<p>I have heard at least four different stories, either at my school or somewhere else, of people getting turned down by almost every school they applied to. I know bits and pieces of each story. A lot of these guys had around 3.2 GPA, or so, with good research experience (I think), and each one of them had a different theory of why they were turned down, be it lack of REUs, low GPA, lack of interest, whatever. But there’s one guy, from some college in Florida, whom I chatted with on gradcafe who applied two years in a row, and got turned down by all schools across the board (3.6 GPA, good GRE scores, good research), and this year he’s applying again, with some NASA work experience under his belt. I’m thinking, how the heck did these people get so many rejections. There seems to be a dichotomy where people either do really well, or really badly, but not in between. Why??</p>
<p>The target dept. (not the U) tries to figure out if the applicant has genuine interest, talent, and direction for his or her specific proposed area of research. They also have to make a bet on whether or not the applicant will wash out (as many do) or complete all requirements of the program with distinction. They have seen many students come & go and have, or think they have, a pretty good sense about this. I’m sure it depends on field, but this is probably why many aspiring grad students sink or swim in the application process.</p>
<p>It also depends on where these people applied to. Applying to only the top 10 schools in your field can be like shooting yourself in the foot (esp. with these 3.2 GPAs you are talking about). That’s not to say that it’s impossible but if you look at the odds, these schools attract many applicants with GPAs much higher and with several years of research experience, possibly even some publications under their belt. There’s also a lot of overlap between these schools in the applicants they invite to interview.</p>
<p>Now if they applied broadly and were repeatedly turned down, I would seriously assess the entire application package (from your records to your statement of purpose) and make some significant changes (where changes are possible).</p>
<p>yes, it all makes sense. But I’m not talking about a top heavy list, or anything that seems out of the ordinary. The guys I know applied to around 6-8 schools across the board. And the guy I chatted with applied to schools ranging from top 10 to top 100… and got turned down two years in a row. His story disturbs me the most. Maybe they botched the personal statement, because I know how you write about your experiences matters a lot.</p>
<p>I’d expect that a lot of complete shut-outs are due to negative letters of recommendation (unless there’s another obvious red flag, like abysmal grades or a history of academic dishonesty). According to professors reading applications, some students have letters saying, “I do not believe that this student would succeed in a PhD program.” That’s basically a kiss of death…</p>
<p>Worst case, an applicant might not even be aware that they have an outright negative letter. </p>
<p>Another potential complication are too many luke-warm letters. The professors I’ve talked to were generally willing to admit students with two supportive letters and one lukewarm one, but not students with two lukewarm letters. It’s quite possible that an applicant might have several lukewarm letters without even realizing. One of my friends by coincidence found out that what she thought was her strongest letter, was actually her weakest. The professor just didn’t seem to care about writing letters and sent one generic paragraph that he probably uses for every single student. She had expected something a tid bit more personalized after a year-long independent study project (including one summer) that turned into a publication, given that she also was on very good terms with him personally.</p>
<p>Thank you. I had no idea this kind of thing was going on. I would have thought that if a professor doesn’t believe in the student, he/she would just respond passively and make it obvious that the letter isn’t going to be good. I would never expect that the professor would go behind the student’s back and ruin his chances. Uncalled for.</p>
<p>Would it be a good idea then, to check with the writers and ask them whether or not they would be able to write something good? or would that be an expression of a lack of trust, and backfire?</p>
<p>good one. i really like it.Thanks for the share</p>
<p>Letters of recommendation are often the first thing the faculty on the admissions committee look at. I have not seen outright negative ones, but certainly plenty of lukewarm ones from faculty that obviously do not know the student well. Just because you got an A in a class isn’t a reason to ask for a letter. Best letters are from faculty you actually worked with in their lab, etc. If your letters are boring and non-specific, it can doom the entire graduate school application, especially if grades are lukewarm to match.</p>
<p>Yes, when you ask a professor for a letter, you should not be shy about asking them if they can write you a strong, positive letter of recommendation. You don’t just want any old letter. That’s why it’s important to cultivate relationships with professors and get a sense of how they feel about you before senior year when it’s application season.</p>
<p>Negative letters from faculty are probably an uncommon occurrence, because professional ethics dictates that a professor tell you if they cannot write you a positive recommendation letter. I’m not saying that they don’t happen, but I will wager that in the majority of cases they are not the reason that a student is getting rejected. However, if an outstanding student gets shutout multiple times and the rest of their folio is competitive, they’re applying to a range of schools, they have well-articulated research interests/goals and they are applying to schools with good fit - then yes, it may be the recommendations are negative or lukewarm.</p>
