How can I be sure I'm applying to a school I can get into?

[Mike H]

Strange, I know that at least the biophysics program here (CU-Boulder) is in the physics department and requires the same courses (minus some class, plus some biology class)

Quick Google searching yielded this program, where it would seem that the requirements for a molecular biophysics certificate could in principle be satisfied with successful graduate studies in multiple departments. This is a rather clever way of doing it, and kind of stands apart from the interdisciplinary programs I was referring to earlier. Now, if this isn't the program you're thinking of, no idea what the deal is then.

Every school I applied to I made sure they had some professors working on projects I'm interested in. I'm interested in photosynthesis and if I had to pick one aspect of that that I'd like to focus in on it would be the physics of the energy transfer process when light is absorbed into chlorophyll...however I'm also just broadly interested in everything the chloroplast does...

Again, as mentioned earlier in this thread, you're going to want to speak to one of your previous professors (ideally, your former research supervisor), especially for advice here. If you appropriately tailored your personal statement/research interests to each school, being sure to tie what they have going on with your past experience/education, that's a reasonable measure. You want to make sure that you have some understanding of what research is being done there, and some expression of interest in that based on your previous experiences. I worked on photosynthesis as well as an undergraduate, and found it fascinating, but I wasn't quite so fixated on continuing with it - it may have been easier since I developed the sorts of 'somewhat specific' interests in membrane proteins, optical & magnetic spectroscopies, and bioinorganic systems, which are a bit more transferable (you can find these sorts of areas under investigations in plenty of places, while photosynthesis itself is a bit harder to find).

This actually makes me wonder how interdisciplinary groups in the US manage. If you are working in biophysics but your degree is biology and the coursework you require is advanced mol.bio courses and specialized biophysics lab courses, how does that work out? Seems this may lead to only certain undergrad degrees being accepted in a research group, because of the attached coursework. A research group, like a business, needs people with different backgrounds.

Generally, they start to contribute - as possible - in areas where they're strong, and start to catch up in areas where they're weak. It's not uncommon for interdisciplinary groups to have tutorials in particular areas from within the group, where the group experts take the lead to help others catch up - there's often not enough demand for formal classwork for everything that needs to be passed along to be instituted, so this is what results. We did this in the last academic lab I worked, in fact. In the end, graduate school is about becoming a self-directed learner - you find something you need to learn about, and you do it. You don't wander around wondering why there wasn't a class about it. You ask people who might already be familiar for help as necessary, and perhaps have to brush up on adjunct topics that wind up being essential. And so on.

 

[Almeisan]

The issue is with an American style grad school, where you follow two years of advanced bachelor courses and master courses, skip your thesis, and work on your PhD right away.

You have to do a certain amount of grad school courses. If it is mandatory to do physics coursework as a biophysics grad student, how do they get PhD candidates of different backgrounds? They will have to get biologists as postdocs and they have to teach the physics PhD candicates everything about biology.

My school doesn't even have a physics MSc, but we do have a biophysics group. If we had the US system they couldn't hire PhD candidates with physics backgrounds because there is no real physics coursework being offered here. At least nothing that requires the rigerous undergrad program a phyics BSc offers.

 

[Delong]

You mean following graduate courses in physics.

Well, to me a PhD is a job where you show you can function in an academic setting and publish original research. Either with the one background or the other, when you arrive at the lab you will need to learn some new lab techniques or data processing/modelling.

You can't do an MSc in physics with just chemistry or biology, and including the basic physics in that if any, as your background to do a graduate programme in physics.

But you say that you are from the US. You probably know that the US does stuff differently than most of the rest of the world. Usually the coursework involved in a PhD is teaching coursework.

Any interdisciplinary research group has to recruit people with different backgrounds and they sure have some experience with how to make the chemist or mol.biologist they really need, fit in.
And it is not like every physicist knows the details about gene expression, protein folding or has actually imaged cells using lasers or AFM.

This actually makes me wonder how interdisciplinary groups in the US manage. If you are working in biophysics but your degree is biology and the coursework you require is advanced mol.bio courses and specialized biophysics lab courses, how does that work out? Seems this may lead to only certain undergrad degrees being accepted in a research group, because of the attached coursework. A research group, like a business, needs people with different backgrounds.

