2014 Applicant Profiles and Admission Results for Statistics/Biostatistics

[Portmanteaujam]

Undergrad Institution: Liberal Arts University in CA
Majors: Mathematics, Computer Science
GPA: 3.6 overall, 3.8 in majors

Type of Student: DWM

GRE General Test:
Q: 164 (89%)
V: 164 (93%)
W: 5.0 (93%)

 

Math GRE: did not take

 

Research Experience: Two poster presentations, one talk with a large audience (250+ folks), one talk with a smaller audience (~40 folks). One published paper in mathematical criminology (applied nonparamteric statistics). Two REUs in mathematical criminology. Currently doing a one-year research fellowship in statistics and labor law at Stanford.
Awards/Honors/Recognitions: Honors program, graduated cum laude, departmental awards, undergraduate scholarships, MAA presentation awards, etc.
Pertinent Activities or Jobs: See "Research Experience". I did a 6-month internship at NASA during the school year, and I've also been a teaching assistant for sections of various engineering courses throughout undergrad.

Letters of Recommendation: 3/4 of my recommendations are very explicitly connected to UCLA. Also, I spent a summer doing an REU there.
Any Miscellaneous Points that Might Help: I applied to some of these schools with success last year.

Research Interests: Nonparametric statistics, machine learning, and applications to social sciences.

 

Applying to Where: (Statistics PhD unless otherwise indicated.)

UC Berkeley - Rejected.

Michigan - Rejected.

CMU (Joint Stats/ML) - Rejected.

UW - Rejected.

Stanford (MS) - Rejected.

UCSB - Received competitive central university fellowship, guaranteed five years funding. Leaning this way.

Oregon State (MS) - Received competitive central university fellowship, guaranteed two years funding.

CU-Boulder (Applied Mathematics) - Received departmental fellowship. I would love to live in Colorado, but funding is not as good as UCSB or OSU...

UCLA - Waitlisted. If I got off the waitlist, this would factor into my decision heavily. I think everybody who isn't rejected is "waitlisted", though, so my optimism isn't exactly brimming over.

Edited March 28, 2014 by allemanau

[Stat Assistant Professor]

To any future applicants reading this: this thread is helpful, but it may be most helpful to talk with your advisers and professors to see what range of schools you should apply to. Looking back, I definitely aimed too high with some of my schools, as my overall undergrad GPA was a bit too low, without any other mitigating factors (e.g. famous LOR writers or LOR writers who collaborate with faculty at the departments I applied to, very high math subject GRE score, substantive research experience with publications, etc.). I don't regret that I tried though, as I managed a waitlist at Berkeley, but my list should not have been as top-heavy as it was (I did, however, have good success with a cluster of schools ranked similarly and ranked somewhere below those top tier schools).

 

The professors you consult with should be able to give you an idea of the strength of your profile, what appropriate schools to apply to, and what types of things can mitigate potential weaknesses in your application (and to what extent these other facors can compensate for those weaknesses).

Edited March 28, 2014 by Applied Math to Stat

[statshopeful2014]

FWIW, from the profiles I have seen here and on mathematicsgre.com, I have noticed that having below a ~3.7 overall GPA seems to make PhD admission to a top 10-15 Stat and top 5 Biostat department unlikely, keeping in mind the GPA bar appears inversely proportional to the prestige of the applicant's institution (a 3.65 from Stanford is better than a 3.8 from Average State U, generally).  Of course, a gpa below that threshold can be overcome by outstanding performance elsewhere in the application (like having attended an elite school, amazing letters, etc.,)  Anyway, for most applicants, the best advice seems that one should apply to a range of schools, with a max/min relative to the schools the applicant feels they would be admitted to.    

 

EDIT: From the few schools that post admissions statistics, I know that UNC-CH Biostat has an average admit GPA of 3.8 and Duke Stat is also around a 3.8.  

