Preparing for the worse.

[GeoDUDE!]

Minimum requirements are an undergraduate overall GPA greater than 3.00 

 

 

You'd be hard pressed to find any graduate program that doesn't have a 3.0 minimum requirement or close to it. That being said, a lot of programs late into their admissions game bend on this in favor for getting more people. You see, while there are more people applying for graduate school than there are spots, the bulk of those applications  go to select schools. 

Edited February 2, 2015 by GeoDUDE!

[UnagiForever]

Sorry, but that GPA is a huge red flag. A lot of the people with "low GPAs" getting into schools are people with close to a 3.0. I would be really surprised if you got in anywhere without first doing another degree/program of some sort. You have to pass your classes in grad school, and I would be skeptical that you truly understood your field if you have a GPA that low. The class I made a C in, I made a C because I didn't understand and didn't have the time to put into it to understand, and that prof operated on a C- curve. Grades do show a lot.

I couldn't agree with neuropanic and ballwera less. With that 2.3 GPA, other professors and adcom will seriously doubt that you understand your material enough to be granted a graduate admission offer. 

 

Somebody I know personally (who maintained a 2.1 GPA) was admitted to a master's program under EXCEPTIONAL circumstances. BUT, he had valid reasons (for the sake of his privacy I will not disclose them in details here, but they include natural disasters affecting his college livelihood, etc). He did not do an entire post-bacc sequence, but only had several years of working experience at various odd jobs after graduation. While unfortunately most professors did not care about his personal history, a couple professors did, sympathized with him, and decided to accept him (he also had great interview skills).

 

If you think your personal history that explains your low GPA can grant you admission under exceptional circumstances, then you might still have a chance for a grad school admission the next time you apply (since it provides a valid excuse and convinces those schools that you do understand material in your field). However, if you do not think any POI will be convinced whatsoever no matter what your story is, I hate to tell you this but you will have to go through an entire post-bacc sequence and perform very well academically. That I think is the only way you can truly be guaranteed an admission to a master's or a PhD, which will lead you towards academics career.

 

Yes, it might require you to take out more loans. But as long as you continue to enroll in schools, you do not have to worry about paying back federal loans until you finish your grad degree.

[ballwera]

I couldn't agree with neuropanic and ballwera less. With that 2.3 GPA, other professors and adcom will seriously doubt that you understand your material enough to be granted a graduate admission offer. 

 

Somebody I know personally (who maintained a 2.1 GPA) was admitted to a master's program under EXCEPTIONAL circumstances. BUT, he had valid reasons (for the sake of his privacy I will not disclose them in details here, but they include natural disasters affecting his college livelihood, etc). He did not do an entire post-bacc sequence, but only had several years of working experience at various odd jobs after graduation. While unfortunately most professors did not care about his personal history, a couple professors did, sympathized with him, and decided to accept him (he also had great interview skills).

 

If you think your personal history that explains your low GPA can grant you admission under exceptional circumstances, then you might still have a chance for a grad school admission the next time you apply (since it provides a valid excuse and convinces those schools that you do understand material in your field). However, if you do not think any POI will be convinced whatsoever no matter what your story is, I hate to tell you this but you will have to go through an entire post-bacc sequence and perform very well academically. That I think is the only way you can truly be guaranteed an admission to a master's or a PhD, which will lead you towards academics career.

 

Yes, it might require you to take out more loans. But as long as you continue to enroll in schools, you do not have to worry about paying back federal loans until you finish your grad degree.

 

I'm just saying, his last 2 years he averaged under a 3.0, averaged a 3.3 in his post bacc. courses. He needs to establish a trend here and so far that hasn't happened. I also take advising someone to take on another $25 - $50k  in additional debt for a degree that really means nothing at this point. IMO taking post bacc classes or a course based master's while working full time is the best way to go. Target universities / research institutions that offer tuition remission and go from there. Paying for a master's at this point is VERY high risk with little reward imo. 

