<p>@microphd
They told me that most people hear “within a few weeks”. A grad student told me that the admissions committee waits to meet until after all of the interview weekends, and I think there are three or four total so I’m guessing 3 weeks or so before everyone will hear. As for admission rates after interview, I’m heard from a couple grad students that it is about 50-60 percent. One person said that 500 people interview for 93 spots, but I think she had her numbers wrong… I think it’s more like 200-250 people that are interviewed. Hope that helps and good luck at your interview!</p>
<p>Man, I love seeing 80-90% post-interview acceptance. What a stress reducer.</p>
<p>@molbio</p>
<p>For the WashU DBBS Biochemistry program, they told us this weekend that they will accept 40-50% of applicants and that if we get an offer we will hear this coming week.</p>
<p>Albert Einstein</p>
<p>I just got an interview invitation in March1,2. Rather late! Anyone is going to be there, too?</p>
<p>xxxxxxx and amyrin, thanks for the information on Wash U!</p>
<p>So does anyone know about their Molecular Genetics and Genomics acceptance rates? I saw on Grad Cafe that someone has already been accepted (I assume from the first interview weekend). This is absolutely my first-choice program…I am so nervous.</p>
<p>So how much of your current research is it actually ok to share in these interviews? </p>
<p>I work in a pretty high profile lab and I’m concerned that sharing too much of my work could result in my PI getting scooped by another lab.
Can I only discuss the portions of my work that I have already had published. We are generally very quiet about the details of our work and many of my interviews are with PIs in a similar field.
To really show case what I have done I would have to share more information… does anyone have any suggestions as to what is appropriate?</p>
<p>any1butme2:</p>
<p>Ask your PI what is appropriate to share because technically all of your work is his. Generally though people will share what they have already done, so their finished projects and what has been published. If you are pressed in your interviews to share your current projects, just say it’s a continuation of whatever you have already published if it really makes you uncomfortable.</p>
<p>I’ve been wondering the exact same thing!</p>
<p>I figure I’m going to avoid mentioning specific gene names, etc.</p>
<p>No one will blink if you say there’s unpublished work ongoing that you’d prefer not to share. It’s absolutely appropriate to be concerned about the existence of unethical PIs – says my boss, “There are lots of fish out there. But don’t let yourself believe they’re all nice tunafish – some of them are sharks.” </p>
<p>I’ve been presenting my work at conferences, although it’s a competitive field and I’m not really near publication. I present data that’s more background-related (previously published results, verification of my conditional knockout, expression of my favorite gene), and don’t present the really juicy stuff, though I do mention that it’s in progress. I use a code name for a gene I’m working on that hasn’t been described in our system. </p>
<p>Don’t let anyone bully you into saying more than you’d like to say. You can always smile sweetly and invite them to contact your PI if they would like more information. The real sharks will try to get you to say more, but you are absolutely right to hold your ground.</p>
<p>It may help to script out your story before you have to tell it. You will end up saying basically the same things to everybody, complete with little pauses for jokes and asides, so you may as well plan what you’re going to say and perhaps run it by a more senior member of your lab.</p>
<p>Thanks MaceVindaloo. I definitely plan on asking my PI. He’s been away at a conference. I’ve been trying to organize my thoughts on what to say and just kept having to ask myself “is this ok to talk about?” Unfortunately, the line is particularly fuzzy for me. I have mainly been working on method development and the actual application of my methods is the potentially proprietary stuff (what I’ve be doing recently). </p>
<p>I understand why these “rules” exist but its probably going to be a bit tough to talk about a method and avoid discussing its application. Sigh I suppose I use large generalizations for the application instead. I guess I don’t really need to convince these PIs how cool my work is. They’re intelligent; they can probably extrapolate and form their own conclusions/specific applications.</p>
<p>Molliebatmit: You’re right I am definitely going to have to come up with a pseudo script or something, just so there is no chance of a slip up. Very good suggestion! Thank you. </p>
