What are my chances for getting accepted to graduate school in astrophysics

[avpan]

Okay so my primary interest is to pursue cosmology. My question now is what are my chances of getting excepted on a horrendous PGRE score. I just received my scores and it was HORRIBLE like failing, think single percentage. I don't even know how I did so badly I didn't think I did that badly. And so this is my downfall.

I come from Purdue University

GRE scores are V/Q/A: 400/720/4
I know they aren't the strongest either, in general I am a horrible standardized test taker and have been since high school

GPA Cum is 3.1 and my GPA major is 3.2

Here is my kicker/my ace in the hole. I am sure I have 3 good recommenders. I have 1 from Los Alamos National Lab from an advisor I did cosmology research. 1 letter from my current advisor I am working with at Purdue in high energy astrophysics. And 1 Prof. that I got A in both of his courses. And for 4th school I have a rec from my advisor I have worked as an ambassador for the College of Science for 3 years, I know its not academic but as a 4th I found it good for more a personal rec.

In total, I have 3 different research experiences, 2 summers and 1 summer+fall+spring
And I have a publication waiting to be refereed where I am first author with the research I did at Los Alamos. And the publication is in the field I wish to pursue.

Despite my test scores, most schools would see me as a good graduate candidate, but how bad will my test scores effect my chances even with the great recs, research, and publication? I know my GPA isn't the greatest but its not awful, I do still make the cut-off. I know my physics skills aren't that bad, I honestly do not know how I did so bad on the PGRE. What are your opinions? I don't want my application to get booted.

 

[zhermes]

Generally, schools first look at PGRE scores, then GPA. So you're not looking too good. The publication is your real 'ace-in-the-hole.' If it weren't for that, I'd say your chances of getting into any program would be pretty slim. With it, I think you can get into some programs, but certainly not any of the good ones... But with a single percentile PGRE score, it is far from a given.

Its probably too late for the GPA, but you've got to pick up that PGRE score if you want to get into any (or a good) physics program.

 

[Kevin_Axion]

Maybe the better choice of words in your second sentence would be "accepted" not "excepted" the latter wouldn't be to your liking.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I know my GPA isn't the greatest but its not awful

It's awful. Sorry, but that's the truth. At many schools, 3.0 is a hard lower bound, and everywhere they are looking for 3.5+. But you have a worse problem - the GRE and grades reinforce each other. If one were high and the other were low, the committee can conclude that you really knew the material, but for whatever reason one of the indicator didn't show it. But with low scores in both, you've deprived them of that.

To get past that, your letters need to be stellar. "The best student I have ever worked with, or am likely to every work with" stellar. "Better than than the graduate students in my lab and even some of the postdocs" stellar.

What are your opinions? I don't want my application to get booted.

Sounds like you've told us what you want the answer to be.

 

[Simfish]

What if your last two years' GPA is above 3.5? My cum. GPA is similar to that of the OP, but undiagnosed ADD ruined my first few years, so after I went on ADD meds, I'm getting an average of 3.6 for my last 2 years.

Also I expect fairly high PGRE scores.

 

[avpan]

the worst thing is I really think I know my material, I honestly don't know how I did so badly on the exam. I know I have always had problems with time managment and standardized tests since the SAT days.

I mean my backup plan is to stay at my university and complete a masters and use that to improve my GPA. It is already said that as long as I get my recs and statement I can get accepted into the masters program.

I can say the GPA is my fault in not being motivated enough to put in extra effort needed to do well in my physics courses. I was for awhile juggling physics with cs courses and Purdue's CS courses were very rough.

I do know my chances are slim, in fact my application is very risky. It will take a miracle and hoping a professor I have emailed or spoken with will take me into limelight when seeing my recommendations and research experience. I am an amazing researcher compared to my undergrad coursework. maybe this christmas a miracle will be given to me.

 

[Simfish]

Hm avpan, did your GPA improve in your last two years? It's possible that you could just take a gap year to do research and to retake the Physics GRE too (do you have to pay your way through master's?).

 

[avpan]

I would have to pay my way to masters. But our school has this program setup called the 5th year masters applied physics degree. I was already a applied physics major and it would only require 1 more year to get my masters.

I fudged up my upper physics courses in my undergrad due to my CS projects at the time, and it was my fault for procrastinating and not working hard enough. And now i am paying the price. But without a CS course I know I can put the effort needed, I guess you can say i just lost my motivation for a while and got bored of the undergrad curriculum. My advisors can say I learned material and physics for my research quickly and the fact I could do work half the time seeing as I already had extensive computational abilities.

