Dr. Isis received the following email the other night. It really hit Isis in the tenders:
Hello, most revered Goddess of life- and career-saving advice.
I have a semi-urgent question for you, and I would really appreciate it if you could answer (either on the blog, or with a quick e-mail). I will bribe you with these. The perfect combination of two pleasures - chocolate cake and heels.Here is the deal. I am an undergrad in my senior year, and will graduate December 2009. I am looking to get into Huge Research University (HRU) in Cold North American country. For my undergrad thesis, I work in a good lab, and the prof was able to send me to present my poster at an HRU conference. Thing is, the PI hosting this yearly conference is my ex-boss from an internship I had at HRU. I did not do too well there (as a much younger and silly Labness), and will not get a good recommendation.
I want to go to grad school at HRU, and would love to use the conference as a chance to look for potential advisors. Is that kosher? How can I just sashay over to some BigWig without an introduction, and ask her if she's looking for grad students?
A complicating point is that I do not have the cut-off GPA for most HRU programs (again, the young silly Labness wreaks havoc). I am hoping if the profs can first meet me, see my sexy poster, learn about the large # of labs I've done research at throughout my internship program, and get interested, I would be able to work something out with them and the admissions people.
Can I just come up and talk to profs at a conference? Should I talk to the students instead? Should I try to hide out from my previous boss to make sure she doesn't talk trash about young silly Labness, and change the potential advisors' minds?
This conference starts in a week...
Please help!
--
Labness
The concern that Labness shares in her letter is not uncommon -- that in order to attend graduate school and catch the eye of a faculty member/potential mentor one must have been a perfect undergraduate with a 4.0 GPA and >80th percentile GRE scores. I thought that, in order to put poor Labness's mind at ease, I would share with you all one of Dr. Isis's dirty little secrets.
If you looked at my undergraduate transcript, you'd see that on paper I was a horrible undergraduate.
Figure 1: An artist's representation of Not-Yet Dr. Isis during her first two years as an undergraduate. Except that, even with her head where the sun does not shine, Not-Yet Dr. Isis was much,much hotter.
When I entered college I had grand plans of becoming a physician. I attended a university in a combined BS/MD program, convinced at 17 years old that I had my career path all figured out. However, my preconceived notions of what this program would be like and the reality were quite different. This, combined with the stresses of being away from home, made me very unhappy. By my second year I had had enough. I, of course, dealt with this very maturely. I stopped going to class. I had no idea what one would do with a biology degree if they didn't go to medical school. Then, after the last semester was over and I had earned a GPA appropriate for someone who had not gone to class in a year, I went home and told Papa Isis that I was leaving college. And that's just what I did. I have only ever seen my father cry twice in my life. The day we buried my mother and the day I told him I was dropping out of school.
Figure 2: Isis the Scientist-- BS/MD school dropout.
After leaving school I got a job through a friend working for a large biotech company and worked there for a few years. I really enjoyed it. I especially loved the research and development aspect of their business. Having the opportunity to interact with biomedical scientists and enjoying these interactions, I figured I at least owed it to myself to complete my degree and explore my options. So, I returned to college on probation, finished my degree, earning a 4.0 in the remaining semesters, ended up having a career-shaping research experience with a faculty member who was doing fascinating work, and leaving with a bachelor's degree.
I got a job with a pharmaceutical company in research and development and it was there that I truly discovered a passion for research and decided that I wanted to pursue a PhD. With recommendations from my undergraduate research mentor and my boss at Big Pharma and my GRE scores in hand, I began to cautiously approach PhD mentors.
Did they all ask about my less than stellar semesters? Yes, and I explained to them candidly what had happened, how it shaped my life, and the passion I had discovered for research. Turns out my passion for research and my drive at 24 years old was much more important to them than the C- I earned in biochemistry at 19 years old. Graduate school ended up being a perfect fit for me and now I'm Dr. Isis.