<p>As if this whole process wasn’t already hard enough… you would think there would be some leeway in these kinds of situations, but I guess all is fair when publication rights and Nobel Prizes (hahaha, if only) are up for grabs.</p>
<p>if you have data to present/speak about, i am assuming you would be far enough along that it would be tough for another rival lab to take your ideas and prepare for publication prior to the lab you are in.</p>
<p>if you are concerned, then just don’t go into too much detail regarding your lab’s work. i have yet to have an interviewer who wished to hear about the research i had performed/am performing for more than five min. but then again, my current and past work is not very related to that of the individuals i choose to interview with.</p>
<p>
This is not a bet I would be willing to take, especially when talking to someone who is a direct rival and who would already have most of the same methods set up in the lab. The hard part of a project is figuring out what to investigate and how; if you have the information on what’s interesting, actually repeating the experiments is trivial.</p>
<p>I don’t mean to be the cynical fourth-year here. But I’ve seen people get scooped based on an overly generous sense of scientific openness, so I think the wise choice is always to share less when in a questionable situation. Loose lips sink ships, as they say.</p>
<p>I think mollie is totally right.</p>
<p>i guess it depends on the study. i have been a part of projects that plan on taking several years to complete.</p>
<p>
The obvious solution is to say, “My co-authors are writing up our paper as we speak.” :)</p>
<p>To anyone who interviewed at Michigan PIBS this weekend: when did they say they would get back with decisions?</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>I think mollie has it right. Tight lipped and well planned it is…</p>
<p>hai I am new here</p>
<p>i did apply to couple of US Schools of Graduate program. I got an interview call from UMIAMI PIBS yesyerday. I am got a confirmed offer from Dr Catherine verfaillies lab in KU leuven Belgium. </p>
<p>I am confused whether i need to go to belgium or stay in the US with the offer i get ?</p>
<p>pls advice?I am an international applicant from india</p>
<p>Chackochen4u:</p>
<p>what do you know about the area the schools are in?</p>
<p>what do you know about how happy the students in those labs are?</p>
<p>what do you know about the funding?</p>
<p>Only you know what your goals and priorities are! Is a US PhD something that you feel is more valuable? Or is it the work in the lab that you are going into that is more valuable?</p>
<p>The advice I was given from my advisors, and from other scientists at the international conferences I’ve attended as an undergrad told me the same thing: It’s not entirely the school, it’s the research, and the funding!</p>
<p>If you know that the labs you are going into are well funded, and the work is something you are equally passionate about, then it comes down to location, but if you are taking on work in a lab that is incongruent with your goals, just for the location, then you may end up resenting it later.</p>
<p>I was also told by a current professor that it’s more important you are in a location that you love, because the work consumes your life, you need to be able to have the appropriate stress relief, and if you are in the middle of nowhere, with nothing to do, you might end up feeling a little like a rat in a maze.</p>
<p>…but that’s just my two cents. Good luck!</p>
<p>Hello everyone,
I wonder how many people yet have to hear back from schools. I have a list of them and the weird thing is I haven’t even received any rejection letters. So checking my mail, logging on the school’s application website etc etc isn’t helping at all.</p>
<p>I did mail a few schools and the only reply was if you do not hear by …such and such date , you might not receive any offer for admission.Yeah I realize that…what about now? And what is the point of waiting for March if you have already rejected me right? Its much easier to accept a rejection letter than wait not knowing the status of your application.
Can people list a few schools they are waiting on any reply?
For me: I haven’t heard a word from BU, Emory (replied to my email saying wait and watch till March),Tufts Sackler( No updates whatsoever)</p>
<p>Did Yale put any rejections on the message center of the applications? Is there a way to check? ( never got any interview so I know I am rejected)</p>
<p>Though I do realize that everyone’s busy I still expected some status on my apps. 
All are Pharmacology applications though.</p>