Fall 2020 Biostatistics PhD Profile Evaluation

[likewater]

Undergrad Institution: Top 10 USNWR (not known for grade deflation)
Major(s):  Cognitive Science
Minor(s):  Math
GPA:  3.96

Type of Student: Domestic, not getting any diversity points

 

Relevant Courses: (H) Linear Algebra(A-), (H) Multivariable Calculus (A-), (H) Real Analysis (currently taking), (H) Probability (currently taking)

Less Relevant Courses: Intro to programming (A), Data Structures (A), Social Network Analysis (A), Human-Computer Interaction (A)

GRE General Test:
Q: 169
V: 157
W: 5.0
 

Programs Applying: Biostatistics PhD programs

 

Research Experience: About a year's worth of research on sentence processing, no publications
Awards/Honors/Recognitions: None outside of GPA related stuff.
Pertinent Activities or Jobs: TA for calculus sequence

Letters of Recommendation: Cog Sci prof I'm doing research with (very strong), linear algebra prof (allegedly strong), SIBS professor (allegedly strong)

Any Miscellaneous Points that Might Help: Attended SIBS

I'm sort of unsure how to evaluate myself as an applicant. My GPA and undergraduate institution help, and I believe my GRE scores are quite good (outside of verbal, hopefully not the biggest issue. Darn you vocab). I have unrelated research experience, but it is to my understanding that actual meaningful statistics/math research is pretty rare among applicants.

 

My biggest worry is definitely my lack of math classes. Since junior year I've delved into the deep end of math, opting to take honors courses to demonstrate my ability because I lacked a long transcript full of quantiative courses. This is clearly not as ideal as say, being a math/statistics major. Importantly, I also won't have real analysis or probability on my transcript before universities see my application. The culmination of these factors would definitely hurt me more if I was applying to straight up statistics programs, but for biostatistics (where I believe they are a bit more lenient on math background), I'm not sure how I fare. This is my current list of where I'm applying to.

 

Applying to: 

Match/Reach - Michigan, UNC, Minnesota, Columbia(?), Berkeley(?), Penn(?), Duke (?)

Safety- Rutgers, Pittsburgh, Emory, BU

Specific Questions:

      1. Is my list of schools reasonable, given my profile? How would you evaluate me as a candidate?

      2. Other possible schools to add to my list? Is it worth it to apply to one of the top 3 (Harvard/Wash/Hopkins)?

      3. I have read somewhere on here (I believe it was a cyberwulf post) that the statement of purpose matters slightly more for those who fall under the "non-traditional applicant" profile. Would I fall under that categorization? Obviously, I will still try to make my statement of purpose as good as possible.

Edited October 29, 2019 by likewater
Formatting

[omicrontrabb]

You should definitely apply to all of the top biostatistics schools. You're really underselling your background. You took Calc 3, linear algebra and real analysis. (I'm a PhD student at one of Harvard/Wash/Hopkins and as an undergrad, the only math courses I took besides those were differential equations (not useful) and another semester of real analysis.)

You go to a top university with excellent grades in general plus a high GRE score. You also did SIBS, which I think is a plus. I would not consider you a non-traditional applicant.

I'd be fairly surprised if you didn't get into at least one of Minnesota/UNC/Michigan/Berkeley. (Although Michigan frequently admits people to their MS instead of the PhD.)

[bayessays]

Agreed with everything above regarding how you should apply to all top biostat schools.

For the relevant purposes, you're a traditional applicant. With how much math you've had, you're in better shape than a lot of people who major in statistics. A statistics undergrad is almost irrelevant, and a lot of math majors don't take any additional relevant classes over what you have.  Nobody is going to look at your profile and think you aren't just a normal looking applicant (and a good one).  Non-traditional applicants are much more extreme cases in my mind. 

[likewater]

Thank you for both of your responses, that certainly lifted my spirits. I will try to be less pessimistic about my admissions chances. I thought I would fall under the nontraditional applicant category because I wasn't a major in statistics/math, but maybe my situation is more common than I thought.

 

On a slightly unrelated note, should I be expecting admissions to contact me about fall grades? From what I've seen on this forum I believe that only happens if you're on the cusp of admission, but I couldn't find much discussion about it. Given that I'm taking real analysis and probability right now, it might make them more likely to ask?

Edited October 30, 2019 by likewater

[omicrontrabb]

I think 1 of the 12 programs I applied to asked for fall grades, so I don't think it's very common. I was also rejected by about half of those programs, so I must have been on the "cusp of admission" at some of them. I was also enrolled in real analysis during that fall semester. So a few might, but generally they won't.

[likewater]

That's good to hear, thank you for all your help. I've made a revised list of schools, does this list seem more reasonable?

Reach: Harvard, Hopkins

Match: UNC, Michigan, Columbia, Berkeley, Minnesota, UCLA, Penn, Duke, Yale(?), Brown(?) (unsure on the last two, probably won't end up applying to save money)

Safety: Emory, BU, Rutgers

[omicrontrabb]

@likewater That looks about right. Although with how competitive admissions are, I wouldn't consider anything a "safety." I go to Harvard/Wash/Hopkins and was rejected from BU. Yale and Brown are probably reaches since their programs are very small (like 2 students a year) and everyone wants to go to an Ivy+. I would consider adding Pitt to your list. Lastly, you might consider applying to Washington (Seattle) in addition to/instead of one of Harvard, Hopkins. UW seems to be a bit easier to get into, since again, everyone wants to go to an Ivy+.

[likewater]

Yeah I mostly used the word "safety" as a way of showing that my odds are higher of getting those places, not that they're an actual safety. Thank you for all your help.