU this morning -- got an email telling me to check the website, acceptance letter was there!