Edited March 28, 2014 by statshopeful2014

[Wct213]

FWIW, from the profiles I have seen here and on mathematicsgre.com, I have noticed that having below a ~3.7 overall GPA seems to make PhD admission to a top 10-15 Stat and top 5 Biostat department unlikely, keeping in mind the GPA bar appears inversely proportional to the prestige of the applicant's institution (a 3.65 from Stanford is better than a 3.8 from Average State U, generally).  Of course, a gpa below that threshold can be overcome by outstanding performance elsewhere in the application (like having attended an elite school, amazing letters, etc.,)  Anyway, for most applicants, the best advice seems that one should apply to a range of schools, with a max/min relative to the schools the applicant feels they would be admitted to.    

 

EDIT: From the few schools that post admissions statistics, I know that UNC-CH Biostat has an average admit GPA of 3.8 and Duke Stat is also around a 3.8.  

 

3.9 for UNC-CH biostatistics PhD, actually. 

 

How are international university GPAs converted into the GPAs American schools display on their sites, i.e. could there be inflation due to generous GPA "exchange rates"?

 

Another factor is that high grades tend to positively correlated with good recommendations and high test scores, which makes it hard to tease out the relative importance of grades alone by anecdote/inspection. 

[biostat_prof]

In my department, it is unusual to admit students who don't have mostly (if not entirely) A's in their advanced math courses unless you're an underrepresented minority. This isn't a hard and fast rule, though. If you're coming from (for example) Chicago or CMU (two good undergraduate programs that are known for grade deflation), we'll be much more forgiving of lower grades. And recommendations are very important for providing context. A person with a few B's but with a recommendation letter saying that this is the highest GPA in the department in recent years will be viewed more favorably than someone with all A's at a school that hands out A's like candy. But in general it's going to be tough to be admitted without a very high GPA unless you have some really strong letters or something else that sets your application apart (or you're an underrepresented minority, in which case it's a completely different game).

 

At my department, we have so little funding for foreign students these days that honestly we pretty much don't admit foreign students unless they come from a couple universities that are well-known to produce excellent students (Tsinghua, Peking, Hong Kong University, and Indian Statistical Institute jump to mind immediately; there may be a few others). If you didn't go to one of those universities, well, I hope you have recommendation letters saying that you're the best student in history and you have a couple JASA papers on your CV, because that's probably the only way you have a chance. We could probably fill our quota of foreign students several times over with only students from Tsinghua/Peking, so there just isn't much incentive to take a chance on students from a school we've never heard of. If you're a foreign national that attended a U.S. university, well, you'll still be considered, but there is almost no margin for error. Your GPA, test scores, and recommendations all need to be just about perfect.

[Stat Assistant Professor]

Yeah, although my overall undergrad GPA was a little bit on the lower end, my grades in math/stat (and engineering and CS) classes were all A or A-. My undergrad also has a reputation for grade deflation, so that is likely why the overall undergrad GPA did not -completely- kill my chances.

[Y.T. Safire]

In my department, it is unusual to admit students who don't have mostly (if not entirely) A's in their advanced math courses unless you're an underrepresented minority. This isn't a hard and fast rule, though. If you're coming from (for example) Chicago or CMU (two good undergraduate programs that are known for grade deflation), we'll be much more forgiving of lower grades. And recommendations are very important for providing context. A person with a few B's but with a recommendation letter saying that this is the highest GPA in the department in recent years will be viewed more favorably than someone with all A's at a school that hands out A's like candy. But in general it's going to be tough to be admitted without a very high GPA unless you have some really strong letters or something else that sets your application apart (or you're an underrepresented minority, in which case it's a completely different game).

 

At my department, we have so little funding for foreign students these days that honestly we pretty much don't admit foreign students unless they come from a couple universities that are well-known to produce excellent students (Tsinghua, Peking, Hong Kong University, and Indian Statistical Institute jump to mind immediately; there may be a few others). If you didn't go to one of those universities, well, I hope you have recommendation letters saying that you're the best student in history and you have a couple JASA papers on your CV, because that's probably the only way you have a chance. We could probably fill our quota of foreign students several times over with only students from Tsinghua/Peking, so there just isn't much incentive to take a chance on students from a school we've never heard of. If you're a foreign national that attended a U.S. university, well, you'll still be considered, but there is almost no margin for error. Your GPA, test scores, and recommendations all need to be just about perfect.

