Rejection woes.....

[Ancient_DNA]

This thread is quite depressing.  I was rejected from my home school, twice, both by profs I had taken many classes with, gotten all A's in their classes, and done independent research with them, and they wrote my LORs.  I also got rejected from a school I was very excited about attending, but then I found out I never had a chance to begin with, since my POI there hasn't taken a new grad student in over 5 years.  Both of these rejections came on the same day, so I was a little bummed to be honest.  However, I got into the school I was rejected from last year as well with a killer funding package with two amazing supervisors, and I got into my never-thought-in-a-million-years school too.  Keep your heads up, but I know how much it sucks since I was rejected all around last year too.

 

I also wanted to touch on the subject of eligibility for grad school.  This thread (and the results page) has had a lot of students saying how they figured they were shoe-in's, great fits for programs, etc.  I guess I question the authenticity of that.  Not to be hostile or rude, but I am confused why so many people apply to long-shot schools?  I applied to one (for two programs mind you), but the application was free to do, and I was able to use the all of the same resources like letters and transcripts for both.  Why needlessly put yourself through torture of applying to strictly Ivy League grad programs, or only with rockstar profs when many of you have self-admittedly low(er) test scores, GPAs, or have little research commonalities or experience with the school/dept/program/prof in question?  If the application is fee is so expensive and you know they only take less than 10 students per year, why bother applying if you know your research isn't even in the realm of possibility for acceptance?

 

Does this problem extend from both ends I guess is another question to ask.  To profs and departments have a hard time saying "No. Do not apply, you will not be a good fit here" for fear of offending someone or losing on that extra $100-$200 application fee, but crush the dreams of a budding student in the process?  I have only ever heard of two people being told not to apply to certain programs, myself for a project before I changed it, and was then encouraged to apply (and got rejected anyways haha) and by my friend.  I think undergrad educations push higher level degrees to freely, and it has become the "new" standard of education everyone has got to have.  I know so many people who have no business even applying to grad school with very low GPAs, low independence, low work drive, etc.  But they apply because it's the next step in their education, or so they're told.  I feel like now it is a push like we see in high school where "everyone must go to University, it is a must" when so many students would excel in trade schools or colleges and be much happier.  The same goes with grad school now.  There is a large push towards getting an MA, PhD, Post-doc, etc., when so many students would be much better off holding onto their BA and going out into the workforce since they lack the most basic requirements to even be admitted but they just have to go because it's what is done.

 

Any thoughts on this?

[maelia8]

I also wanted to touch on the subject of eligibility for grad school.  This thread (and the results page) has had a lot of students saying how they figured they were shoe-in's, great fits for programs, etc.  I guess I question the authenticity of that.  Not to be hostile or rude, but I am confused why so many people apply to long-shot schools?  I applied to one (for two programs mind you), but the application was free to do, and I was able to use the all of the same resources like letters and transcripts for both.  Why needlessly put yourself through torture of applying to strictly Ivy League grad programs, or only with rockstar profs when many of you have self-admittedly low(er) test scores, GPAs, or have little research commonalities or experience with the school/dept/program/prof in question?  If the application is fee is so expensive and you know they only take less than 10 students per year, why bother applying if you know your research isn't even in the realm of possibility for acceptance?

 

I think that the issue is twofold. Firstly, I think that many students are told by advisors that they will never get a good job unless they get into a top-10 program, which is something we're told in a lot of fields, especially in the humanities. There is a widespread belief that if you don't get into a school with a big name in that field, or a big name in general (such as a member of the Ivy League), you will be passed up for jobs, and I think this is why many students apply to programs that are technically out of their reach. They think that if they don't get into a top-10 program, then they will never get a job in that field anyway, so why bother applying anywhere else? This means that more people apply to programs that they are likely to get rejected from after not even having considered programs that they could have gotten into, merely because those programs are lacking in "rockstar" professors or a big brand name.