So, what's the point and my advice for Labness? Decide which faculty you want to meet and do a bit of background reading into what they're studying. Go to that conference, approach the faculty you are interested in studying with (not the students, but the faculty members) and tell them about your hot science and why you want to study with them. Tell them about the research you've been involved in and why you want to attend graduate school at their university. You'll have to be prepared to explain your less than stellar GPA, and you should do so honestly. Your former advisor may say something about the failed experience you had with her, or she might be pleased to see how you've matured. But all of that is irrelevant. You focus on the person you are now, how you have matured, the successful research experience you've had now, and the positive impression you've made on your current PI. When you're done, sit and write sincere thank you notes to the faculty who took the time to talk to you.
You're gonna have to make a first impression with your enthusiasm for your work and your drive to attend grad school since you can't rely on your GPA to make the impression for you. Still, I think you'll be surprised in that you might find people who see potential in a scrappy, young undergraduate who had a bit of a rough start and are willing to offer her an opportunity.
It might be because you remind them of themselves.
Comments
I'll ad that a student with a less than clean academic background may want to look into different/programs and universities, to figure out which ones are more likely to take the time to see you as a complete person. For example, as an extreme, med school apps tend to be judged on a pretty quantitative, cold-hearted scale, in which a professor will have little input, even if they think the sun rises inyour eyes.
The same can be true of some graduate programs, while others take the time to consider the whole student more closely. Asking around to figure out which these are is worthwhile. Some universities have more than one program that will allow you access to the same professor (for example department/center/interdepartmental programs) and the different programs may judge students independently.
Be prepared with a concrete and short explanation of why your current abilities do not reflect the blots in your academic history.
Posted by: neurolover | February 28, 2009 4:40 PM
Labness - Dr. Isis gave you some wonderful advice. As long as you can show your potential supervisors how you've grown, and can explain your less-than-stellar GPA honestly, you should be able to make some headway.
I too had sub-stellar grades in my undergrad. I distinctly remember one semester getting a 1.8 GPA - yeah, that was a rough time. I turned things around, but the semester really killed me. In my 4th year I went to a conference and met my eventual masters supervisor. She took me under her wing, even with my lower GPA, because she could see that I had matured along the way. Not all was roses: I didn't get my pick of grad schools, and I did have to prove myself to the department and university by taking some extra classes, but that just helped bump up my GPA.
Anyway, I just wanted to share my experience so you know it's not all about GPAs in grad school. Good luck!
Posted by: Mrs. CH | February 28, 2009 7:26 PM
Almost all of the scientists who I most respect that I've had the occasion to meet and talk with on this subject admit that they too started off their undergrads terribly. Some of them, like Dr. Isis, took time off and others, like me, figured it out while still embroiled in school. I had some not so nice grades on my transcript and was prepared with answers should any of my potential supervisors have asked me about it, but no one did. I like to think its because of the huge improvement in grades through my undergraduate career, and me being able to sincerely express my wish to pursue graduate studies, along with relevant skills... plus my sparkling personality *natch*.
Posted by: Anna | February 28, 2009 7:30 PM
Thank you, Dr. Isis. I now have a game plan, which really puts my mind at ease.
At this conference, there will be a few speakers who do such tremendously cool and creative things it boggles my mind! I will read up some more about their work, and plan questions I've been wanting to ask them.
I'll talk to them, and mention that I'd love to work with them as their M.Sc. student on such-and-such, if they're looking. Regardless of the response, I will send them a note thanking them for their time.
Here's the question: e-mail or handwritten card? E-mail means it will go to them directly, and will remain in their inbox for future reference. Handwritten seems more thoughtful, but may get lost and forgotten.
In any case.
Thank you, Dr. Isis! I am glad you took my problem to heart!
Posted by: Labness | February 28, 2009 7:36 PM
Hand-written card. Every time. No exception. I keep a pack in my top left desk drawer for just such occasions.
Yes, an email is instant, but I overlook a lot of emails. I look at all the personally addressed mail I get. A hand-written card is memorable and shows that you made the effort to write it, address it, get it to the post, etc.