 

A couple of JASA papers...... Isn't that too extreme? I did not even see such publications on the CV of PhD graduates or even junior faculty members.

[cyberwulf]

A couple of JASA papers...... Isn't that too extreme? I did not even see such publications on the CV of PhD graduates or even junior faculty members.

 

I think biostat_prof is trying to make the point that it's extremely hard to get into a top 10 biostat program as an (overseas) international student unless you attended one of a very small number of "elite" foreign institutions. Sure, 2 JASA papers is an exaggeration, but largely irrelevant to the point; we would of course be impressed even if had "only" a first-authored Biometrics paper, but it's basically unheard-of for applicants to have methodological publications when they apply.

[Y.T. Safire]

I think biostat_prof is trying to make the point that it's extremely hard to get into a top 10 biostat program as an (overseas) international student unless you attended one of a very small number of "elite" foreign institutions. Sure, 2 JASA papers is an exaggeration, but largely irrelevant to the point; we would of course be impressed even if had "only" a first-authored Biometrics paper, but it's basically unheard-of for applicants to have methodological publications when they apply.

 

Thanks for your comment, cyberwulf. I understand the point biostat_prof was trying to make and I appreciate one sharing one's insight as an insider. I was just hoping to get relatively moderate comment with my previous post. I believe biostat_prof, as a professor, will be happy to encourage students to get the best opportunities they could have instead of discouraging them from even trying the top 10 programs. I hope I have clarified things. 

[a563]

Recently accepted an offer, so I figured I should post my results here.

 

Undergrad Institution: Canadian university, fairly well-known for mathematics and statistics

Major(s): Statistics 
Minor(s): Pure Mathematics
GPA: 3.78 (based on WES evaluation)

Type of Student: Canadian citizen, male, minority

GRE General Test:
Q: 166 (93%)
V: 165 (95%)
W: 4.5 (78%)

GRE Subject Test in Mathematics: Not taken
 

Programs Applying: Biostatistics PhD

Research Experience: 2 full-time and 1 part-time with stats professors at my school. Potential co-authorship on 1-2 papers.
Awards/Honors/Recognitions: Dean's List for several semesters, undergraduate research award
Pertinent Activities or Jobs: TA for a few courses, 1 year's work experience in analytics at a tech company  

Letters of Recommendation: All three from research supervisors
Any Miscellaneous Points that Might Help: Taken a few grad stat classes

Applying to Where: (all Biostatistics PhD)
Washington - Admitted with funding (accepted offer)
Michigan - Admitted to MS program with funding

North Carolina - Admitted with no word on funding

Harvard - Rejected after phone interview

UC Berkeley - Rejected 

Minnesota - Waitlisted

[biostat_prof]

Thanks for your comment, cyberwulf. I understand the point biostat_prof was trying to make and I appreciate one sharing one's insight as an insider. I was just hoping to get relatively moderate comment with my previous post. I believe biostat_prof, as a professor, will be happy to encourage students to get the best opportunities they could have instead of discouraging them from even trying the top 10 programs. I hope I have clarified things. 

 

Just to be clear, I am only speaking for my own department that can only admit a very small number of international applicants for various reasons. Given that competition for this very small number of slots is so intense, we simply don't admit international students who attended schools that we're not familiar with unless their files are absolutely extraordinary. (I can't remember this happening even once in the past 5-6 years.) This certainly isn't true everywhere, however. Historically I know Stanford admitted very few domestic students because they have plenty of money (and as a private school they don't have to worry about in-state tuition) and the applications from overseas are generally stronger. Having said that, at virtually any school it will be much more difficult to be admitted as a foreign student simply due to the fact that there are many more foreign applicants and some funding options (particularly NIH training grants) are only open to U.S. citizens/permanent residents. It's even worse at state schools, since foreign students are usually never eligible for in-state tuition, making them even more expensive. So my goal is not to discourage anyone from applying, but I also want people to be realistic about their chances. If you are a foreign applicant and your credentials are anything less than extraordinary, you should apply very, very broadly. And honestly, if you attended a foreign institution that doesn't have a track record of sending students to top-ranked PhD programs in the U.S., you should look at MS programs as well, because you may have trouble finding any PhD program willing to admit you with funding if they aren't familiar with your school.

