Caltech is very stats driven. It’s not clear the OP has the numbers. Harvey Mudd would be good to apply, but I still think Reed is best chance.
Scratch.
The OP has a dream, which many students have. I think that Merc81’s comments, as well as that of others, have given the student options - which is what OP wants. Also, there is now more information on the table.
KSTY1098, said “Grad school admission is much more dependent on GPA and GRE scores than anything else.”
This is incorrect. It is important to distinguish “graduate school” from “professional school”. “Professional school” refers to programs like law school, medical school, dental school, etc. These are professional training programs designed to prepare students to enter specific professions. They typically get hundreds or thousands of applicants. For these programs, grades and scores are used to cull the pool. The term graduate school is also used to describe programs that offer Master or doctoral degrees in academic fields, usually aligned with academic departments although they can be interdisciplinary too. Someone who seeks a graduate degree in physics is probably seeking such a degree. If so, then admission is not more dependent upon GPA or GRE scores. Naturally GPA and GRE scores get factored in but the single most important factor is fit with the program–and that fit usually entails a research fit-given everything else about an application is ok. It is not simply a horse race, in terms of credentials with the “highest” scores and grades winning out. Rather, research fit will trump scores and grades.
There are compelling reasons for the difference between grad school and professional training programs in terms of the selection process and weighting of credentials. Most grad programs get a limited number of applicants-at most the numbers are in the 100s not thousands. The pool is small enough to allow all the applications to be read carefully by at last one or two faculty members. Further, most programs rely on a mentorship model whereby students work closely with a faculty member in that faculty member’s lab or, if outside STEM, simply with that faculty member-essentially being trained to conduct research, write or produce things that are offshoots of the faculty member’s work. Students are often seeking experience with a very circumscribed area-along with more general training. So fit with a mentor is critical. In such cases, previous work, area of interest and who you worked with prior to applying to graduate school would be more important than grades or scores.
Ohio state
With respect to deadlines, I would not compromise your choices in consideration of them. If you are determined to research a few schools and write an appropriate short essay for their applications, this can, in principle, be done by the 1st. It would even be fair, and possibly enhancing to your essay, to say, for example, that it was only “recently that I became aware of [this school’s] excellent physics program and extensive science facilities.” You can then research your choices further over the coming months regarding their deeper suitability for you. Colleges with multiple essay requirements would present a greater challenge, of course.
CalTech is very stats driven. So are Harvey Mudd and MIT. It’s really hard to get a high GPA at Harvey Mudd, so I wouldn’t recommend it for someone who wants grad school.
It is doubtful the OP has the stats for CalTech. http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/what-my-chances/1823379-mit.html#latest
I didn’t see his Nov scores posted, but those are not strong scores for someone wanting to major in physics at a competitive school and could be what affected his application.
And yes, @intparent is correct that depth of class content will differ by school, but in terms of textbooks, there are only a few textbooks that are pretty standard across the majority of physics UG programs. A student who relies on only the classroom experience for their education will have a weaker foundation from a weaker program. But students who are active in their educations and constantly seek to enhance their understanding and challenge themselves should have the potential to succeed in any grad program (which is why you see students accepted to grad programs from across the spectrum of UG schools. If only tippy top programs adequately educated students for top grad programs, you wouldn’t see those “non-tippy top” acceptances.)
Incidentally, this is where the frequently mentioned advice to students (on College Confidential) that undergraduate school does not matter if you plan to “apply to graduate school” falls apart. It does matter if you plan to go on for an academic (as opposed to applied) Master or doctoral graduate degree. You can certainly get a doctoral degree even if you went to a small undistinguished college but you may need extra years to establish a track record (in terms of research or writing) that makes you competitive whereas simply attending a school with better resources and opportunities may obviate the need for extra years.
Further, the advice to attend a cheaper school and get A’s to save money for grad school also falls apart when you are talking about academic rather than practice degrees. The lions share of students working towards a doctoral degree in an academic area are supported on federal grants or serve as TAs/RAs which also usually comes with “tuition remission”. Thus, most doctoral candidates are funded and don’t pay tuition.
It is true that most students who continue their education after their bachelor degree attend professional training programs. For them, the usual advice on CC about the need for high scores and grades and devaluing the choice of school (as in saying it does not matter) may be valid but for those interested in an academic degree it is not.
My advice to those seeking an academic graduate degree is to choose a college with outstanding resources in your intended major (yes, department reputation is relevant to college students-another thing I see denied frequently by CC posters), work in a lab or with a mentor who seems interested in nurturing the careers of college students, who is relatively well known (or at least prolific) in their field and (if possible) who is well funded.
“Naturally GPA and GRE scores get factored in but the single most important factor is fit with the program–and that fit usually entails a research fit-given everything else about an application is ok. It is not simply a horse race, in terms of credentials with the “highest” scores and grades winning out. Rather, research fit will trump scores and grades.”
^ I would replace Research fit with Research competency. Publications are more important than GPA and GRE. They show you can do essentially what graduate school is all about independent research.
Even OP gets the applications in on January 1st, what about the transcript and LoRs?
@Mom2aphysicsgeek my new scores are a 690 in math 2 and a 680 in math 1, still a 700 in physics. In my defense, I had never touched on magnetism and electricity in school.
I think competency can be subsumed under fit. In some labs it makes sense that students will come in with publications but in other areas this may be unrealistic. Sometimes the cost benefit ratio of training undergrads in certain techniques is not favorable. In those cases, they may arrive with experience working around a technique but without any direct training in it themselves.
With respect to aspects of an application that are not directly under a student’s control, some colleges are willing to wait a reasonable period of time for the remaining elements.
Mudd is well known in the grad school world, and even Mudders with lower GPAs get into excellent grad school programs. It is very selective and fit is important, though. A 33 ACT is only 25th percentile there, it is a definite reach.
Most schools will accept late transcripts, scores, and LORs. I will say that when they are all late, it tells the school that they were a last minute addition. Schools protecting their yields may be less likely to accept that applicant.
Lawrence was my Physics major’s safety.
If it is affordable, not sure why you are panicking. The Ohio State University is well respected for physics. If you like a big school, and it is affordable, time to celebrate your admission there.
If you prefer a smaller environment, you may want to see if there is still time to apply to Reed and/or Oberlin and check if they are affordable (in the net price calculators).
@jsmith As much as you or I may wish that test scores were not a filter (and if you have ever read any of my posts, I am not a fan of so much reliance on standardized test scores), the reality is that they are at this point in time. Schools like CalTech which require them are going to see your math scores as weak.
Apply to schools that appeal to you, but do NOT be discouraged if you end up at a lower ranked program. Attend and shine. Look, my ds scored a 750 on the math 2 in 9th grade. He graduated from high school with college credit for numerous math and physics courses. He took 400 level physics classes his freshman yr. And he attends Alabama…not a powerhouse physics university. But he has awesome professors. He has great research mentors. His research opportunities have taught him a ton outside of classroom topics. (I don’t even know how many languages he can program in…a huge benefit bc different projects use different languages.) He is thriving and creating an awesome UG experience. It is possible to accomplish your goals outside of MIT, UChicago, and CalTech. You can aim for them for grad school. (And in case you are wondering why our ds ended up at Bama, it is bc of their generous scholarships and their research honors program. He has zero regrets about where he is and he loves it there.)
Awesome, Mom2.
Go ahead, apply to Reed. The sciences are our forte, particularly physics.
1 Like
I don’t really see any evidence that this student would fit in well at Reed.
Well, then this student shouldn’t consider LACs altogether, then, because I don’t see how this student would fit in at Williams, Swarthmore, Harvey Mudd, Grinnell etc.