Go to #14 school for CS PhD or do year-long internship and try applying again next year?

[anon1]

I am currently doing a summer internship at NASA and it sounds like I could extend my work for another year if I want to. Last year I got into internships at MIT(2 programs both of which I did), Harvard, NASA, Caltech, Stanford, and Princeton, but only got into 3 #14 ranked CS schools for PhD programs plus Columbia (#17) for a Master's. I think the mediocre turnout was due to 1. GRE score: 166 Verbal, only 160 quant (maybe my biggest problem), 5.5 writing, 2. Unfocused essay, 3. two strong recommendations (people who wrote them for all of the internships I got into) paired with two weaker recommendations-- all things that I could potentially change. I have a 3.66 GPA, 3.94 CS, and 3.89 overall for the last 2 years (did my program in 3 years because I already have another undergraduate degree that covered my liberal arts requirements), double major with math, plus publications in philosophy, biology, physics, coauthor of ACT math questions for prep book, etc. Two summers ago I interned at Harvard (center for astrophysics).

I'm worried about going to a grad school that I'm not that excited to be attending. I have a fiance who is planning to move wherever I go and I would hate to have him move only to find out after a year that I really don't want to be in the program, or that I heavily regret not trying to raise my GRE score and apply again.

In addition, if I could do anything, I would probably get a PhD in math, even given my low GRE score. And if I could do anything as a career, I would want to be doing scientific research: advancing the world's body of knowledge, specifically I guess, in the form of math research. I'm worried that a PhD in CS, given what I would be doing at UCSD, won't really fill the bill.

Should I go ahead with UCSD, or try for the year-long internship (defer at UCSD if I can) and apply again...?

[Usmivka]

I want to point out that program rankings, particularly in CS, are considered so unreliable as to be ignored. This has come up a number of times in the forums. I'm linking one that I know about because I replied in detail to it So for all you or I know, the program you got into is the best possible one in your field for your interests. It sounds like it doesn't fit with your interests, but that is really unclear to me since you didn't specify your research interests or what you might do at UCSD. If you aren't excited about the place don't go. And of course, if it isn't fully funded (tuition AND living stipend) don't go.

[OregonGal]

I would say that if you're not feeling excited about attending the program, it's probably not the best fit for you. And if you want to get a PhD in math (theory? applied math?) then yes, it sounds like CS isn't going to fit well. It sounds like you applied to these schools before you really drilled down on what it is you want to do in your career, and that what you want to do is more similar to what you're doing at NASA. In that case, I'd say defer (keep options open) and look to apply to programs where you have a better academic fit in the next admissions cycle.

[anon1]

I have full funding for 1 year guaranteed at UCSD. It's doing high performance computing for scientific applications, so there is some math involved, but it sounds like I would be doing more programming (supporting scientists' research) than doing (math) research.

I also got into UCLA (fully funded for 2 years guaranteed). I turned them down, but it sounds like I might be able to take them up on the offer if I want to. There I would be doing AI research that is more theoretical/mathy. But it might in fact be too late now.

And I got into Columbia, but only for an unfunded Master's.

I think I would like to take the year to think about this decision and to reapply, but a couple of my professors have encouraged me to just go because they think UCSD is a 'good enough' school. Which brings up another issue-- asking my recommenders to write for me again-- will they support my endeavor?...

I'm also a bit worried that if I wait a year my options could get worse. But at least I will have the summer internship at NASA (maybe a year-long one as well-- I am free to work with anyone I can find who is willing to work with me, which includes someone doing applied math--I actually have one possible lead to follow up on), a higher GPA (my GPA when I applied was 3.5, now 3.66), and the additional math major (added during my final semester), all of which should be helpful whether I apply for CS or for applied math...

[ghanada]

I remember back in April when you were really scattered about where to go in this thread:

It sounds like you are really all over the place now and are kind of lost. In that thread you were picking schools based on ivy status, location, weather, etc. Then you finally (after 2 pages worth) mentioned research and you made it sound like all of your options were great fits for what you wanted to do. Now you don't even want to do a PhD in CS anymore?

You seem like you could benefit from taking some time off (maybe more than just this next year) to really sort out what you want. Seriously, taking time off from school can really help give you perspective and lock down what it is you are passionate about. I took 3 years off from undergrad to do that and am happy I did. It completely changed my view on the types of jobs available and I took a lot of time planning out the best track to get there. I just finished a Masters and will start a PhD this fall. I'm 29 now so I can say it really isn't a big deal starting grad school a little later in life. You will hate life if you try taking on a PhD you aren't interested in.

