how many schools are you applying to?

[frankdux]

and break it down by number into safety, middle, reach.

safety: 1

middle: 4

reach: 4

i could probably use some more safety schools, but i just can't find any that have my research interests. could anyone help me find a somewhat easier school that offers an applied math (or interdisciplinary math, or computational math) program that offers interdisciplinary/overlapping research into astronomy and astrophysics?

[rising_star]

I applied to six schools for my MA and six for my PhD. I couldn't possibly break them down into reach, safety, middle, mostly because when I applied for MAs I knew nothing about the field and when I applied for PhDs, I was a great fit* at all the schools and knew I'd be competitive wherever I applied.**

*Never underestimate fit. I emailed beforehand to make sure I was choosing the right potential advisor at each school. I tailored my SOPs heavily to show how my interests matched with each advisor, department, and university.

**That isn't meant to sound cocky. Part of it was good grades, good letters, and a good thesis. Part of it was a few other things that I wouldn't really discuss in a forum like this (and that technically don't play a role in admissions but unofficially do). It probably helped that almost every single person I applied to work with knew at least one of my letter writers and so could get more info on me than could ever be included in a letter.

[docstudent]

I'd say don't waste your money and time applying to more programs...you're bound to get into at least one of the nine you're already applying to, and mediocre "safety" schools (aka diploma mills) won't take you anywhere worthwhile anyway. If you don't get into a decent program, either take a year to retool or change your career plans. Best regards.

[t_ruth]

I don't think I'm applying to any 'safety' schools, but 1 uber reach, 3 very good schools, and 6 pretty good to good. I'm in social sciences though, where I'm guessing there are a million applicants for every spot.

[hartshorneBoy]

16 schools.

9 Reaches,

4 Good shots

3 "Safeties" (hopefully) due to good fit and good connection there.

[frankdux]

^^^ no offense, but unless you're Doogie Howser, i dont know how you could call any of those schools except for University of Utah a 'safety' school.

[Dreams]

16 schools.

Sixteen schools is a lot to be applying to hartshorneBoy. But if you have the money to do so, then why not.

I am applying to 6 programs: 3 master's level and 3 doctoral level. like rising_star, it is hard to classify them because they all fit very well, and I have taken the time to ensure my interests matched what each program could offer.

I guess we will see come spring.

I also do not recommend adding any more schools to the list frankdux. As already mentioned, you will likely get into one or more of them, especially if the fit is good between your interests and their offerings.

[academiccricket]

For better or worse, I'm applying to all highly-respected programs in my field. I don't think there is such thing as "safety..."

I'm applying to 10 programs total, 8 Ph.Ds and 2 MAs.

The 2 MAs might conceivably be considered "safety" (since I already have an M.A.), but I was rejected from one last year, so who knows?

For the PhD: Harvard, U Chicago, Johns Hopkins, UC Berkeley, NYU, U Wisc., Brandeis, Catholic University. My research interests "fit" four well, I suppose. For the other four, I would have to do interdisciplinary work to support my sub-interest. One program is restructuring its department/faculty so despite it not being as "competitive", it impacts what students are selected, and what funding is available.

You can never be sure which departments are taking more students this year as opposed to last year, if it is a strong/weak applicant pool, or what other factors are involved when selecting students. Last year, at my "safety" the adviser I applied to work under had a slight stroke and took the year off, thus leaving me with a gap year.

[rising_star]

You can never be sure which departments are taking more students this year as opposed to last year, if it is a strong/weak applicant pool, or what other factors are involved when selecting students. Last year, at my "safety" the adviser I applied to work under had a slight stroke and took the year off, thus leaving me with a gap year.

This is so true! My program has a larger than expected cohort this year. Because of their commitment to funding current students, the number of people accepted in this admissions cycle is going to be much smaller. (The current economic crisis isn't helping matters since our state is teetering on the edge of flat broke, affecting how much money the university has and therefore funding available to grad students.)

To frankdux, hartshorneboy, and everyone else: How are you classifying safety vs reach vs middle? Is it just based on the ranking of the school? Because, depending on the field, fit may trump ranking. For example, I'm at what you could argue is a lower ranked program (who knows since the rankings in my field last came out in 1996, the same year my advisor earned his PhD!) but it's pretty much the perfect place for what I want to do (my advisor said that to me a few days ago actually when we were discussing my dissertation plans). At the same time, many of the "higher ranked" or "more prestigious" programs would be terrible places for me to do the work I want to do (and that's leaving aside the inevitable turnover in programs). My point being that there is a lot more to safety/middle/reach than just published rankings or even the opinions of faculty. Fit is everything. Not just academic fit but social/cultural fit, geographic fit, etc.

[t_ruth]

I think that's true rising_star about the ranks to some extent; however, there are always going to be superstar schools (top four or so) where the name will look good on your CV no matter what you are studying and will always attract great people, and there are also going to be schools at the other end.

I'm applying to one of those super prestigious schools and that is my reach, then I'm applying to schools in two categories, say 10-30 in the rankings and 31-50 in the rankings. I think within those groups I'm giving much more consideration to fit than ranking. If I applied to something that was tier 3 or 4, I might consider that a safety, but I don't think I'd be very happy going there, so am not applying to any of those.

[hartshorneBoy]

I agree with rising_star, hence why safety was in quotes. What I meant is that I feel like I have a good chance at being at the top of the pool there, and my recommenders are very very close to the faculty at the schools, and I am a great fit there, while they are not top top top tier, and my school has a very good history of students placing there as undergrads. When I say 3 safeties, I feel certain I will get into one of the three safeties, just from my handwavy probabilistic modelling.