 

Secondly, because most of these extremely exclusive programs accept such small numbers of students, there is a strong "lottery" feeling to the process. Obviously, many more qualified students will be rejected than will be accepted, since the school cannot take take near as many students as are qualified (due to funding, exclusivity, etc). Even if you might not have a stellar GPA, top GRE scores, amazing LORs, a great SOP, and postgrad field-related work experience, applying takes on a gambling aspect, since even most of the people who DO have those things don't get in. Since there is no magic GPA cutoff or GRE score that guarantees acceptance and it's hard to know how good your LORs and SOP are when compared to those of others, I can easily see how someone could convince themselves that they are actually a quite competitive candidate when they might not be, or vice versa (like me - my stats weren't too shabby, but I convinced myself that I was horrifically under qualified, everyone was better than me, and I probably wouldn't get in anyway when I actually was accepted and wait listed at several top-10 programs in my field). Especially if you're a few years out from undergrad, it can be really hard to find anyone to compare notes with or get advice from, so an application created in isolation that the applicant thinks is stellar might not be as competitive as they hoped. 

[Ancient_DNA]

I think that the issue is twofold. Firstly, I think that many students are told by advisors that they will never get a good job unless they get into a top-10 program, which is something we're told in a lot of fields, especially in the humanities. There is a widespread belief that if you don't get into a school with a big name in that field, or a big name in general (such as a member of the Ivy League), you will be passed up for jobs, and I think this is why many students apply to programs that are technically out of their reach. They think that if they don't get into a top-10 program, then they will never get a job in that field anyway, so why bother applying anywhere else? This means that more people apply to programs that they are likely to get rejected from after not even having considered programs that they could have gotten into, merely because those programs are lacking in "rockstar" professors or a big brand name.

 

Secondly, because most of these extremely exclusive programs accept such small numbers of students, there is a strong "lottery" feeling to the process. Obviously, many more qualified students will be rejected than will be accepted, since the school cannot take take near as many students as are qualified (due to funding, exclusivity, etc). Even if you might not have a stellar GPA, top GRE scores, amazing LORs, a great SOP, and postgrad field-related work experience, applying takes on a gambling aspect, since even most of the people who DO have those things don't get in. Since there is no magic GPA cutoff or GRE score that guarantees acceptance and it's hard to know how good your LORs and SOP are when compared to those of others, I can easily see how someone could convince themselves that they are actually a quite competitive candidate when they might not be, or vice versa (like me - my stats weren't too shabby, but I convinced myself that I was horrifically under qualified, everyone was better than me, and I probably wouldn't get in anyway when I actually was accepted and wait listed at several top-10 programs in my field). Especially if you're a few years out from undergrad, it can be really hard to find anyone to compare notes with or get advice from, so an application created in isolation that the applicant thinks is stellar might not be as competitive as they hoped. 

 

That makes a lot of sense, thanks for taking the time to provide such a detailed reply.  I'm a Canadian, and I guess it is different here than in the states, we don't really seem to push the "big" schools so much.  Then again, I didn't really learn much about grad school until my 3rd year anyways.  Maybe I sheltered myself from the process, but all the stat comparisons and test scores and top-10, top-20 rankings etc. is just mind boggling to me.

[HKsai]

That makes a lot of sense, thanks for taking the time to provide such a detailed reply.  I'm a Canadian, and I guess it is different here than in the states, we don't really seem to push the "big" schools so much.  Then again, I didn't really learn much about grad school until my 3rd year anyways.  Maybe I sheltered myself from the process, but all the stat comparisons and test scores and top-10, top-20 rankings etc. is just mind boggling to me.

Trust me I have a lot of experiences with those people. All the people at my school are like "pre-med" major. I still remember freshmen year, I got talked down so much because I'm a psychology major and not a hard core science major. All my friends are like..."if you need a doctor in the future, you can always find me" I was like...we are all freshmen, you haven't taken the MCAT, haven't gotten in the med school etc. I remember this one girl, she was like "crap I have 3 Cs and failing my orgo class, i guess i should get a clinical psychology Ph.D as backup just in case if i don't get into grad school.

