Importance of Undergraduate Institution

<p>Hi all,</p>

<p>I'm a sophomore microbiology undergrad thinking about graduate school. I have a strong GPA, I'm volunteering in one of my professors' lab next semester, and hoping to get an internship at a biotech company this summer (2009). I'm planning on continuing to do undergraduate research at my school (leading to a poster presentation, and possibly a publication), and hoping to get into a summer research fellowship at another university next summer. From what I've heard, it seems like I'm doing everything that prospective grad students are supposed to do as undergrads (e.g. research experience, keeping my GPA strong, etc.). However, I'm a bit worried, since I go to a lower-tier state school that no one has ever really heard of. I've looked at a few of the departmental webpages of the grad schools I'm interested in, and it seems like all of the students there did their undergrad work at big-name schools. Does this mean my chances for getting into a decent grad school are totally screwed? Help me out here!</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

<p>I doubt you're current school will kill your chances, but the fact is that it will hurt them. You have to push extra hard. GRE scores will be very important for you, so start early on mastering that test.</p>

<p>Seems like you still have time. So rather than worry about the unfairness of it all, just work that much harder to get in. Don't let what you see on departmental web pages discourage you. There are always exceptions.</p>

<p>Good luck!</p>

<p>Publications are the great equalizer. A publication from someone at Minot State is the same as a publication from somebody at UCSF. You are doing everything correct and I think you are wise to do summer research programs at other institutions. Your academic pedigree will probably only be an issue if you bring it up.</p>

<p>The GRE is also a very good equalizer. In your case, use your GRE score to exceed the scores of those folks who attend more recognized schools.</p>

<p>I'm fairly certain that lower-tier schools are underrepresented in top-tier graduate programs because there aren't many undergrads at those schools that even apply to grad school; but there are a lot of undergrads from top-tier schools that apply to grad school (and get accepted to top programs), and so their schools are better represented. If you look around long enough, you'll find grad students at top programs in your discipline of interest from lower-tier schools.</p>

<p>You'll be fine.</p>

<p>The GRE doesn't matter that much.It can only hurt you. At the top programs, everyone scores high. Its not something that will get you in. However, getting letters of recommendation from reputable faculty that state you are a one of a kind student or something to that effect will do wonders.</p>

<p>I'm in a CS program at a lesser known state school. As far as I know, I was the only one in my program to apply to graduate schools this cycle for CS/IS, which is probably about 100 students. So, I suspect that sarbruis is right, at least based on my anecdotal evidence.</p>

<p>Surely coming from a strong department can only help you.</p>

<p>Coming from a well known school will help you, but coming from a lesser-known school won't hurt you. What matters more is what you do there. The others who say that students at lesser-known schools are less likely to apply to graduate school are correct, and that's why you see less of them than your Harvard and Michigan students.</p>

<p>Continue doing what you're doing and you should have few problems.</p>

<p>D just graduated (December) from a top 50 (barely) university not well known for sciences and she has already been admitted to Cornell and UPenn for organic chemistry PhD program for Fall 2009 (yes, christmas came early for her!). All other parts of her application were strong, general GRE scores, gpa, two years of consistent research in 1 lab at college, Goldwater honorable mention, summer REU, and a mediocre chemistry GRE score. She too was nervous that her school's rank/name recognition and the so-so chem GRE might hurt her chances. At least for two programs this was not the case. She is still waiting on several schools.</p>

<p>Follow the good advice given above. Continue everything you are doing and especially concentrate on developing relationships with professors who will be able and willing to write you strong supportive letters of recommendation. And take the time to write a quality statement of purpose at application time.</p>

<p>D was given good advice early on (freshman year) by a very wise mentor and was able to begin charting her course early. It seems you have received the same type of advice.</p>

<p>These programs invest a significant amount of money in their students. They want assurances that their candidates have the ability to finish their programs and do well. You will have the opportunity to demonstrate that when you complete your applications.</p>

<p>Top 50 is absolutely nothing to worry about. The OP is probably attending an unranked (by USNWR), tier three or four school. And still, it's not worth worrying about, for the reasons stated above.</p>

<p>I think that the poster who suggested publishing had an excellent idea.</p>

<p>I provided some opinions on this topic elsewhere so I thought I would cut and paste them here, in case they are of any use. </p>

<p>As a selection committee member for PhD programs in my field the past 15+ years at different institutions (top privates, one public), I have some thoughts. We do account for GRE scores, letters of recommendation, experience with research and research goals, overall GPA (esp on particular courses) and school attended (but the latter point is not weighted as high as the others and our net of undergrad schools that we think are great is very large).</p>