I didn't get the point of this post sorry.

 

[Delong]

Again, as mentioned earlier in this thread, you're going to want to speak to one of your previous professors (ideally, your former research supervisor), especially for advice here. If you appropriately tailored your personal statement/research interests to each school, being sure to tie what they have going on with your past experience/education, that's a reasonable measure. You want to make sure that you have some understanding of what research is being done there, and some expression of interest in that based on your previous experiences. I worked on photosynthesis as well as an undergraduate, and found it fascinating, but I wasn't quite so fixated on continuing with it - it may have been easier since I developed the sorts of 'somewhat specific' interests in membrane proteins, optical & magnetic spectroscopies, and bioinorganic systems, which are a bit more transferable (you can find these sorts of areas under investigations in plenty of places, while photosynthesis itself is a bit harder to find).

That's interesting point and I will consider it thank you.

 

[Delong]

Get that GPA up. Work harder.

My GPA is barely 3.0 am I doomed for continuing onto graduate school? I had a bad year of personal issues which dropped my grade down somewhat...

 

[Delong]

How do you think you're going to get into a PhD program if you have a 3.2 GPA? Engineering is most likely an easier path to repaying student loans but it's hard work. If you're not that into it you may become a mediocre engineer and then nobody wins.

My GPA is only 3.0 am I doomed for getting into grad school?

 

[Dr. Courtney]

My GPA is only 3.0 am I doomed for getting into grad school?

If you are content with a 3.0 for the rest of your undergrad, you are doomed for a life of mediocrity.

You have to want it. A 3.0 GPA for one year does not need to turn into a 3.0 GPA at graduation.

 

[Delong]

If you are content with a 3.0 for the rest of your undergrad, you are doomed for a life of mediocrity.

You have to want it. A 3.0 GPA for one year does not need to turn into a 3.0 GPA at graduation.

You don't understand that is my cumulative GPA I am no longer an undergrad I already graduated from college. I took a LOT of hard classes.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Delong, a 3.0 is very low. Very few schools are likely to accept this.

In grad school, a C is considered failing. A 3.0 average is therefore right on the edge of failing. If you're on the edge for undergrad, it is not promising for grad work.

 

[Delong]

Delong, a 3.0 is very low. Very few schools are likely to accept this.

In grad school, a C is considered failing. A 3.0 average is therefore right on the edge of failing. If you're on the edge for undergrad, it is not promising for grad work.

But I know I'm a good student and I know I'm intellectually capable. I took a lot of hard classes from different apartments. I was trying to do molecular biology and biochemistry while at the same quarter doing quantum mechanics or differential equations. I took so many tough classes throughout all six years of college I feel like my low GPA is more understandable that way.

I took way more classes than I needed for my major just for my own scientific interests.

Should I retake some classes in college then?

 

[micromass]

But I know I'm a good student and I know I'm intellectually capable.

But how will grad schools know this?

I took a lot of hard classes from different apartments. I was trying to do molecular biology and biochemistry while at the same quarter doing quantum mechanics or differential equations. I took so many tough classes throughout all six years of college I feel like my low GPA is more understandable that way.

This shows poor planning skills and a tendency to overestimate your abilities. Still not a good sign for grad school. Don't try to convince us, try to convince the grad school

 

[microMRI]

Are American grades inflated somehow or the exams are too easy? I read somewhere that in UK first class honors is 70%. My current Uni in Germany would give me the best grade (1.0) if I could get above 95% (no other way) and I just know a guy who could get 1.0 in most of the subjects (very rare).
Maybe most of the PF members are bright (which is quite likely), so 3.2 GPA is not good enough.

 

[micromass]

Are American grades inflated somehow or the exams are too easy? I read somewhere that in UK first class honors is 70%. My current Uni in Germany would give me the best grade (1.0) if I could get above 95% (no other way) and I just know a guy who could get 1.0 in most of the subjects (very rare).
Maybe most of the PF members are bright (which is quite likely), so 3.2 GPA is not good enough.

