what to do if you're rejected and don't want to give up for next year

[trulin]

Hi everyone, I'd like to say I'm impressed with how a lot of people here got into great programs. My question is to ask what you believe worked most strongly in your favor during admissions processes.

Thanks,

Alex

[Loser777]

Luck of all kinds:

• happening to email the right people during undergrad
• happening to get rejected from what would have ended up being dead-end jobs
• people willing to collaborate after little more than a cold email
• paper getting rejected at a smaller conference that led to revisions and eventually it getting accepted to a bigger conference]
• deciding to pursue a position in a lab unrelated to my major... that would lead to an REU position in something I want to continue doing
• doing an REU that didn't lead to a paper but got me inspired to start a side project
• a side project that I spent a few weeks hacking out in the summer turning into an accepted 1st author paper at a top conference over the course of a year
• person x at z school happens to know one of my letter writers
• etc etc etc etc etc

Sure, I could say that getting papers accepted was what worked most strongly in my favor, but that's misleading and obscures the bigger picture. In a lot of cases it was a lot of blind luck and winging it. My overall strategy over the last three years of undergrad was little more than to just have something cooking at all times, be it a side project or something in the lab.

[controlc]

In terms of descending significance:

• Strong LORs (coupled with the fact that the admission committee knew my letter writers)
• Relevant research experience
• Publications
• Good personal statement
• High GPA

I'm not even going to bother placing the GRE in that list. Honestly though, the first 3 items can be put under the umbrella of "research experience" since research experience generally culminates in publications and good recs

 

I agree with the poster above that (unfortunately or maybe fortunately) luck has a lot to do with it as well.

Edited March 1, 2015 by controlc

[zliu224]

For me (I got into CMU MSCS, MSML, MSCV, Michigan Phd with fellowship and RAship, Wisconsin with TAship + scholarship), it's

 

Hardwork and strive for excellence:  If you want to get into the top MS/Phd program, you need to be the best of the best. Yes, a student might be really smart. He can get all the 1st place in the coding competition like ICPC with ease, but research (which is highly valued at top academic program) is not just about being smart, but also about the amount of time you spend reading literatures that you might not even understand as an undergrad, installing software on the testbed that few people would use, or developing an innovative algorithm that no one has ever come up with before. You also need to maintain a relatively high GPA (>= 3.9) in your course works. Depending on which school you are in, you also need to be aware that sometime this strive for excellence will separate you out from the rest of the group. So you need to be really determined and passionate about what you did.

 

Luck: this means some times you might not get what you want (getting into top program) even though you paid the due and spent lots of time on research. This really depends on the institution, CS programs you currently enrolled in, and professors. If you are in an institution where the program encourage undergrad to do publishable research under several really good professors who regularly publish in top conference like SIGCOMM etc. Then congrats, you are in luck. Some department does not really encourage undergrad to do research until they took more advanced classes. But if you are really good, I guess this wouldn't be a problem. 

 

If you are applying for MS, then GPA and courses you took are the most important factors, since most MS programs are course based program. Having research experience will be really helpful too especially if you are applying for the highly competitive MS program like CMU, Stanford etc. Finally, I would say internship at a reputable company will also help your application (although Academic/Industrial R&D might be better)

 

If you are applying for Phd, research is the most important of all. Having several first author publications at top conference in your field will definitely get you an edge over many other applications. It will also help you get a really good recommendation and personal statement. Of course, GPA still matters. In my opinion, getting a >= 3.8 plus publications at several top conferences is greater than only a 4.0. But getting a 4.0 with many high quality pubs >= 3.8 plus equal amount of pubs. 

 

Hope this helps

[pascal_barbots_wager]

...You also need to maintain a relatively high GPA (>= 3.9) in your course works...

 

I'll politely disagree with this one. All else equal a high GPA can only help you, but there are plenty of people in the results search who got into Stanford/Berkeley/CMU/MIT with 3.6-3.7s. Hell, even lower GPAs can be offset by great research experience or LORs.

[zliu224]

I'll politely disagree with this one. All else equal a high GPA can only help you, but there are plenty of people in the results search who got into Stanford/Berkeley/CMU/MIT with 3.6-3.7s. Hell, even lower GPAs can be offset by great research experience or LORs.

 

What you said is true. high GPA does not guarantee acceptance into top program. It won't hurt you if you have a higher GPA, but lower GPA might hurt you consider the fact that you are in competition with many other top applicants who are really good at what they are doing academic wise. But having a 4.0 is not worth it if you don't even have time to do good research. 

 

I also have seen many applicants with 4.0 major GPA, and 3.9 overall GPA with first author pubs at these top programs. Yes, you shouldn't place too much weight on GPA if that take you too much time, but sacrificing GPA for more research experience might not get you anywhere neither, since most schools internally have cut-offs for the grade. 

[trulin]

I had a 3.95 overall and 4.0 major. 4 strong letters of recommendation (1 from REU, 2 from people I have completed research for/with, 1 industry). 95%+ GRE all categories. 1 submitted paper only (coauthored, not first name). 2 summers of research at large mobile chipset maker.

I think honestly it came down to the only one submitted and not yet accepted paper. Also I have small bits of experience in different fields (HCI/social robotics, Parallel Algorithms, Applied Probablity) and hadn't narrowed my subfields more than theory, algorithms and applied probability in networking.

If you would recommend a course of action, would it be to find a niche and pursue it all the way until next application season while I look for job in the meantime?

[cicada2014]

I think the biggest factor is glowing recommendation letters from well-known professors in your area. Next important is research experience. (Of course, these two are intimately linked).

 

In my experience most of my admissions came from schools where the LoR writer contacted professors and personally recommended me.

Edited March 6, 2015 by cicada2014

[phdreally]

In my case, when I finished undergrad (~10 years ago) from an unheard of univ (not in US), my GPA sucked (~3.4), no research experience, and hardly knew any profs who could write me a letter of recommendation. I tried to get into grad school, but couldn't get an admit anywhere even in my country. However since then I joined a startup as a founding member, learnt a lot there, designed and implemented an open source distributed filesystem from scratch, got the company acquired etc. Now I tried again to get back in to grad school (because it has always been my dream), and got admits in great univs with just LoRs from industry.

 

So, if you get rejects everywhere, don't lose hope. At this point in time your profile may probably not shine, but that is not an indicator in anyway of your true potential. You may need to take unconventional steps (which for me was necessary - there was no other way I could get into top univs with just my GPA). I also consider myself lucky that I did not get into a mediocre univ 10 years ago, as that would have effectively eliminated the possibility of me getting in a great univ now.

 

Again, all rejections can be converted to your advantage, if you really really want to get into grad school. I present myself as an example.