<p>Wow, two or three days is a surprisingly great turn-around! I guess that only applies if you've been accepted though? Can't believe UCSF made you wait a whole month.</p>
<p>To take us off in a new direction, did anyone apply for NSF GRF? A little late to be asking this now I guess, but what is the deal with the "key words" and "statement attesting to the originality of the proposal" in the research proposal part? Didn't notice that until the very end, so I had to make my tabs smaller and shorten the title just to make everything fit. :P I feel like a tard because I bet nobody else wastes space on the key words, but still gets the funding anyway. Any of you have creative proposals?</p>
<p>Oh yes, they'll tell you very quickly if you've been accepted (I suppose I shouldn't say 2 or 3 days -- within a week, more realistically), but will only tell you later if you've been rejected. This is probably because they keep some number of people on a waitlist -- if UCSF's top 20 candidates had all declined by the beginning of March, maybe they would have offered me a spot. (Maybe not. ;))</p>
<p>Thanks for the surprisingly candid declaration mollie. I will finish my aps and just throw my hands up and let the cards fall however the fall...</p>
<p>I didn't apply for NSF GRF, I was under the impression that this is to be filled out when you formulate a proposal in your chosen lab.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I was under the impression that this is to be filled out when you formulate a proposal in your chosen lab.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, that's what I thought when I went to my school's fellowship office and read samples of successful proposals. But when I looked more closely, I realized half of the winners were totally bluffing - they were seniors like me who obviously didn't know what project they'd be working on the next year, let alone who their PI would be or where they would enroll.</p>
<p>NSF funding is portable: you're not required to work on the proposal you submitted, the money's just yours to take anywhere. (Kind of like how you have to list a college for the National Merit Scholarship program in the fall of your senior year in high school, but you can change the school later if you receive the scholarship.) NSF just wants to see that you can develop well-thought-out research proposals in general. If you're applying in your first year of grad school, it makes sense to formulate a proposal for the lab you're in, but even then you could get creative if you wanted to...</p>
<p>Hey guys, I need you advice...I just checked my GRE subject test score by calling ETS and I got 590 (74% percentile), do you think I should submit this score to the schools or should just leave it out? Please let me know. Thanks!</p>
<p>That's a tough call. Based on the GPA you posted at the start of this thread, I would say leave out the subject test score. The GPA indicates that you know the material very well so they probably won't question the absence of the subject test score.</p>
<p>heres another question regarding subject test scores...</p>
<p>Most of the schools that I am applying to do not require a subject test, however, many of them "strongly recommend", "recommend", or "encourage"
you to submit scores for it. I was thinking about sending it only to schools that require (obviously) and "strongly recommend" sending the scores. I don't know how I did yet, but what score (in terms of percentile) is good enough to warrant sending the scores to "recommended" and "encouraged" schools? Is this dependent on your GPA and where you went to school?</p>
<p>I think it does depend on your GPA and where you went to school, especially if you were an international student. If the admissions committee isn't familiar with the curriculum or reputation of your school, they might use the subject test score to tell them what your GPA "means" in terms of actual content learned. If they are familiar with your school, then a good score will tell them that you definitely retained the material, or that you care enough about going to grad school to study for the subject test, or whatever.</p>
<p>I think if you're over 95% you should send to all schools; over ninety, send to required and strongly recommended. Under ninety is still not bad really, esp. if you're a domestic student, but at that point it won't help your case much to send them and it's $15 per school, so...</p>
<p>Got an e-mail from them the other day. I don't think I'll be applying there directly - might participate through another grad school eventually.</p>
<p>I haven't been on this site since I applied for undergrad but here goes. </p>
<p>Top 10 University
3 years research experience in same lab
undergrad fellowship for research
summer research fellowship at Cornell Med
biology
3.57 GPA, major GPA's a little lower
GRE: taking it in a week!</p>
<p>I'm applying to: Stanford, U Washington, UT Southwestern, Harvard, Northwestern, Mayo, Cornell Med, Baylor, Johns Hopkins, and maybe NIH/GPP.</p>
<p>Most of it is either in translational research or molecular bio. I'm actually a little worried about the whole process since I started rather late, and as a result this semester's GPA will not be so great (I'm hoping some schools won't look at it). Also I feel that many of my schools might be reach schools, but I'm taking my chances with them because I love the research they are doing there. </p>