<p>that makes me wonder whether my TA professors might write better letters than my faculty adviser, whom I’ve known for 4 years, but with whom I’ve communicated probably less than 10 times TOTAL. On the other hand, I’ve only known my TA professors since August, and apparently they think I’m doing an excellent job, even though my students think I’m average.</p>
<p>another thing that was not explicitly mentioned in this thread is the matching of students to professors. the people who got outright rejected by every school may not have had very well-matched interests to any of the professors at the institutions they were applying to, or perhaps had not contacted any of those professors to establish a personal connection or mention them in their application. this is also important.</p>
<p>other than that, i would assume it was the recommendation letters, since everyone and their mother in graduate admissions says the letters of rec are the most important things.</p>
<p>But don’t sky-high GREs help those 3.2ers?</p>
<p>The GRE is not weighted much in the application process. Most commonly, they seem to be used to screen out applicants if they don’t meet a minimum. I hear they may also be used to help secure/allocate funding.</p>
<p>It is certainly good if you have great GRE scores, but to be honest, high GRE scores do not really say much about an applicant’s research potential or even their work ethic, simply their ability to test well on a standardized test. While GPA is also not weighted much, at least consistently high grades say something about an applicant’s work ethic and ability to succeed in high-level classes.</p>
<p>^^ yes, the above is pretty accurate in terms of my experience on grad admissions committees</p>
<p>neltharion,</p>
<p>If neither GRE nor grades are weighed much, then what is weight much? Interview? Work experience?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You can also think about it from a professor’s point of view. Academia is pretty small, especially if you’re within a subfield. Say you had a student that was very poor. Bad attitude, lazy, and just not very competent. Say they’re then applying to schools where you know people. You’re going on record to them about this student’s performance. Why should you lie to your peers, and possibly let them admit someone that will waste hundreds of thousands of dollars in resources, with a “lukewarm” letter instead of a negative one?</p>
<p>To me, the worst is what b@r!um’s friend experienced. A professor that should have written a very strong letter, but instead took the easy way out of what is considered part of the job for taking non-graduate students into their lab. It makes me wonder how this professor’s grad students fare once they graduate, as a professor’s connections can be a very important part of getting that first job with your PhD.</p>
<p>@ ThereseR: The most important parts of an application are the LORs, SOP, and research experience (not the same as “work experience,” unless your work entails some research). Then comes the writing sample, followed by your GPA and GRE.</p>
<p>As for interviews, some schools do not even conduct interviews. My gut feeling tells me that interviews are used mainly to weed out those who do not fit well with the department but only after they’ve already decided you are “admittable” based on your overall application package. It’s basically the last line you have to punch through, convincing a school you are truly a good fit and that you actually do want to go to the school.</p>
<p>What about international students? Does GRE score have more importance for them? And are letters of recommendation less important for internationl students?</p>
<p>This happened to a friend of mine last year. She was shocked. She applied to 8 schools, not all top tier, had a great GPA and GRE’s, research experience etc. She was interviewed at several places and was rejected from all. She is trying again this year and did land a fabulous job doing research at a medical school in her chosen area. She is kind of a sarcastic person, which sometimes comes off as negative so I was thinking that might have shown itself in her personal statement and interview.</p>
<p>Going back to the original issue (those with universal rejection), I do think you have to look at the non-numeric parts of the application, and I think you need to understand that there are several different reasons why someone can be looking exclusively at rejections. A lot of these reasons are things that the applicant is doing consistently across applications.</p>
<p>Some people will apply only to departments where they are not competitive or where they lack a strong enough match to potential advisors. You may want to study field X at a top 10 school, but your ambition does not mean you will make it.</p>
<p>Some will sacrifice that necessary good match in order to satisfy some other requirement, like being near loved ones, living in a favored region, or attending a “party school”*.</p>
<p>Some will reveal in their written statements (perhaps accidentally, perhaps just foolishly) some issue or mindset that is not popular among professors - a focus on industry over academia sometimes, or an inability (despite TOEFL and GRE) to communicate effectively, or an uncertainty about what they want to do, or the appearance that they are going to grad school only because they couldn’t find a job. </p>
<p>Some people will apply with a stack of letters that are blandly positive but make it clear that there is no real recommendation. Note that your writers may think of themselves as “third letter” writers even if you are using them as “first letter” writers, and that many applicants miss both the distinction as well as the hints that may get tossed their way by their own writers!</p>
<p>**: Yes, I have seen this. *</p>