<p>I'm not great on the ranks so I use the term fairly loosely. I don't think academics are following USNWR. But we'd probably we'd look at the top 40 public schools, for example, but it depends on one's area. If a school is known to us in our field, if someone was able to work with and/or aget a ref. from faculty we know at a given school, get some research experience in that school, we couldn't care less what its national rank is by the popular press. </p>

<p>To illustrate if I can, one of our best ever students came from U of Utah. One of my best friends is a full professor at Harvard, her undergrad was a small local school with @ so-and-so in the name. At all the schools I've been at, we'd be excited to interview students who worked with people in our field we know at U of Illinois, Ohio State, or Arizona State, just to name a few. That's because in our field, great people happen to be doing great research at those places.</p>

<p>For PhD programs, one has to get out of the national ranking mindset and understand that in PhD-land it's ranking that is field specific. While there is a common main can't-go-wrong thread across top national schools or LACs, beyond that one has to drill down and see where the top researchers are located for each field to get a sense of how it would be regarded in a given field. </p>

<p>Opportunities to get to know and <em>work with</em> scholars at any school in one's field is hugely beneficial. If my D were wanting her PhD (too early yet- she says that's so boring mom!), I'd look for the best public schools in her area of interest (why waste money?) and find out what formal and informal opportunities there are to get research experience and letters of recommendation and guidance from professors at those schools. I would then encourage her to work on getting that experience once there. Might be volunteering in a lab, doing independent study or other such things. </p>

<p>Research experience is great for so many reasons:</p>

<p>a. We worry that applicants don't know what they are getting into. Without research experience, how do you know you want to spend a lifetime doing it? So having it tells us you have some idea what you are in for.
.
b. We look for applicants who have a genuine passion and excitement for research and the field. Research experience doesn't guarantee that but helps a bit. Passion and excitement are almost the only drivers that will keep you going. </p>

<p>c. If someone in our field, who we respect (and often we are friends with- it's a small world!) can tell us about their first hand insights about a student's potential to do research, that is extremely useful to us. Such opinions come from faculty you get to do research with. </p>

<p>d. Faculty you get to know in your field of interest can guide you through the PhD application process. They can help you figure out what your strengths and interests are. Direct you to courses to take. They can point you to the schools you should be applying to. Look over your essays. </p>

<p>At our school- like a lot of top research schools in many fields- we are looking for future researchers who will publish a lot and impact our field with their discoveries. We will take those with promise and provide them with full tuition and living expenses for four years. We do not do this out of the goodness of our hearts: we get them to work as our research assistants which helps our own publication record, they add so much intellectual stimulation to our environment, we enjoy mentoring students into our world, and we hope they go on to become famous and everyone will know they came from our school We are fortunate to be in a field that has more jobs than good PhD students and decent salaries. So the ones we bring in need to have an aptitude for research and be excited about it (internally driven).</p>

<p>In the applicant process, we are trying to exclude some key people (and we have to read between the lines and look for clues or counter evidence, since few are naive enough to tell us about it directly):</p>

<ol>
<li><p>We don't want people who want a PhD because it gives them status (e.g. my parents think I should get a PhD!).</p></li>
<li><p>We don't want people who see being a professor as a cushy and stable job (e.g.flexible schedule, tenure, I get summers off!). Such applicants don't have a clue about our work lives!</p></li>
<li><p>We weed out those who don't know what they want but want a PhD for vague reasons: to avoid getting a job, to buy time, or because they think collecting more or higher degrees can't hurt. We are not funding your hobby or personal growth! </p></li>
<li><p>And we would prefer not to take those students whose primary passion is teaching. While that is a wonderful goal in and of itself, and we pride ourselves on teaching well (and most of our students win teaching awards), our program is not designed for that particular focus. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>Please note I am only describing the orientation of top PhD programs in my field. I can not state with any confidence these admission points above are true across all fields</p>

<p>If even after gaining as much research experience as possible at your current school, you still feel that it will be a burden that prevents you from getting into the right phd program for you. You could always spend a couple years working as a lab tech at a more prestigous place or if you have more clearly defined career interests at that time, a lab that fits your interests really well and publishes a lot. There is a lot to be said for taking a few years and starting your publication record, learning new techniques and making contacts.</p>

<p>how about transfer?
I think that the to transfer to another more prestigious univ after two years
is not that difficult provided your have great frosh/sophomore GPA and passion
for research</p>

<p>BTW, many thanks for the comment by starbrigt.
It clarifies some of my earlier doubts regarding what graduate
school admission officers are looking for.</p>