Unreasonable decisions and lack of transparency

[Meirrin]

Dear arty13,

 

There are many reasons to conclude why you were not accepted, some include:

 

1. You are too much of a god damn idiot to realize GPA will affect your credibility in a graduate program. Even though many would agree that GPA is not the best indicator of success, you honestly weren't smart enough to just go with it anyway for the sake of your future. Smart people realize this, and thus have secured their spot in your intended program at Berkeley.
2. You managed to convince the PI at Berkeley that you're a little shithead without realizing it.
3. You applied to only one graduate program.
4. You assume anyone at Berkeley gives a shit about what you have done in comparison to what you will do with them. Noone wants to get headaches from working with a god damn pirck all day, whether or not he/she is right sometimes.

I have (as I assume many here have) concluded that you likely have a severe case of autism; please get this checked out for the sake of everyone here.

Lol'd hard.

 

Yea sorry arty13, it seems like you've done all this to yourself. Why would Berkeley want some punk who won't even take theiir classes seriously. Sounds like you just want to show up, ignore them, then abuse their equipment.

[Crucial BBQ]

Didn't you apply to more schools? Nothing is guarantee in these things.

No.  He only applied to Cal because Cal has the lab he wants/needs to use for his own research.   He obviously does not need a Ph.D....for anything...and his "great discovery" was already made...elsewhere.   To be frank, what mentor/advisor/POI is going to bring this guy into their lab when it is obvious the OP is not going to accept any type of mentoring to begin with.  I can see it now:  Lead:  "This is my lab,...".  OP:  "I was the PI of my own lab!  I had students, dammit!  I know what I am doing.  Get out of my way!".

 

The OP sounds fishy, there is something not right with it.   

[Secret_Ninja]

This was a hilarious distraction, thanks. 

[Between Fields]

Speaking as someone who used to work in graduate admissions, the fee you paid is to pay the person's salary who has to deal with your folded-over, stapled application materials in the copy machine, try to get tenured faculty to do anything on time, and then queue things up for an administrator to sign off on it. You're not contributing monetarily to the department at all, and you're certainly not a customer to those professors--you're a job applicant. 

[Bethdv]

 

Yea sorry arty13, it seems like you've done all this to yourself. Why would Berkeley want some punk who won't even take theiir classes seriously. Sounds like you just want to show up, ignore them, then abuse their equipment.

 

 

No.  He only applied to Cal because Cal has the lab he wants/needs to use for his own research.   He obviously does not need a Ph.D....for anything...and his "great discovery" was already made...elsewhere.   To be frank, what mentor/advisor/POI is going to bring this guy into their lab when it is obvious the OP is not going to accept any type of mentoring to begin with.  I can see it now:  Lead:  "This is my lab,...".  OP:  "I was the PI of my own lab!  I had students, dammit!  I know what I am doing.  Get out of my way!".

 

The OP sounds fishy, there is something not right with it.   

 

 

This.

OP, it looks like you wouldn't be committed to the program at all, and honestly a pain in the ass to work with for 4+ years. If there was any hint of that in your SoP, specially trashing previous professors, that's an automatic reject. I personally would pick someone with a less outstanding CV but who would be less likely to make me and my colleagues miserable for years.

But still, the school is very competitive and it's very likely that there were just better applications. Being above minimum requirements is not a guarantee in any way. I've also read that LoRs from outside the US/Europe are majorly disregarded because they're all overly praising and provide little additional information about the applicant. All eggs in one basket is very risky business.

[MadtownJacket]

OP has to keep in mind that those "best student" awards are given out every year, and possibly for every department at most schools.  So yes, there are plenty of highly-qualified applicants out there in the world applying to Berkeley and the likes.

 

Also, congrats on getting published and having your work shared?  Isn't that what scientists are expected to do?  I've also had my work shared on national media, yet I didn't even state that anywhere on my application nor did I bring it up in my interviews because I didn't think it was out of the ordinary.  Maybe I'm just humble, but I'm just doing what I'm expected to do.

 

If the same attitude that I sensed from OP also came across in the application, then that would seem like an automatic rejection to me.

[VioletAyame]

It's interesting that there was another thread like this from someone who was applying to Berkeley too, in history I think. I wonder if it's really Berkeley or just a coincidence.

On the other hand, I really don't understand the sense of entitlement here. The frustration and disappointment, yes, the "how could this happen to me" but not "I deserve to get in! They're screwing me!". Well they didn't promise any of us anything except taking a look at our apps. I think most admission websites usually state righty under the criteria or successful applicants profile that it's just a guideline and in no way will guarantee admission. So you may be entitled to an explanation, and please ask nicely, but nothing else. Your POI encouraged you to apply; he did not promise you a spot. IMHO it's because you obviously don't want a PhD. Maybe you can apply to be a research fellow there (not sure if it's feasible without a PhD, I know) or establish some collaboration between the lab you're currently in with their lab to use the equipment. Just some thoughts.