[echlori]

Just to be clear, I am only speaking for my own department that can only admit a very small number of international applicants for various reasons. Given that competition for this very small number of slots is so intense, we simply don't admit international students who attended schools that we're not familiar with unless their files are absolutely extraordinary. (I can't remember this happening even once in the past 5-6 years.) This certainly isn't true everywhere, however. Historically I know Stanford admitted very few domestic students because they have plenty of money (and as a private school they don't have to worry about in-state tuition) and the applications from overseas are generally stronger. Having said that, at virtually any school it will be much more difficult to be admitted as a foreign student simply due to the fact that there are many more foreign applicants and some funding options (particularly NIH training grants) are only open to U.S. citizens/permanent residents. It's even worse at state schools, since foreign students are usually never eligible for in-state tuition, making them even more expensive. So my goal is not to discourage anyone from applying, but I also want people to be realistic about their chances. If you are a foreign applicant and your credentials are anything less than extraordinary, you should apply very, very broadly. And honestly, if you attended a foreign institution that doesn't have a track record of sending students to top-ranked PhD programs in the U.S., you should look at MS programs as well, because you may have trouble finding any PhD program willing to admit you with funding if they aren't familiar with your school.

 

Thanks, I kinda wish I had read this 2 years ago, but I'll probably apply to just MS programs next year.

[ashramsoji]

Just heard from my first school so I thought I'd add my info here:

 

Undergrad Institution: Liberal Arts school, semi-ivy
Major(s): Political Economy & English

Minor(s): Asian Studies
GPA: 3.8
Type of Student: Domestic White Male

GRE General Test:
Q: 167 (95%)
V: 163 (91%)
W: 4.5 (78%)

Program Applying: Statistics

Research Experience: 6 years working for a company that does a lot of survey research, survey methodology, and social science research work
Awards/Honors/Recognitions: Dean's list in college, presentation at a User Experience conference
Letters of Recommendation: 2 from graduate statistics professors for classes taken as non-degree student, 1 from undergard econ stats professor, 1 from owner of company with PhD Pysch and many publications

Any Miscellaneous Points that Might Help: pretty good professional growth, high GPA, aced both of my graduate level statistics courses

Applying to Where:

University of Maryland (UMD) -
Georgetown - accepted 4/8
George Washington (GW) -
 

[mittensmitten895]

Based on my conversations with other admitted students, it seems like this board skews heavily towards the "traditional" PhD applicants.  I know it would take all of about 10 seconds for certain people to figure out who I am based on this information, but I'm nevertheless putting my profile out there in the name of sample representativeness.

 

Undergrad Institution: Big state school (ranked 70's)
Major(s):  Microbiology, with medical/public health focus

Minor(s): 
GPA: 3.67

Type of Student: DWF

Grad Institution: University of Michigan

Concentration: Biostatistics MS, Epidemiology MPH

GPA: 4.0 (A+ = 4.3, but max cumulative GPA allowed is 4.0)

 

GRE General Test:
Q: 800 (94th)
V: 770 (99th)
W: 4.5 (67th)
GRE Subject Test in Mathematics: N/A

 

Math/stat preparation: 4.0 in Honors Calc II, 3.0 in Honors Calc III, 4.0 in linear algebra, A-'s in early biostat grad classes that got cancelled out by A+'s later on, advanced calc/real analysis in progress now 

 

Programs Applying: Biostatistics PhD, Epidemiologic methods ScD

Research Experience: Lots of epidemiology research experience starting in undergrad.  Involved in design, conduct, and analysis of a few small-scale studies.  Funded for two years of grad school as the data manager and stats consultant on a medium-sized cohort study with some fun statistical challenges.
Awards/Honors/Recognitions: Full-ride merit scholarship for undergraduate, Honors College in undergrad, Dean's Award merit scholarship for grad tuition, a conference travel award, selected to be a student speaker at our school's causal inference symposium

