Categorising Phy. Grad schools

[metalrose]

Categorising Phy. Grad schools ... please help

Hi,

I am an indian student wishing to pursue physics grad school in us in about a couple a years time from now.

i am having a hard time categorising schools. There are just so many of them.

As a non-american it becomes really difficult to know about various universities, and its practically a very difficult job to study the website of each of them.

It would be great if guys out here, especially the american folks and those who've been to grad schools or are applying etc...fill out the template below with around 5-10 schools within each tier.

And yeah, I'd like to pursue theoretical physics most probably in the fields of HEP or mathematical physics or maybe just maybe astrophysics/cosmology( highly unlikely).

Also, the following would require rough estimates. I am not asking for exact rankings and all...
Top Tier Schools

Average cutoff gpa (out of 4.0):
Average GRE scores:

Name 5-10 such scools:


Second Tier Schools

Average cutoff gpa (out of 4.0):
Average GRE scores:

Name 5-10 such scools:


Third Tier Schools

Average cutoff gpa (out of 4.0):
Average GRE scores:

Name 5-10 such scools:



Thanks a lot.

 

[twofish-quant]

It would be great if guys out here, especially the american folks and those who've been to grad schools or are applying etc...fill out the template below with around 5-10 schools within each tier.

The problem is that physics graduate schools in the US don't work via a tier system.

The best reference for US graduate programs is the AIP guide here

http://www.aip.org/pubs/books/graduate.html

 

[metalrose]

The problem is that physics graduate schools in the US don't work via a tier system.

By a tier I don't necessarily mean an official categorisation of schools. I mean something like putting the ivy leagues and the big names into the top tier, and the next best ones into the 2nd tier so on...

I would like to divide the schools into three main tiers, so that I could apply to 2-3 schools from each tier...

Thanks

 

[Ashuron]

i think for grad school, it's important to find the group that you want to work with..

you will be familiar with their names when you are reading the literature for your undergraduate research

 

[Fizex]

http://www.physicsgre.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3421" for the field you are asking but take it with a grain of salt as not all rankings are absolute.

 

[Vanadium 50]

It still doesn't work like that. If you wanted to do experimental nuclear physics, Harvard and Chicago are nowhere near the top. Michigan State and Stony Brook are much stronger. Astronomy and it's Arizona and Hawaii.

 

[Fizex]

It still doesn't work like that. If you wanted to do experimental nuclear physics, Harvard and Chicago are nowhere near the top. Michigan State and Stony Brook are much stronger. Astronomy and it's Arizona and Hawaii.

I'm confused. He didn't say which schools he was thinking of; just an example of what he meant by tier (non official ranking for his personal list). Or you might be responding to my posting of the news rank in which I say that he's not going into nuclear physics.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The point is that it's not a question of assigning schools to tiers. The point is that the tiers themselves really don't exist.

 

[Clever-Name]

Once you isolate WHAT you want to study then you can look at the schools and rank them in 'tiers' if you want. But as Vanadium has already pointed out. When it comes to physics no one school is at the top. You have to look at the specific discipline.

metalrose has stated that he's interested in theoretical high energy physics or mathematical physics. Perhaps that narrows it down a bit.

 

[Vanadium 50]

"Theoretical high energy physics" is still a big field. Stringery? Model building? Calculations? Phenomenology?

 

[metalrose]

@everyone

I think I now get the idea that grad shcool rankings depend a lot on what one wants to focus their research on.

Well, as I stated, my research interests(as of now) lie in the fields of theoretical HEP or mathematical physics.

To make it more specific, as Vanadium says, I think I'm more inclined towards string/mathematical physics.

It's too early for me to narrow it down completely. Also, is there no concept of good grad schools for physics "in general" or is it all relativistic, depending upon your field?

What I mean is, would a Harvard graduate in experimental nuclear physics get any priority, when it comes to getting post-docs or maybe jobs in the industry or elsewhere, as compared to a stony brook graduate...simply because of the "Harvard tag"?