[seeingeyeduck]

Sometimes people are just really entitled. I once has a roommate who ranted and raved after her bf broke up with her - "how dare he break up with me!" Then she listed all her perceived good traits and attractiveness, while not realizing that no one is obligated to date her no matter how great she considered herself to be. This sounds exactly like that.

Edited February 23, 2014 by seeingeyeduck

[geographyrocks]

Also, sometimes the hardest people to work with are those that are smart and have a good background but have an "I am better than this class, these people attitude." Your post here comes off a bit like that (which could be entirely unintential on your end). The fact that you dont put efforts into classes if you dont feel like it and the attitude you have about being an undergrad advising grad students could definitely be red flags to the adcom if you gave off the same vibes in your applicaiton.

This was my first thought as well. 

[CardTricks]

From my interactions with faculty, they look more for people with fitting personalities, attitude, and potential rather than people that already have extensive resumes. 

[eddotman]

Thanks, but I would really appreciate if you could show me some of these extremely intelligent and qualified individuals, i.e. undergrads who have been publishing on their own and featuring in the news and creating startups and such.

 

This is more common than you think. I know plenty of people (well, "plenty" is a relative word here) who did many (or all) the things you did + more while maintaining a higher GPA. Don't sit on too high of a horse. All that said, remember that admissions committees are simply made of people, and people are subject to all kinds of biases. Not getting in somewhere doesn't reflect anything on you. As an example, I got into the top 1 and 2 ranked programs in my field, but was rejected from another school that was top 20 or so. Sometimes, there are variables that are out of your control.

[tormentor]

Dear OP. Please do us a favor and let us know which school you eventually join so that we mere mortals have the option of avoiding your awe-inspiring aura! 

[phdcandidate022014]

The OP reminds me of the guy/gal that you'd hear on the bus that would regale the person they're speaking to (and, perhaps not accidentally, nearly everyone around them) with tales of yesterday's exam: "I totally went out the night before and had like 50 beers, I was so wasted, then I rolled out of bed five minutes before going to class for our midterm.  Totally pulled a C- on it.  That class is kinda BS anyway, I hardly even studied."

 

Plus, his discussion or thesis is not even internally consistent.  He states that he only wanted to go to Berkeley to gain access to the lab - if that is the case, I'm not sure how he views rejection to their PhD prgram as the ending of his stated goal.  If he truly is working on innovative research, and his contacts are who he says they are, it does not seem out of the question that there would be another path (or two) to get to Berkeley and do what he wants.  Besides, if just using the equipment was really his only goal, it doesn't make sense that he's so burned about being rejected.

 

Additionally, while the other stats for this person may be good, they are only telling part of the story to us by stating their GPA, geographic location of their undergraduate institution, their research papers, and a snippet of their lab experience.  If there was a bad GRE score, if they did not go to a rigorous undergraduate institution, if their SOP was weak, these are all factors that could sink the application.  That's not even to speak of the fact that this department (which was it?) only accepts a couple of students in a given cycle.  So there could be some other external factor.  But if the OP was looking for people to say "That's BS, they should have accepted you!" we couldn't do that without getting a full data set.

 

Finally, it seems that the OP has some positive things going for them and it may be a waste of time to get hung up on being rejected from Berkeley.  Hopefully they did not spout off any of those observations to Berkeley, as it seems that could do some damage to any future hopes of doing work with them.  Some of those comments (I'm a paying customer???) really showcased some naievete (you're not a customer and you're not owed a detailed breakdown from any school you apply to - your rationale is the same as the fools that buy a ticket to a sporting event and assume that gives them license to cuss at players, throw things, etc.). 

[themmases]

Based on his discussion of his research, I would not want to work with the OP. IMO listing a bunch of publications that are still in review comes across as resume padding at best. At worst, sharing information about an unpublished discovery with another lab would probably disqualify someone from collaborating with me forever. It's terrible, but my department has had projects we were never able to publish because a naive fellow shared data or signed over the PI role to someone they shouldn't have. If someone shared our results or that we had successfully invented something before we had even written the paper, I would see that as a huge betrayal.

 

I also don't find it credible to claim to have been the first individual to do something-- ever, but especially if your project has co-contributors. I am also publishing with just a BA (and overseeing subspecialty medical fellows, so I must be the real genius, right? ), and IMO in that position you need to be especially clear about what you contributed and why your work specifically was needed. The OP comes off like it's just a feather in his cap to have these PhD-level contributors, rather than actually needing their contribution. That is almost never true of anyone, let alone someone like the OP.

 

The OP just really comes across as someone I wouldn't trust to be a collaborator in research. I can't really tell if that's because of naivete or actual dishonesty, but as a researcher I wouldn't personally care to find out.

[Kaitri]

He started it.

 

Part of me thinks he started this thread because he's bored. He's a troll, plain an simple. He posted, we responded. He's probably sitting at his desk somewhere enjoying a bag of popcorn waiting for more of us to post speculative comments that are almost as outrageous as his initial/follow-up posts.

