There IS such a thing as a Safety School in Grad Apps: Here's how to spot them!

[SocGirl2013]

While I was sorting through my list around October - feels like eons ago now - I got some of the most brilliant advice from Grad Cafe, and I will be forever grateful for that. One thing that kept coming up; however, was the idea that there is no such thing as a safety school when it comes to Grad Apps. Now that I am somewhat on the other side of the fence, I think this isn't entirely accurate. Sure, it's true if you simply pick the lowest ranked school or an unranked school in your field and assume it's a "safety" because of your stellar stats. However, a well calculated assessment of programs based on not one but all of the following factors can, in fact, make admission into at least one program highly likely. 

 

I got into my safety school with funding, plus two more, but because I was under the impression that safety is an illusion in the process, I needlessly spent months in anxiety, even though in my heart of hearts I knew that there was no way I would get denied from this one program. There will, of course, never be any guarantees, but here are the steps you can follow to be as safe as you can with this process:

 

1. Forget about top 20. Apply to top 20 all you like but forget about them being safe in any way. Even if all the stars align, this is where the pool of the best of your bunch is aiming. Chances are there will always be more people for whom all of the stars align just as perfectly, more people than they can accept.

 

2. Create a chart that records the average stats from programs on your list outside of the top 20. Now compare that to your own stats. This is how you can pick how competitive your safety school can be, by making sure you are solidly above the average. For my safety, I was outside of the top 50 really, owing to a pretty crappy quant score. Yours can be a T30, depending on your stats. This alone, however, does not guarantee a safety in any way. 

 

3. After criteria 1 and 2 are met, the third, and perhaps the most important step is to identify the ideal fit. What is the ideal fit? Let's say you want to study cars (bear with me), and THE greatest living professor of car studies ever teaches at University A; there are also one or two assistant professors studying cars at A. However, at the core of institute A itself lies the study of Light Bulbs. Is A a great fit for you? Yes. Is it an ideal fit that will make it very hard for you to be denied? No. Now University B, on the other hand, may not have a single most high profile celebrity scholar of cars, but most of it's faculty studies cars in someway, and the core of the department is all about cars. The "About" or "History" page of Uni B will most likely mention something about cars within the first paragraph or 2. University B is your ideal fit and the best choice to keep as a safety, provided that you have followed steps 1 and 2 in choosing it.

 

4. Those are the three most essential factors in choosing a safety, but you can have an additional advantage if you are able to find personal connections with your safe choice. Perhaps a Prof. at your alma mater attended this grad school and can write you a good letter, or your neighbor's aunt currently teaches there and she can connect you for a cup of coffee prior to applying. This step isn't necessary, but useful.

 

5. Goes without saying, don't forget any of the great advice you get on Grad Cafe about crafting the perfect SOPs, your writing samples etc. In order for this to work, your application must be presented at it's best.

 

Choosing a safety is not just about ranking or stats or fit, it's about finding at least one program that is THE perfect combination of all of these things. It worked out for me exactly as I'd hoped, so I am passing along what I learned this season with hopes that it will work out for others as well.

Edited March 1, 2014 by SocGirl2013

[GeoDUDE!]

I think this is highly field dependent; In any program where an offer tuition + stipend is expect there is no such thing as a safety. Academia is to fickle by nature.

 

What is a saftey?

 

TBH, any field where you are paying for the degree ( except maybe medical, vet, and law schools) are reasonably easy to get into. There are some very difficult MBAs, but there are a handfull of programs that take on students for money.

 

If there were "safties" you would see the same people get into all of their schools; while this happens to a very select few of elite prospects, the 98% or so of us dont do quite as well no matter the spread. That is why people apply to many schools.

[SocGirl2013]

I think that's a very narrow way of looking at it. I got into 3 PhD programs, and 1 was my "safety" with full tuition + funding (it was, by no means "a field easy to get into"). If you read the OP more closely, then I mentioned that a number of things need to be assessed in order for a graduate program to be considered a safety. I also said there are no guarantees but careful calculation can give you the closest thing to a safety, defined here, as somewhere where the likelihood of getting in is much higher than not getting in. 

 

In any case, calculating worked out for me (and some other people I know) so I thought I'd share what I did with future applicants. 