[ballwera]

As far as the LOR debate goes; if you don't think someone will write you a good letter, you shouldn't be asking that person at all.  

[GeoDUDE!]

This is a post by Jeff Erikson:http://3dpancakes.typepad.com/ernie/2005/03/re_phd_with_low.htmlon the matter. 

 

Jeff Erikson had a low undergraduate gpa (2.4 I think) and is now a tenured full professor at a top 5 CS department and half his graduate students now have tenure.

 

He's proof it happens.  One thing I'll probably say is that he probably was much above average in intellectual ability in terms of students going to graduate school, so while he was lazy he was able to articulate that he had much more potential than his stats suggested.  Another thing is graduate school is much more competitive now. 

 

 

Anyway, I totally forgot about his post, so I hope it helps you. 

Edited February 2, 2015 by GeoDUDE!

[ilovelab]

This is a post by Jeff Erikson:http://3dpancakes.typepad.com/ernie/2005/03/re_phd_with_low.htmlon the matter. 

 

Jeff Erikson had a low undergraduate gpa (2.4 I think) and is now a tenured full professor at a top 5 CS department and half his graduate students now have tenure.

 

He's proof it happens.  One thing I'll probably say is that he probably was much above average in intellectual ability in terms of students going to graduate school, so while he was lazy he was able to articulate that he had much more potential than his stats suggested.  Another thing is graduate school is much more competitive now. 

 

 

Anyway, I totally forgot about his post, so I hope it helps you. 

  Great post. This makes me wonder how many schools implement GPA/GRE cutoffs that are not mentioned on their websites. Some schools will actually take a look at every application but most won't.

[Applemiu]

You'd be hard pressed to find any graduate program that doesn't have a 3.0 minimum requirement or close to it. That being said, a lot of programs late into their admissions game bend on this in favor for getting more people.

 

Agree. Write to them and talk to them, you'll see you can get in.

[Yuanyang]

This is a post by Jeff Erikson:http://3dpancakes.typepad.com/ernie/2005/03/re_phd_with_low.htmlon the matter. 

 

Jeff Erikson had a low undergraduate gpa (2.4 I think) and is now a tenured full professor at a top 5 CS department and half his graduate students now have tenure.

 

He's proof it happens.  One thing I'll probably say is that he probably was much above average in intellectual ability in terms of students going to graduate school, so while he was lazy he was able to articulate that he had much more potential than his stats suggested.  Another thing is graduate school is much more competitive now. 

 

 

I actually read that article before. It basically told me I need to get one guy to pull alot of strings to get me in to a program. I thought I had that at some of the places I applied to, but obviously not. Hope it will help someone else reading the thread.

 

I'll definitely look into Queen's college, any labs there that you know are taking students? 

[Applemiu]

I'll definitely look into Queen's college, any labs there that you know are taking students? 

 

 

Sorry, I do not. But look at all the colleges in the CUNY system, some have masters in Neuroscience and some other in General Psychology. Once you get into a (relatively cheap) Master program in NYC you can also reach out to NYU, Columbia etc. to attend colloquia, volunteer, get connections...

[poweredbycoldfusion]

Sorry, but that GPA is a huge red flag. A lot of the people with "low GPAs" getting into schools are people with close to a 3.0.

Agree. The only people I personally know who've gotten in with under a 3.0 did so by pulling strings or on a special admit type of basis. The realities of how seriously GPA is weighted in biomedicine in particular was something I wasn't completely aware of before I applied. It's just as important as experience, and GPA is how students become competitive for external funding. Also, there is a culture in academia that has to be taken into account. A lot (not all) of these profs were very excellent students themselves and only want to take on similar students and may not respect or want to risk their school's reputation on lower GPA applicants. This isn't all profs, but funding is tight, application numbers are up across the board, and students that appear to be a risk are going to have a tough time.

