Completely Clueless on my Competitiveness

[TheCommodore]

I'm a late undergrad looking for guidance on where I should be aiming (if anywhere) for the future in stats, biostats, or biomath.

Several questions here, so bear with me, I really appreciate it.

School:I go to a less-than-stellar Midwest commuter school (rank less than #50 of regional midwest universities), and I'm extremely nervous that this instantly kills my applications.

Reserach Experience:I have 5 years of great lab experience at a very respected (disproportionately to what you'd expect from the school) biomedical lab in its specialty areas. I've led a couple of projects, been highly involved in the nuts-and-bolts of research since day 1, and I'll have at least 1 first authorship paper when I'm done. Biology was my first love, but the farther I got, the more I realized that I needed (and wanted) a better background in stats to feel comfortable with the research I was doing. I'm better at biology, but I have more fun doing stats.

GPA/Classes:My majors are cell/molecular bio (GPA > 3.9) and math (GPA >3.9) with a minor in chem, with classes in advanced biology (cell, immunology, pain mechanisms, diabetes pathology, neurological diseases), calc I-III, differential equations, linear algebra 1, stats theory I-II, applied stats, intro real analysis, abstract algebra, complex analysis, c++, and decent experience with R. My concerns here are a B+ in stat theory I (and maybe theory II which I'm taking right now) and intro to real analysis, at school as poor as mine I have a feeling this will be looked on like an F at an Ivy League institution. I also don't have the opportunity to take measure theory or another linear algebra class due to few teachers and a strange rotating schedule.

GRE:Not yet taken, I was going to a month ago but I've been so convinced I'm not a good candidate, I haven't felt like putting down the money without some idea of whether I'm on the right track. Judging by the scores of friends with similar skills and background, I'm looking at ~760 quantitative, 550+ verbal (or whatever the equivalent is now).

Letters of Rec:The professor in charge of the lab will write me a killer letter (although I'm a little worried he has more faith in my ability, especially in math, than I can actually demonstrate in grad school), and my stats professor will probably be helpful for the programs I'm interested in (I did ok (B+ to A) in his classes, but he's foreign and doesn't know me extremely well). For my third letter, I have a choice between a professor who knows me decently well from university math contests and events but I haven't had for classes, another math professor who I've had in class but I don't know extremely well, or a professor I had for critical literature who absolutely loved me (actually wanted to poach me for his program) and would write a glowing recommendation but might not carry weight in math programs. I'm leaning toward the english prof since it shows balance and sets me apart, but advice would be appreciated.

Ambitions:I'm not sure if I should be applying to masters, PhD, or neither, but based on recommendations of my advisor and a couple other professors, I've been looking at applying to PhD programs in stats, biostats, and biomath, with a very quick list of

Stats or Biostats-Minnesota, Washington, Duke, Michigan, Wisconsin

Biomath--UCLA, NC State, Florida State

Ideally, I'd like to go to Minnesota for a few good and a few not-so-good reasons, but I think its still a little ambitious for me. I know these lists are short, but I've done only a few weeks of research because I'm beginning to think they're all reaches.

Any help you can give would go a long way, I've asked several professors their thoughts and they all say shoot for PhD, but the more I read posts here and on application sites, the more confident I am that I won't be competitive. Thanks for your time.

[sisyphus1]

you are a perfect candidate for biostat phd programs -- i think you will be more than competitive at even the very top programs.

[Biostat_Assistant_Prof]

I think you are worrying way too much. Its true a student with a degree from a top 20 institution will have the edge over you given all other things identical, but I highly doubt a B+ at your school is an F somewhere, probably more along the lines of a B-. The top 20 institutions are great and viewed admirably, but there are reasons other than academics, such as financial reasons, that students may not have attended these top institutions. For example, I could have attended Emory as an undergrad, but instead, I went to a large state university because it was significantly cheaper. I'm finishing undergrad completely free of debt because of that.... Overall, as long as you attend an accredited university and performed well, your application won't be immediately shot down simply because of the school name.

Don't take what I said as absolute, but Biostat programs are not exactly drawing in record breaking applications numbers. Given your GPA, LORs, classes taken, and expected GRE school, you'll probably be in the running at any schools phd you apply to for Biostat.

If you're thinking of applying for entrance next fall, you still have time. Most schools have deadlines around mid- December, although a few are early December and a few are in January... If you can take the GRE before the end of November, you should still be able to get the GRE scores to them in time ( at least unofficially for schools with a December, 1st deadline and official scores shortly after)

Edited October 26, 2012 by Noco7

[cyberwulf]

As usual, I'm happy to bang the drum for biostatistics (vs. stats or biomath), but it sounds like you're already leaning that way. Good!

I think sisyphus and Noco might be a touch optimistic in their assessments of your prospects for PhD admission, chiefly because of the main concern you cited in your original post (weak undergraduate institution). Coming from a little-known school doesn't "instantly kill" your chances, but it does mean that other parts of your application will have to be pretty strong to convince adcoms that your performance isn't purely a symptom of big-fish-small-pond syndrome. As always, the devil will be in the details: how well/poorly is your school perceived, how outstanding are your letters, what do your grades in key classes look like, etc.

Without knowing more, I would guess that you are most likely to be "in the discussion" for PhD admission at biostat departments like Minnesota and Michigan. The above details could push you either towards "longshot" or "likely admit". Washington is probably more in the "longshot"-to-"possible" range depending on the above. You should be able to get into all of the major Masters programs.

