<p>Hey guys, I need help with figuring out my chances for graduate school for 2013.
Here are my stats:
Undergraduate Institution: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, Indiana
Major: Chemical Engineering w/ Organic Chemistry Minor
GPA: Cumulative: 3.5, Major: 3.75
GRE: Taking in October. Confident about math but not so much about the verbal part.
Research: 2 years of experience in Physical Chemistry and Spectroscopy Research
Internship: Worked at Amgen (Pharmaceutical Company in California) for summer, 2012.
LORs: I can get great LORs from my mentors and my research advisor.</p>
<p>I'm looking to do a masters (non-thesis) in engineering and go straight into the industry after that. </p>
<p>I'll be applying to:</p>
<p>UC: Berkeley, LA, SB, SD
Cornell
Univ of Wisconsin
Univ of Minnesota
UT Austin
Purdue
and maybe a few others</p>
<p>Thanks guys. Your help would be greatly appreciated.</p>
<p>Nobody does “chances” for graduate school. Your GPA is fine, but beyond that, so many factors go into admissions that anyone who says they can “chance” you is lying.</p>
<p>maybe for purdue and the UC’s with the exception of Berkeley and SB. I know UT Austin rarely ever accepts masters students. I can’t comment on the rest of the choices. Your GPA is rather on the low side.</p>
<p>lol@ you thinking you can even begin to “comment” on his chances.
His overall GPA is average, but grad schools care about your major GPA. His is pretty good (but this depends on his undergrad school’s average gpa.)</p>
<p>Average GPA won’t get you into the top schools. And I can comment on his chances because I have been through the process. I go to a top 5 ChemE school and everybody that I have met here has at least a 3.9 overall GPA and near perfect GRE scores with a good amount of research.</p>
<p>You can’t comment on anyone’s “chances” because I’m fairly certain you haven’t sat in a graduate admissions committee meeting at your top-5 ChemE school.</p>
<p>This whole idea of random students giving out “chances” is hot buttered nonsense. Graduate admissions are an incredibly holistic process that take into account a wide array of factors that are beyond the realm of anyone on an Internet forum to figure out and that vary wildly from school to school and program to program. Funding, research interests, personal connections between professors, etc. etc. etc. That data is not remotely accessible to you, me or anyone else outside each individual committee.</p>
<p>You, of all people, should know that anecdotal data about one person’s experience as an outside observer isn’t a particularly good substitute for understanding what actually goes on inside a gradcom meeting. Since we don’t have that data available, we really can’t make any substantive conclusions about the possible results of that committee’s process. And of course, that committee’s conclusions are only valid for that one set of applicants at that one program. Give the same stack of applications to a gradcom at a different school and you might end up with a completely different set of admissions results.</p>
<p>You’re making a wild-assed guess, is what you’re doing. And that’s OK, as long as you call it a wild-assed guess.</p>
<p>Yea but he is looking to go to grad school for a non thesis masters. I think we can agree that they place much more emphasis on the numbers rather than other factors such as research, etc.</p>
<p>I think a lot of schools basically toss out applications for a terminal masters. I probably do a little more digging on this, but UT and stanford for sure are two top research universities that don’t give out terminal masters for chem e.</p>
<p>how big of a sample size are we talking about? I’m pretty sure top schools accept SOME people with sub 3.7 GPA. But I have heard that 3.7+ is the norm if you want to go top 10…</p>