Edited February 3, 2015 by poweredbycoldfusion

[Chimeric Phoenix]

Another option is to just apply to more schools this cycle. I had a friend that went 0/4 for their first round of applications. They then applied to a few more schools whose deadline hadn't passed and they ended up getting into a pretty good school. 

 

I had a pretty bad UGrad GPA as well (my stats are in my sig) and I will echo the advice about getting an MS. I ended up paying for only 1 semester of school for mine, and getting a scholarship or TAship for the rest. Total extra loans was about 15 - 20k for living expenses. 

 

I have no idea why people are saying a MS is useless. It is absolutely useful. You would enter the job market with 3+ years of experience and a MS as opposed to a BS. You'd go from 30-40k/yr to 50-60k/yr just like that. Your UGrad is going to make getting into a MS more difficult, but  from my experience you DO NOT need to do your MS at a top tier research university to get into a top tier PhD program. You will need to do a thesis option to prove that you can do research/teach/study all at the same time. 

 

TL;DR

Apply to more PhD programs right now or

Get your MS. Apply again, this time to a better spread of schools. If you're in the same place 2 years from now, it might be time to reconsider your career goals.

Edited February 3, 2015 by Chimeric Phoenix

[Yuanyang]

I already have a hard time finding MS programs that haven't passed the deadline yet. Know of any particular PhD programs?

Edited February 3, 2015 by Yuanyang

[000]

 

Special Bonus Points: On good personal terms with Dr.E Boyden and Dr.K Tye. Reccomendation from Dr.A Graybiel. Took 2 grad courses at Harvard Extension School and one Summer lab course in electrophysiology at UW Friday Harbor Lab.

 

 

I am a neurobiology graduate student. If you are being honest with yourself about this? This really should mean a lot. 

 

You are at a major disadvantage with your GPA. I know that some programs will throw your application out immediately when they see it, but not all of them will. If you can get letters of reference from people who are as respected as Ed Boyden and Ann Graybiel, you should be able to overcome your undergrad record. Your recommenders need to address your GPA in their letters and say that it is not a good reflection of who you are as an applicant. Try to get all of your recommendations from people who are at this level of research. 

 

I can tell you that if you came to top-tier programs with glowing recommendations from these three people, you would be admitted somewhere. I am concerned that you're not able to get a technician position at MIT with anybody else... that suggests that there's more going on. Neuro labs in MIT/Harvard are not generally hurting for funding, and if you did a good job at your previous position, you should be able to "upgrade".

[UnagiForever]

I already have a hard time finding MS programs that haven't passed the deadline yet. Know of any particular PhD programs?

Brandeis accepts M.S. applications for Neuroscience on rolling basis (until June 1, 2015): http://www.bio.brandeis.edu/grad/neuro/index.html

 

Google "neuroscience rolling admission" and you might get some results on programs that might still accept applications.

Edited February 7, 2015 by UnagiForever

[Yuanyang]

 

I can tell you that if you came to top-tier programs with glowing recommendations from these three people, you would be admitted somewhere. I am concerned that you're not able to get a technician position at MIT with anybody else... that suggests that there's more going on. Neuro labs in MIT/Harvard are not generally hurting for funding, and if you did a good job at your previous position, you should be able to "upgrade".

 

The very first thing they told me when I got hired was "we have a lot of money coming in". That is to a certain degree true, but its certainty not going to new technicians. The Graybiel lab used to have 6 Technicians on staff, now they only have one and its certainly not me. All the funding was instead used for new equipment and for another post-doc to work there. Everything the techs used to do was outsourced to companies like Transnetyx or is now done under supervision by undergraduates. This seems to be a trend in all the BCS and McGovern Labs; most of my technician co-workers are either leaving for grad school or finding work elsewhere.