I would probably not make this distinction -- I really doubt that schools consider the subject tests strongly enough that they would make a distinction between anyone over 90th percentile.</p>
<p>
If it's not on the current transcript you're sending, schools won't see it -- it's not like undergrad, where you have to send an updated transcript after first semester grades are in. You still have to graduate, because you have to send a final transcript after graduation to the school you end up picking, but your first semester grades won't make a difference as long as they're not on the transcript you're sending now.</p>
<p>Hey StarDash, how did you like the Cornell Med summer program? Was it this recent summer? I was in the GSK SURP program, so we probably went to a few of the same seminars assuming you went to some hosted by Sloan-Kettering and we probably had the same poster session. PM me your name if you want; I would love to read about your research from the abstract booklet.</p>
<p>What do you think is best for SOP, written in concise more philosophical manner or more detailed including description of the science one has been involved with over the years and is interested in?</p>
<p>I wrote mine in the detailed way, describing my projects and my role in them. I didn't pontificate about the virtues of developmental biology. I didn't mention, beyond a sentence or two, how I chose that field, and I especially didn't mention my childhood fascination with baby animals (you laugh, but I've seen other people write SOPs like that). I have a fit paragraph, of course, and I state my career goal. As far as motivation and interest are concerned, my actions speak louder than my words could, anyway.</p>
<p>On the other hand, you should have recommendation letters from the people you worked for, and a description of the project on your CV, so you're repeating information if you describe your research in the SOP. Also, even if the philosophical stuff is bs, at least it provides a flow: my SOP right now is a solid brick of information, unskimmable but not exciting to read. But hey, I hear that no one reads the SOP anyway.</p>
<p>I have two critics that suggest different things for the SOP and was under the impression that it was a bigger part of the application. If you search the internet for guidelines on SOP most say to make it very clear and devoid of technical jargon but I guess that doesn't apply to science. However UCSF (BMS) says something like do not simply repeat your CV to us in prose and brevity/clarity work in your favor. I suppose all that really matters are the stats that we are working so hard to develop and the SOP might influence them between those candidates but is impossible to predict what wins.</p>
<p>I'm going with a brief intro into why I am interested, research experience (pubs), declaration of what I intend to do with the degree, and summation. I should probably go back and supplement with more science. It seems overkill as they already know where you worked, what you worked on, and what you published...</p>
<p>I'm also applying to UCSF BMS, and I need to submit two 650 word essays (which I should write this weekend-ish, because it's due soon). If I remember correctly, one of them is for research and the other is an SOP. So I won't be including my research experience in the SOP for that school.</p>
<p>I think the SOP really is important and more than a distinguishing factor between candidates, because it's where you describe your fit to the school and specific profs. No matter what format you use, that information needs to be in there. I'm hoping that detail works in my favor, because I did a lot of independent work, learned many techniques, and other Good Things which may not be clear from the CV. Of course, I'm trying to cut the flab and make the essay very clear, so in the end I hope to have brevity/clarity but still all of the necessary info.</p>
<p>I expect that they're not getting a lot of brilliant prose for these SOPs. (What % of applicants are ESL students?) So don't worry too much.</p>
<p>I am bit worried after looking at these stunning stats of my peers (as I will be applying to the same schools). I was going to apply in Fall 2008, but I got RAship at NIH for two years, so now I am applying in Fall 2009.</p>
<p>Stats:
GPA: 3.81 (University of California)
GRE: Q/V/AW: 740/610/4 (i am worried about this analytical score a bit)
Still have not taken Subject test. Probably in Mid 2008.
Will have 3 years of research experience when I apply.
Hoping for one high impact first author publication and one low impact one in cancer research or something. </p>
<p>gheeya, those look like really good stats. that's a really high GPA for someone coming out of Cal. from what i've gathered, GRE aren't that significant for grad school in biomedical sciences.</p>
<p>your 3 years of research experience and prospective publications will go a long way, if you can discuss those two intelligently.</p>
<p>I am positive that you'll have a very easy time publishing "one high impact first author publication and one low impact one in cancer research or something" in one year time, oh wait...</p>
<p>Snowcapk,</p>
<p>What do you make of inquiry on the applications as to which faculty we have contacted about our application? It almost seems to me that they are implying we should contact faculty, although i've heard this can be pretty annoying and pointless...</p>