Need a quick profile review for PhD

[adityaj]

Looking for a profile review:

Profile:

• I am a international student with US MSCS degree from Tier 1 School.
• GPA: 3.4 (Lots of CS courses than required)
• I have 2 years work exp, 2 years of research assistantship at school, 4 product internships.
• Research: 2 Journal articles, 4 Conference Papers, 6 workshop papers. and other research related activities. Also mentored Undergrads
• The only low is my GRE (due to busy at work, no preparation had to take it): Quant: 760 Verb: 340, AWA: 3.5
• Toefl (had to take the exam with no preparation) : 107/120
  
  Applied for Fall 2010 Phd Program:
  
  • UWash
  • UCSD
  • UCSB
  • DUKE
  • Stanford
    
  1. Are any of these safe universities for profile?

  Also applying for Fall 2011 Program(if none of above give me a offer):

• What are some other Universities which I should consider to apply next year?
  

[adityaj]

LORS - 2 Professors (Popular), 1 Manager at work.

I really worked hard for my research team at school and hence could publish. I am confident my professor would complement the same in LOR.

------------

It would be great if anyone would find time for there 2 cents on the above profile review.

Also datamineguy, DJLamar, and thisAintNoGame it would be great if you could take some time out for the same.

Thank you again.

[Gaiden59]

I would say your research background seems very strong, but your GPA and GRE scores are a little on the low side, particularly for the schools you mentioned so it is hard to say how they balance out in the end.

Out of the schools you mentioned, I would say Stanford is a bit of a long shot, but you could possibly get into the one of the others depending on how heavily they weigh your research and what subfield you are applying to. However, I don't think I would consider any of them safe.

I don't have any advice for other schools to apply to in 2011 since I really only know schools in my subfield, but I would definitely advise taking the GRE again since the low score might really drag you down at top schools.

[thisAintNoGame]

I agree with Gaiden59; the research track record is strong but the GPA/GRE is a little low. I would take the GRE again if you are applying next year.

A 3.4 GPA is not bad but you have to remember that the best people from all over the world are applying to these institutions and a lot of them have very high GPAs. Also, the low score on the Verbal of the gre might reflect that you wont be able to write well. Communication is extremely important in research, so the ability to write well is very important. I would try to improve this skill (not just for grad admissions though, its a good life skill). Also, all publications are not equal. Getting a paper into a top IEEE or ACM conference is great but having it appear in a very low prestige or unknown conference may not do anything.

In terms of the schools that you applied to this season...

Stanford/UWashington - Stanford is one of the top schools in CS and UWashington is too. No one has a guaranteed shot at getting into these schools. If I was a betting man, I would unfortunately have to bet against you getting into these schools (dont worry, Im betting against myself too). I would say probably not (but have hope, since you never know!)

Duke/UCSD/UCSB - These aren't the top schools but they are competitive institutions none the less. A person with your publication record will stand out at these schools but nothing is a guarantee. Maybe a 50/50 shot.

In terms of advice on apps, if you know the area that you want to work in (I would assume you do since you have all those publications) then tailor your application towards a professor who works in your field that you would like to work with. If you can say something like "I have read Professor X's paper on subject Y and I feel that I could extend that work by taking his approach in section 2 and adding a Bregman Divergence and ..." (I just made that up and put little thought into what adding a Bregman Divergence actually means) then you stand a much better chance at getting noticed and getting in.

I am not sure what your area is, but some other schools to consider would be Umass-Amherst, Penn State, University of Virginia, NYU, SUNY Stony Brook, and UNC.

[grotesqueidols]

Because you are an international applicant they actually will pay close attention to your verbal GRE score. I seem to recall a school calling any score below 400 "worrying." Your TOFL score is pretty good, but the committee is going to wonder why it is high when your verbal GRE score is so low. In the past few years schools have really been "cracking down" so to speak on international applicants with poor English skills. Since graduate students are usually required to serve as teaching assistants and so on, undergrad complaints have caused many graduate committees to be quite harsh towards any perception of language issues.

Thus you need to get your score up, at the very least above 400. You have to show them you can compete against native speakers. You also need to have 100% of your application material checked by a native English speaker. If you have a low verbal score, every grammatical mistake will look gigantic to a committee.

[adityaj]

Thank you Gaiden59 and thisAintNoGame. I would like to keep this thread open a little long to see if I can gather additional feedback.