Also realize, doing a PhD is about specializing and becoming an expert in some field. Nobody wants a jack of all trades that isn't particularly strong in anything. This is why you need to lock down your interests now so you don't waste time jumping around advisers/departments/schools.

[R Deckard]

I remember back in April when you were really scattered about where to go in this thread:

It sounds like you are really all over the place now and are kind of lost. In that thread you were picking schools based on ivy status, location, weather, etc. Then you finally (after 2 pages worth) mentioned research and you made it sound like all of your options were great fits for what you wanted to do. Now you don't even want to do a PhD in CS anymore?

You seem like you could benefit from taking some time off (maybe more than just this next year) to really sort out what you want. Seriously, taking time off from school can really help give you perspective and lock down what it is you are passionate about. I took 3 years off from undergrad to do that and am happy I did. It completely changed my view on the types of jobs available and I took a lot of time planning out the best track to get there. I just finished a Masters and will start a PhD this fall. I'm 29 now so I can say it really isn't a big deal starting grad school a little later in life. You will hate life if you try taking on a PhD you aren't interested in.

Also realize, doing a PhD is about specializing and becoming an expert in some field. Nobody wants a jack of all trades that isn't particularly strong in anything. This is why you need to lock down your interests now so you don't waste time jumping around advisers/departments/schools.

I just read her old thread. It looks like UMD would be the best fit based on research interests. Their numerical analysis and scientific computing is all done in the CS department and includes well-known faculty that students and other professors speak extremely highly of. In fact, the entire department seems very math-oriented. She could essentially get a PhD in Math from the CS department at UMD. Ironically, UMD isn't even in the conversation anymore.

Edited June 22, 2012 by R Deckard

[anon1]

I had that impression about UMD's scientific computing; but neither my fiance nor I wanted to stay in MD, plus I wouldn't have started out working with scientific computing people.... still though, this was perhaps an epic fail.

I could try to contact UMD, but I doubt they would let me in now. Who knows though, maybe someone has decided not to go...

[anon1]

*fail since his job is already in MD, not mentioned in this thread

[R Deckard]

It might be easier to get back in at UMD since they offered you a TA position and not a fellowship. They may still need more TA.

Alternatively, you could go to UCSD and enroll in the CSME program. You could probably be co-advised by a math professor or possibly have a math professor as your main advisor (I'm not sure what they allow in the CS department).

[anon1]

I checked out the CSME program, but it doesn't look like there are any CS PhD students in it (it lists PhD students but none affiliated with CS)... My advisor at UCSD is involved in the group, but it looks like his research is more focused on parallel computing, using GPUs, and writing software to facilitate scientific research, than on the math side of scientific computing. Although, one of his recent grads was second in all of her country in a college math exam.... so there must be some math involved for her to gravitate to his group. His research sounds employable though, right? High performance computing?

UCLA will still let me go. Research there is in AI algorithms, which seems more like pure math. Recent student publications are on efficiently solving the dots and boxes game, on rectangle packing, etc. A recent grad came from Berkeley with an undergrad GPA of 3.97. This prof has double the number of publications that the UCSD professor has, but he doesn't get anywhere near the number of government grants for his research (whereas the UCSD prof has two pages full of grants he's gotten-- most in conjunction with other research facilities, national research labs, etc.).

UCSD is ranked much higher than UCLA in theoretical CS (the part of CS closest to math imo-- and my favorite part of cs), if I want to change advisors. Maybe I should be considering the entire department at each school as opposed to the professors who are interested in working with me now?

[R Deckard]

It seems like you are not interested in either of these schools. At this point, I really don't know what you expect to get out of creating more threads and asking for more advice.

[anon1]

After reading responses from this: thread, I am convinced that both schools are excellent options.

I suppose now I am looking for advice on which to choose, though like you said, people have already given lots of advice, and have even voted:

One of the schools just doesn't seem clearly better than the other..

[anon1]

Upon further reflection, I am going with UCSD. The department was significantly more friendly when I visited.

[anon1]

Or not. I just looked on ratemyprofessor. UCLA adviser: 5.0 helpfulness, 5.0 clarity, 1.0 easiness and glowing reviews (2), UCSD: 3.0 helpfulness, 2.0 clarity, 3.0 easiness (2 bad reviews)

UCSD person was nicer, but he might be frustrating to work with if he's not clear... I have trouble dealing with supervisors like that.... and am unmotivated to work hard for them.

