How much can good research experience and GRE scores compensate for a low GPA?

[overcast]

Hello all,

I am applying this year for Fall 2011 admission to PhD programs, a mix of Cancer Biology and Cell Biology. I have strong research experience (2.5 years plus of a solo post-undergrad project with a previous co-author publication in a high impact factor journal), very strong letters of rec, and 1520 GRE (800 Quant, 720 Verbal, 6.0 AW).

However (I'm sure all of you saw this coming, wouldn't post just to brag), my GPA is less than stellar. 3.25 at a top-20 private university with a 2.82 science/math. I just kind of slacked off in college and didn't take my classes seriously enough, and am obviously regretting that now.

I am applying to a mix of "safety" schools and some more on the "dream" side for someone with my GPA (UPenn, Rockefeller, Sloan Kettering). Can anybody with previous experience at these schools or insight into the application process in general comment on how reasonable you think my chances are at schools of this tier? Can the poor GPA be overlooked or do you think my application will get weeded out before the essay and letters have a chance to be read?

Thanks, and sorry for the cliche "What are my chances" post, but I'm sure other people have been there.

Edited December 9, 2010 by overcast

[waddle]

I am applying this year for Fall 2011 admission to PhD programs, a mix of Cancer Biology and Cell Biology.

Cool, I've done some research in cancer/cell/molecular biology, too, but not as much as you have. I'm an applicant this year, too, so for what it's worth, I'll tell you what I know. (I'm in a related situation, except I'm hoping a high GRE & GPA can make up for having no publications).

3.25 at a top-20 private university with a 2.82 science/math.

I was told by a summer research program director (ex-faculty member of a top biomedical/biological science program) that when she sat on admissions committees, as long as you had >3.0, you'd be fine. Of course, this varies between departments & years. That said, a 2.82 science GPA from any school--even if it has a high reputation--is very low nearly anywhere you go. If we forget about the other applicants from top undergraduate institutions, there are still those applicants with high GPAs from no-name institutions against whom you'll be competing. Is there an upward trend to your grades? or is there a pattern to your low grades, that you could somehow explain?

I just kind of slacked off in college and didn't take my classes seriously enough, and am obviously regretting that now.

Cool story, bro. (Sorry if this comes off as terse or snarky--I most surely don't mean any offense, but I think you're better off not saying you slacked off.)

I'm thinking that once your application makes it past the first round of screening, you're probably home-free. I don't think many programs really care about the GRE other than for awarding fellowships (yeah, I know, bummer). Once you're over, say, 1300, you're given the go-ahead.

Good luck!

waddle

Edited December 9, 2010 by waddle

[Tall Chai Latte]

Hi overcast,

I was in your shoes last application season. My cumulative UGPA was 3.09 at a top-50 public university with probably 3.0 in science/math, on top of that I had 4 years of undergrad research (three solo-projects and various little side projects). But here I am -- first year grad student at a top-20 school. My GRE wasn't even as good as yours... I was very worried about my own chances just like you, and I asked the same question when I was invited to interview: do undergrad grades matter THAT MUCH? From the replies I got, how competitive you are depends on the application pool of that particular year, and also whether your research background matches what the department/program is looking for (I had a mix of molecular biology/structural biology background). If you do get interviews, that means you passed the first filter. Like waddle just mentioned, you might not get awarded fellowships, but getting accepted should be more important.

I would encourage you to aim high, because the application process is kinda like a black box -- nobody really knows what exactly AdComms are looking for. Try to make some contacts with prospective PIs of your interest also helps too, sometimes this gives you a leg up. I did apply to Cornell/Sloan-Kittering but I was turned down. Good luck!

Edited December 9, 2010 by Tall Chai Latte

[Miniprep]

Overcast,

Last year I was given an opportunity to interview at 2 of the 8 schools (schools I thought were out of my league) I applied to with only 1.5 years of research, a 1420 GRE and a very low GPA of 2.7. Like Chai Latte said, you never know what the adcomms are looking for.

[efdp]

Just a quick note: I had really similar numbers to yours (3.0 < UGPA < 3.1, GRE > 1500) and got into a top 10 molecular bio program. I had a bit more research experience, but no publications to show for it. The fact that you've completed and published a project will, I think, look really good to the admissions committee -- they want some kind of indication that you can be productive in graduate school and there is literally no better way to demonstrate that than publishing. I came from an Ivy, so maybe that helped me a little -- can't really say how much, but I kind of doubt it was that much of a bump. For comparison my hit rate with grad apps was something like 50%, with n = ~10.

I think your strategy of applying both to top-tier and second-tier institutions is a good one (and it's good to have lots of options -- you may find that you click with one program particularly well during interviews, so much so that it's obvious where you should go). But I would say that while it's not a sure thing, you would have totally reasonable chances at places like Rocky, Sloan, and UPenn. I think it is definitely not a waste of time for you to send in apps to all of your dream schools. Good luck!

[phira]

I think you'll be fine! I've got a 3.35 from a top-30 university, but if you look at my transcript, it's obvious that I struggled in my biology classes and excelled in women's studies. But I got excellent GRE scores (not as wow as yours, but close!), and I've been working in a lab for a year and a half and doing some great work. Everyone I've talked to has said that GPA is often the least important thing for a lot of schools. And since I've been invited to interview at the University of Chicago and Johns Hopkins, I guess that's true!

[EcologistCory]

I am wondering everyone's opinion about somewhat of the flip side of this discussion...

I'm curious about my chances on getting into virology/microbiology PhD with low GRE. I am currently a MS student with 3.7 gpa, extensive research, position in a competitive research assistant (besides my regular research lab), undergrad GPA 3.5 with a year of of research, however my GRE is 1090 (450V, 640Q, 3W).

Any suggestions: should I retake the GRE or use that time to take more courses? Also, with my current scores and gpa, would I be competitive in mid to top level programs? I would love to go to Stanford or Harvard.

Thanks!

[emmm]

Retake the GRE -- I don't see the value of more courses, given that you have what sounds like excellent research. I don't think the undergrad GPA will matter much, since it's well above the minimum required 3.0. Is that the GPA you were worried about? I don't think a 3.5 undergrad GPA is ever a problem when there are good letters from the researchers you worked with to go along with it.

[EcologistCory]

@ emm: I'm not worried about my GPA, but my GRE scores. I am trying to decide if I should retake the GRE or put that time into something else (courses, community service, etc). I know that schools use GRE scores to determine if a student will be successful in grad school and since I've already proven I can be successful I didn't know if I should retake.

[emmm]

@ emm: I'm not worried about my GPA, but my GRE scores. I am trying to decide if I should retake the GRE or put that time into something else (courses, community service, etc). I know that schools use GRE scores to determine if a student will be successful in grad school and since I've already proven I can be successful I didn't know if I should retake.

I don't see much point in taking more classes unless you need prerequisites or you need to raise a sub-par GPA. Since it does not seem that either applies to you, don't spend your time on more coursework. DEFINITELY improve that GRE. You don't want your application to be thrown out because you did not meet some minimum used for screening. For sciences, even your Q score might need to be a bit higher -- you might want to check averages for programs you're interested in.