Edited March 1, 2014 by SocGirl2013

[fuzzylogician]

What you've done is just redefine what a 'safety school' is. When we say there is no such thing as a safety school, we mean it in the way that most people think about it when they say this term, namely a less prestigious program that you feel it's easy to get into. What you are talking about is finding a lower-ranked program with a perfect fit for your interests, which is what we always recommend anyway. In particular, we tend to recommend to (1) ignore rankings, because they hardly correspond to prestige within specific subfields and really what matters is not so much the school name or even the program name but the reputation and connections that your advisor has; and (2) apply according to fit: you may get into top programs and be rejected from (on paper) less prestigious ones, because your work and profile fit better with the former programs and not the latter. Or, vice versa: your profile better fits with schools that are less prestigious, and not with the more prestigious ones. I suppose it's possible that applying to lower-ranked programs can improve your chances because these programs might generally get less applications than others so there is less competition, but you haven't shown that this is actually important. At the end of the day, what really matters is the fit. 

[bsharpe269]

I think you actually makes good points.

 

Basically you are saying that instead of applying to safety schools based on rating along, that if you combine rating and fit then you have a great safety. I think its beneficial for people to hear that message!

[gr8pumpkin]

I only call my Safety School a safety school because I was all but told that I would be accepted if I applied, and was already a visiting scholar there.

[juilletmercredi]

I have to disagree with you - I'm glad that you got into your programs, but I think that's because you followed standard guidelines for applying to graduate school rather than followed some protocol for safety programs.  You got into a school that was an excellent research fit for you and where you were above the minimum standards for admission.  That's not a safety school.  That's good application season planning - we always recommend that applicants apply to a range of schools, including some outside of the top 10-20, to maximize their chances of getting admitted somewhere.

I also said there are no guarantees but careful calculation can give you the closest thing to a safety, defined here, as somewhere where the likelihood of getting in is much higher than not getting in.

This isn't a safety school.  A safety school is a school that unless something very weird happens you KNOW you will get admitted.  That's why it's a safety - it's 'safe,' it rules out the option of having to take a gap year because you didn't get in anywhere.  There's no such thing as that in grad admissions.

I dislike the idea for two reasons, and the second one is bigger than the first.  The first reason is the same as everyone else - that even mid- to low-ranked doctoral programs are competitive in many fields.  For example, your post seems to suggest that someone - on the basis of very high stats and excellent fit - can pick a top 30 PhD program as a safety.  This, IMO, is folly; some of these programs are getting 300-500 applications for 5-10 slots.  There are bound to be many other people in the application pool who have good research fit (since all the professors' research areas are public) and who have excellent stats as well.

My second reason is that most people tend to use "safety school" to mean the school that they will go to even if it's not their favorite or preferred option, just to be in graduate school next year, and I fundamentally disagree with that idea.  I see graduate school as a means to an end - a process, yes, but one that eventually leads to a degree that's needed to have a certain career.  If you don't get into a degree program that perfectly suits your needs, there's no point in going to grad school.

By this I mean - let's say that you're in a highly impacted field in which no one who attends a PhD program outside the top 20 gets an academic job.*  I mean like, 0% of the graduates from the #21 program and down got academic jobs; they all went on to do fabulous and interesting non-academic things. You want to be a professor.  You may consider a top 50 program to be your safety school, but you want to be a professor.  Why go there if it's not going to get you to your goal?


*I don't believe in rankings essentialism like this; I'm just using it for the purpose of the example.

[gr8pumpkin]

I'm not sure if you're talking to me or not, but I observe that we have dueling Peanuts characters. 

[SocGirl2013]

I have to disagree with you - I'm glad that you got into your programs, but I think that's because you followed standard guidelines for applying to graduate school rather than followed some protocol for safety programs.  You got into a school that was an excellent research fit for you and where you were above the minimum standards for admission.  That's not a safety school.  That's good application season planning - we always recommend that applicants apply to a range of schools, including some outside of the top 10-20, to maximize their chances of getting admitted somewhere.

I also said there are no guarantees but careful calculation can give you the closest thing to a safety, defined here, as somewhere where the likelihood of getting in is much higher than not getting in.