Yes, generally what you mention makes total sense( Don't know if we can apply Bregman divergence in my field: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bregman_divergence ). SOPs are tailored to areas and some of my ideas of work in the professors areas were mentioned. I am into AI and did get to publish at the tier 1 or premier conferences (ACM,IEEE, AAAI, SIGKDD, ICML, another IEEE and more). I also got 2 travel awards for the tier one conferences.

Frankly I had no time for GRE(It was a walk-in exam), but I would make a note of the same and rewrite if I apply next year.

GPA also has its magic agreed, but imagine taking your classes via video while traveling from conference to conference for one full year ... oh Yes!

[tempProfileS]

Your research is exceptional, but nothing's a given.

I highly suggest you get your quant GRE to 800. Anything less is a red flag for a dept secretary at one of the top schools. Don't get screened out for something trivial.

Apply to Stanford, MIT, CMU, and Berkeley. I think you have a good shot at one of the top 4 schools.

[adityaj]

Agreed.

Thank you grotesqueidols and tempProfileS I will consider your feedback as well.

[farseer]

I think the places that you published is very impressive, almost enough for a phd degree seems to me I would be very surprised if you dont get into any schools you applied this year.

Especially the top schools would weigh more on your research profile(which you stand out). Remember phd application is essentially a job application and I think you've shown more than

enough qualifications. For the gpa and gre scores I wouldn't worry too much of it, my sense is those are only a factor for those without too much research experiences. But let us know

how it goes this year so that can plan accordingly. Good luck!

[adityaj]

Thank you all. I will keep you posted.

The reason I have posted here is statistically if you observe the last 4 years of admits and rejects displayed in gradcafe and other such databases, you would observe that the admit decisions are made early, and rejects follow. (especially for the schools I applied).

Now I have not even heard via email from any of them. So wanted to find out if any blunder in my profile exists which I should fix?

Thank you again and any such feedback will be appreciated.

[tempProfileS]

If you don't hear back from any schools this year, the only reason I can think of is getting screened out in the first round ( possible by secretary or computer) due to low GPA and GRE. If your app makes it to the later rounds, your research credentials will be better than 95% of the other applicants.

GPA may be impossible to bring up now, so work on your GRE (both quant and verbal).

[DJLamar]

I have a 760 quantitative GRE score as well and I would be really pissed if I actually did find out that that's what's keeping me out of some of the programs that I applied to -- especially since I'm a math major as well and had a 4.0 in upper level math courses! (though ok, I did have a C in calc III freshman year )

[Gaiden59]

I have a 760 quantitative GRE score as well and I would be really pissed if I actually did find out that that's what's keeping me out of some of the programs that I applied to -- especially since I'm a math major as well and had a 4.0 in upper level math courses! (though ok, I did have a C in calc III freshman year )

I don't know if a 760 would knock you out of the running, but I would say a low 700s would certainly be a red flag at any of the top schools. Consider this: some quick googling showed distributions for different intended majors, and I found statistics that said 18.6% of intended comp sci people get an 800. I don't think this number can be far off since 6% of ALL the people who take the test get an 800. The stated mean for CS is 717. So going in with a 760, you already have an entire quarter of the people who took the test in your major did better in the only section that could possibly have even the slightest bearing on your ability to perform well.

Obviously other factors can carry you and it would be silly to weed people out over such a silly test, but I would not be surprised at all if a school like Stanford just auto-rejected anyone with a score below a 750.

[grotesqueidols]

TempProfileS and everyone else:

No one is being screened out by a secretary or a computer. Secretaries do not have that sort of power and every application is looked at by the committee. Maybe the committee tosses out everyone under a certain score into the trash (which would truly surprise me), but they do so as the designated body to make such decisions. Common comments I have seen coming from the committee in response to low GRE scares are things like "Low GRE score but significant work experience" or "poor verbal score but highly recommended by so and so for this specific project" or "Low GRE score and nothing to make up for it."

The secretary will organize the stack of applications is usually organized first and foremost by area of specialization then either alphabetically or most likely by the order they became complete. What the actual committee does after that is up to them but you will never be eliminated by anyone who is not on the committee.

If you do get rejected you can (nicely) inquire about what kept you out. Some departments will tell you. For example, if you did not waive your right to see your recommendation letter specifically, the school might let you see a copy. The secretary may have been told that they are allowed to read the notes attached to your file. You never know. Phrase your request like "I would like to become a better applicant so I would like to see what I need to work on."

