Properly using feedback from last application cycle

[Halek]

So, 

Last year I applied to graduate schools. I didn't get into any of my schools but I did get feedback from almost all of them. The only thing they could all say was that I had no publications. Unfortunately, this is rather hard to fix. Since then I have been working as a field technician in my field (ecology) and I have talked to my PI about authorship. She said that I can take an active role in the papers that come from the research I'm doing, but that these papers likely won't be even closed to published when I apply to graduate school. Since this was my only feedback last time I applied, does anyone have any additional advice on improving my application, since these papers won't be on there?

 

Some general stats:

Graduated in 2016 with a BS in Biology: Ecology and a BA in History from the University of Texas: Austin
GPA: 3.5
GRE Verbal: 85th percentile
GRE Quant: 51st percentile
GRE Writing: 90th percentile 
Research Experience: Worked in labs since my freshman year, internship at the EPA, senior project and poster presented at my university's poster fair, field technician position, a poster at the end of this summer and most likely a paper eventually. 

I'm planning on retaking the GRE in September to hopefully improve the quantitative score. Not much I can do about my GPA at this point. 

[TakeruK]

Usually, having publications is not an absolute requirement for graduate school admissions. Many people are admitted without any publications at all. 

I would also advise against taking the feedback too literally unless you know the feedback was carefully crafted for you. Some things are hard to give good feedback on (e.g. your letters or your essays) so admissions committee may just look at the easiest quantitative thing to point out and say that. This doesn't mean that there are no other things needing improvement.

For the publication aspect, you could consider applying to a wider range of schools next year. Some schools won't care about pubs as much. One potentially worrying thing is that looking at your experience, it sounds like you have worked on many projects since your freshman year but still have no publication, not even a co-authored one. Maybe this is normal in your field, but to me, this could be a concern. Even in my field, it's not always possible to complete a publication-worthy project in just one summer since research is unpredictable and things can go wrong. So, my advice is to ensure your application not only say what projects you worked on, but what you accomplished as the result of your work. For example, I supervised one undergrad a few summers ago on a project that didn't result in a publication but answered a very very important question for our future work. (We needed to know if we should try to run future projects with a more time-expensive but more accurate method A instead of continuing with our less accurate but much quicker method B). So, in the letters for this student, we always emphasize the outcome of their work and how their summer work has informed years of future work. 

So, be sure to do this in your SOP and your CV discussing your own work, as well as talking with your letter writers. Share the feedback from the schools with them and ask them if they would be willing to emphasize the impact of your work even though it was not a publication.

I also have some other advice that could help.

1. Remember that admissions is somewhat random/stochastic, so not getting in doesn't really mean it's a judgement of you as a person or a scientist. How many schools did you apply to last year? If it's less than 6, consider applying to a larger number of schools. If you applied to lots of schools, then look at the list again with a mentor (i.e. someone who knows your abilities and interests well) and consider whether the types of schools you're applying to are a good fit.

2. Your sidebar says that you are interested in Ecology or Anthropology. Applying to multiple PhD fields is not that normal unless there is a much closer connection between those two fields than I would expect. Maybe you already did this, but you really have to treat them as two separate applications. Make your Ecology PhD application completely different than your Anthropology application. For point #1 above, this means you should be applying to at least 6 programs in each of these two fields, maybe more. You may also want to have different letter writers. And do not mention that you are also applying to the other program. At some schools, you are not able to apply to 2 PhD programs and/or you must mention them. Unless it is a rare case where the same school is a perfect fit for both programs for you, or unless the school allows multiple program applications without the programs knowing about your other one, I would only apply to one program per school.

[Halek]

Thanks for the response!

I only applied to 4 schools last time around, so I'm definitely applying to more this time.
The reason I've listed both is because I'm interested in human land use and how this impacts conservation. Some schools put this type of research in Ecology, but others put it in Anthropology or even Geography. I've been mainly making the choice on a school-by-school basis. 

[rising_star]

57 minutes ago, Halek said:

The reason I've listed both is because I'm interested in human land use and how this impacts conservation. Some schools put this type of research in Ecology, but others put it in Anthropology or even Geography. I've been mainly making the choice on a school-by-school basis. 

On the one hand, I understand what you're saying and you could even add urban planning to that list. BUT, on the other hand, there are real differences in how an ecologist, an anthropologist, and a geographer will approach the study of land use and conservation. I think one obstacle you're facing might be just that, especially if you're applying at the PhD level. Are you interested in how humans approach land use (policy or practices)? Because, if so, that's more appropriate in anthro or geography than in ecology. If you're more interested in thinking about landscape scale conservation and ecological impacts of various choices, then ecology makes more sense. I recommend reading some key journals in the field (Land Use Planning comes to mind, but also Environment and Planning [of which there are multiple], The Annals of the AAG, Geoforum, and Ecology and Society) to see how scholars are approaching the subject and from what departments. 

[Neuro15]

Couple thoughts:

1.) While publishing is always helpful to an application, the lack thereof hardly breaks one. 

2.) Try to bump that Q GRE score up. A score in the 75th percentile up would help a lot. Your GPA isn't bad, so academically if you raise the GRE you should be ok on that front. 

3.) Increase the number of programs you apply to, both in numbers and in diversity of prestige. Applying to four programs is on the lower side. If they were of all high prestige, that's why you were not successful. 

 

[lemondrop825]

You don't state if you contacted any potentials PIs before submitting your application. Making a connection with a PI is the most important thing. In a lot of ecology and evolutionary programs students are nominated by PIs and those who don't do not get admission. It's also important to stress that this is an underfunded field. A lot of times students get rejected because their potential PIs do not have funding to take them on. A lot of this is about timing and luck. Of course, if you get a fellowship like NSF this will make things a whole lot easier.