- #1
Polluxy
- 8
- 1
Hi there,
If any people who have sat on grad school admissions committees are lurking out there, I would love to hear your opinion on this:
I'm reapplying to grad school for next fall after I took my Masters and left at another institution. I made a right mess of things there; was going through a long period of depression for other reasons, I essentially lost every ounce of motivation I had. But I haven't been soured on physics or grad school, I know the causes of my failings and I'm determined to fix them. So I'm teaching intro physics at another Uni right now and preparing my applications.
Here's the thing: I did really well in undergrad. 4.0, 3 REUs, a bunch of presentations and a couple publications, stellar letters of recommendation and I won the Goldwater scholarship. I didn't have a problem getting into a top-tier physics grad school with a fellowship the first time around. But now, with a two-year black mark, I'm not sure how I can show the admissions committees that my undergrad is more representative of the work I am capable of, that I have worked past the issues I had during grad school. Of course I have my personal statement to elaborate, but those are just words, I'd really like to be able to hand them something concrete.
So I'm toying with the idea of retaking the physics GRE. The first time around I did alright, but not great. My thinking is that a marked improvement might show an admissions committee that I have the focus and discipline it requires to prepare for it. But then of course there's the argument that the PGRE is basically useless and has no correlation to how well you do in grad school, and some people might wonder why I'd feel the need to take it again after two years of graduate courses. So I'm not sure if it will look like a childish attempt to focus on the wrong things, or whether it could help my application package.
What do you think? Are there better, concrete ways of demonstrating my ability?
Thanks for any advice,
Pollux
If any people who have sat on grad school admissions committees are lurking out there, I would love to hear your opinion on this:
I'm reapplying to grad school for next fall after I took my Masters and left at another institution. I made a right mess of things there; was going through a long period of depression for other reasons, I essentially lost every ounce of motivation I had. But I haven't been soured on physics or grad school, I know the causes of my failings and I'm determined to fix them. So I'm teaching intro physics at another Uni right now and preparing my applications.
Here's the thing: I did really well in undergrad. 4.0, 3 REUs, a bunch of presentations and a couple publications, stellar letters of recommendation and I won the Goldwater scholarship. I didn't have a problem getting into a top-tier physics grad school with a fellowship the first time around. But now, with a two-year black mark, I'm not sure how I can show the admissions committees that my undergrad is more representative of the work I am capable of, that I have worked past the issues I had during grad school. Of course I have my personal statement to elaborate, but those are just words, I'd really like to be able to hand them something concrete.
So I'm toying with the idea of retaking the physics GRE. The first time around I did alright, but not great. My thinking is that a marked improvement might show an admissions committee that I have the focus and discipline it requires to prepare for it. But then of course there's the argument that the PGRE is basically useless and has no correlation to how well you do in grad school, and some people might wonder why I'd feel the need to take it again after two years of graduate courses. So I'm not sure if it will look like a childish attempt to focus on the wrong things, or whether it could help my application package.
What do you think? Are there better, concrete ways of demonstrating my ability?
Thanks for any advice,
Pollux