You might throw apps at a couple of biostat departments from among the following to increase your chances of success a little bit: Emory, UCLA, Brown, Columbia, Penn.

[TheCommodore]

Thanks for the comments. They've made me think more about my original plan, which was to test the waters with a masters (I didn't even realize till months ago that bachelors to PhD was a possibility) and re-evaluate later so I can gain a little momentum and confidence in myself. But, I've had a couple professors say that this isn't always the best, especially if you think you want a PhD eventually. I don't quite get what the harm would be, but I could understand arguing that it might make you look indecisive or unprepared for the big show. Any insight there?

Also, would a lit theory prof's recommendation be too far outside what admissions look for in candidates?

[Biostat_Assistant_Prof]

If your end goal is a PhD, its definitely in your favor to skip the masters and go straight into a PhD program. Not only will this likely save you a year, but more importantly, it will save you a ton of money. Students typically pay for Masters programs, whereas PhD students are likely to receive funding through RA's, TA's, or, fellowships, which come with tuition waivers and stipends.

[victor.s.andrei]

Students typically pay for Masters programs...

Sometimes, they get their employers to pay.

[victor.s.andrei]

I'm a late undergrad looking for guidance on where I should be aiming (if anywhere) for the future in stats, biostats, or biomath.

Several questions here, so bear with me, I really appreciate it.

School:I go to a less-than-stellar Midwest commuter school (rank less than #50 of regional midwest universities), and I'm extremely nervous that this instantly kills my applications.

Reserach Experience:I have 5 years of great lab experience at a very respected (disproportionately to what you'd expect from the school) biomedical lab in its specialty areas. I've led a couple of projects, been highly involved in the nuts-and-bolts of research since day 1, and I'll have at least 1 first authorship paper when I'm done. Biology was my first love, but the farther I got, the more I realized that I needed (and wanted) a better background in stats to feel comfortable with the research I was doing. I'm better at biology, but I have more fun doing stats.

GPA/Classes:My majors are cell/molecular bio (GPA > 3.9) and math (GPA >3.9) with a minor in chem, with classes in advanced biology (cell, immunology, pain mechanisms, diabetes pathology, neurological diseases), calc I-III, differential equations, linear algebra 1, stats theory I-II, applied stats, intro real analysis, abstract algebra, complex analysis, c++, and decent experience with R. My concerns here are a B+ in stat theory I (and maybe theory II which I'm taking right now) and intro to real analysis, at school as poor as mine I have a feeling this will be looked on like an F at an Ivy League institution. I also don't have the opportunity to take measure theory or another linear algebra class due to few teachers and a strange rotating schedule.

GRE:Not yet taken, I was going to a month ago but I've been so convinced I'm not a good candidate, I haven't felt like putting down the money without some idea of whether I'm on the right track. Judging by the scores of friends with similar skills and background, I'm looking at ~760 quantitative, 550+ verbal (or whatever the equivalent is now).

Letters of Rec:The professor in charge of the lab will write me a killer letter (although I'm a little worried he has more faith in my ability, especially in math, than I can actually demonstrate in grad school), and my stats professor will probably be helpful for the programs I'm interested in (I did ok (B+ to A) in his classes, but he's foreign and doesn't know me extremely well). For my third letter, I have a choice between a professor who knows me decently well from university math contests and events but I haven't had for classes, another math professor who I've had in class but I don't know extremely well, or a professor I had for critical literature who absolutely loved me (actually wanted to poach me for his program) and would write a glowing recommendation but might not carry weight in math programs. I'm leaning toward the english prof since it shows balance and sets me apart, but advice would be appreciated.

Ambitions:I'm not sure if I should be applying to masters, PhD, or neither, but based on recommendations of my advisor and a couple other professors, I've been looking at applying to PhD programs in stats, biostats, and biomath, with a very quick list of

Stats or Biostats-Minnesota, Washington, Duke, Michigan, Wisconsin

Biomath--UCLA, NC State, Florida State

Ideally, I'd like to go to Minnesota for a few good and a few not-so-good reasons, but I think its still a little ambitious for me. I know these lists are short, but I've done only a few weeks of research because I'm beginning to think they're all reaches.

Any help you can give would go a long way, I've asked several professors their thoughts and they all say shoot for PhD, but the more I read posts here and on application sites, the more confident I am that I won't be competitive. Thanks for your time.

1. Don't worry about the B+.

2. The GRE is a filtering mechanism. Register for the exam. Take the exam. Don't look back.

3. Get the letter from a professor who knows you well.

4. Your apparent lack of research experience is the weakest part of your application. Get involved in your community **now**: register to attend a conference, join a professional society, read interesting articles in publications in your field.

5. Beware of impostor syndrome.

6. Good luck. Apply. Don't give up.

[cyberwulf]

If your end goal is a PhD, its definitely in your favor to skip the masters and go straight into a PhD program. Not only will this likely save you a year, but more importantly, it will save you a ton of money. Students typically pay for Masters programs, whereas PhD students are likely to receive funding through RA's, TA's, or, fellowships, which come with tuition waivers and stipends.

This is true; the main reason to skip the Masters is because there is typically little funding available for Masters students while most PhD admissions come with a full funding package. One thing to keep in mind is that most programs will consider you for Masters admission if you don't quite make the PhD cut. So, if you're open to starting in the Masters program, be sure to make that clear when you apply (how to do this varies by program; call and ask if you're unsure).