dissimulare

Alright, so basically I just want to know--based upon the factors discussed herein--would it be generally okay to assume that I'd have a chance at being admitted to prestigious graduate schools such as, but not limited to: Harvard, CalTech, Stanford, University of Chicago, ect.

So I am currently an undergraduate at a public university, Ohio State University to be exact. I am majoring in Physics(advanced concentration) and am also shooting for a minor in Computer science. I am planning on going on to graduate school for either Theoretical physics or Astrophysics. I am enrolling in the honors program at OSU and am planning to do research during my stay. I am currently a Sophomore. I dislike typical college party life(abhor, actually), and am very academically orientated. I plan to keep my grades as flawless as possible(knowing physics is probably going to fight back) without killing myself with work and driving me absolutely insane.

If I started research the spring semester of this year(sophomore year), and continued to do research until graduation, all the while staying in honors and keeping high grades, would I have a good shot at graduate admission? I feel a prestigious graduate school would give me the best opportunity to go where I envision my degree taking me: research. Note that a job is not what I'm after. I don't want a comfy, well paying job. I want to do research, research, and more research. CERN would be fantastic(pipe dream), or anything close to the sort is what I am after. Note: Yes, I know I am going to need Phds to achieve my work goals. I am also planning on doing those, as well.

Knowing that life never goes how one plans it, to what extent--based on rough guess-timations--can these variables change without hurting my chances at grad school? Like GPA fluctuations, or maybe if I miss a year of research? And yes I know graduate admissions to such schools is a crapshoot, at best. I just kinda want a rough idea, and I don't want to delude myself into thinking for the next three years that I have it made. A reality check is what I am looking for.

Thanks for any time that you all spend answering my thread.

xraymancs

As a long time advisor to physics majors who have gone on to graduate school, the most important things for getting into a top graduate program are, in order of importance:

1. Top grades in your physics courses. If your GPA is not close to 4.0 then you just won't be competitive in the applicant pool.

2. Physics GRE above 80%ile. The highest ranked programs have a lot of high scoring applicants, particularly international ones so you need to be in the mix with a high score. Of course you need to ace the General GRE as well (including the verbal part).

3. Strong, personal letters of reference. This means you need to get to know at least one (but the more the better) faculty members very well, probably by doing research with them. A great letter from a faculty member at OSU (no slouch as a physics program!) can make a huge difference. If you have a published journal article with one of them it is even better.

4. A personalized statement. Learn about the school you are writing to and be specific in identifying faculty whom you might wish to work with.

I always recommend to my advisees that they should take at least one summer to do an REU at another university, one which you might consider for graduate school.

Good Luck!

juillet

First of all, as I've said multiple times on here, it is possible to be a scholar and still enjoy life. Some scholars enjoy partying and many did non-academic things in college. It's okay if you really just hate parties, but it's not a prerequisite for getting into graduate school. Other than my research and keeping my grades to an acceptable level, I was known for being kind of a slacker in college, and I'm an an Ivy League PhD program with an NSF.

You won't need PhDs, you will need ONE PhD.

You'll never have it made. You can make yourself competitive, but admissions committees often estimate that a large proportion of applicants to their programs are competitive and qualified for admission. It comes down to personal factors sometimes, as well as the desires and vagaries of the professors taking on students. For example, one year in my science-oriented lab-based field, we turned down two applicants (out of 4 we brought to interview) simply because we didn't think they would click with our lab environment. They were both well qualified applicants (one had done research at Harvard), but they just didn't "fit."

So the best thing to do is make yourself competitive by keeping up your research (why would you miss a year?) and keeping up your GPA. I agree with the advice of going to do an REU. If you decide to study abroad for a year in a place where you can't get research experience, you can make up for it by working as a lab tech in someone's lab for a year after college or something.