Chemistry Applications Fall 2015

[AnubisGate]

I'm a bit late to post my stats up on here, but I've been very busy with school this semester. I have applied to Princeton, Stanford, Northwestern, and UNC Chapel Hill so far. I applied to both physical and theoretical programs, indicating in my SOP that I was interested in focusing on relativistic electronic structure calculations or something PCET related. I also plan to apply to Penn State, Emory, and possibly somewhere else.

 

Stats are in my signature.

[ChemiKyle]

What are people's plans if they don't get in anywhere?

I have to get a job over the summer for when financial aid stops covering my rent, so I was planning on trying to find a tutoring job; if the world ended (i.e. I don't get into grad school) I'd probably stick with that.

 

I'm a bit late to post my stats up on here, but I've been very busy with school this semester. I have applied to Princeton, Stanford, Northwestern, and UNC Chapel Hill so far. I applied to both physical and theoretical programs, indicating in my SOP that I was interested in focusing on relativistic electronic structure calculations

Nice! I was looking at a joint-appointment with an experimental PChem group and a theory-based one.

I have a math and physics background but no formal work in theory unless you consider black-box Gaussian calculations valid (which wouldn't be done at Northwestern anyway); do you know if people from outside of theory often jump into it for their Ph.D. studies?

[Kinetic Isotope Defect]

My stats are below & in my profile. My main concern is my low GPA (for the first two years of college I was in a major I absolutely hated, and it made me really dislike school) will make it so my application won't even be looked at, but I know my research abilities and chemistry knowledge are very good so I'm applying to highly ranked programs. My strategy is to apply to as many programs that interest me to buffer for the denials based on my low GPA. I even got one right off the bat (received a call from a professor at Texas A&M a couple nights ago!), so that's encouraging. Good luck to everyone else!

 

GPA: 2.93

cGPA: 3.24

GRE: 163Q (86%), 164V (93%), 4.0AW (56%)

Chem GRE: 810 (79%)

Research interest: Chemical Biology

Research Experience: 1.5 years in organic lab

Publications: None yet, preparing multiple 1st author manuscripts at the moment

Other Related Experience: Taught advanced organic lab 1 semester, developed 2 experiments for the course

Awards: Departmental fellowship, university research scholarship, Dean's list

Presentations: 1 poster at big ACS event at school

Edited December 18, 2014 by KineticIsotopeDefect

[Queue]

I have to get a job over the summer for when financial aid stops covering my rent, so I was planning on trying to find a tutoring job; if the world ended (i.e. I don't get into grad school) I'd probably stick with that.

 

Nice! I was looking at a joint-appointment with an experimental PChem group and a theory-based one.

I have a math and physics background but no formal work in theory unless you consider black-box Gaussian calculations valid (which wouldn't be done at Northwestern anyway); do you know if people from outside of theory often jump into it for their Ph.D. studies?

 

There are a lot of experimental chemists that use theory to start their projects (Ab Initio calculations). One of my research adviser used Gaussian and Cfour to compute the geometries, harmonic frequencies, dipole moments, etc. before beginning his work on IR laser spectroscopy. However, my theoretical chemistry research adviser told me that isn't really a "theoretical chemistry." He told me it's more of a computational chemistry combined with experimental. I was looking for professors that combine both theoretical and experimental chemistry as well and my adviser to me to look for chemistry programs that have large physical chemistry department. Those include "big schools" such as MIT, UC Berkeley, UChicago, Ohio State, etc. He also suggested schools with prestige theoretical chemistry program, but not so much of experimental, such as University of Florida or University of Georgia. 

[clickclick]

So despite being rejected from all the schools I applied to last year...... I was just accepted to UT Austin and U Washington!!! These were both my top picks and the emails came within 20 minutes of each other during my lab's group meeting. This is the happiest day of my life so far!

[ChemPlasmonics]

So despite being rejected from all the schools I applied to last year...... I was just accepted to UT Austin and U Washington!!! These were both my top picks and the emails came within 20 minutes of each other during my lab's group meeting. This is the happiest day of my life so far!

First off, congrats that is great to hear! What division did you apply for at Texas? I know they handle admissions separately there so I'm curious as to which groups are making decisions now.

[michelium]

Just got the unofficial acceptance to Vanderbilt. So exciting! This process is already a roller coaster, and its not even close to being over yet! I haven't posted yet, but my general stats are provided in my signature. 

[b3lypdft]

Yeah I also got into UW and this just made my day.

[Hijojo]

Wow, congrats to everyone who got into schools today! That's super awesome I suspect there'll be some more results tomorrow - it seems to me like schools are trying to get some decisions out before Winter break starts.

