<p>I just graduated from a tier 3 school with an EE/physics dual degree. following are my stats,
Cum GPA:3.66
Major GPA EE:3.6
Physics:3.6
GRE: not yet
-Completed a yearlong internship as an Automation engineer for a large company during Junior summer.
-Researched on Physics during Sophomore summer and junior year on gyroscopes. However, I was mostly doing secretary kind of work for the professor though I presented his research at a bunch of conferences. (Didn't understand what I was presenting though just said what he asked me to say:()</p>
<p>My plan:
Currently awaiting a job opportunity as a consultant for Siemens in technology field.
Am planning on writing a C++ book for beginners in simple terms to boost my application.
Probably going to have the company paying for my grad school tuition.</p>
<p>How does look for me.</p>
<p>I would really like to get into UPenn, MIT, Stanford, or Caltech. Remember I come from a school where the US News ranking is in #180s range.</p>
<p>I don’t think writing a C++ book for beginners will do anything for your application. </p>
<p>There are many good schools that have well respected departments to get your CS Masters degree in, so you don’t have to do or die by getting into MIT or Stanford level schools. How will you attend grad school while working? You seem not to be tied geographically if these are you top picks.</p>
<p>Since you have an EE background you may have quite a few prerequisites, but likely you are missing some specific CS ones that many schools will expect you to have taken in college or postbac. Carnegie Mellon is one that doesn’t require CS BS (there are others (Chicago)
[The</a> MS program in Computer Science](<a href=“http://www.csd.cs.cmu.edu/education/master/]The”>http://www.csd.cs.cmu.edu/education/master/)</p>
<p>Well, you can cross MIT right off that list - they will only award a masters in CS to lingering MIT undergrads or en route to a PhD. And after that, Stanford is a TOP program in CS, and with what you have described I do not think you have a shot at it. Caltech is a pretty big reach, but UPenn is a possibility with some work and a little luck. </p>
<p>Is your prospective employer going to send you to school full time at a location of your choice? That is a pretty sweet deal - most employers will only pay for part-time study around your work!</p>
<p>Anyway, your school name does not help, and the internship and proposed book are complete non-issues. Your essential lack of research experience is a bigger deal, as is your lack of preparation in computer science. On the first point, you have no real experience doing the most important part of grad study, and that will make you a big risk to any program. On the second point, you are way behind your competition on preparing for the academics in CS, and will likely require at least a few courses to even have a real shot at admission plus a few more after admission just to get ready for the core coursework of the MS.</p>
<p>So I think you could have a shot at UPenn* in a year or two, having spent that time taking a couple of high-level preparatory CS classes and getting some research experience under a professor (or at least PhD) somewhere.</p>
<p>*: Please note that I am basing this solely off of USNWR rankings, since just about the only thing they really DO measure is how hard it is to get in. Each of these schools may have other issues that you will need to overcome.</p>
<p>So you guys are saying I don’t have a shot at these schools because of my lack of a computer science background?, or is it because my stats are too low? Please explain.</p>
<p>I was thinking about that too so right now the only program that has a reasonable chance of admitting me seems to be Penn’s MCIT program, which is a program in MS on CS for non-CS majors.</p>
<p>Other that that can you tell me where my GPA stands, is it too low too?</p>
Grad school admissions is holistic, so you have to consider all the factors at the same time. Your GPA is good enough to be applying to top-25 schools, but below average for top-5 programs like MIT and Stanford. Your school rank is probably going to be a negative at least in comparison, but it is hard to say how much. You do not have any real research experience, which would normally be a negative, assuming that your advisor writes such in your letter of recommendation. The tuition support is a small positive, because it means you need to compete more against the general admissions standard than against the other prospective grad students. The book and the internship are complete non-factors.</p>
<p>When you put all those together, you are essentially below average in just about every way compared to admits at top-5 programs. That is why I said MIT and Stanford won’t happen. Caltech (probably) and Penn would consider your GPA to be fine, but it is hard to be sure how competitive you are considering the other issues - I would recommend applying at least to Penn and seeing what happens. There are definitely lots of lower-ranked CS programs where you would have a much stronger shot.</p>
<p>
Your GPA is not a problem other than the fact that top-5 programs will have so many strong applicants that they can and will take 3.8+ consistently. I would say your GPA becomes average for the programs in the roughly 6-15 ranking, and strong below that. But remember that they will tolerate a lower GPA if there are other strong factors (like research, glowing LOR’s, etc.) but expect a higher GPA if there are shortfalls in other areas (like research, preparation, etc.).</p>
<p>That would probably help. You should also look into which schools actually accept MS students. I know most programs here at Caltech don’t accept non-PhD seeking graduate students.</p>
Maybe - it depends a bit on what you do during that time. A typical working year will not really influence things one way or the other, but if you use it to take some classes in CS and/or get involved with some industrial research then it might. As a cautionary note, be aware that you will need letters or recommendation for your application, and while one from a supervisor would be reasonable, the other two should be from faculty… many of whom will start to forget your fine performance while you are working.</p>
<p>mmm cosmicfish I have to say some of the advices you gave me are actually inaccurate.
