Delusions of Grandeur

[Vitaminark]

You know what's depressing? When your letter writers tell you that you have probably a better shot of getting into a PhD program than your peers . . . and then all (yes I said it, ALL) of them get into a program and you don't. That's like a major shot to the ego. I feel like I worked so hard and I'm getting older. Going through this process all over again seems absolutely painful. The only thing I had really going against me was my GRE scores. Everything else was great, GPA, research fit, research experience (I even had a summer research internship at an Ivy League last summer), etc. I don' t know, I'm just depressed. This reminds me of high school all over again when I busted my ass to graduate towards the top of my class, but couldn't go to undergrad right away because I couldn't get financial aid, meanwhile my friends who all had B and C averages went to top notch Universities.

I'm a Bitter Betty.

/end violins

[jordanami]

Yup, I am with you. I thought I was all set with my near-perfect GRE scores. I figured I might have a problem getting funding, but not acceptance. So far though, 3/5 are in and they are all rejects. Two wanted me to finish a masters first, which is understandable, I'm halfway through. But I may take the one school up on their offer to advise me about "how to approach my application if I decide to apply again next year". The only consolation I can really take is to see all the rejections on the results board. Most of us have decent, even great stats, and many people post about being rejected from safety schools only to be accepted, and even funded, by dream schools. Some of it, I think, is just goodness of fit... do we say something in our POS that sparks an interest in one of the adcoms, etc.. It looks like you still have several schools left to reply, don't give up hope yet! I did see, just today, someone who posted (identical stats, so it must have been the same person) of a rejection from one school with a pretty sizable funding and acceptance right below.

[Zouzax]

yea, I totally understand this. I applied to 6 schools and I thought for sure ONE of them would let me in. I wasn't even looking for 2 offers, just 1 would be enough. Everyone told me I had great stats and would surely be accepted somewhere. Alas, they (and I) were wrong. Midway through my rejection letter-receiving period I was surprised to not even receive so much as an interview or a follow-up question. But as they say, hindsight is 20/20. Now that I think about it, I really couldve made some serious changes to my application, SOP, and CV. Everything couldve been cleaned up and made a little clearer.

In addition, Ive realized that I need more experience if I want to be accepted to a top-notch program. Like Jordanami said, I definitely need to finish my Master's so I can send them a sample of my thesis next time. And also, I definitely need more experience. Now I understand some of the reasons why I wasn't accepted. If all goes well, Ill be entering a Master's-level research program in the fall, and then Ill be applying for a ph.d again in fall 2012. Joy!

[Zouzax]

Most of us have decent, even great stats, and many people post about being rejected from safety schools only to be accepted, and even funded, by dream schools. Some of it, I think, is just goodness of fit... do we say something in our POS that sparks an interest in one of the adcoms, etc..

This is very true. Call me naive but when I was filling out my applications in October I didn't realize just how competitive this process is. I've learned a lot from reading this forum & will definitely use it to my advantage the next time I apply.

[Langoustine]

Yeah, when I did all this back last November I did not realize how cutthroat this experience is! Like the OP, I had all my LORs and many more people tell me grad school would be great for me and that I would def get in...I found this site after I submitted all my applications and after reading a lot of other peoples' stats it is not surprising I did not get as many interviews as I thought I would. Am still waiting for some schools so all is not lost (yet). But this has been a very educational experience about applications and academia in general. At least if I do this again I will do some things differently and will be much more prepared!

[lewin]

Everything else was great, GPA, research fit, research experience...

It's actually really hard to tell whether you had good research fit. It can take years for papers to be published, so although it might have looked like you had a good match, the professor might actually have moved on from what you thought they were doing. That is, their "recent" papers might actually represent something they were doing three years ago and are no longer interested in.

By luck, the places where I got graduate respones were often ones where my stated interests were where the POI was heading in the future, not what they had done in the past. But of course that would have been impossible for me to know at the time of application.

[qbtacoma]

yea, I totally understand this. I applied to 6 schools and I thought for sure ONE of them would let me in. I wasn't even looking for 2 offers, just 1 would be enough. Everyone told me I had great stats and would surely be accepted somewhere. Alas, they (and I) were wrong. Midway through my rejection letter-receiving period I was surprised to not even receive so much as an interview or a follow-up question. But as they say, hindsight is 20/20. Now that I think about it, I really couldve made some serious changes to my application, SOP, and CV. Everything couldve been cleaned up and made a little clearer.

Why is it that we can never have these sorts of revelations until after everything is turned in? I do this all the time when I can't think of anything to improve my papers until it is much too late.

[hello! :)]

This is so true.

It's actually really hard to tell whether you had good research fit. It can take years for papers to be published, so although it might have looked like you had a good match, the professor might actually have moved on from what you thought they were doing. That is, their "recent" papers might actually represent something they were doing three years ago and are no longer interested in.

By luck, the places where I got graduate respones were often ones where my stated interests were where the POI was heading in the future, not what they had done in the past. But of course that would have been impossible for me to know at the time of application.

[Vitaminark]

It's actually really hard to tell whether you had good research fit. It can take years for papers to be published, so although it might have looked like you had a good match, the professor might actually have moved on from what you thought they were doing. That is, their "recent" papers might actually represent something they were doing three years ago and are no longer interested in.

By luck, the places where I got graduate respones were often ones where my stated interests were where the POI was heading in the future, not what they had done in the past. But of course that would have been impossible for me to know at the time of application.

I understand this, but I had already been in correspondence with all my POIs before I applied and they all said how my fit was good with theirs I guess others were a better fit, lol. But not really "lol"

[lewin]

I understand this, but I had already been in correspondence with all my POIs before I applied and they all said how my fit was good with theirs I guess others were a better fit, lol. But not really "lol"

Oh, sorry then

[ringo-ring]

This reminds me of high school all over again when I busted my ass to graduate towards the top of my class, but couldn't go to undergrad right away because I couldn't get financial aid, meanwhile my friends who all had B and C averages went to top notch Universities.

I don't want to be mean but plausible explanation could be that there is something wrong with the way you write your SOP (or undergrad admission essay). If everything else is OK, why else? you could assume that's because competition is high, but all of your peers got in so this is apparently not the case... GRE scores are not at all important if everything else is great as you say.

[Vitaminark]

I don't want to be mean but plausible explanation could be that there is something wrong with the way you write your SOP (or undergrad admission essay). If everything else is OK, why else? you could assume that's because competition is high, but all of your peers got in so this is apparently not the case... GRE scores are not at all important if everything else is great as you say.

You're not being mean at all; it could be a possibility. However, my SOP was looked over and suggestions for edits were made by all three of my letter writers, so I don't think it was a horrible one. I think my downfall may have been that I sounded too idealistic. Hindsight is 20/20, no?

[ringo-ring]

However, my SOP was looked over and suggestions for edits were made by all three of my letter writers, so I don't think it was a horrible one.

hm... letter writers know you very well, so they could have a completely different impression after reading your SOP than somebody from the outside. kinda of ambiguous points in the essay that everyone interprets accordingly to his own experience

anyway, I too, feel like those schools that rejected me, they just made a horrible mistake!!

yes, I can rationalize that my GRE is not bad but not in 99 percentile, no one of the letter writers had known me for at least a year, I have no peer-reviewed publications, the competition for internationals is tougher... but still, I tend to feel it was like, they just don't like me, that's it. and if they don't like me, they will only dislike me even harder if I have better accomplishments