Jump to content
Dwar

2019-2020 Application Thread

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, captmarvel said:

Yeah, UCSD just says you have to remain in good standing, which is a 3.0. That 3.7 requirement is honestly a turn-off to me!

Shouldn't they feel confident that the people they've admitted to their five year plus program are committed to doing their best without the threat of pulling their funding if they drop below an A- average? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mr_Spock2018 said:

I bet MIT will release their decisions any day now.....

 

Hey, Squidward, I bet old man Krabs is going to break any ...

I spoke with the admissions - they said decisions would be made at the end of this week and sent out next week. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PoliSci4FlyGuys said:

Shouldn't they feel confident that the people they've admitted to their five year plus program are committed to doing their best without the threat of pulling their funding if they drop below an A- average? 

You would think. And a 3.7 is above an A- average! 
 

Does anyone know if this is a new requirement or if it’s been standard for UCLA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ikebana said:

I was among those who could not receive some e-mails due to some errors in OSU e-mail system, and I have contacted to DGS few days ago whether I still have the same problem or not. She told me that I am waitlisted for the funding, and they did not share information on campus visit yet.

While all other schools that I am admitted send couple of personalized e-mails through faculty members and encourage to be in contact with them, I am pretty surprised with OSU's indifference to its potential grad students. I think it is fair to contact them and ask about your funding situation. 

 

Last year they invited people who were waitlisted for funding to the campus visit. So cruel imo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PolSci95 said:

Don't know yet

aren't you admitted to Princeton? I understand weighing my options though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, captmarvel said:

Yeah, UCSD just says you have to remain in good standing, which is a 3.0. That 3.7 requirement is honestly a turn-off to me!

Yeah, but if you do what you need to do in phd courses you will get A- or A. Anything below - even a B+ - would raise serious red flags to the department anyway so it does not matter. And this is also true for departments that require a 3.0 average.

Edited by Theory007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Theory007 said:

Yeah, but if you do what you need to do in phd courses you will get A- or A. Anything below - even a B+ - would raise serious red flags to the department anyway so it does not matter. And this is also true for departments that require a 3.0 average.

This is not true across all departments, especially in certain math, EECS, or science courses. If student wants to do nuclear stuff or advanced math, they would be taking courses alongside PhD candidates in whatever field and may not have same foundation in proofs or physics. Makes it riskier for a qual leaning student who may want to take real analysis or something and they may forego that opportunity to expand methodological repertoire. Same for methods purists trying to break into history. Some do not have holistic backgrounds coming in, and while the PhD should cultivate that, this GPA thing may end up reifying silos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, e2e4 said:

This is not true across all departments, especially in certain math, EECS, or science courses. If student wants to do nuclear stuff or advanced math, they would be taking courses alongside PhD candidates in whatever field and may not have same foundation in proofs or physics. Makes it riskier for a qual leaning student who may want to take real analysis or something and they may forego that opportunity to expand methodological repertoire. Same for methods purists trying to break into history. Some do not have holistic backgrounds coming in, and while the PhD should cultivate that, this GPA thing may end up reifying silos.

Yeah, also, you typically do the quant courses in your first year, which for plenty of people are likely going to be one of their lower grades, and now you're risking the next four years of funding. Plus, I have grad school friends who noted that sometimes you blow off a class because you have more important research work to do or something. I just don't see how this isn't a clear red flag for UCLA if you're comparing it to a similar school, and it seems like it would negatively affect their ability to be competitive among peers?

Edited by captmarvel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, captmarvel said:

Yeah, also, you typically do the quant courses in your first year, which for plenty of people are likely going to be one of their lower grades, and now you're risking the next four years of funding. Plus, I have grad school friends who noted that sometimes you blow off a class because you have more important research work to do or something. I just don't see how this isn't a clear red flag for UCLA if you're comparing it to a similar school, and it seems like it would negatively affect their ability to be competitive among peers?

Yeah, there is almost no margin for error, in one of the nation's more expensive cities no less. That would give me serious pause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Theory007 said:

Last year they invited people who were waitlisted for funding to the campus visit. So cruel imo

It is the same for this year as well. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, are-you-f'ing-serious said:

Who would have thought she actually applied to ALL of these schools? SMH...

Dude, you're such an asshole troll. You literally came back just to shit on someone who's been nothing but nice and encouraging to other people in this thread? Seriously? That's just embarrassing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, are-you-f'ing-serious said:

Who would have thought she actually applied to ALL of these schools? SMH...

Ah your'e back and salty as always. Cannot be good for your skin.

System tends to be stochastic. Hard to know a priori where one will land. Rule of thumb is to apply widely, and if a person has the resources in terms of money and time to fire off all these apps, then so be it. Schools should be better about fee waivers and leveling the field so that this is viable for all applicants, but I have a pretty strong hunch that was not the intent of your post. I thought you no longer needed us, anyway....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, cardinal35 said:

anyone else claiming anything from UNC? 

UNC usually sends out applications over a long period (i.e., over the course of a few weeks). I emailed the department yesterday and was told that decisions have been made (and I heard back yesterday, as I mentioned above).

Edited by uchenyy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Gradschool2020!!! said:

Do acceptances and rejections all come out at the same time? Eg is it like a mass email?

Do you mean MIT? Looks like it. For other pograms, it varies widely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, looks like I got my wish!  Heard from MIT today....but rejection.  Not at all surprised.  I appreciate they send their acceptances and rejections at the same time.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey did anyone’s MIT decisions say how many students applied and/or how many were admitted? 
 

I think acceptance rate info for top colleges is fascinating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dwar said:

Hey did anyone’s MIT decisions say how many students applied and/or how many were admitted? 
 

I think acceptance rate info for top colleges is fascinating.

I got into MIT. They said that over 350 people applied with a less than 9% acceptance rate. Sorry to everyone who got rejected from them. You all are amazing applicants; I think I just happened to both get very lucky and to be well aligned with the faculty's research interests. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.