I just checked CMU computer science masters statistics and the average GPA for masters is 3.6. remember it is average, it means there are lower GPAs and higher GPAs admitted. Here, I think you are talking about GPA requirements for Phd candidates, which is in 3.8 range.
I called both UPenn and MIT and they said even a year work experience at a technical giant (like Siemens) is a strong positive for an engineering major. If you don’t know work experience (with serious responsibilities) substitute for research in engineering compared to other sciences.
I don’t agree with this because I believe professors with doctoral degrees and decades of experience under their belts will have a strong enough memory to remember a student who did years worth of research work for them, and studied under them, and graduated in top 5% of the class.
And what kinda adviser would write negativities in a student’s recommendation letter?</p>
<p>However, I agree with you that I lack education in computer science and that’s why I am applying for programs designed for students with no prior knowledge on CS.</p>
<p>You are best off getting your letters of recommendation written before you leave school, so you’re still fresh in their mind (as in, they’ll be able to see your face and remember exactly who they are). You can always ask them to revise the letter slightly to mention the year you’ve been working once you’re ready to apply to schools again the following fall.</p>
<p>Also, most companies that will pay for your MS often only do it if you enroll in the program while you’re still a full time employee. That often means you need to find a school that’s local to your employer or one that offers online classes. And, if they are local, you may need to primarily take night classes. I know of students that have managed to get their companies to pay for them to do their MS away from the company, but it seems to be the exception, not the rule.</p>
<p>That’s a great idea about the letter or recommendations @RacinReaver. I will definitely try to get to get that done.</p>
<p>And yes with the company tuition reimbursement, I was thinking if I am working for Siemens, they are literally all over the country, so I can always shift to an office near the university of my choice. Also, I think they allow you to attend school full-time provided you are a valuable asset that they would really want to retain.</p>
I was indeed talking about PhD GPA’s - force of habit. Good catch.</p>
<p>
I agree that work experience is a positive all else being equal, I disagree that many people manage to keep all else equal. I have 7 years experience as an engineer, and while I agree that is helps in some ways for grad school, I think most work years provide nothing but an opportunity for vital skills to degrade. The research I did at work is nothing like the research I did at grad school.</p>
<p>
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. A good LOR is good in very specific ways, and a professor who is writing the letter right after or during your work will put more detail into than one who has spent the last year or two supervising your replacement. Ultimately, it depends on you and the writer, but as a general rule your LOR gets worse with time, not better. If you are the best student they have seen in the last X years, that will certainly prolong things.</p>
<p>
Very few, but in writing a recommendation the author places their own reputation on the line, and some writers hedge their bets by stating positives that are not necessarily positives for grad school. For example, a letter saying that you are a hard worker and good student is … OK. A good letter gives specifics about what you did and ranks you (at least roughly) in the writer’s experience. Neither one has “negativities” but only one really helps you.</p>
<p>Regardless, I am offering only advice. Feel free to disregard any or all of it - I certainly cannot claim knowledge of how every program works.</p>
<p>Your first steps are to take the general GRE and the CS GRE and see how you do. At a bare minimum take a CS GRE practice test and see how you do. The official page has some example questions to show what kind of material is covered on the CS GRE. As you’ll see, you need more than just programming ability, you need <em>computer science</em> knowledge, and CS is a branch of math. Just look at how many of the sample questions don’t seem to have anything to do with computers or programming (to the untrained eye).</p>
<p>Also, don’t be so set on getting into a top school. Be set on getting into the right school for you: a school that has a research group you want to be part of.</p>
<p>I don’t believe the schools that have MS for non CS majors will require or expect the CS GRE. Not even PHD programs necessarily expect that, as my daughter is in one and she didn’t take it (don’t know if that had to do with her being a math/CS concentrator). She wasn’t accepted into top 4 programs but was in several top 10-15.</p>
<p>@TomServo, I was thinking about taking CS GRE but recently found out they have cancelled it. So I basically have no way of proving my CS knowledge to schools since I don’t have required courses on my transcript.</p>
<p>Get involved in an open source software project or start one yourself. In short, build up a portfolio. This is no substitute for knowledge of graph theory, automata, formal languages, first-order logic, algorithm analysis, etc., IOW the theory side, but it’s something.</p>