It will take a miracle for my application now, but my backup plan to do a masters could pay off. Do graduate schools still need PGRE score even after one completes masters with a good GPA?

Realistically, I know I probably will be getting rejections from everywhere come the spring. I guess a part of me really needs to get my act together and do really well and not dally during the Masters stage. It kind of sucks how a few mistakes one makes really do effect you in the long run. I mean, if I can do really well during masters I know I can have a strong application for top schools considering my only weakness is the GPA and scores whereas i am a star everywhere else.

 

[Pengwuino]

To reinforce what's been said, you are in a pickle to say the least. Sure being a good researcher might be nice... but do you think you can pass your courses as a graduate student? Or your preliminary exams? There are roadblocks in place that can make it so that being a good researcher is irrelevant as you'll never get to that point.

 

[Vanadium 50]

One of the most common pieces of advice on this forum, particularly those still in undergrad, is "get a Masters". If this really made a big difference, you'd see a bunch of people in PhD programs that already had a MS from somewhere. But you don't.

I think you also need to be honest with yourself about whether you are prepared for even a master's program. A 3.2 GPA and a GRE in single digits doesn't exactly scream out preparedness. If you think you're in a pickle now, if you crash and burn in a MS program think where you will be.

You also need to be honest with yourself on whether or not you are a "star". There are ~700 PhD's per year awarded in physics. Someone a graduate admissions committee might call a "star" would be in what? Maybe the top 10% of that? That means top 70. There are also about 5000 physics bachelors awarded - so a star is in the top 1.5% or so - the best student out of 70. Purdue graduates about 30 BS's per year, so a "star" would be the best student in the last two or three years. Maybe that's you, but that's what a star is.

 

[avpan]

The test doesn't show my ability in physics. I would say my greatest weakness was just it was standardized. I am pretty bad at managing my time during a timed exam, especially since the PGRE is about time management. I was not as prepared because I did not do a practice exam. I have always done badly on ETS exams, since high school. I like to take my time and think about problems rather just race through them.

I know my GPA only dropped from 3.5 because I was so focused on completing CS projects, which at Purdue are really tough courses. They were courses for major CS students and I even thought they were worst than regular physics courses. I even admit where times I could have been studying instead I was maybe trying to date a girl and win a collegiate championship on our paintball team. I know that was my fault. But I know that when I focused on my work, I get the job done right. That can be seen from my publication alone, where most were worried about the next exam, I was probably getting my research project finished.

My PGRE score may say that I do not know my material, but I am 100% confident that if it was not a very dependent time management test than well I would know my material just fine.

How many undergrads can say they have had publication? as first author? and worked at a national lab? I would say that qualifies me as pretty unique. The only thing holding that is GPA and Test scores.

I am not saying I am the best, far from it. I just saying I know my weaknesses and my strengths. Purdue isn't the easiest school to come out of. Especially in Applied physics whereas a normal graduate has 43 credits in physics courses, I actually had to take an additional 30 credits for applied aspect. So in hindsight I know my 3.2 may look bad but I also had to take more classes that could effect that grade. I can say that if I did not choose to go applied I would have greater than 3.5 GPA. But instead of caring about GPA I went with utility.

I know most won't believe when I say coming out with a 3.2 from Applied Physics from Purdue was decent enough, where 3.3 or higher is considered with distinction.

For now, I will complete my application I intended on completing. And I will see what happens. And adjust for what happens in the long run. I will hope my application is looked at with seriousness instead of just thrown out without looking at my other qualities. It would be a shame for them not to see my pub, considering the work I did was pretty relevant to current research and damn well required computer science skill average physics major would not have. I know different professors look at applications and each one looks for different qualities. I have a cousin at Berkeley who says her advisor finds research more desirable. So the definition of "best" is subjective. I have the best research experience out of my class, no one else has a publication where they are first author.

If I do get accepted anywhere or not, I will be sure to post it. So it may help those in my similar shoes.

 

[Pengwuino]

Good luck with your applications. It sounds like you heard what you wanted to hear.

Where are you applying to?

 

[avpan]

Berkeley (know this one is out lol), davis, irvine, cornell, yale, upenn, uofhawaii, umich, osu for Ph.D. programs and Purdue for Masters which is already a given according to the department if I turn in my statement of purpose and recs.