Pertinent Activities or Jobs: Besides being funded through a research assistantship during grad school, I interned as a data analyst for two summers at a local research non-profit; some public health volunteering pre-grad school; post-baccalaureate research fellowship in epidemiology pre-grad school

Letters of Recommendation: (1) Linear regression/GLM sequence full biostat prof who I also worked with on several projects during my internships, (2) internship supervisor (no PhD, but MS biostat) who directly oversaw the manuscripts I prepared during my internship, (3) assistant biostat prof from a survival class I aced, (4) full biostat prof from my clinical trials and consulting capstone course --  I would guess that (1), (2), and (4) were outstanding recs and (3) was good to great
Any Miscellaneous Points that Might Help:  Longstanding interest in causal inference that made it easy to connect a somewhat nontraditional background to my proposed area of research.  Only applied to places where I had a potential dissertation mentor/topic combination in mind.  Spent a lot of time on my SOPs so that it was clear how and why I ended up in biostatistics.  Some academic service (ad hoc and search committees, etc).  1 pub + 2 more in progress + a few conference abstracts.

Applying:

Michigan Biostatistics PhD - Accepted 1/24, current funding would continue as long as I make academic progress

UNC Biostatistics PhD - Accepted into DrPH program 2/3, never heard about funding

Berkeley Biostatistics PhD - Rejected 3/18

Harvard Epidemiologic Methods ScD - Rejected 3/7 (I was told pre-rejection that they thought I would choose the funded biostat offer... yep)

Harvard Biostatistics PhD - Accepted 2/10, standard 4-year funding package

[ginagirl]

Undergrad Institution: Top 50 Liberal Arts College

Major(s): Neuroscience

Minor(s): Psychology, Mathematics (through Calc III, Linear Algebra, Real Analysis)
GPA: 3.61
Type of Student: DWF

GRE General Test:
Q: 162 (84%)
V: 167 (97%)
W: 4.5 (78%)

Program Applying: Biostatistics (11 PhD, 5 Masters)

Research Experience: 2.5 years undergraduate research project; summer independent research project; 2 years full-time stroke research; 4 posters/abstracts, 2 published contributions (NEJM, Stroke), 1 pending co-authorship
Pertinent Activities or Jobs: TA for upper level neuroscience research seminar (2 years) & intro level neuroscience course (3 years); peer tutor for Calc I & intro level neuroscience course (3 years); full-time stroke research (2 years)
Letters of Recommendation: 2 from neuroscience professors/research supervisors, 1 from current boss/PI, 1 alternate from summer research supervisor (all "outstanding", according to one admissions faculty from highly ranked program.)

 

Insight into Outcome of Application Season: I think it was somewhat advantageous for me to have a different background than other applicants, while still having a decently strong mathematical background/interest. I don't think I spent enough time tailoring my applications to the programs and contacting programs/professors ahead of time, and I feel that hurt my application. I know that my LORs were what pulled me through in a lot of my applications, and having 3-4 unknown but enthusiastic writers to vouch for my dedication and intelligence was crucial. I am disappointed I wasn't more competitive for PhD programs but I understand it is difficult to admit non-stat/math applicants with how competitive the applicant pool is.

 

Attending- Hopkins, ScM degree. Attended their PhD recruitment weekend, and made it to a very small waitlist just before the deadline. Was offered ScM while I was waitlisted after I mentioned that I was considering other Masters programs also. Ended up not getting off the waitlist (spots left were filled), so I took the ScM offer. Great program, even better research fit

 

Results:

PhD

Downgraded to Masters acceptance (4 out of 11): Hopkins, UCLA, Minnesota, Emory

Waitlisted, withdrew application before 4/15 (4 out of 11): Duke, UPitt, Boston, Vanderbilt

Rejected (3 out of 11): UPenn, UNC, Brown

 

Masters

Accepted (5 out of 5): Duke, UColorado, UVermont, UMass Amherst, SUNY Buffalo