 

 

Based on his discussion of his research, I would not want to work with the OP. IMO listing a bunch of publications that are still in review comes across as resume padding at best. At worst, sharing information about an unpublished discovery with another lab would probably disqualify someone from collaborating with me forever. It's terrible, but my department has had projects we were never able to publish because a naive fellow shared data or signed over the PI role to someone they shouldn't have. If someone shared our results or that we had successfully invented something before we had even written the paper, I would see that as a huge betrayal.

 

I also don't find it credible to claim to have been the first individual to do something-- ever, but especially if your project has co-contributors. I am also publishing with just a BA (and overseeing subspecialty medical fellows, so I must be the real genius, right? ), and IMO in that position you need to be especially clear about what you contributed and why your work specifically was needed. The OP comes off like it's just a feather in his cap to have these PhD-level contributors, rather than actually needing their contribution. That is almost never true of anyone, let alone someone like the OP.

 

The OP just really comes across as someone I wouldn't trust to be a collaborator in research. I can't really tell if that's because of naivete or actual dishonesty, but as a researcher I wouldn't personally care to find out.

 

This thread has, however, sparked an interesting conversation about labratory work, collaboration and intellectual property. I think that themmasses' comment is bang on - trust and collaborative ability is such an important part of the academic process for some fields; I think it would be easy for intelligent yet arrogant/entitled applicants to get themselves blacklisted based on offhand comments made in their SoP.

[GandalfTheGrey]

I have (as I assume many here have) concluded that you likely have a severe case of autism; please get this checked out for the sake of everyone here.

Two problems with your assertion:

1. Really disrespectful to autistic people/people with autism.
2. I don't think we have enough information to make a DSM-V diagnosis: http://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autism/diagnosis/dsm-5-diagnostic-criteria

[Icydubloon]

If you're having school problems I feel bad for you son, I got 99 problems but a rejection ain't one

 

 

Edit: Except Stanford

Edited March 2, 2014 by Icydubloon

[orientalbird]

Haha, this is very entertaining. I'm not gloating though. I think OP can do 3 things:

 

1. Confront with the committee about their decision.

2. Cultivate healthy and positive personality, trust me, it's for your own good.

3. If you are so good as you described, given the right attitude, you can be successful in your career no matter what. A Ph.D degree won't define you.

[bathingintheneon]

I agree with all the previous comments about the OP. I went to undergrad (and currently work at) an elite university where most of the students feel "entitled" to their grades, so this way of thinking from a young student comes as no surprise.

 

With that said, I consider myself to be a top applicant. Great grades, awards, presentations, and lots of research experience. I was still rejected from three schools. Why? Research fit mostly, but I was also trying to carve out a research niche that few have done before. And I wasn't always met with welcoming arms. Not everyone wanted to collaborate in the ways I wanted to. I wasn't rejected from these programs because I was less of a great applicant, it's just not want the PIs wanted to do. Remember, THEY are the FACULTY and YOU are the STUDENT. You don't have a PH.D. Or your own lab. You haven't earned those yet, so it makes little sense to act like "I should have got in, and they need to justify to me why I wasn't admitted."

 

Being rejected is okay. At the end of the day, I'm going to the program that was the best fit for myself and my future advisor, and everyone's happy.

[dhg12]

Guys... this is actually my favorite thread. I know it wasn't meant to be funny but whenever I read the OP's message all I can think of is the Earl of Lemongrab from Adventure Time yelling "UNACCEPTABLE" 

 

Scratch that, OP is probably straight up Lemongrab (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GxnM-0onvs)

[fasboo]

Getting over Op for now, I had a valid question. If one gets rejected from a school- is it okay to ask why and get some feedback? Visit the dept later on? Any experiences with this.... I just really wanna know for schools where I has the right fit especially, what weakness may have been there ?

[seeingeyeduck]

I think so, as long as you don't become difficult if they say they dont have the time to do it. I think it shows initiative and a willingness to improve. It's certainly a good idea if you want to apply there again.

[skyentist]

From your post and comments, I would hate to work with you. So I am guessing most PI's would hate to work with you. That's why you got rejected. You seem arrogant, ignorant, egotistical, borderline psychopathic, and childish. Take a few years off and grow up a little bit and re apply.

[RomulusAugustulus]

Getting over Op for now, I had a valid question. If one gets rejected from a school- is it okay to ask why and get some feedback? Visit the dept later on? Any experiences with this.... I just really wanna know for schools where I has the right fit especially, what weakness may have been there ?

 

I know some schools/departments state right on their websites that, due to the number of applicants, they cannot provide feedback on unsuccessful applications.

 

That said, IF you were in close contact with a POI who helped you with the application process it MIGHT be ok to send them a polite email thanking them for communicating with you and (politely) asking if they have advice on how to improve your application in the future. I would also wait a bit after rejections go out so it doesn't seem like you are trying to get them to reconsider or something. It is NOT ok (as I think we all agree) to demand to know why you weren't accepted. Schools make no promises to provide you with that information. 

[gr8pumpkin]

I know some schools/departments state right on their websites that, due to the number of applicants, they cannot provide feedback on unsuccessful applications.

 

It's more than that.  If they admit a reason for rejection that is contestable, hello litigation.