If that's not the case, then what I'm asking for is a few universities in each tier which are good in the fields of string/math physics so that I can narrow down my focus on those few universities.

Thanks all.

 

[twofish-quant]

What I mean is, would a Harvard graduate in experimental nuclear physics get any priority, when it comes to getting post-docs or maybe jobs in the industry or elsewhere, as compared to a stony brook graduate...simply because of the "Harvard tag"?

No. It would work the other way. If there is a post-doc/job in experimental nuclear physics, then everything else being equal, the Harvard graduate would lose out to someone from Stony Brook. (BTW, the reason Stony Brook is strong in this area is that it's right next to Brookhaven National Labs).

Also most of people's branding comes from the adviser than the school.

 

[Fizex]

The point is that it's not a question of assigning schools to tiers. The point is that the tiers themselves really don't exist.

Ah, then I agree. There are a lot more factors to consider than the reputation of the school in the field and maybe even more than how much they publish. How much support you get and collaboration is happening in the department or which professors are willing to work with you and their reputation (which might be a lot higher than the school's) when you visit their open house might convince you to attend more than the school's status. There are some schools with poor financial packages like the UC's and stanford that also might affect your decision no matter how highly regarded they are. However the OP should rank them according to your probability of getting in so that you have reach/fit/safety categories.

 

[metalrose]

I guess I get the idea.

So could you guys give me atleast around 5 schools to work around with, that are known for string theory or mathematical physics and that are not insanely hard to get into.

I don't expect myself to have a great gpa by the end of my undergrad. I'll at most be able to manage something in the late 2's or just touch a 3.0

I don't know if I'd be able to publish anything or not but will certainly get some research experience.

If I get great GRE scores, and considering the fact that I'm an international student, which would mean that most universities would give the GRE a priority over my gpa (?), what all schools am I looking for?

Why I say the above is because I've got know through the internet, that in case of international students, gpa's aren't considered the way they are for americans simply because the standards and systems in other countries may be vastly different from those in US.
Is that right?

If it is, could you guys give me around 5-6 schools that I'd be able to get into given my profile(around late 2's or 3.0 gpa, minimal research exp. , great GRE scores, international student)?

Thanks

 

[G01]

I don't expect myself to have a great gpa by the end of my undergrad. I'll at most be able to manage something in the late 2's or just touch a 3.0

...

If it is, could you guys give me around 5-6 schools that I'd be able to get into given my profile(around late 2's or 3.0 gpa, minimal research exp. , great GRE scores, international student)?

You are going to need to compare that GPA to an equivalent GPA from an American school. What is the total GPA possible?

An American with a GPA "in the late 2's" just would not get into grad school anywhere. Many grad schools have a school wide GPA cutoff of 3.0. So, many departments will not even read a grad application with a GPA less than 3.0.

Even if you have a 3.0, you chances are very low. Think about it: you'll be competing with people who have GPA>3.5, much more research experience, and good GRE's.

So, is your GPA equivalent to an American GPA? (i.e. on the same scale)

Why I say the above is because I've got know through the internet, that in case of international students, gpa's aren't considered the way they are for americans simply because the standards and systems in other countries may be vastly different from those in US.
Is that right?

If you have gotten low course grades throughout your time at university, the admissions committee will know. Even if your GPA is calculated in a different way or on a different scale, they'll work it out.

 

[twofish-quant]

So, is your GPA equivalent to an American GPA? (i.e. on the same scale)

One thing that makes this a very difficult question to answer is that American GPA's are widely regarded in large parts of the world as hopelessly inflated. Chinese students in particular are known for very low grades, but high test scores, because the educational system is just different.

So when looking at international students, graduate schools will take that into account. Usually what happens with Chinese students that the school will look at the transcript and whatever records exist, and the student will not calculate a GPA, because that's a meaningless number.

see http://www.shanghai.gatech.edu/students/faq/application.html

Just as there is no such thing as tiers. In some countries there is no such thing as an equivalent to the US GPA.