Only thing I can really do is hope for the best after its all done. I've been told from my advisor and other scientists at LANL that most of the schools look at application as a whole. I've had great responses from faculty from following schools

 

[eri]

I hate to break it to you, but most people applying to grad school have done research, many of those have worked at top universities and/or national labs, and many of them have publications. That's not unique, especially for the top schools you're applying to. You're not going to get into any of those schools. I know people with better grades, research, and GRE/PGRE scores who didn't get into those schools. You need to aim a lot lower.

 

[avpan]

I also know people with lower grades than me, and not as much research and get into those schools. And seriously not many people are first authors as undergraduates from what I heard its uncommon.

You may be right I may not get into any of those schools. But I am at least trying. When life knocks you down, you get up again. I know I may sicken most people with my optimism, but that's how I roll. Life always seems to work out how it should.

 

[Simfish]

I also know people with lower grades than me, and not as much research and get into those schools

Oh, are you willing to list their stats here? What were their PGRE scores and GPAs? Especially their grades for their last 2 years?

 

[Vanadium 50]

I also know people with lower grades than me, and not as much research and get into those schools.

But did any of them tank the GRE? As in single-digit percentiles?

In any event, it's clear you have made up your mind, and that you were really here for reinforcement of your previously-formed opinion. Best of luck, and I hope you get in somewhere.

 

[Pengwuino]

Dude, if you think you're so great and you know people who weren't as good as you who got into those kinda programs, why did you ask us anything in the first place?

 

[avpan]

I never said I was the greatest. I only stated that I know people who have gotten into graduate schools with less impressive credentials to prove that you don't have to do amazing things to get into good graduate school. Each graduate school I know holds different standards, so nothing is ever determined.

I have come to reality, and I was looking for honest opinions with some "supportive" advice. I know some have just offered straight discouragement. I am not dumb, I know my situation and everyone makes it sound like graduate school only depends on GPA and test scores. Is anyone here actually ever helped decide graduate students? I ask because I sincerely ask what they think because they offer the most insight.

If I may apologize if I said anything that offended anyone because that was not my case. My main point was to see if anyone knew of similar cases to mine that may be helpful because I know I am not the first.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Is anyone here actually ever helped decide graduate students?

Yes, but you've already decided that you aren't interested in what I have to say.

 

[avpan]

On the contrary, i did listen to what you and everyone said. I agree with everything you said except that you think I am not ready for masters.
But you already assumed I wasn't good enough because of PGRE and GPA score without looking at my transcript or any other materials I feel like. Do you honestly not bother with any application if you something that is just numbers? Like did you ever think some people just aren't good test takers? Like if you look at my undergraduate courses the only C I got was in my quantum mechanics course, in terms of basic physics courses needed in undergrad. I got C in my applied courses later in the 3 other Cs in my cs courses. But I think my computational background shown in my research shows that I still know more and can do more than the normal physics major who only took one cs course.

I just do not understand why everyone thinks because I did poorly on an exam that I am not fit for graduate school. I mean I could always end up taking 1-2 years to work and then try again, but the problem still remains that the PGRE requires so much prep time that some just do not have time for. I am really listening to everyone here. Understand that when I saw my score that my self-esteem really took a hit to the nuts. I mean I felt like my undergrad education was useless. It did make me think that all those times I blew off my work to enjoy college experience is coming back to bite me in the ***. Like it REALLY sucked. After a few hours though after reading most of you comments I realized that being depressed and thinking my life was over just ruins things more, and I know I am invited back to finish masters in case the worst. So yes I could screw my masters up, but wouldn't you all try anyway if you were in my shoes? So I always keep myself optimistic because this way I can keep myself moving forward instead of being dragged backwards. I mean my SAT in high school said I sucked at math, yet I still made it through as a physics major.

 

[Pengwuino]

We're telling you what admissions committees will think. They will see someone with 2 massive red flags. In the end you are competing with a host of other students. You need to justify why an admissions committee needs to pass up on a more well rounded student than someone with an extremely poor PGRE score and low grades. That's one thing people forget, they aren't just deciding if you're good enough for their programs, they're deciding whether you're better than the other people applying.

 

[avpan]

You are very true, and that is why I am hoping they will see my research background and maybe possibly think of accepting me on probation or something. I mean I am unfamiliar but I have heard that some schools do accept people on probation to see how they do the first semester/year. I mean if I was able to bring up my grades in graduate courses that would prove I am capable. I can except staying an extra year to complete my masters and try to improve my GPA if I have to. The reason I am not inclined to do so because I feel I would let my recommenders down, if that makes sense. I mean they put so much faith in you that if you can't succeed they would think they couldn't help I feel. So I mean even one acceptance would make my day, its wishful thinking but I know I am a valuable asset to a group with my skillset.

