Welcome to the 2013-2014 Cycle

[steedyue]

UCSD has always admitted & funded international students, there's just substantially less money available to assign to them. So, p(admission|American) != p(admission|international). The stats of many of the international students are superior to the domestic ones, it seems.

From what i heard, an international student admitted in 12 was not funded and he finally went to another top 15. But in 13 they funded all incoming international students.

And based on my conversation with Karen, UCSD does have funding for 14' international students.

[anxious2151]

Applicants should expect a response from UCSD in roughly 4 weeks. I received this information directly from the department. Hope it helps!

 

can't wait 4 weeks. must know now               

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

I keep forgetting those of you in the States will likely have tomorrow off. That could also mean little if any action tomorrow (though who knows). I hope you all are planning to do more than I am (namely, watch the previous night's animation domination trifecta).

[cane14]

I would visit Prof. Kaare Strom on Tuesday. He is committee member and we will see how things work out.

Cool, thanks !

[silver_lining]

Applicants should expect a response from UCSD in roughly 4 weeks. I received this information directly from the department. Hope it helps!

Great. Just what I need more time to think of all of the stupid things I've said and written. 

And condolences to the person who was rejected from Melbourne. It is a pretty nice city. 

[RWBG]

From what i heard, an international student admitted in 12 was not funded and he finally went to another top 15. But in 13 they funded all incoming international students.

And based on my conversation with Karen, UCSD does have funding for 14' international students.

 

UCSD has always admitted & funded international students, there's just substantially less money available to assign to them. So, p(admission|American) != p(admission|international). The stats of many of the international students are superior to the domestic ones, it seems.

 

They used to have a message on their website that explicitly stated that they did not fund international students. I know, because I would have applied otherwise. It's hard for me to believe they would have left that statement up if that weren't true.

[silver_lining]

We appear to have a massively lame troll this year. Harvard acceptance? I highly doubt that. The University of San Diego doesn't even have a PhD program according to their website. 

[sylark]

Hmm. I haven't checked, but perhaps they meant to put "UCSD" rather than University of San Diego. Though, the Harvard admissions is highly suspect.

[timeless90]

definitely trolls out there. 

Is it really common to see them in the results page?

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

Anyone willing to claim the Texas A&M? Or are those suspect too?

[jeudepaume]

Congrats to A&M acceptances!

 

Harvard is indeed highly dubious—especially looking at the reported GRE score. It looks like an attempt to make everybody feel (even) a (bigger) failure.

On the other hand, if it's a legit one, then I take my hat off.

 

Also, in regard to A&M reports: is the scholarship really so small?? - 10,000 per year? Are you expected to survive on this for 5 years? 

I optimistically thought that Ph.D. scholarships are at least somewhat bigger. 

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

 

Also, in regard to A&M reports: is the scholarship really so small?? - 10,000 per year? Are you expected to survive on this for 5 years? 

I optimistically thought that Ph.D. scholarships are at least somewhat bigger. 

 

In one of those moments of perfect optimism, I looked into varying stipends. They all vary quite a bit. I believe the OSU baseline is around 12k, for example (but Columbus isn't an expensive city). The Ivy's tend to have some of the higher stipends, but they're also in very expensive areas. Also, this number will typically increase as you move through the ranks and take on more responsibilities (or at least, one of my top choices does this).

 

I do wonder about A&M, though, considering 1.) they run on a 12 month academic calendar and 2.) you have to pay tuition and fees even as a Ph.D. student.

 

Edit: Though if that post is correct, then I'll take it to mean that "full funding" indicates covered tuition and fees?

Edited January 20, 2014 by TakeMyCoffeeBlack

[jeudepaume]

Edit: Though if that post is correct, then I'll take it to mean that "full funding" indicates covered tuition and fees?

 

That's how I interpreted it too, but $10,000 for 12 months still is not a lot. 

As a Master student I had around $11,000/10 months, and I remember feeling quite restricted in my expenditures.

[IRToni]

One of the reasons I did not apply to Wisconsin (aside from my PoI having retired just last year) was their low stipend, honestly...

[sylark]

Congrats to A&M acceptances!

 

Harvard is indeed highly dubious—especially looking at the reported GRE score. It looks like an attempt to make everybody feel (even) a (bigger) failure.

On the other hand, if it's a legit one, then I take my hat off.

 

Also, in regard to A&M reports: is the scholarship really so small?? - 10,000 per year? Are you expected to survive on this for 5 years? 

I optimistically thought that Ph.D. scholarships are at least somewhat bigger. 

 

Assuming the A&M results are not fake...(which I think they are)

 

Usually stipends are given to students that recieve full-tuition funding/waiver. Stipends are used for living expenses; therefore,  $10,000, broken-up into 8 one-month payments of around $1250 per month should more than cover basic living expenses if one is financially responsible, in most cases (if we are talking NYC then this would be a great start, but probably not quite enough). Further, most students don't receive stipends whatsoever. Though it may not seem like much, a tuition waiver + stipend (and perhaps health insurance) that size can enable a grad student to attain a phD without accumulating any debt. Students have the choice to spend money on car payments, more costly housing, expensive new clothes, ect. Stipends generally wouldn't cover those costs; they are mostly enough to pay for housing and food. A grad student I went to undergrad with recieved a $12,000 stipend, or $1,500 a month. She spent $700 on hounsing+utilities, $200 food ($50 per week), and left the rest as a cushion for unexpected expenses for conferences, dates (though she is not one to pay the bill), gym membership ($20), ect. From what she told me, she was able to save about $300-$500 per month, or ($400X8=$3,200). During the summers, she was able to work a little part-time (about 25hrs.) and do her researchship  while using the saved money from her stipend to get through the summers without working long hours (which would detract from her studies) or applying for a costly loan.