Yes, the grading system in the US is quite different from Europe. A 90% would be seen extremely good in my country in Europe, and it's usually just one or two students who pull this off. In the US, this seems very different. Also remember that the US use letter grades. The European culture and the US culture are very different.

 

[atyy]

Are American grades inflated somehow or the exams are too easy? I read somewhere that in UK first class honors is 70%. My current Uni in Germany would give me the best grade (1.0) if I could get above 95% (no other way) and I just know a guy who could get 1.0 in most of the subjects (very rare).
Maybe most of the PF members are bright (which is quite likely), so 3.2 GPA is not good enough.

Well, which is easier, to get 90% consistently or 70% consistently?

Anyway, it is not true that the A grade in the US is uniformly 90%. I've taken classes where the A grade is around 80% (and have heard, but not verified that there are classes where it was around 30-40% - apparently a quantum mechanics course at MIT where the brand new professor over estimated what was "easy"). I personally think 90% for an A is very hard, so I've avoided those, but had to do it once - it was a European exam (language exam administered by the Goethe Institut)! So I think your view is too generalized.

 

[micromass]

Well, which is easier, to get 90% consistent or 70% consistently?

It depends how the curve is and how tough the exams are.

 

[Delong]

But how will grad schools know this?
This shows poor planning skills and a tendency to overestimate your abilities. Still not a good sign for grad school. Don't try to convince us, try to convince the grad school

I was interested in a lot of different subjects. I know it's not a good habit for the long run in science but I was/am young and I couldn't decide on what subjects to focus on. I know I'm supposed to convince the graduate school I just feel like giving a public explanation right now. I know I'm not the most impressive student out there but all I've ever wanted to do in life was become a scientist I thoroughly love science and there's nothing I'd rather do with my life. I've made a lot of personal sacrifices for this very path I can't settle with any other career choice I just can't...

 

[Vanadium 50]

A 3.0 and taking six years to graduate is even worse, I'm afraid.

 

[Delong]

A 3.0 and taking six years to graduate is even worse, I'm afraid.

I took a lot of different classes, they aren't from all the same subject/major, that's why I took six years... I don't know I can't just give up. there is honestly nothing else I want to do with my life. I just can't accept "give up" as my answer...

 

[Delong]

I got accepted into an REU and I hear some REU's are harder to get into than graduate school. Doesn't that mean I'm capable of getting into graduate school as well? I know I'm not dumb I am a capable student everyone's answers here are really making me feel unstable and touchy...

 

[e.bar.goum]

I got accepted into an REU and I hear some REU's are harder to get into than graduate school. Doesn't that mean I'm capable of getting into graduate school as well? I know I'm not dumb I am a capable student everyone's answers here are really making me feel unstable and touchy...

Some REU's are harder to get into than graduate school. Not all. You know yourself better than we do, we only know the information that you have given us. Look, don't give up, but take the advice that people have given you -- narrow your focus, be realistic about what schools you can get into, make sure you have good letters of recommendation, talk to potential supervisors. Don't "give up", just be realistic, and do what you can to improve your chances.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I can't just give up. there is honestly nothing else I want to do with my life.

Then you should seek counseling. If there is only one thing that will make you happy, this is not healthy. When it is something that you have historically not done terribly well at, this is even less healthy.

 

[Vanadium 50]

t all I've ever wanted to do in life was become a scientist

And yet you played chess instead of doing your assignments. Is it not reasonable to reserve these positions for those who have worked for them instead of those who played games instead?

 

[Delong]

And yet you played chess instead of doing your assignments. Is it not reasonable to reserve these positions for those who have worked for them instead of those who played games instead?

How in the world did you know I play chess?!

 

[Delong]

Some REU's are harder to get into than graduate school. Not all. You know yourself better than we do, we only know the information that you have given us. Look, don't give up, but take the advice that people have given you -- narrow your focus, be realistic about what schools you can get into, make sure you have good letters of recommendation, talk to potential supervisors. Don't "give up", just be realistic, and do what you can to improve your chances.

Thanks I really appreciate this advice.

 

[micromass]

How in the world did you know I play chess?!

Vanadium is all-knowing and all-seeing.

 

[Vanadium 50]

How in the world did you know I play chess?!

The chess isn't the point. The point is that you didn't do the work you needed to do.