 

Understand that it was not the rejection from schools that upsets me the most, it was the fact that I listened to Ann Graybiel when I was encouraged to apply for grad programs, was assured i would get in at least one program, and even with that I got nothing. I am not certain why; either a) I was lied to b)she underestimated the rigor of admissions c) she overestimated my credentials (even with 2.3uGPA) d)the letter of rec was not very positive, e) all of the above. Even worse, I'll have to rely on her letter again if i want to apply to MS programs on time.

 

 

 

Brandeis accepts M.S. applications for Neuroscience on rolling basis (until June 1, 2015): http://www.bio.brandeis.edu/grad/neuro/index.html

 

Google "neuroscience rolling admission" and you might get some results on programs that might still accept applications.

 

Brandeis has already been suggested in this thread, I'm looking into it. There are a few Neuroscience MS that are still accepting applications (most without funding) but I'm also considering MS programs in Biomedical science, Bioinformatics, and Psychology. I still don't know about how difficult it would be to get into a PhD program from a different field, the answers in this thread are very unclear about this.  This is what I've started so far:

 

Northeastern (MS Bioinformatics, MS Bioengineering)

Northwestern (MS Neuro)

Georgia Tech (MS Bioinformatics)

BU (MS Psych, MS Bioinformatics)

Texas A&M Veterinary (MS Neuro)

University of Sheffield (MS Neuro)

OSHU (MS Bioinformatics)

University of Idaho (MS Bioinformatics)

U maryland,baltimore (MS Biomedical)

[UnagiForever]

Understand that it was not the rejection from schools that upsets me the most, it was the fact that I listened to Ann Graybiel when I was encouraged to apply for grad programs, was assured i would get in at least one program, and even with that I got nothing. I am not certain why; either a) I was lied to b)she underestimated the rigor of admissions c) she overestimated my credentials (even with 2.3uGPA) d)the letter of rec was not very positive, e) all of the above. Even worse, I'll have to rely on her letter again if i want to apply to MS programs on time.

Regardless of how false your recommender was in terms of your admission potential, you should not be blaming others for suggesting you to apply or giving you false hopes. No matter what someone else has suggested or what someone else said about your potential for getting accepted, it was YOUR choice alone to ultimately apply to these schools, and you only have yourself to blame.

Since she wrote the letters for your past applications, I don't think she'll have any problem writing more letters for your new applications for this fall admission.

Edited February 7, 2015 by UnagiForever

[Yuanyang]

Regardless of how false your recommender was in terms of your admission potential, you should not be blaming others for suggesting you to apply or giving you false hopes. No matter what someone else has suggested or what someone else said about your potential for getting accepted, it was YOUR choice alone to ultimately apply to these schools, and you only have yourself to blame.

Since she wrote the letters for your past applications, I don't think she'll have any problem writing more letters for your new applications for this fall admission.

 

Correct. You figured out what everyone else in the thread has missed. 

 

Now I have to rely on you and apparently the people here who know more about graduate admissions than a Kavali prize winning institute professor. How I hate myself for listening to her instead of the internet people on grad cafe. So can you gauge my chances at those institutions I listed or should I be looking for different programs at other schools?

Edited February 8, 2015 by Yuanyang

[UnagiForever]

Correct. You figured out what everyone else in the thread has missed. 

 

Now I have to rely on you and apparently the people here who know more about graduate admissions than a Kavali prize winning institute professor. How I hate myself for listening to her instead of the internet people on grad cafe. So can you gauge my chances at those institutions I listed or should I be looking for different programs at other schools?

I'm not in a neuroscience field but I think the user "000" (the neuroscience grad student) might be able to provide more helpful input in regards to your admission potential for these programs you are applying as part of plan B. You can probably send a PM. If those schools you listed do not have minimum GPA requirements posted on their website, it certainly doesn't hurt to apply and maybe your admission potentials are much higher than the previous schools you applied to.

 

I am pretty sure other people on this thread have figured that out too, even though they didn't explicitly state it like I did. Just because a Kavali prize winner, nobel laureate, or a world's most respected scientist assures you that you will get into one of the programs you applied to, it doesn't mean at all that you are absolutely guaranteed to get in (sure, they will be GREAT references, but unless they have the direct power over those schools' admissions, your admission is not guaranteed regardless of what they say). 