 

[twofish-quant]

Even if you have a 3.0, you chances are very low. Think about it: you'll be competing with people who have GPA>3.5, much more research experience, and good GRE's.

On the other hand it's a game. Because 3.0 is a hard limit, you have Chinese schools changing their grading systems so that people don't go under 3.0. If you can get someone in your school to officially say that a score of X means Y in the US.

Personally, I'd be less interested in your grades than your coursework. What classes have you taken?

 

[metalrose]

@ two-fish quant

Well, as for the courses I have taken, that's going to be a big problem too, because I have talked in my other posts about it, I am not a physics undergrad, instead I am pursuing a degree in Electronics and Comm. engg.

So uptil now all I have taken, or rather all that my university offers in the name of physics, are the basic physics courses in the first two sem.s ,i.e. Physics 1 and Physics 2.

At most I can chose a couple of material science electives in my last year.
And I cannot take up a physics course in my school simply because it doesn't offer one as it's a school of "information technology". And I can't change schools now due to various technical reasons.

So anyway, as it is I'd be applying as an engg. undergrad. with a not so great gpa, at most a 3.0
I don't know what kind of research I'll be able to carry out if any and if I'll be able to publish anything or not.
I don't know wether recommendations from physics prof.'s at my school would count that much or not, since, they are not exactly "known people".
It's a no-name school with no-name faculty.

It seems as if I am totally screwed. But what makes me think again is the fact that there have been a couple of seniors from my school who have made it to the Caltech grad programme.

I don't know the details, about their academic record, but they did make it to caltech.

So that gives me hope...

 

[twofish-quant]

It seems as if I am totally screwed. But what makes me think again is the fact that there have been a couple of seniors from my school who have made it to the Caltech grad programme.

If you can get in touch with them, you'll likely get very useful information. One problem is that I know a fair amount about graduate schools, but I don't know anything about your school or your situation. I don't know what a 3.0 GPA means, but the people from your school that have made it to Caltech (or anywhere else) would have a much better idea.

 

[metalrose]

@twofish-quant

I've been trying to get in touch with those guys...

Anyway, I also found out a profile of an Indian student on physicsgre.com

He got 62% marks, had an Elec. Engg. undergrad. from a no-name school, had worked on some research topic with a guy at ISRO, (Indian Space Research Organization) and he got into u of pittsburgh.

62% doesn't seem to be much if calculated in terms of gpa out of 4.

So I guess, because of a basic uncertainty about foreign education systems, grad schools are willing to offer some relaxation to foreign sudents, and are focused much more on the GRE and reccomendations.

Have a look at his profile here:

http://www.physicsgre.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3421

It's the 4th post from the top by a guy named "satyad18".

Also, is U of pittsburgh a good programme, in general and also in cosmology(that's what this guy applied for)?

thanks

 

[Ashuron]

well.. you said you will try to do the grad school a couple of years from now..
2-3 years are long enough to improve your grades to above 3, which I believe is quite important in your application

trying to do more research is also important, it will tell you what you will actually do later
it also familiarize you to the people names and the literature
you can make your decision after experiencing some research..
start early is important..
What I am doing at start is just learning the experimental procedures and reading the literatures
I certainly hope I can contribute more in the future..

I have also known some Asian students who contacted research groups in US for internship, you may also try this, of course strong reasons and reasonable grades are crucial..

self-studying maths should also be helpful..

btw I am a Physics major doing my undergraduate study..

and yeah, as others said, big name is not everything..
people and facilities are much more important..

 

[metalrose]

@ashuron

Well, as of now, all I have done is Kleppner and Kolenkow, the first 3 chapters of electrodynamics from griffiths, and have just started math methods by mary boas.
(self study)
I have just entered my second year.

My school offered two basic physics courses in the first two sem.s. These were basically designed for engg. students and were very brief and included so many topics crammed into two sem.s, almost all undergrad. topics except mechanics.
So that serves little importance.