 

There are a lot of experimental chemists that use theory to start their projects (Ab Initio calculations). One of my research adviser used Gaussian and Cfour to compute the geometries, harmonic frequencies, dipole moments, etc. before beginning his work on IR laser spectroscopy. However, my theoretical chemistry research adviser told me that isn't really a "theoretical chemistry." He told me it's more of a computational chemistry combined with experimental. I was looking for professors that combine both theoretical and experimental chemistry as well and my adviser to me to look for chemistry programs that have large physical chemistry department. Those include "big schools" such as MIT, UC Berkeley, UChicago, Ohio State, etc. He also suggested schools with prestige theoretical chemistry program, but not so much of experimental, such as University of Florida or University of Georgia. 

 

I definitely agree that most the experimentalists use some amount of theory for their projects, but in my experience, theoretical calculations with things were mostly a means to the end goal. As opposed to the more theory-based groups, who were really interested in diving into the finer details and doing the complicated calculations that things like Gaussian can't necessarily do. Ideally, I'm interested in a group where I can do both - I'm personally more of an experimentalist, but I also really want to be able to do the complex calculations to understand the underlying theory

 

So in general, I find myself wondering how much influence the subjective aspects of our apps actually have on the process. Other human beings will be the ones reviewing our applications, and there seems to be so much variation between what aspects of our apps schools prioritize. Don't really have a conclusion, thought maybe it could open up some dialogue. At worst, I think we all deserve a good amount of credit for throwing ourselves to the wolves in the first place! Hope everyone starts/keeps getting good news! Thanks for making a place I could vent a bit and talk to some peers going through the same stuff.

 

On the whole, I think the most important aspects of an application stay roughly the same from school to school - LORs, research experience, department fit, that sort of thing. I think it's more in the smaller details where subjectivity comes more into play - the graduate coordinator at UPenn told me, for instance, that it would look worse to not submit a Chem GRE score than to submit a one that's on the lower end of things (as opposed to other divisions, where not submitting might be viewed more favorably). Of course, meeting POIs and making favorable impressions is also a subjective way that can be very important in applications.

[Queue]

First off, congrats that is great to hear! What division did you apply for at Texas? I know they handle admissions separately there so I'm curious as to which groups are making decisions now.

 

I've applied for physical chemistry department and got an unofficial acceptance today as well. 

[AnubisGate]

Nice! I was looking at a joint-appointment with an experimental PChem group and a theory-based one.

I have a math and physics background but no formal work in theory unless you consider black-box Gaussian calculations valid (which wouldn't be done at Northwestern anyway); do you know if people from outside of theory often jump into it for their Ph.D. studies?

 

I've heard that a lot of people who go into theory haven't seen material more pertinent than the QM covered in physical chemistry. I personally don't have much background in theory, but I know what work is being done by who and where. I think that it is most important to identify what kind of problems you are most interested in working on and demonstrating that you are familiar with the work in those fields. Who did you identify in your SOP for Northwestern, btw?

Edited December 19, 2014 by AnubisGate

[ishii]

So is it actually somewhat normal for PhD programs to be sending decisions out this early?

 

I fully wasn't expecting to hear anything at all until much closer to the February/March timelines they indicated as 'we will definitely let you know by x'. But I got an email from Stanford today - only 10 days after submitting my application... still half-convinced it's fake/spam!! (So I did the obvious thing and join a forum to ask about it... hi, I'm new )

[AnubisGate]

A quick results search for 'chemistry' returns over a page of decisions made in December alone, I'd rest assured that you're admitted...assuming that e-mail isn't a rejection

[Maxtini]

It might also be an offer for interview~

[AnubisGate]

Touché, Maxtini!

[Organometallics]

Big week for me....accepted to both Stanford and UC Berkeley.  Wooohoo!  Two of my top choices, nonetheless.  Now I can actually relax over the holidays   

Best of luck to everyone else!

[Maxtini]

Congratulation! It seems everyone here got his/her own early admission~

[St Andrews Lynx]

So is it actually somewhat normal for PhD programs to be sending decisions out this early?

 

I fully wasn't expecting to hear anything at all until much closer to the February/March timelines they indicated as 'we will definitely let you know by x'.

Moderately normal. 

If you look on the Results section of GradCafe you can see when the schools sent out their offers last year. Quite a few (Princeton and UPenn, for example) sent out their decisions in early/mid Jan, or even later. Other schools do it in waves.

[ChemPlasmonics]

I received an email from my POI at UTexas-Austin (analytical division) saying that the admissions committee deliberations were "wrapping up" and that he was impressed with my application and confident I would receive good news from them. Definitely good to hear, but I am uneasy until things are official as this professor was not on the committee himself. I am hoping they will send out offers on Monday before the holidays. I know we are all waiting for good news before January!

