Mixed-Quality Application Chances

[th3rdthatcher]

Hey guys,

 

I am a fourth year student who will be applying to grad school in organizational behavior or I/O psychology this coming December (won't be graduating until then, too). I am considering both masters and doctorate programs, and would really appreciate you guys weighing in to help me discern if a doctorate program is even feasible without a Masters first, given my situation.

The most pressing issue is my GPA. At my first University (mid-tier state school) where I spent 3 years, my UGPA was a miserable 2.8. However, I transferred to a new school (top-tier private school) the past summer, and my performance has drastically improved-- overall, my final 60 credits there will have a GPA of about 3.75. My overall uGPA should be about a 3.1 (assuming the last fall semester is included in my reported uGPA). I'm also predicting a good enough score on the GRE, given that my HS ACT score without studying was a 31.

My research experience is pretty decent: 

• worked in 3 research labs
• won 2 university-wide research grants (one at each school)
• 3 regional/national/international conference presentations
• 2 undergraduate conference presentations
• hopefully a publication under my belt before I graduate
• lead for an ongoing consulting project my I/O lab does for a nationally recognized marketing firm
• 2 good LORs, 1 mediocre one
• TA in psychology department

 

I am pretty certain that I'll be able to get into at least a MA program somewhere, and perhaps even a PHD. However, I really have no idea the calibre of programs I should be applying for, given the strange nature of my situation.

 

Thank you very much for your input.

Edited May 7, 2016 by th3rdthatcher
add

[Oshawott]

Most grad schools only take into consideration the last two years (or equivalent) of undergrad so your GPA is probably fine. The only thing that I would be concerned about with regards to your profile is the one mediocre LOR...depending on what you mean by mediocre. Do you mean that the letter writer can't really say anything good?

[th3rdthatcher]

Mediocre as in generic-- nothing bad, but nothing exemplary (whereas I did research independently under the other professors). Would you think that in light of this info, a shot at top 20 PHD programs wouldn't be completely absurd?

Edited May 7, 2016 by th3rdthatcher

[The_Old_Wise_One]

I would be worried

4 hours ago, th3rdthatcher said:

Mediocre as in generic-- nothing bad, but nothing exemplary (whereas I did research independently under the other professors). Would you think that in light of this info, a shot at top 20 PHD programs wouldn't be completely absurd?

I would be more worried about the GPA if you are looking into top 20. You will be completing with people that have > 3.8

 

[th3rdthatcher]

2 hours ago, The_Old_Wise_One said:

I would be worried

I would be more worried about the GPA if you are looking into top 20. You will be completing with people that have > 3.8

 

Definitely agree with that. Would you say a decent plan would be to shoot for top Masters, then try for PHD? (I want to go into academia, and so rank actually matters). 

[Oshawott]

Regarding your GPA, if your last two years is ~3.75+ GPA and high GRE scores (320+ combined), I wouldn't rule out PhD's in the top 20--however if you want to get a good idea where you actually would rank, some schools post admission information like GPA and GRE averages/ranges of their accepted applicants. If you're within the range or slightly below the average, then I wouldn't shut the door.

Research-wise, you've been very productive with 5 conferences, potentially one publication, and have shown that you are competitive for research grants at the undergraduate level. You also have actual I/O consulting experience on top of your research projects. Don't sell yourself short just because you had a rocky start.

My advice would be to first look at POI's you're interested in before you look at what school they come from. After you compile a list, narrow it down based on placement rates of your POI's (i.e., do their students graduate with jobs you want) This is a better indicator of how you will succeed rather than looking at the program's aggregate since some faculty may be excellent at placing students while others are not. After that, email the POI's to see if they are accepting students (only take them off the list if they explicitly say no; if they don't respond they may have just lost the email or been too busy). Once all of this is done, look at the school's rankings and find information on the GRE/GPA of accepted applicants, and gauge your competitiveness. Again, being a bit below the average at a top-rank institution is not bad (it is an average so there has to be people below it).

Finally, if you're still uncertain about it, ask your LOR writers to assess your competitiveness and give suggestions. Even if they're not necessarily IO, they'd still have a good idea of how students should fair.

Edited May 8, 2016 by Oshawott

[The_Old_Wise_One]

11 hours ago, Oshawott said:

Regarding your GPA, if your last two years is ~3.75+ GPA and high GRE scores (320+ combined), I wouldn't rule out PhD's in the top 20--however if you want to get a good idea where you actually would rank, some schools post admission information like GPA and GRE averages/ranges of their accepted applicants. If you're within the range or slightly below the average, then I wouldn't shut the door.

Research-wise, you've been very productive with 5 conferences, potentially one publication, and have shown that you are competitive for research grants at the undergraduate level. You also have actual I/O consulting experience on top of your research projects. Don't sell yourself short just because you had a rocky start.

My advice would be to first look at POI's you're interested in before you look at what school they come from. After you compile a list, narrow it down based on placement rates of your POI's (i.e., do their students graduate with jobs you want) This is a better indicator of how you will succeed rather than looking at the program's aggregate since some faculty may be excellent at placing students while others are not. After that, email the POI's to see if they are accepting students (only take them off the list if they explicitly say no; if they don't respond they may have just lost the email or been too busy). Once all of this is done, look at the school's rankings and find information on the GRE/GPA of accepted applicants, and gauge your competitiveness. Again, being a bit below the average at a top-rank institution is not bad (it is an average so there has to be people below it).