This isn't a safety school.  A safety school is a school that unless something very weird happens you KNOW you will get admitted.  That's why it's a safety - it's 'safe,' it rules out the option of having to take a gap year because you didn't get in anywhere.  There's no such thing as that in grad admissions.

I dislike the idea for two reasons, and the second one is bigger than the first.  The first reason is the same as everyone else - that even mid- to low-ranked doctoral programs are competitive in many fields.  For example, your post seems to suggest that someone - on the basis of very high stats and excellent fit - can pick a top 30 PhD program as a safety.  This, IMO, is folly; some of these programs are getting 300-500 applications for 5-10 slots.  There are bound to be many other people in the application pool who have good research fit (since all the professors' research areas are public) and who have excellent stats as well.

My second reason is that most people tend to use "safety school" to mean the school that they will go to even if it's not their favorite or preferred option, just to be in graduate school next year, and I fundamentally disagree with that idea.  I see graduate school as a means to an end - a process, yes, but one that eventually leads to a degree that's needed to have a certain career.  If you don't get into a degree program that perfectly suits your needs, there's no point in going to grad school.

By this I mean - let's say that you're in a highly impacted field in which no one who attends a PhD program outside the top 20 gets an academic job.*  I mean like, 0% of the graduates from the #21 program and down got academic jobs; they all went on to do fabulous and interesting non-academic things. You want to be a professor.  You may consider a top 50 program to be your safety school, but you want to be a professor.  Why go there if it's not going to get you to your goal?

*I don't believe in rankings essentialism like this; I'm just using it for the purpose of the example.

I have to concede, you make excellent points, especially your second reasoning behind disliking the idea of a safety. I guess what I was going for a different definition of safety and what I was really trying to do was share my application season planning techniques. 

[Crucial BBQ]

While I was sorting through my list around October - feels like eons ago now - I got some of the most brilliant advice from Grad Cafe, and I will be forever grateful for that. One thing that kept coming up; however, was the idea that there is no such thing as a safety school when it comes to Grad Apps. Now that I am somewhat on the other side of the fence, I think this isn't entirely accurate. Sure, it's true if you simply pick the lowest ranked school or an unranked school in your field and assume it's a "safety" because of your stellar stats. However, a well calculated assessment of programs based on not one but all of the following factors can, in fact, make admission into at least one program highly likely. 

 

I got into my safety school with funding, plus two more, but because I was under the impression that safety is an illusion in the process, I needlessly spent months in anxiety, even though in my heart of hearts I knew that there was no way I would get denied from this one program. There will, of course, never be any guarantees, but here are the steps you can follow to be as safe as you can with this process:

 

1. Forget about top 20. Apply to top 20 all you like but forget about them being safe in any way. Even if all the stars align, this is where the pool of the best of your bunch is aiming. Chances are there will always be more people for whom all of the stars align just as perfectly, more people than they can accept.

 

2. Create a chart that records the average stats from programs on your list outside of the top 20. Now compare that to your own stats. This is how you can pick how competitive your safety school can be, by making sure you are solidly above the average. For my safety, I was outside of the top 50 really, owing to a pretty crappy quant score. Yours can be a T30, depending on your stats. This alone, however, does not guarantee a safety in any way. 

 

3. After criteria 1 and 2 are met, the third, and perhaps the most important step is to identify the ideal fit. What is the ideal fit? Let's say you want to study cars (bear with me), and THE greatest living professor of car studies ever teaches at University A; there are also one or two assistant professors studying cars at A. However, at the core of institute A itself lies the study of Light Bulbs. Is A a great fit for you? Yes. Is it an ideal fit that will make it very hard for you to be denied? No. Now University B, on the other hand, may not have a single most high profile celebrity scholar of cars, but most of it's faculty studies cars in someway, and the core of the department is all about cars. The "About" or "History" page of Uni B will most likely mention something about cars within the first paragraph or 2. University B is your ideal fit and the best choice to keep as a safety, provided that you have followed steps 1 and 2 in choosing it.

 

4. Those are the three most essential factors in choosing a safety, but you can have an additional advantage if you are able to find personal connections with your safe choice. Perhaps a Prof. at your alma mater attended this grad school and can write you a good letter, or your neighbor's aunt currently teaches there and she can connect you for a cup of coffee prior to applying. This step isn't necessary, but useful.