Don't let the thought of emailing a thank you cross your mind again, Grasshopper. ;)
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | February 28, 2009 7:46 PM
This is an awesome post Isis! (Thanks Labness for asking!)
I'll soon be attending some conferences; one at a local larger university and a national conference in a far away state. I'll be sure to keep the thank-you note suggestion in mind too.
Posted by: Eugenie | February 28, 2009 8:02 PM
I jumped out of academia after getting a MS in order to found a company, so I'm a relative academic lightweight in these parts. But my undergrad experiences sound similar to those already mentioned. Grades varied between sufficient and sorrowful for a number of reasons, and as with Labness ended up being a bit short of the minimum requirements.
If you have good sources for letters of recommendation, don't underestimate their power.
The PI that you worked under in your earlier days could go (at least) one of two ways. If they are a jerk, they could assume that the 'successfu'l work you've done since is just indicative of lower standards in other labs. This would of course be bad, but it would also require the implicit denigration of the other PIs you've worked under, so their good reputation will directly support you in this case.
The other way of looking at it is of course that you are improving. Now I can only speak for myself here, but given two candidates of equal competence and all else being equal, I'd prefer the one who is trending upwards.
Posted by: Vietor | February 28, 2009 8:15 PM
Excellent advice (as always!). I can't even count how many times in the last six months (no really...I've run out of fingers/toes, and my calculator is nowhere to be found) I've had convince a student that most grad programs will overlook a non 4.0 GPA if they have excellent research experience. Where does this myth that they must have perfect grades to get into graduate student come from?
Posted by: unbalanced reaction | February 28, 2009 8:23 PM
And graduate programs that want you will even consider you despite wretched graduate school experiences. I had a terrible first year that killed my graduate school GPA and nearly killed me in the process. I spent some time away. Had to explain what had happened, but got accepted to all of the programs I applied to anyway.
Good bribe for the Goddess there Labness.
Posted by: Academic | February 28, 2009 9:11 PM
thank-yous get you remembered!
i made small fruit baskets for my faculty recommendation writers when i was applying to grad schools. (they were all so great to me.) every one of them was shocked- they said they had never before had someone go to such great length as thanks for a recommendation! well, now i may just be applying to join them... aside from remembering me from keeping in touch, that may just get me remembered as the girl who went the extra mile.
i've also written thank you notes to people who have helped me along my way in grad school. the last one was to the boss of a friend of mine. i delivered the note, ran into my friend in the hallway, talked to her for a minute, and then she went in to talk to her boss. she emailed me later, saying that whatever i gave her boss made a real impression on him.
even i kinda sucked at some things- mostly i got all my fucking up out of the way in high school, but my first semester in college was kinda rough and i had a bump in the road my last semester too. every interview i had (especially the one with my now-mentor) asked about it, and i was quite frank in saying i was young, stupid and too ambitious. and i learned my lesson and learned how to better handle my life as a result of my mistakes.
i think the key thing is using the experience to change your behavior. that's what life is all about, really.
and thanks for the idea, dr isis! i will be using that system when i go to eb.
Posted by: leigh | February 28, 2009 10:04 PM
My husband and I are both applying this year, and we both have just under 3.0 GPAs. I've heard that if you can explain the low GPA, especially if there is improvement in the last two years of undergrad, you're ok. So far neither of us have gotten feedback that our GPAs are too low, but I think it is affecting our application responses nonetheless. It seems to completely depend on the applicant pool the year(s) you apply. It also seems that at some schools, working in the lab of someone that is well known in the field makes a difference, if that person has a good reputation, they can vouch for your skills, and if you can do well in a good, respected lab, they figure you're of good enough quality.
Posted by: Sara | February 28, 2009 10:17 PM
I was a college dropout after only 3 weeks and destroyed all my parents' hopes for my future. After working as a secretary/phone/coffee chick for a couple of years, I went back to college and after getting stellar grades in the first semester, promptly starting skipping classes, just managed to skate by for the next 3.5 years and graduated with a GPA of 2.5. I finally woke up to myself at 23yo, did a second undergrad degree, graduated top of my class then spent a couple of years in Shitty Job Hell before heading back to grad school and eventually to where I am now.