Edited February 13, 2010 by grotesqueidols

[Gaiden59]

TempProfileS and everyone else:

No one is being screened out by a secretary or a computer. Secretaries do not have that sort of power and every application is looked at by the committee. Maybe the committee tosses out everyone under a certain score into the trash (which would truly surprise me), but they do so as the designated body to make such decisions. Common comments I have seen coming from the committee in response to low GRE scares are things like "Low GRE score but significant work experience" or "poor verbal score but highly recommended by so and so for this specific project" or "Low GRE score and nothing to make up for it."

The secretary will organize the stack of applications is usually organized first and foremost by area of specialization then either alphabetically or most likely by the order they became complete. What the actual committee does after that is up to them but you will never be eliminated by anyone who is not on the committee.

If you do get rejected you can (nicely) inquire about what kept you out. Some departments will tell you. For example, if you did not waive your right to see your recommendation letter specifically, the school might let you see a copy. The secretary may have been told that they are allowed to read the notes attached to your file. You never know. Phrase your request like "I would like to become a better applicant so I would like to see what I need to work on."

While I have no doubt what you say is true at some schools, I know that it is not universally the case that the committee fully reviews all applicants. My research advisor told me that as a grad student she and others worked with the admit committee and their job was to read and comment on the applications. She also said that while a professor would look at their comments (multiple grad students would comment each paper) before any decision was made, the professors would remove many applicants from the pool from the comments alone before the actual committee reviewed them, and this was at a top CS school. So if there were a lot of comments like "very low GRE and GPA, but good research", I could see a professor at a top school tossing it before taking it to the committee since there will likely be a large stack of "good GRE, GPA, and research" in the pool. Obviously grad students have more knowledge as to what a good applicant should look like over a secretary or something, but they aren't quite the professors of the committee who have done this several times so for people who have less balanced profiles, it might be hard to make it through any kind of early elimination.

Edited February 13, 2010 by Gaiden59

[grotesqueidols]

Interesting...and a littler surprising. That would be considered a breech of confidentiality where I've worked and studied. There is no way that another graduate student should be looking at your test scores, academic records, or recs. Where I worked, even undergradaute work study students were not allowed to be the ones to make the photo copies. Whoever your advisor worked with must have been a particularly lazy or horrible committee member. That is really not the norm. Even if the application was horrific, someone higher on the committee would need to sign off on the rejection. If that prof was willing to sign off without even looking at it, damn. Weird too.

I worked in the US but at Cambridge, where I am currently, the department physically locks the office doors when application material is being handled. The Graduate office closes to the public early, again so no one could possibly walk in on confidential information. Point is, it isn't a secretary or a computer deciding anything: if a committee thinks a grad student is qualified enough to decide that is their business but they are not an unspecialized admin.

[adityaj]

It looks like we deviated a little away from the required information.

1. Can any one share or compile some typical selection processes? Say from previous exp in school A(need not give name) they have multi round selection, in school B they have a single round and so forth.
2. Also it would be nice to have in the forum a collection or 1 main sticky on the top with info such as top schools for CS PhD broken down with specialization and typical requirements/range of scores, for admission.

Thanks.

[adityaj]

Thank you all who posted replies. A special thanks to grotesqueidols, Gaiden59, DJLamar, farseer (Thanks http://forum.thegradcafe.com/uploads/emoticons/default_smile.png' alt=':)'> ), thisAintNoGame !

[farseer]

One thing I forgot to mention is that I do know many schools admit student by subfields. It means that if you applied for field A and if no professor in field A is taking on new student, even if you are absolutely stellar they may not admit you. It's pretty sad but it's what it is. That's why I said phd application is just like a job application in some places and that's what makes the admission process somewhat "random". Since you applied to multiple schools I assume the chance that happens for all is negligible. So just stay tuned for good news.

[OH YEAH]

Your research is exceptional, but nothing's a given.

I highly suggest you get your quant GRE to 800. Anything less is a red flag for a dept secretary at one of the top schools. Don't get screened out for something trivial.

Apply to Stanford, MIT, CMU, and Berkeley. I think you have a good shot at one of the top 4 schools.

I disagree. I don't think it matters. For the record, I got a lower math score than the poster did and got accepted to Princeton. Caveats: I'm American, and my research/recs were awesome.

I would however work on that verbal score...

Edited February 15, 2010 by OH YEAH

[Zen]

I think this page throws some light on the important notes

http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/grad-school-app-tips.htm

[adityaj]

Updating the Thread and closing this.

• UWashington - Reject
• UCSD - Admit.
• UCSB - Admit.
• DUKE - Admit.
• Stanford- Reject.