Finally, if you're still uncertain about it, ask your LOR writers to assess your competitiveness and give suggestions. Even if they're not necessarily IO, they'd still have a good idea of how students should fair.

What top schools only look at last 2 years' GPA? Every program I applied to wanted my major and cumulative GPA when filling out the application, none even mentioned wanting the last 2 years only.

Adding to that, most schools have a minimum GPA for fellowships, so funding can be an issue when your GPA is below a certain threshold.

That said, if your GPA is low, everything else best be spectacular. Being that OP mentions one not so good LOR, I would be cautious about top tier PhD programs. 

[The_Old_Wise_One]

16 hours ago, th3rdthatcher said:

Definitely agree with that. Would you say a decent plan would be to shoot for top Masters, then try for PHD? (I want to go into academia, and so rank actually matters). 

I think that would likely be the most probable route. 

[Oshawott]

2 minutes ago, The_Old_Wise_One said:

What top schools only look at last 2 years' GPA? Every program I applied to wanted my major and cumulative GPA when filling out the application, none even mentioned wanting the last 2 years only.

Adding to that, most schools have a minimum GPA for fellowships, so funding can be an issue when your GPA is below a certain threshold.

That said, if your GPA is low, everything else best be spectacular. Being that OP mentions one not so good LOR, I would be cautious about top tier PhD programs. 

Maybe it's field-specific since you're in Clinical and that's a way more competitive program than my area. It might also be regionally specific, as the vast majority of my applications were top Canadian programs (all specified last two years, and some of those programs are competitive with top U.S. institutions globally) so I may not have fact-checked the American ones properly in terms of GPA requirement since as I noted in my above post, my standing relative to other people GPA/GRE wise wasn't as big a factor in terms of who I decided to apply to (not to say that it isn't important!)

After checking a few top U.S. schools, as @The_Old_Wise_One said, they look for major and cGPA, so I would second their cautiousness. Apply for Master's programs where you can get the most out of your research productivity, strong statistical training, and demonstrate your ability to handle graduate-level work.

[th3rdthatcher]

13 hours ago, Oshawott said:

1 hour ago, The_Old_Wise_One said:

What top schools only look at last 2 years' GPA?

I've noticed that a few programs actually explicitly state multiple times on their site that they only look at the last two years (e.g. Texas A & M, #11 in research productivity; top 20 in most other rankings). I've heard of the "Last 60 credits / 2 years" being broadly applied, but the information on it seems to be mixed. However, I do agree with you on the issues of fellowships/scholarships. However, most programs that I've seen give 100% tuition waivers automatically, so it shouldn't be a massive problem. 

 

 

[th3rdthatcher]

13 hours ago, Oshawott said:

Regarding your GPA, if your last two years is ~3.75+ GPA and high GRE scores (320+ combined), I wouldn't rule out PhD's in the top 20--however if you want to get a good idea where you actually would rank, some schools post admission information like GPA and GRE averages/ranges of their accepted applicants. If you're within the range or slightly below the average, then I wouldn't shut the door.

Research-wise, you've been very productive with 5 conferences, potentially one publication, and have shown that you are competitive for research grants at the undergraduate level. You also have actual I/O consulting experience on top of your research projects. Don't sell yourself short just because you had a rocky start.

My advice would be to first look at POI's you're interested in before you look at what school they come from. After you compile a list, narrow it down based on placement rates of your POI's (i.e., do their students graduate with jobs you want) This is a better indicator of how you will succeed rather than looking at the program's aggregate since some faculty may be excellent at placing students while others are not. After that, email the POI's to see if they are accepting students (only take them off the list if they explicitly say no; if they don't respond they may have just lost the email or been too busy). Once all of this is done, look at the school's rankings and find information on the GRE/GPA of accepted applicants, and gauge your competitiveness. Again, being a bit below the average at a top-rank institution is not bad (it is an average so there has to be people below it).

Finally, if you're still uncertain about it, ask your LOR writers to assess your competitiveness and give suggestions. Even if they're not necessarily IO, they'd still have a good idea of how students should fair.

This is a tremendously helpful plan of action-- thank you! I will take all of this into serious consideration. Do you know of any programs off the top of your head that exclusively look at the last 2 years' GPA? I know Texas A & M is one, but that's the only one I've found so far that mentions such a policy specifically on its site.

[ihatechoosingusernames]

@th3rdthatcher - A lot of the I/O programs I applied to asked for both my cGPA and my last 2 years' GPAs in the application. Both were around a 3.3, and my GRE was a 320 combined. I got into three top 20 schools. Personally, I think your profile looks great. I'm not on an admissions committee though, so take it with a grain of salt  I'd start studying for the GRE now, and try to take it by the end of the summer so you have enough time to take it again by the end of October if you need to. You can also address your GPA in your personal statement by saying that you got off to a rough start, but buckled down your last two years. 

Definitely take @Oshawott's advice though. Fit is super important! You could have a 4.0 and perfect GRE scores and not get in to a program where you lack a strong research fit. I made a list of schools based on states I could live in, then looked at each professor's research interests. If you don't already know, SIOP's website has a database of graduate training programs.