Now UCLA is looking better. Only risk is: what if I end up not liking the work I'm doing with the prof there, then will have to find someone else to work with, and theory probably won't be an option... though I think they have some good graphics people, and strangely enough in 2009 I saw a networks prof give a talk in Rome, didn't know he was from UCLA, then saw him give a talk on my visit day, and remembered him! Such a cool moment.

Some of my profs said they thought UCSD was a better school for CS, but the two schools are tied in the rankings. Plus I just visited SpaceX on Friday and asked our tour guide which school was better, and her response was, "UCLA is one of our favorites." While in CA I asked around, and everyone's response was that given the choice they'd pick UCLA. Two profs also said that SD is a much nicer city than LA, but really I found LA to be more exciting than SD... maybe after I live there a while it will seem dirty/dangerous? In any case, I have a prof whose daughter lives 2 miles from campus and says I can live there if I want to, which would make moving there less daunting...

[anon1]

ghanada-- cool that you went to UCLA:)

[R Deckard]

Or not. I just looked on ratemyprofessor. UCLA adviser: 5.0 helpfulness, 5.0 clarity, 1.0 easiness and glowing reviews (2), UCSD: 3.0 helpfulness, 2.0 clarity, 3.0 easiness (2 bad reviews)

UCSD person was nicer, but he might be frustrating to work with if he's not clear... I have trouble dealing with supervisors like that.... and am unmotivated to work hard for them.

Now UCLA is looking better. Only risk is: what if I end up not liking the work I'm doing with the prof there, then will have to find someone else to work with, and theory probably won't be an option... though I think they have some good graphics people, and strangely enough in 2009 I saw a networks prof give a talk in Rome, didn't know he was from UCLA, then saw him give a talk on my visit day, and remembered him! Such a cool moment.

Some of my profs said they thought UCSD was a better school for CS, but the two schools are tied in the rankings. Plus I just visited SpaceX on Friday and asked our tour guide which school was better, and her response was, "UCLA is one of our favorites." While in CA I asked around, and everyone's response was that given the choice they'd pick UCLA. Two profs also said that SD is a much nicer city than LA, but really I found LA to be more exciting than SD... maybe after I live there a while it will seem dirty/dangerous? In any case, I have a prof whose daughter lives 2 miles from campus and says I can live there if I want to, which would make moving there less daunting...

The criteria you are using for making your decision are absolutely mind-blowing. Please stop asking random people what they think. Please forget what you read on ratemyprofessor (this is not site where doctoral students review advisers -- it is mainly for undergraduates to complain about professors that are poor classroom instructors).

Which school gave you a better feeling when you visited?

[1FJG]

I seriously doubt that any graduate students would evaluate their professors on ratemyprofessor.com. If anything, graduate coursework tend to be unorganized. Besides, just because one may not be a good lecturer doesn't mean that he/she isn't a good communicator (person-to-person / small group).

Looking at both threads that you posted on tgc, I honestly think that you shouldn't even go to graduate school for you are STILL talking about "which school should I go" based on preposterous reasons/factors (almost) 3 MONTHS after you made your first post. I mean, really?

Just on this page, you evaluate the schools based on:

- rankings

- locations

- reputation

- assumptions (e.g. if the professor is this, than you can't deal with him/her.)

that assumption one also showed that you are biased towards one over the other. Without even asking "what do you mean by 'if he's not clear'", why wouldn't the advisor from UCLA be "frustrating to work with"? Is it because ratemyprofessor.com told you that this advisor has strong numbers (based on 2 reviews) that this person automatically became a good person to work with/for? Your logic is a mess.

And since you also said that "what if I end up not liking the work I'm doing with the prof there, then will have to find someone else to work with", it suggested that you just wanna study in a program and work for someone that is absolutely perfect for you that you don't have to deal with any obstacles (during your 5 years) before you commit yourself to a program.

Good luck with finding any person to work with.

[R Deckard]

I seriously doubt that any graduate students would evaluate their professors on ratemyprofessor.com. If anything, graduate coursework tend to be unorganized. Besides, just because one may not be a good lecturer doesn't mean that he/she isn't a good communicator (person-to-person / small group).