 

[Fizex]

Are you expecting us to give you an outright percentage such as q 10% being accepted? (rhetorical question) Because no one on this forum knows what the admissions committees will decide and if I were you I would still apply to those schools anyway. Just stop arguing about why you think you can get in; it won't change your chances.

 

[Vanadium 50]

It did make me think that all those times I blew off my work to enjoy college experience is coming back to bite me in the ***.

That's because that's exactly what happened.

Our choices have consequences. You don't get to pick the choice and also to pick the consequences. (Just like you don't get to ask a question and also to decide what the answer is)

Let me try and explain this with numbers. Pengwuino is right - what matters is where you fall relative to the other applicants. If a school gets 200 applications and accepts 30, it doesn't matter if you can move yourself from #197 to #38 - you're not going to be going there.

Ballpark numbers - there are about 5000 physics BS grads per year. About 3000 take the GRE, and so presumably want to go to grad school. There are about 700 PhD's graduating per year, so for the sake of round numbers, let's say attrition means that 1000 students are accepted. So you need to be in the top 1000 students in the country.

You never said what single digits are, so let's say the 9% percentile. That means you came in 2730th out of 3000 on the GRE. As far as grades, let's assume grades are uniformly distributed between 3.0 and 4.0 (they aren't - they peak higher, at least among applicants for graduate school), so a 3.1 is 2700th out of 3000. So you need letters that are strong enough to advance you in the rankings by about 1800 places.

Or, in the hands of our imaginary committee, you're sitting now at maybe #187 out of their 200 applicants, so you need letters that are so strong they convince the committee to accept you over 157 other students with better grades and test scores. Maybe they are that strong, but you need to know that that's what you are up against.

Or would be, if you were trying to apply to an average graduate school. Your schools are mostly Top 20, so your competition will be stiffer. Since you're coming from a Top 50 school, and looking to move up, the committees will be looking for evidence that Purdue was too easy for you. Your grades and test scores will not provide that evidence.

Your message #21 raises more red flags. A C in a core course like QM is another one. Grad schools want you to succeed, and low grades in core courses is a sign that you are not prepared. Worse, getting C's in post-core classes is a huge red flag. In graduate school, all the classes are post-core, and in graduate school, C is failing.

In that same message, you say retaking the PGRE will take too much time. Fair enough - that's your choice. But like I said, choices have consequences.

If one looks at the bottom 10% or so of applications, there is a common theme: "Yes, my grades are low and my test scores are low. But I am passionate about physics." The usual reaction is "Evidently not passionate enough to do what it takes to get the grades and test scores up."

Oh, and as far as admitted under probation, maybe some places have it, but everywhere I am familiar with academic probation is something that happens to grad students on their way out, not on their way in. What is less uncommon is accepting a student without support - if you're willing to fork out the tuition, they'll take it. But even this isn't exactly common: schools like to have a large fraction of students finish the program, and it's usually not worth a few tens of thousands of dollars to have their stats go down.

I know, you say you want "supportive advice". We could say "poor little bear, of course you'll get into Berkeley". But is that really what you want? The fact of the matter is that your application has many red flags.

 

[avpan]

I see your point, and I know Berkeley was out of my reach. Kinda just applied as a why not apply. I figured my chances at state schools were much better. I definitely see where you are coming from. But for post core courses, I never really had any except 2 extra post core physics courses. CS courses were essentially lower division courses equivalent to freshmen-soph CS major. I spent the majority of my last years doing those to finish a minor/applied degree.

Also, I am applying to astronomy departments rather than physics departments for most of the schools. Only Davis, Irvine for physics since astronomy is combined with physics. I have known that physics competition was always a lot stronger.
I have an honest question, if one finishes a masters does that person have to take a PGRE assuming they do well in their master courses? If so, my plan now would be to finish my applications anyway. And Apply to the schools and hope for the best but plan for the worst. I graduated this semester so next semester I essentially will only be working with my research advisor and no courses. So if PGRE is required even for master students then I would plan to take it in april and study correctly the next time around. This way I wouldn't have to study for it while taking courses in the next year.

 

[eliya]

This is unrelated to the discussion, but it intrigued me.

