Mediocre Grades, Great Research Experience

[Fourstarnotes]

Hi everyone, just looking for a little advice. I applied to PhD genetics programs last year and didn’t get into any schools so I figured I could use a little advice. 

 

I have a BS in Biology and a minor in religious studies with a 3.1 GPA.

I also have a masters in biomedical science with a 3.1 GPA.

 

I took the GRE and scored 156 (71% below) for verbal reasoning, 150 (40% below) for quantitative reasoning and a 4.5 (80% below) for analytical writing. 

 

I have worked in a human genetics laboratory with for the past 4 years. I have attended and presented at several genetics conferences and am on dozens of abstracts. I have one first author publication and three publications where I am a coauthor, with a few others in preparation. I have excellent references from my job in the laboratory but none (I was close enough to ask) from my undergraduate or masters program. 

 

I think I just chose the wrong programs last time and thought my research experience would overcome my mediocre grades and average GRE scores, which proved not to be true. So I guess I’m really looking for advice as for what I should do? 

 

Should I take the GRE subject test for biology? Should I contact professors at the schools that I want to apply to see if they have are taking students in their lab? 

 

Any advice would be appreciated! I would really like to get in this cycle.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Fourstarnotes

[rising_star]

Did you really apply to PhD programs without any rec letters from either your bachelor's or master's? If so, that's a major red flag that definitely didn't help your applications. If I were you, I would try to get at least one letter from your master's, if not two, and also to raise your quantitative GRE score. Your GRE score and GPA are below some cutoffs but the GRE is the only one of those you can fix. Contacting professors to see if they are taking students is also necessary so you should work on that too. But, I wouldn't be surprised if the GPA, GRE, and odd rec letters are what kept you out.

[Shamrock_Frog]

I agree with the above poster about not having an academic reference from your masters or undergrad. That is definitely a red flag. You will not be having any academic references and you've got both a BA/BS and a masters.
 

My uGPA was slightly higher than yours, with some post-bacc classes that had a much higher GPA (~3.7 from one institution and 4.0 from another, around 20 hours total). 

Your masters GPA being so low might be worrisome as well. Most applicants that I've seen on here that have a low uGPA have a 3.8+ masters GPA. But they also don't have the research experience you have.

Do you have a list of programs you are looking at? That will help you determine if you need the Bio GRE. 

I got into a PhD program with low GRE scores (higher verbal and higher writing, but quant about the same) but I had a lot of research experience (5 years post-bacc, no masters). No publications, but a couple of posters and a lot of varied experience in techniques. 

 

Just be smart about which universities you apply to.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Shamrock_Frog

[eeee1923]

Your master's GPA is a bit worrisome. Your first year in most bio PhD programs would consist of coursework and lab rotations. Classes are of less emphasis than research but you are expected to keep around 3.6+ without putting too much time into classes. A MS would essentially be similar to the 1st yr of the PhD and if you were scoring around the B level, some adcomms may feel you won't be able to keep up with the coursework. 

 

That being said, the only things you can improve are your GRE, and making sure you get strong LoRs and write a strong SoP. You need to improve on your general GRE (i.e. close to or at least at 160 for both the Q and V). Also if you plan on taking the subject GRE - aim for at least the 75th percentile or don't bother sending the scores (they won't help your application package). The fortunate thing is that unlike physics and math PhD programs, a lot of Bio programs don't require a subject exam. 

[Fourstarnotes]

Thanks for the help everyone! As for my masters GPA I was in the program while working full time in the research lab I am currently at. Since I was focusing on working full time simultaneously I only focused on keeping a B average since my employer was paying for the program. Since it was at night after work I wasn't really able to form strong connections with professors either. 

 

I will be able to get letters for atleast one professor from my undergraduate institution but I'm less sure about my masters, I think they would write it but I don't know how strong it would be. I will still have extremely strong letters coming from my research in the laboratory I currently work in. And I do plan to retake the GRE's to increase my score. 

Would it make sense to just not include my masters program in my application at all? Since it may raise too many red flags? I know this sounds crazy but it seems like this may be a good option? 

 

Thoughts? Thanks again everyone!

[rising_star]

You could apply without mentioning your master's but you damn well better make sure that no one finds out that you ever did a master's. I say this because most schools require you to provide transcripts from every institution you've attended since high school. They also have you certify that everything in your application is true. If you omit your master's and they find out, they could take action including forcing you to withdraw your application or rescinding your acceptance. That's a huge risk to take, imo.

[eeee1923]

.... Would it make sense to just not include my masters program in my application at all? Since it may raise too many red flags? I know this sounds crazy but it seems like this may be a good option? 

 

 

Your GPA is 3.1 not 0.0 - aka you meet the base requirement for applying. I would include all your transcripts. Like rising_star said it would be a hassle to completely hide this part of your training (plus all the legal stuff).