Is my self study, enough for 1 year of self study or do I need to be even quick?

I am planning to complete math methods by boas in this sem, and maybe finish off with major chunks of electrodynamics from griffiths. Then next sem, I'll be able to do Quantum and maybe a bit of classical mech from gregory.

What do you think?

 

[Ashuron]

uh..the way I see it is if you still have several years before finishing your engg program and want to do physics grad studies later..why not change your major?

studying something you do not want to do in the future seems wasting your time..

 

[metalrose]

@ashuron

uh..the way I see it is if you still have several years before finishing your engg program and want to do physics grad studies later..why not change your major?

Most american would suggest that, but it doesn't work that way here in India.
I am in a very specific school, i.e. an "institute of Information technology". They don't even have a physics undergrad. programme. Even if I were in a normal university, we can't change majors like in america, we infact don't even have a system of majors and minors and stuff.

Anyway, I wanted to pursue physics right from the beginning but coz of whole lots of reasons couldn't get into a normal BS physics course. The school I am currently in was the best option for me for vvarious reasons I won't get into here.

So anyway, the thing is, neither can I change majors nor can I change my university now.

I've got to stick with it.

So my earlier question still stands.

Is my prep. going ok or do I need to do things more quickly?

Thanks

 

[Ashuron]

I am sorry for not understanding your situation..

from my knowledge, here is the standard curriculum of simple physics majors in most countries:

year 1: intro mech and/or em
year 2: not clear, sometimes intro modern physics and/or em
year 3: intermediate Classical Mechanics , intermediate E/M, intro Quantum Mechanics
year 4: really different for each university

usually plus compulsory Calculus courses, Linear Algebra, and Ordinary Differential Equation course..
and also additional electives from Math/Physics and other discipline

I am not fitted to give any advice, especially since you still have a long time until your application..
as others said talk to your seniors/advisors

 

[metalrose]

@ashuron

I just had a chat with an indian student who got into U of pittsburgh theoretical cosmology grad prog.

He too was an elec. engg. undergrad.

He says, all I need, is a good physics GRE score and some research exp.

Said, halliday resnick, Arthur beiser, and quantum mech. by griffiths would suffice for the physics GRE.

Is that true? If that is true, then I guess I am already past that level.

He got in despite having 62% marks in his undergrad.

Seems like the universities are pretty willing to relax their criteria a lot for international students owing to uncertainties of international gpa system and curriculum in foreign universities.

 

[Ashuron]

uh..i believe he has some research experience..
i think physics GRE is not that important and not all that difficult

I am not an expert, so try to contact more of your seniors..

 

[twofish-quant]

He got in despite having 62% marks in his undergrad.

If he is from your school, then that's important information since it tells you what a 62% means.

Most Chinese schools will state on the transcript what the number score means, and this can be very different from school to school.

Also at MIT, most courses were set up so that the number grades ended being very low although they were not reported on the transcript. People would get 62/100 on tests and the jump for joy because that was an A+.

 

[twofish-quant]

Seems like the universities are pretty willing to relax their criteria a lot for international students owing to uncertainties of international gpa system and curriculum in foreign universities.

They really don't "relax" their criteria. What they do end up doing is to change the policies so that international students have the same standards with different numbers. It's like buying something for 25 dollars. It matters a lot if you are talking about American dollars, or HK dollars.

I can tell you want something costs in US dollars and US grades. I don't know the going exchange rate between US dollars/grades and Indian rupees/grades.

Also, there is a dean that I knew that mentioned that one reason American grades are inflated by international standards is the Vietnam War. The problem is that in the 1960's, people could avoid being drafted into the Army by going off to college, but you lost your college deferment if your grades were low, so professors started giving everyone high marks so that they wouldn't get kicked out of school and then sent off to Vietnam.

I find this interesting because I've noticed that Canada grades more strictly then the US.