[Bioinformatics] Tiers for these grad schools? My chances? Do I have enough safeties?

<p>So I'm a rising senior, and I have been looking into grad schools for bioinformatics, and I want to stay in California. Luckily, there are many choices! :D</p>

<p>Quick summary of my stats, 3.64 GPA as a genetics major in a mid-tier UC. Worked in a lab unrelated to bioinformatics summer before college and during sophomore year. Joined a bioinformatics lab on campus junior year, and am still there. In mid junior year, I got a job as a tutor on campus, and also as a data analyst (kind of). Planning on taking GREs in September (it isn't all that important right?) I can code decently (I think) in R and Perl.</p>

<p>So these schools below are on my list. What tiers would they fall in, and what would you think my chances of getting in are? Basically, I want to make sure I have enough safety and "good chance" schools in my list. (Would any of these be safety schools for me?) Of course I will be talking to some professors too, but it doesn't hurt to have more opinions.</p>

<p>UC Santa Cruz
UC Berkeley
UC San Diego
UC Los Angeles
UC Davis
UC Irvine
UC Santa Barbara
UC Riverside
UC SF
Stanford University
University of Southern California</p>

<p>Bioinformatics is not my field, but I only came to comment that in grad school admissions there’s really no such thing as a “safety” school. It doesn’t work like undergrad - first of all, there aren’t very many programs that you can be pretty sure of admission to. And secondly, since grad school is completely optional you shouldn’t “settle” for a school you wouldn’t otherwise want to attend.</p>

<p>Actually, I kind of disagree, especially in STEM fields. Although there may be no such thing as a perfect safety in grad school admissions, I definitely had safeties on my list. I purposely applied to two schools my recommenders definitely considered safeties, although I also could probably have considered the school where I did an REU a safety since they strongly encouraged me to apply and even sent me a fee waiver.</p>

<p>My analysis was correct, not only did I get into all three of these schools (along with the other schools I ended up choosing between), I got named fellowships (extra money, no teaching, etc.) for being an outstanding applicant at each of these schools.</p>

<p>So my advice would to ask your recommenders. If there is a slightly less well regarded school (like the one I picked) where they know people, that might be very good to use as a safety.</p>

<p>Let me explain what I mean by this.</p>

<p>A “safety” school is, in essence, a backup school. It is a school at which you are all but guaranteed of admissions to. Colloquially, it’s also a school that you’ll default to attending if you don’t get in anywhere else. It’s not your first choice, but you think you can be happy there, and something incredible would have to happen to make you not get in.</p>

<p>Having connections through recommenders does increase your chances of getting in - but lots of professors know each other, and professors have lots of students. Programs at which your advisor knows someone are good bets, but they still aren’t safeties - there could be another better student in your interest area that year, or the person who wants to take you on may run out of funding, or another student’s advisor could have an even closer relationship with the professor, or anything else.</p>

<p>But my objection to a “safety” school designation has less to do with your chances of admission and more to do with what a safety school means in the undergrad parlance. It’s a school you’ll default to attending, if you don’t get in the place(s) you really want to go. But there should be no such school in graduate school admissions. Grad school is optional; you don’t have to go. So anywhere that you attend should be somewhere that you are passionate about and really excited about - not a default “just in case.”</p>

<p>In other words, yes, of course I think people should apply to some top-tier schools and some schools at which they believe they have decent to excellent chances of getting accepted (personally, I would’ve been very surprised if I had not been admitted to some of the master’s programs to which I applied, although I would not have called them ‘safeties’). I think it’s even okay to say “Well, I would only go to X program if I didn’t get into Y and Z.” But they should ALL be places that you’d be really happy and academically, professionally fulfilled at. If you kind of dislike the idea of being in a particular program, don’t waste the money.</p>

<p>That’s all I meant.</p>

<p>I definitely agree that you should only apply to schools you know you would be happy attending. That’s why my safeties were actually pretty highly ranked. However, the last one I should not have applied to since I knew I would choose to stay at my undergrad institution if I only got in there. For some reason, I felt like I had to have a school like that on my list when a lot of my professors actually thought it was unnecessary.</p>

<p>But honestly in a field like bioinformatics, I think you could somewhat accurately gauge how you compare to other applicants if you ask professors. The usually will have an opinion based on other students they have advised and also on your record (research experience is very important).</p>