[GeoDUDE!]

I'd be willing to bet the Kavli prize winning scientist's graduate school application was much different than yours. For the very strongest of applicants, its schools fighting over the applicant and not the applicant trying his best to get into schools. That scientist probably has no idea what it means to be a fringe candidate, or in your case, not really a candidate at all.  

Edited February 9, 2015 by GeoDUDE!

[Yuanyang]

I'm not in a neuroscience field but I think the user "000" (the neuroscience grad student) might be able to provide more helpful input in regards to your admission potential for these programs you are applying as part of plan B. 

 

Not all of those programs are in neuroscience, but maybe you can answer something else that I'm still unclear on. If I do a Masters in a life science field (there are a lot of names for them) that is not neuroscience/neurobiology and doesn't have that kind of focus, will it matter? Will a 4.0 GPA in that program have any value in a future PhD? is there some flexibly in life sciences? I'm seeing conflicting information from the people I've sent PM.

[ballwera]

Biggest issue here is you weren't realistic with where you chose to apply...

[ilovelab]

Not all of those programs are in neuroscience, but maybe you can answer something else that I'm still unclear on. If I do a Masters in a life science field (there are a lot of names for them) that is not neuroscience/neurobiology and doesn't have that kind of focus, will it matter? Will a 4.0 GPA in that program have any value in a future PhD? is there some flexibly in life sciences? I'm seeing conflicting information from the people I've sent PM.

  It might matter if there is no thesis component to the masters. If its just coursework I don't know how much help that would be. If the masters has a thesis component and you can do something neuroscience related then you should be good. The bigger question is what will adcoms look at when deciding if you make the cutoff, your undergrad GPA or your masters. My guess is that the Masters GPA will help you get passed the cutoff.

  The other issue is can you afford a masters? Can you realistically afford up to 100k in debt? Grad loans have a higher interest rate than undergrad (I think). As a back up I would still consider looking at biotech/research jobs. You are going to have to expand your search outside of boston.

[stygldbby]

I'm not an expert, but as someone that has had three very different research experiences that are very much removed from my (current) primary research interests, I think the most important thing that would come out of a research/thesis based masters is proof that you can do good/productive research at a higher, more independent level while performing well academically. That's what I've been told during my interviews when the discrepancy between research experience and current interests came up. With that understanding, I don't see why thesis work in a related life science (e.g. straight biology) wouldn't help you. But then again, I'm neither a neuroscientist nor do I have an MS and masters programs are expensive so maybe someone more in the know would have better insight. Good luck!

[Vene]

I'm not an expert, but as someone that has had three very different research experiences that are very much removed from my (current) primary research interests, I think the most important thing that would come out of a research/thesis based masters is proof that you can do good/productive research at a higher, more independent level while performing well academically. That's what I've been told during my interviews when the discrepancy between research experience and current interests came up. With that understanding, I don't see why thesis work in a related life science (e.g. straight biology) wouldn't help you. But then again, I'm neither a neuroscientist nor do I have an MS and masters programs are expensive so maybe someone more in the know would have better insight. Good luck!

As far as relevance I can say that I know professors in departments other than neuroscience who do neuroscience work. Off hand, I can think of pharmacology and biophysics professors who would qualify. So, even if the degree isn't in neuroscience, if the work is relevant to neuroscience I don't see a real problem.

[ilovelab]

As far as relevance I can say that I know professors in departments other than neuroscience who do neuroscience work. Off hand, I can think of pharmacology and biophysics professors who would qualify. So, even if the degree isn't in neuroscience, if the work is relevant to neuroscience I don't see a real problem.

I totally agree. The biggest issue is some of these masters programs are essentially coursework only. That's helpful for the OP but a thesis based masters would be even better.