[Whisky-with-a-Y]

I received an email from my POI at UTexas-Austin (analytical division) saying that the admissions committee deliberations were "wrapping up" and that he was impressed with my application and confident I would receive good news from them. Definitely good to hear, but I am uneasy until things are official as this professor was not on the committee himself. I am hoping they will send out offers on Monday before the holidays. I know we are all waiting for good news before January!

 Congrats ChemPlasmonics, If you were contacted directly from a professor I wouldn't stress too much. Good Luck!!

[ChemiKyle]

I've heard that a lot of people who go into theory haven't seen material more pertinent than the QM covered in physical chemistry. I personally don't have much background in theory, but I know what work is being done by who and where. I think that it is most important to identify what kind of problems you are most interested in working on and demonstrating that you are familiar with the work in those fields. Who did you identify in your SOP for Northwestern, btw?

Just like Hijojo said, I'm more of an experimentalist looking to understand the nuts and bolts of all the computational work; so the theory person would be secondary to my experimental advisor. It's good to hear I wouldn't be the only one with barely any background.

The only theorist in my SoP was Ratner; I was only vaguely aware of theorists when I was applying and didn't want to put down someone I didn't know enough about. I almost put down Shiozaki, but since he doesn't have tenure I was hesitant - I think having a newbie in your group while trying to get tenure would be very stressful. Since applying I've been looking more into Schatz and Seideman, they're both very nice which is the main selling point for a theory advisor since I figure I'll be messing up a lot and asking questions quite often.

I also just got accepted to Northwestern via phone call!

Best day ever, especially since I'd been bummed that I couldn't afford to send scores to a few other schools on my list. Huge mood booster!

[ChemSet]

Got acceptance from UC Riverside. Offering Eugene Cota Robles award, Summer 2015-Spring 2016 total stipend of about $43,000. Sheesh, that is tempting!

 

I have a question... am I supposed to reply to these acceptance e-mails? Something like, "Thank you very much, I'm looking forward to visiting." at least? 

Edited December 23, 2014 by ChemSet

[Whisky-with-a-Y]

Got acceptance from UC Riverside. Offering Eugene Cota Robles award, Summer 2015-Spring 2016 total stipend of about $43,000. Sheesh, that is tempting!

 

I have a question... am I supposed to reply to these acceptance e-mails? Something like, "Thank you very much, I'm looking forward to visiting." at least? 

 

 

Congrats Chemset, that is a tempting amount of money. That is a great question about the emails. I have responded to a few and have not to others. I dont think it is mandatory as you are accepted until the deadline that they give you. From my experience I have gotten the email, then a day or so later another discussing recruitment event dates. So mainly my responses have been in regards to the dates concerning travel, not accepting the offer or acknowledging it. Hope that helps

[AnubisGate]

Just like Hijojo said, I'm more of an experimentalist looking to understand the nuts and bolts of all the computational work; so the theory person would be secondary to my experimental advisor. It's good to hear I wouldn't be the only one with barely any background.

The only theorist in my SoP was Ratner; I was only vaguely aware of theorists when I was applying and didn't want to put down someone I didn't know enough about. I almost put down Shiozaki, but since he doesn't have tenure I was hesitant - I think having a newbie in your group while trying to get tenure would be very stressful. Since applying I've been looking more into Schatz and Seideman, they're both very nice which is the main selling point for a theory advisor since I figure I'll be messing up a lot and asking questions quite often.

I also just got accepted to Northwestern via phone call!

Best day ever, especially since I'd been bummed that I couldn't afford to send scores to a few other schools on my list. Huge mood booster!

 

That's awesome! Congratulations man . When did you complete your application? I haven't heard back from them yet, but it gives me some hope that our stats are within the same range.

 

P.S. I mentioned Shiozaki, Ratner, Seideman, and Freedman. Toru is doing some very cool work in collaboration with Danna that deals with predicting magnetic properties of large, heavy elements. Because spin-orbit coupling is greatly exaggerated in heavy elements, a more rigorous treatment needs to be made. Toru is working on implementing the Dirac equation into his computational arsenal, which would provide for an accurate account of spin-orbit coupling. Spin-orbit coupling is one of the causes of magentocrystalline anisotropy -- one of the essential properties that Danna is working to exploit. The whole project ties so nicely together with my own personal research interests.

I feel mentally aroused after typing that...I hope I get accepted 

[Cookie]

I almost put down Shiozaki, but since he doesn't have tenure I was hesitant - I think having a newbie in your group while trying to get tenure would be very stressful.

 

Congrats! Just an FYI, Shiozaki WILL definitely get tenure. There has never been any doubt His BAGEL code is one of the most well written excited state codes, both in programming style and theory content. It is open-sourced so you can check it out yourself. The speed is mesmerizing!

Plus, working for an assistant professor has many advantages. There are a few threads here you can read about it.