 

5. Goes without saying, don't forget any of the great advice you get on Grad Cafe about crafting the perfect SOPs, your writing samples etc. In order for this to work, your application must be presented at it's best.

 

Choosing a safety is not just about ranking or stats or fit, it's about finding at least one program that is THE perfect combination of all of these things. It worked out for me exactly as I'd hoped, so I am passing along what I learned this season with hopes that it will work out for others as well.

I think that this is great advice, in general.  However:

 

1.  What is Top 20?  For undergrad that makes sense as there is clearly a grouping of the "top 20" schools.  But what does this mean for grad school?   There are grad program rankings and even fewer grad school rankings.  That is because a few of the Top 20 programs for Discipline X might actually be at "top 300" universities or universities that are "not known".  Another issue is funding.  More-than-likely, what you might perceive as a "safety" because of its lack of ranking or prestige or what-ever is also more-than-lilkely a small program with limited to no funds.  When a program has $Millions in funding, for example, they can afford to take a chance or two on "solid, but still kinda iffy" applicants.  Programs with severe lack of funds are going to be more picky, sometimes even going years without admitting one (Ph.D.) student, waiting for that perfect applicant to come along because they cannot afford to waste money on someone who is not an exact fit.  What is it, something like 50% of Ph.D. students drop out?  

 

Even programs that have the $Millions to spend on research/students are still taking a risk when they offer admits.  Like undergrad admissions, grad school admissions/programs use algorithms based on historical data of how many offers extended turn in admitted students.  The program I was looking into at MIT offers admissions to around 20 applicants each year because historically roughly 1/2 of their offers are denied.  But what would happen if all 20 decided to accept?  Well, that program would then be obligated to pay the guruanteed tuition and stipend ($40K) per year per student for five years per student.  Kinda puts a dent in their budgets, doesn't it.  A "safety" program cannot afford to make that mistake.  In reality, because of this, admissions at a "safety" might be even harder/more competitive.

 

2. Great advice, if you can find it.  One of the reasons why there is a lack of grad school rankings is because grad schools do not collect, or at least publicize, this information in the same way undergraduate institutions do.  You can find some information for some programs/schools, and for others, nothing.  You are supposed to select grad programs based on what the specific programs are doing and how closely it matches to your own perspective course of study/research; not how good the schools name will look on your resume/CV.

 

3.  Cannot complain here, but this should be #1. 

 

4.  I know people who have worked in university admissions or even taught courses. My experience is that they can offer great advice, point you towards the right people, but cannot really do much outside of that.  

 

5.  Yup, for sure. 

 

To go with your closing sentence I think that it also helps if you are honest with yourself and the schools you are applying to.  I once read something that went along the lines of "Once you read a couple hundred applications you get the feel for those applicants who really are a great match for the program and for those who are simply applying 'just because'".  If you are truly excited about a program and you feel that you are a great fit, it will show in your application. 

[geographyrocks]

I really wish this was true, but it definitely isn't for my field.  I was actually rejected from a school that I was "overqualified" for and had a great fit.  Just because it worked for you does not mean it will work for others. 

I just don't want people to have false hope.  All you can do is create the best application possible and really hope the stars align.  And by "stars align" I mean: your POI has room for another student, your POI has funding OR your POI can convince the school to fund you through TAs, you aren't up against 30 applications that had an app just a tad better than yours, the adcom wasn't in a terrible mood while reading your app, etc.

 

Something that isn't mentioned often on these threads is to look at the current graduate students and who their advisers are.  If you see that Prof A has 5 grad students, there's a good possibility they won't be signing for another one. 

[juilletmercredi]

gr8pumpkin, I was responding to the OP, but yes we do have dueling Peanuts characters.  (Linus is my favorite after Snoopy, TBH.)

 

Something that isn't mentioned often on these threads is to look at the current graduate students and who their advisers are.  If you see that Prof A has 5 grad students, there's a good possibility they won't be signing for another one.

 

Not necessarily.  If you're in a field where you need to work directly with a professor/advisor, it's better to directly ask that adviser whether he's planning on taking on additional students for the fall, because it's hard to predict those things just by looking at current students.  For example, my primary lab website lists me as a graduate student but it doesn't list my cohort year, and I am graduating this year, so my adviser actually needs someone to replace me.  It also hasn't been updated in ages so a recently graduated doctoral student is still on there - so it looks like my adviser has 3 doctoral students when really, come fall, he will have just 1 plus whoever they admit this year.  Also, neither my primary nor my secondary lab funds me (I have external funding), so my presence doesn't take up a funding slot.