Looking at both threads that you posted on tgc, I honestly think that you shouldn't even go to graduate school for you are STILL talking about "which school should I go" based on preposterous reasons/factors (almost) 3 MONTHS after you made your first post. I mean, really?

Just on this page, you evaluate the schools based on:

- rankings

- locations

- reputation

- assumptions (e.g. if the professor is this, than you can't deal with him/her.)

that assumption one also showed that you are biased towards one over the other. Without even asking "what do you mean by 'if he's not clear'", why wouldn't the advisor from UCLA be "frustrating to work with"? Is it because ratemyprofessor.com told you that this advisor has strong numbers (based on 2 reviews) that this person automatically became a good person to work with/for? Your logic is a mess.

And since you also said that "what if I end up not liking the work I'm doing with the prof there, then will have to find someone else to work with", it suggested that you just wanna study in a program and work for someone that is absolutely perfect for you that you don't have to deal with any obstacles (during your 5 years) before you commit yourself to a program.

Good luck with finding any person to work with.

Completely agree. It's been about eight months since applications starting going out, and the decisions is still based on almost completely arbitrary factors. I'm surprised the schools haven't pulled their offers yet.

[wine in coffee cups]

This might sound a little weird, bear with me. Have you considered pressing pause on going back to school and maybe applying for, like, a job at Goldman Sachs or McKinsey or some other "elite" employer?

I'm getting the sense that you really value prestige, both in and in responding to it in others (#entry1057863770). You what you want to do To me, it sounds like you would get the most personal fulfillment out of working at a status-obsessed place like GS where you can hobnob with a bunch of Ivy League alumni, make a ton of money living in a big city of your choosing, and set yourself on track to attend the name brand business school of your dreams.

This wouldn't require nearly the degree of focus and commitment that a PhD would and would keep a lot of doors open for you afterwards. You are pushing all the hiring buttons of those top financial and consulting firms: female, marathon runner, math/CS major from an expensive private university people have heard of, lots of confusingly unrelated but prestigious-sounding research opportunities, previous liberal arts education. You totally have the skill set they are looking for: programming experience, data analysis, striving tendencies. After just a couple of years, you'd be almost assured of getting into at least some of HBS, Stanford, Wharton, Sloan, or Booth. Everyone you'd be around would validate you in all the ways you like to be validated. Is this plan not a much better fit for your personality and goals than slogging away at PhD from a public school in a city you are not 100% thrilled with working on an area of research you aren't fully invested in with an advisor you turn out to hate?

[anon1]

wine in coffee cups, wow. that is an amazing analysis. one of the people I respect and admire most is a close relative of mine who is an executive at GS and went to HBS. If I could have her life, I probably would. The only issue is that she's already made it so far... I might always feel like a failure in comparison. But it's something to think about. it's crazy that you made that leap. thanks for sharing your thoughts.

[anon1]

I also-- despite my prestige chasing-- really truly do want to add to peoples' knowledge of the world. I want to uncover new science.

[comp12]

When is the deadline for your decision? It is July.

[SymmetryOfImperfection]

I also-- despite my prestige chasing-- really truly do want to add to peoples' knowledge of the world. I want to uncover new science.

Go for the elite bank job.

[ponylevel]

I like the downvotes on basically all of the OP's posts (not).

A clear lack of understanding of her background is prevalent in basically all the responses.

She's asian, probably has overbearing parents (Phillip Guo did his PhD at MIT in CS, see his many posts on this subject here - http://www.pgbovine.net/asian-parents.htm) and simply has different values than most of you.

Unless you're asian, you won't get it. Asians don't have equal opportunity for advancement in a foreign country without "prestige".

Granted, gauging your advisor from a shaky index like ratemyprofessor is beyond stupid.

I recommend the OP to apply to prestigious master's programs, accumulate more research experience and go from there. Top PhD programs in CS are beyond hard to get into unless you're a prodigy or a stellar fit. I would also warn the OP to lean more towards the side of what you're inherently interested in and less to the side of "what do employers want to see / what looks prestigious".

[wine in coffee cups]

A clear lack of understanding of her background is prevalent in basically all the responses.

She's asian, probably has overbearing parents (Phillip Guo did his PhD at MIT in CS, see his many posts on this subject here - http://www.pgbovine....ian-parents.htm) and simply has different values than most of you.

Unless you're asian, you won't get it. Asians don't have equal opportunity for advancement in a foreign country without "prestige".

Except she is not of Asian ancestry.