 

I have another friend who has an okay GPA, crap GRE scores, pretty good recommednations and no research experience. She applied to like the top 20 schools and didn't even get an interview. She was like, "I have an amazing recommendations, how come I didn't get into at least ONE program." Like maelia8 said, a lot of people treat grad school like the lottery and they feel like they deserve to have the spot because they have decent grades. It also doesn't help that most of the professors are so "encouraging" (at least in my school) which fuels the delusion of the students. The professor that I'm really close with literally just told me "your GRE score isn't very good, have you tried thinking a master program that can help you achieve what you wanna do?"

 

This year I met a friend who had one research experience, 40-50%-tile GRE score applied to Harvard, Yale and Standard for their social psych PhD. and told me that, "well I don't even like psychology but most grad students seem like they don't want a PhD anyway. They just do it for the money." Rejected across the board and went to her master interview at our school's business school (which she considers a shit school because it's not Wharton). She went to the interview thought it was an MBA program (yes from psych to MBA, you can see the dedication).

 

Honestly, applying to master program is the best choice i've ever made. I hate research (i've been in 5 labs and did 3 internships at other universities and hospital). Now I get to do what I love without forcing myself to do something that I don't like to do or I can never achieve. I have to constantly tell myself not to give up when all my friends that didn't get into grad school keep telling me that, "well if i applied to your program, i'm sure i will get in" or "you got waitlisted by northwestern? I guess now you are stuck with NYU."

Edited April 16, 2014 by HKsai

[Ancient_DNA]

Trust me I have a lot of experiences with those people. All the people at my school are like "pre-med" major. I still remember freshmen year, I got talked down so much because I'm a psychology major and not a hard core science major. All my friends are like..."if you need a doctor in the future, you can always find me" I was like...we are all freshmen, you haven't taken the MCAT, haven't gotten in the med school etc. I remember this one girl, she was like "crap I have 3 Cs and failing my orgo class, i guess i should get a clinical psychology Ph.D as backup just in case if i don't get into grad school.

 

I have another friend who has an okay GPA, crap GRE scores, pretty good recommednations and no research experience. She applied to like the top 20 schools and didn't even get an interview. She was like, "I have an amazing recommendations, how come I didn't get into at least ONE program." Like maelia8 said, a lot of people treat grad school like the lottery and they feel like they deserve to have the spot because they have decent grades. It also doesn't help that most of the professors are so "encouraging" (at least in my school) which fuels the delusion of the students. The professor that I'm really close with literally just told me "your GRE score isn't very good, have you tried thinking a master program that can help you achieve what you wanna do?"

 

This year I met a friend who had one research experience, 40-50%-tile GRE score applied to Harvard, Yale and Standard for their social psych PhD. and told me that, "well I don't even like psychology but most grad students seem like they don't want a PhD anyway. They just do it for the money." Rejected across the board and went to her master interview at our school's business school (which she considers a shit school because it's not Wharton). She went to the interview thought it was an MBA program (yes from psych to MBA, you can see the dedication).

 

Honestly, applying to master program is the best choice i've ever made. I hate research (i've been in 5 labs and did 3 internships at other universities and hospital). Now I get to do what I love without forcing myself to do something that I don't like to do or I can never achieve. I have to constantly tell myself not to give up when all my friends that didn't get into grad school keep telling me that, "well if i applied to your program, i'm sure i will get in" or "you got waitlisted by northwestern? I guess now you are stuck with NYU."

 

That right there is the confusing part to me.  Here in Canada, it goes Masters, then PhD, then post-doc, in a natural progression.  In very, very, very rare occasions do people skip MA entirely and go straight into a doctoral program.  They have to be the cream of the crop, I know of only one girl in my group who did that.  She had A's across the board, did a double major in Physical Anthropology and Life Sciences (a general science degree that covers chem, physics, biochem, math etc), ran a field school in her undergrad, did two undergrad summer research projects, wrote independent studies with the top two profs in my department, volunteered in labs, and the list goes on.  It did not surprise me that she got boosted to a PhD. 