 

Also, some labs are just really big.  One lab may only have 2 students but the PI didn't the the funding he wants so can't add anymore; another lab may have 5 students, but he also has 3 postdocs and tons of money so he's looking to take on 2 more.

[mux127]

There are no schools called safety. I am admitted to schools in top 20/30 ranked but rejected from 70/80 ranked ones. I thought the lower ranked ones are safety schools but mmm no. I learnt that many things are involved in the admission processes and this is why I am rejected from them. Never think, there is a safety school, I'd recommend.

[ahlatsiawa]

I just got rejected from South Carolina for Aero. It was the safest of my safety schools and I was sure I would get in. The Aero program there is only one year old and hasn't even been accredited yet. On the other hand I got into Syracuse, #4/12.

[personalityresearcher]

There are no schools called safety. I am admitted to schools in top 20/30 ranked but rejected from 70/80 ranked ones. I thought the lower ranked ones are safety schools but mmm no. I learnt that many things are involved in the admission processes and this is why I am rejected from them. Never think, there is a safety school, I'd recommend.

Yup - definitely agree. Fit is huge. My friend applied to a handful of psychology programs. The place that took him, or even interviewed him, was Harvard. He was rejected from very low tier "safety" schools.

[nugget]

 If you don't get into a degree program that perfectly suits your needs, there's no point in going to grad school.

 

 

You have made some great points, juilletmercredi. This is the only one I disagree with. Sometimes no program perfectly suits your needs, or people only get into programs that are a fairly good match. I think if a school is at least an 80% perfect match, it's possible to be happy accepting an offer that's lower on the wish list. Depending on one's life circumstances, accepting an offer that isn't the dream school is a better option than applying again the following year.

Edited April 17, 2014 by jenste

[Crucial BBQ]

I generally agree with the answers to the OP, but something has accrued to me; I know of two programs that might constitute the proverbial safety school. When going through the faculty listings for one of the programs, those who were faculty in my area of interest had a common theme: we'd love to bring in new grad students but we have no funding. Since a part of the job as a Ph.D. student is to ultimately contribute to the overall research of the lab/POI/PI/institution, it stands to reason that if you are willing to "work for free" then you are in.  The other program had a comment regarding Spring admissions on the program's website.  It went something like this:  ​Our program generally does not admit students in the Spring.  This is partially because a Spring admit would be out of sync with the rest of the program and because funding begins annually with Fall admits.  However, the school would love to have your application fee so if you have a reason to apply for a Spring admission be prepared to fund yourself. 

 

Of course it stands to reason that the applicants would otherwise need to be qualified, but if you are covering your own tuition and research expenses I would suspect your chances for admissions are a little higher, no? 

 

You have made some great points, juilletmercredi. This is the only one I disagree with. Sometimes no program perfectly suits your needs, or people only get into programs that are a fairly good match. I think if a school is at least an 80% perfect match, it's possible to be happy accepting an offer that's lower on the wish list. Depending on one's life circumstances, accepting an offer that isn't the dream school is a better option than applying again the following year.

Perhaps it is just me, but I only applied to schools that had that "80%" of what I was looking for.  

 

Read the Already Attending forum...numerous posts to the effect of "Should I drop out?", "I'm dropping out", "I hate grad school", "Grad school/my program is not what I thought it would be", and so on.  

 

In my opinion if one can garner from the adcoms exactly what part of the application was deficient, and it is something that can be corrected, waiting a year may prove to be the best decision made. 

Edited April 17, 2014 by Crucial BBQ

[maelia8]

I think that applying to grad school is a process that simply involves a lot of uncertainty, a process that no one should go into with complacency, but rather with humility. Expectations must be surrendered - once you've done your best to carefully research schools and made your application the best that it can be, at the end of the day, you just have to let go and hope that you are lucky enough to have a couple of admits at programs that are a good fit for you. These probably won't be all of the programs that you thought were an amazing fit, but if you did your homework, hopefully it will be at least some of them.