Or would be, if you were trying to apply to an average graduate school. Your schools are mostly Top 20, so your competition will be stiffer. Since you're coming from a Top 50 school, and looking to move up, the committees will be looking for evidence that Purdue was too easy for you. Your grades and test scores will not provide that evidence.

People keep saying that where you go for undergrad doesn't matter for grad school applications, but are you implying here that top-something schools will be more generous towards applicants from good or equally ranked schools?
You didn't explicitly say it, but if you're going up, schools will look for evidence that the school you came from was easy for you. Now, assuming that there are two applicants, one from a non-ranked school and one from MIT. Let's assume that they have equal research experience, equal LOR, and equal GRE and PGRE. However, the student from the non-ranked school has a 4.0 GPA while the one from MIT has a lesser GPA. Would they prefer the MIT applicant?

 

[Pengwuino]

I have an honest question, if one finishes a masters does that person have to take a PGRE assuming they do well in their master courses? If so, my plan now would be to finish my applications anyway. And Apply to the schools and hope for the best but plan for the worst. I graduated this semester so next semester I essentially will only be working with my research advisor and no courses. So if PGRE is required even for master students then I would plan to take it in april and study correctly the next time around. This way I wouldn't have to study for it while taking courses in the next year.

Yes, you have to take your PGRE, no exceptions. My university requires a certain PGRE score before they even let you graduate with your masters. PhD programs will always pretty much always require them for admission.

 

[deluks917]

This is unrelated to the discussion, but it intrigued me.

People keep saying that where you go for undergrad doesn't matter for grad school applications, but are you implying here that top-something schools will be more generous towards applicants from good or equally ranked schools?
You didn't explicitly say it, but if you're going up, schools will look for evidence that the school you came from was easy for you. Now, assuming that there are two applicants, one from a non-ranked school and one from MIT. Let's assume that they have equal research experience, equal LOR, and equal GRE and PGRE. However, the student from the non-ranked school has a 4.0 GPA while the one from MIT has a lesser GPA. Would they prefer the MIT applicant?

From my experience on Physics GRE forum (specifically the grad school acceptance threads) I'd say going to MIT (or a similarly ranked school and doing reasonably well) makes a student far more likely to get into grad school. There are good reasons for this, in my opinion the classes at MIT/Harvard/etc really are substantially harder then those even at a good school like Rutgers. Nonetheless large numbers of students graduate from good LAC's and state schools and get into top programs. However such students were the top students at their undergrads and usually took several graduate classes. If MIT undergrad was not easy but you did okay despite a challenging schedule you will probably do okay at MIT grad school. If you weren't near the top at Purdue you are going to be at the very bottom at Princeton.

people should really look at those threads on Physics GRE forum as give you real information on who gets in and who does not.

 

[Simfish]

people should really look at those threads on Physics GRE forum as give you real information on who gets in and who does not.

Yes, that does give a lot of real information. The problem is that there is very little information on certain subsets of applicants, *especially* the subset with very high PGRE (>850) and low GPA. I went through all the threads and could only find a single domestic non-Caltech/Chicago example (two if we're counting astrophysics). Both managed to get in at least one tier-1 school, but their GPAs weren't THAT low (one was 3.5, another was 3.3)

 

[Vanadium 50]

Also, I am applying to astronomy departments rather than physics departments for most of the schools. Only Davis, Irvine for physics since astronomy is combined with physics. I have known that physics competition was always a lot stronger.

Where on Earth did you get that idea?

 

[Vanadium 50]

People keep saying that where you go for undergrad doesn't matter for grad school applications, but are you implying here that top-something schools will be more generous towards applicants from good or equally ranked schools?

No, I am implying a letter of recommendation from MIT that says "this os our best student this year" will be given more weight than a letter of recommendation from East Cupcake Community College that says the same thing.

 

[Caramon]

You will not get accepted into a top 50 school. Aim for top 125-75.

 

[Simfish]

No, I am implying a letter of recommendation from MIT that says "this os our best student this year" will be given more weight than a letter of recommendation from East Cupcake Community College that says the same thing.

Oh, that's a very good point. I was about to say "well, it's really the prestige of the professor that matters more", but then I caught myself and saw that it contained the "best student this year" comment.

BUT...

It is certainly much easier to be the "best student" this year in a state university than at MIT. Furthermore, a professor at a state university could say that "this UG is better than many of my grad students".

 

[Vanadium 50]

It is certainly much easier to be the "best student" this year in a state university than at MIT.

Which is why the comment carries more weight coming from a strong school.