 

I guess my other question is, in the US, is a Master's frowned upon, instead of a PhD?  I see a lot of people ignoring the MA level entirely on this board and shooting right for PhD.  Is this normal, or is there a lot of delusion out there, like you hint at in your post?  My older sister who lives in Oklahoma and is married has a friend that is doing his PhD in Boston (what school, I have forgotten).  At any rate, my sister tells me that in the US, Master's programs are like an extension of your Bachelors, and "grad school", like the grad school that I know of, which is like  a job interview, doesn't really start until PhD.  Any truth to this as well?  I looked into some US MA programs, and it seemed they were primarily course work (at least for the Forensic/Physical anthro programs I examined), is this true as well?

Edited April 16, 2014 by Ancient_DNA

[kimmibeans]

That right there is the confusing part to me.  Here in Canada, it goes Masters, then PhD, then post-doc, in a natural progression.  In very, very, very rare occasions do people skip MA entirely and go straight into a doctoral program.  They have to be the cream of the crop, I know of only one girl in my group who did that.  She had A's across the board, did a double major in Physical Anthropology and Life Sciences (a general science degree that covers chem, physics, biochem, math etc), ran a field school in her undergrad, did two undergrad summer research projects, wrote independent studies with the top two profs in my department, volunteered in labs, and the list goes on.  It did not surprise me that she got boosted to a PhD. 

 

I guess my other question is, in the US, is a Master's frowned upon, instead of a PhD?  I see a lot of people ignoring the MA level entirely on this board and shooting right for PhD.  Is this normal, or is there a lot of delusion out there, like you hint at in your post?  My older sister who lives in Oklahoma and is married has a friend that is doing his PhD in Boston (what school, I have forgotten).  At any rate, my sister tells me that in the US, Master's programs are like an extension of your Bachelors, and "grad school", like the grad school that I know of, which is like  a job interview, doesn't really start until PhD.  Any truth to this as well?  I looked into some US MA programs, and it seemed they were primarily course work (at least for the Forensic/Physical anthro programs I examined), is this true as well?

 

Yeah, that sounds about right. Masters programs are mostly about taking graduate level course work to expand your knowledge although some programs do contain a thesis component. A Master's isn't frowned upon here in the states, but in many disciplines you have to repeat all the work from your masters for your PhD. In fact, some schools actually award you a masters once you pass your qualifying exam, but it varies. I know in my field a Master's is recommended if you have never done research, your undergrad grades were not all that good, or if you don't know if you are ready/would actually like a PhD. For the record, many people here in the U.S are surprised to hear you don't need a Master's to move on to a PhD, but it is really only recommended if you have good grades and a good amount of research experience.

[HKsai]

That right there is the confusing part to me.  Here in Canada, it goes Masters, then PhD, then post-doc, in a natural progression.  In very, very, very rare occasions do people skip MA entirely and go straight into a doctoral program.  They have to be the cream of the crop, I know of only one girl in my group who did that.  She had A's across the board, did a double major in Physical Anthropology and Life Sciences (a general science degree that covers chem, physics, biochem, math etc), ran a field school in her undergrad, did two undergrad summer research projects, wrote independent studies with the top two profs in my department, volunteered in labs, and the list goes on.  It did not surprise me that she got boosted to a PhD. 

 

I guess my other question is, in the US, is a Master's frowned upon, instead of a PhD?  I see a lot of people ignoring the MA level entirely on this board and shooting right for PhD.  Is this normal, or is there a lot of delusion out there, like you hint at in your post?  My older sister who lives in Oklahoma and is married has a friend that is doing his PhD in Boston (what school, I have forgotten).  At any rate, my sister tells me that in the US, Master's programs are like an extension of your Bachelors, and "grad school", like the grad school that I know of, which is like  a job interview, doesn't really start until PhD.  Any truth to this as well?  I looked into some US MA programs, and it seemed they were primarily course work (at least for the Forensic/Physical anthro programs I examined), is this true as well?