 

Yeah, that was a long second-hand anecdote about stipends and frugal graduate student living, but I think it is possible to live off a modest stipend and get through school loan-free if you are willing to make some sacrifices. Though, you won't likely be able to do this and indulge in buying a car, designer clothing, lots and lots of alcohol ect. Many things I know some of my fellow undergraduates feel entitle to despite not having a job. Them loans are gonna bite them in the you know what after they finish school. So, don't worry too much about it, many grad programs invest in their students, especially if they are a TA or RA. (Most programs seek students that have the potential to assist them, and will pay-up to recruit them.)

 

P.S. I would kill to recieve full funding and stipend offer!  And good luck to everyone!

Edited January 20, 2014 by sylark

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

If you would like to join me in panic driven weeping, please do so...now...

 

Don't stress yourself out too much. Enjoy your long weekend! You have the good fortune, of course, of being an early admit to a great program.  

 

Thanks, too, for your information on the timeline at top programs (or at least, possible timeline).

[IRToni]

 

Anyhow, although I know our anxiety levels are already quite high, here's some news. I found out a bit of information re: Stanford. Next week they will cut approximately 400 applications down to 80. Afterward, they will further scrutinize that group of 80 for final spots.*

 

Do we know Stanford's class size? This year's cohort had 18, the year before 21. I'm guessing they make roughly 25 offers then, and put 5 on the waitlist?

[timeless90]

Do we know Stanford's class size? This year's cohort had 18, the year before 21. I'm guessing they make roughly 25 offers then, and put 5 on the waitlist?

 

Do you think stanford's yield will be that high??

[timeless90]

These trolls are significantly impacting my ability to enjoy a solid three-day weekend (Yay, MLK, Jr.!).

Anyhow, although I know our anxiety levels are already quite high, here's some news. I found out a bit of information re: Stanford. Next week they will cut approximately 400 applications down to 80. Afterward, they will further scrutinize that group of 80 for final spots.*

Presumably, other large schools are operating on a similar schedule. This means the veracity of any admissions claims made too swiftly can be called into question (take note, silly trolls claiming spots at top-10 programs with February deadlines).

If you would like to join me in panic driven weeping, please do so...now...

*Source: Live & work @ Stanford. Secondary source information which derived from AdCom grad volunteer.

 

thanks for the info. 

When you say next week, are you referring to the final week of january???

[IRToni]

 

Do you think stanford's yield will be that high??

 

That's the question! Numerically, it might make sense for them to cut down to 80 and then to 40, but 40 for a class of 20 means 50% yield. Do we have any numbers? Wasn't there a spreadsheet going around a couple years ago?

[timeless90]

That's the question! Numerically, it might make sense for them to cut down to 80 and then to 40, but 40 for a class of 20 means 50% yield. Do we have any numbers? Wasn't there a spreadsheet going around a couple years ago?

 

From what I know, princeton selects 40ish with a target class size of ~20. thats approximately 50%

The only question is, if the preference among applicants (or the accepted people, for that matter) is roughly on par across stanford and princeton...haha

[jazzrap]

That's the question! Numerically, it might make sense for them to cut down to 80 and then to 40, but 40 for a class of 20 means 50% yield. Do we have any numbers? Wasn't there a spreadsheet going around a couple years ago?

40 people? It seems overly optimistic for Stanford. A number of other schools probably have 50 percent yield rate in mind when making decisions though. 

[IRToni]

 

That's the question! Numerically, it might make sense for them to cut down to 80 and then to 40, but 40 for a class of 20 means 50% yield. Do we have any numbers? Wasn't there a spreadsheet going around a couple years ago?

 

Stanford has better weather, so maybe their yield is higher?^^ Guess Stanford's will be closer to 40 then, since princeton and Stanford are kind of peer competitors. I'm guessing there will be some people with offers from more than one HYPS school, and then there will be the odd person turning down a HYPS school for other programs (better fit? I think Rochester sometimes got people that turned down HYPS, possibly other top-5 schools), so 50% might not be that far off.

[UCSDPS]

They used to have a message on their website that explicitly stated that they did not fund international students. I know, because I would have applied otherwise. It's hard for me to believe they would have left that statement up if that weren't true.

 

I don't think it's true unless some people are Secret Americans.

[o.j.]

I meant this business week that will commence on Tuesday, after the holiday. While some people may be on campus working today, all will be back by then.

As far as yield goes, I believe that they cut the 80 application figure nearly in half, to 30-40. Not all admitted students accept the offers (those crazies!), leading to a lower yield than what was postulated above.

 

I think that the process of cutting down from 400 to 80 is pretty scary, but I imagine the process of 80 to 40 is potentially even more arbitrary.  

 

P.S. Cautiouslyoptimistic - I hope this is not keeping you awake! It must be 2AM where you are right now.