<p>I attend the University of Arizona for Biomedical Engineering with 2 minors in Biochemistry and Physiology.
My graduating GPA should be in the 3.6-3.65 range.
GRE: Q164 (84%) V157 (75%) W4.5 (75%) (I have time to retake this with much more preparation if it'll be beneficial)
Relevant Experience:
-1 summer in a lab dealing with Biomedical Engineering/ Organic Chemistry (3rd author)
-1 summer in internship with Biomedical Engineering company
-1 year in lab dealing with genetics and microbiology (1st author)
Letters of Rec:
1-2 from each position I've had and 2 professors
Awards/Honors:
-Lots of small misc. scholarships
-Large 4-year scholarship that almost completely paid for school
-Lots of Dean Lists (for 2.5 years running now)
-Planning on being a Boren Scholar soon (if the application goes well)</p>
<p>Misc. Info: I graduated high school one year early, but took an extra year in college to get the 2 minors (which prepare me for my desired graduate degree) and study abroad (hopefully). So I'll be graduating at the same age as most other 4-year students (20-21).</p>
<p>I'm planning on applying to a lot of schools for Genetics or if the school has the program, Genetic Engineering. They include: Harvard, Stanford, University of Washington, Cal Tech, John Hopkins, Berkeley, MIT, Georgia Tech, UCLA, University of Arizona (backup)</p>
<p>So what are my chances at these top universities and what should I do with my time to better my chances since I still have 2 years left?</p>
<p>“Chances” are not helpful for UG and even less so for Grad School. So much depends on your proposed research and what the dept. is looking for and has openings for. I will say that if you are interested in “top” depts. you will have top be a “top” student, and your numbers don’t suggest that. If your user name describes your attitude toward college work, your chances at successfully entering and finishing a grad degree are low. Best wishes.</p>
<p>Thanks for the input. My first summer research experience was a comprehensive “How to get into and succeed in graduate school”, so I know that the stats I posted are nowhere near enough to get an accurate read on my future. I was looking for the input of whether I would be considered a “top” student or not. If you did, I could have stayed my course. But if you don’t think I do, then it’s time for some improvement. I’ll get myself more research experience (maybe internationally), publications, improve my GRE score, and shoot for a 3.7. I really appreciated your opinion, so thank you!
p.s. I initially made my username what it is because it was ironic, as I tend to study way before my tests and do my assignments well before they’re due haha</p>
<p><em>shrug</em> I was/am a procrastinator and I successfully finished a PhD program. You have to learn how to manage your time, but a lot of grad students and academics are procrastinators.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There’s no way to know. We don’t know who you are competing with. If you’re a junior with 2 years still left and you already have 1 year of research experience, that’s good. Your GPA is also fine, as are your GRE scores. But there are a lot of intangibles that go into applications - the exact nature of your research experiences vs. what the professors want that year; whether someone you’re competing with is a closer fit to the labs you’d enter than you are; maybe you have an interesting skill that the department wants or something. Grades-wise, you are fine and competitive for programs, but otherwise there’s really not much we can say.</p>
Juillet usually gives golden advice, but I cannot see these limp GRE scores and a predicted 3.6 GPA (which I’d wager is an ambitious projection) getting you into the the depts. of Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Cal Tech, Berkeley, etc. You should be casting a far wider net and seriously buckling down on your studies. </p>
<p>Could you give me a frame of reference of the GPA and GRE scores you believe a top student possesses? I heard from my summer program’s lecturer on grad school admissions that as long as you’re a respectable student (GPA >3.5), meet their GRE “threshold” (~160 on Q/ V and ~4.5 on W), and have proven yourself a competent researcher as an undergraduate, the rest lies in the application and the specific school’s interest.</p>
<p>Thanks for your opinion! It makes me feel better, but just in case, I’ll try to meet Snarlatron’s definition of a top student. It would only make me feel regretful if I didn’t get into a program that seems right for me because of GPA or GRE scores (which I could have definitely improved), so if I can meet even higher expectations, this has a smaller chance of happening.</p>
<p>I did kind of overlook the fact that this was engineering; I suppose that a 164 is average/mediocre for engineering. For genetics, I think they are pretty decent unless you want to do computational genetics. However, the new GRE’s percentile ranks aren’t as badly skewed as the original GRE. I still think that a 3.6-3.65 is fine (actually, pretty good) for top schools (especially in a field like engineering), and I don’t think the verbal scores on the GRE matters too much.</p>
<p>When I say “fine” I don’t mean that they are excellent - just that I don’t think they will absolutely be the thing that keeps an otherwise outstanding applicant out. GPAs and GRE scores are just thresholds in PhD programs - you need to pass a threshold (that few PhD programs will release, because it’s a bit fluid) but beyond that higher or lower doesn’t really work in your favor. A 3.5 with excellent research experience could get in over a 4.0 with lackluster experience and recs. The rest of your application will need to be outstanding.</p>