 

Sorry if my post makes it sound like no one can get into a PhD program straight out from undergrad (I do have friends that are going to PhD this coming fall and they are seniors now). I think my frustration comes from what maelia8 said that most students think that they can't get a job if they have a PhD. This delusion couples with the mentality that "I'm not a good student if I don't do graduate work" "force" the student to apply for PhD without preparation what they are getting themselves into. I can tell you SOOO SOOO many stories about these delusion. I had at least like 10+ people asked me why don't I do PhD, and I kept telling them I HATE research but they were like "but you can become a doctor." I was like ," I'm not spending 5/6+ years doing things that I don't want to do!"

 

The master degree that I'm pursuing is a terminal degree (like social work and other counseling degree). Obviously, I'm not prevented to apply to PhD afterward if I want to. Unlike what kimmibeans said, my degree is ENTIRELY different than my undergraduate work (since there's no counseling degree in undergraduate and counselign is NOT psychology). In the middle of my first year, I will start seeing clients and reviewing tapes and stuff. NONE of this will happen in any undergraudate level courses. I can't say for other fields like chemistry. Because I was going to apply for master in psych and my professors said it's for people that wanna equip themselves with better skills to prepare to apply for PhD later (similar to what kimmiebeans said).

 

Yeah, that sounds about right. Masters programs are mostly about taking graduate level course work to expand your knowledge although some programs do contain a thesis component. A Master's isn't frowned upon here in the states, but in many disciplines you have to repeat all the work from your masters for your PhD. In fact, some schools actually award you a masters once you pass your qualifying exam, but it varies. I know in my field a Master's is recommended if you have never done research, your undergrad grades were not all that good, or if you don't know if you are ready/would actually like a PhD. For the record, many people here in the U.S are surprised to hear you don't need a Master's to move on to a PhD, but it is really only recommended if you have good grades and a good amount of research experience.

 

Btw do you have any tips on having a chinchilla as pet? I really wanna get one when I go to grad school but they seem "complicated" to have.

[kimmibeans]

Sorry if my post makes it sound like no one can get into a PhD program straight out from undergrad (I do have friends that are going to PhD this coming fall and they are seniors now). I think my frustration comes from what maelia8 said that most students think that they can't get a job if they have a PhD. This delusion couples with the mentality that "I'm not a good student if I don't do graduate work" "force" the student to apply for PhD without preparation what they are getting themselves into. I can tell you SOOO SOOO many stories about these delusion. I had at least like 10+ people asked me why don't I do PhD, and I kept telling them I HATE research but they were like "but you can become a doctor." I was like ," I'm not spending 5/6+ years doing things that I don't want to do!"

 

The master degree that I'm pursuing is a terminal degree (like social work and other counseling degree). Obviously, I'm not prevented to apply to PhD afterward if I want to. Unlike what kimmibeans said, my degree is ENTIRELY different than my undergraduate work (since there's no counseling degree in undergraduate and counselign is NOT psychology). In the middle of my first year, I will start seeing clients and reviewing tapes and stuff. NONE of this will happen in any undergraudate level courses. I can't say for other fields like chemistry. Because I was going to apply for master in psych and my professors said it's for people that wanna equip themselves with better skills to prepare to apply for PhD later (similar to what kimmiebeans said).

 

 

Btw do you have any tips on having a chinchilla as pet? I really wanna get one when I go to grad school but they seem "complicated" to have.

Lol, unfortunately the chinchilla in that picture is not my chinchilla, just an old wallpaper from my computer. However, I am looking into getting either a chinchilla or a rabbit as a pet since dogs are not allowed in my housing complex.

I guess what a Master's degree means varies by field as different fields have different requirements and different levels of training, so there is no straightforward answer as to what a Master's translates to in general.

[HKsai]

Lol, unfortunately the chinchilla in that picture is not my chinchilla, just an old wallpaper from my computer. However, I am looking into getting either a chinchilla or a rabbit as a pet since dogs are not allowed in my housing complex.

I guess what a Master's degree means varies by field as different fields have different requirements and different levels of training, so there is no straightforward answer as to what a Master's translates to in general.

Aww you tricked me lol................jk