Hang in there Labness. The Dr Isis and the previous commenters have given sound advice. I guarantee that if you look at a lot of professor's undergrad transcripts, you'll find less than stellar grades. Find the advisor that fits your interests best and make yourself known to them as a enthusiastic, committed and dedicated future grad student rather than just a name with a poor GPA.
Posted by: Professor in Training | February 28, 2009 10:42 PM
Comrade PhysioProf's grades sucked motherfucking ass as an undergrad.
Posted by: Comrade PhysioProf | February 28, 2009 11:39 PM
Closely related:
I had no idea how to be a good student as an undergrad, an my grades sort of reflected that. It was only after i graduated that i decided to go into medicine, and i took all my premed classes at that point (and rocked them hard). When you know what you want and you figure out how to do it, it gets easier. It would be horrid if we were all judged on our behavior at 19.
Posted by: PalMD | March 1, 2009 1:07 AM
Isis, I teared up at the story about your father. I hope he was able to see you turn things around and become a science goddess!
Posted by: Asphericity | March 1, 2009 1:21 AM
I've been obsessing over my shitty grades over the past two weeks and it's reassuring to hear that people manage to make it even after fucking up.
I have a question that's somewhat related. Recently I've been considering taking a fifth year to finish my undergrad. I have no problems getting the credits I need to finish my degree, but I want to take an extra year to do extra classes that I wish I had taken and improve my GPA. Would this be a waste of time, or should I go for it?
Posted by: LostMarbles | March 1, 2009 1:54 AM
Posts like these are awesome. I feel humbled and embiggened at the same time. (And I sprayed my monitor and keyboard while reading CPP's comment...) My optimism on my past academic life has increased by an order of magnitude! Thank you.
Posted by: biopunk | March 1, 2009 4:29 AM
I am on the admissions committee for my department this year. While it is true that a bad GPA is not disqualifying (especially in light of outstanding research credentials, explainable circumstances, or obvious improvement with time), one thing to keep in mind is that the minimum "passing" grade in grad school is a B. No matter how mad your research skillz, if we don't think you can get a B in our classes, we won't accept you.
We had a student with excellent letters apply this year with a 3.3 GPA. ALL of this applicant's science grades were a B or lower (with 1 or 2 exceptions) including all of the senior level classes, where the student had 2 Cs and 3 Bs. We had serious doubts the student would be able to maintain a B in our classes, so we had to pass on the student.
Posted by: helenahandbasket | March 1, 2009 9:07 AM
Let me also echo and further emphasize the impact of a hand-written note posted in a timely manner. Even more today than when I applied to grad school, a hand-written note stands out among the zillions of e-mails. These notes stay in my mind and accompany me to admissions committee meetings. They reflect a level of maturity and interest that an advocate can present at the meeting in your support.
I still do this, whether I'm meeting with a politician or fellow researcher. In my most recent job search, I wrote every single person who interviewed me out of respect for their time and to reiterate my strong interest in the position.
I had good grades (and missed out on major life experiences as a result) but I had shitty GRE scores that made interviewers question the rigor of my small-niche undergraduate institution. However, in each application letter, I took the time to look up two or three faculty and their research (no web pages back then) and express in my cover letter that my match for that program was exemplified by my specific interest in the work of professors X, Y, and Z and that I'd love to meet them. Hence, your idea to chat up individual potential future mentors is superb.
One note: if applying at an Ivy League program in the same town as your undergrad, do not say cut your interview day short by telling the graduate coordinator that you really need to get to your intramural bowling match because you are in first place. (I got rejected but we won the intramural championship.).
Let me just say this about our hostess with the mostest, Dr Isis. Thank you for providing this incredibly valuable advice for hundreds if not thousands of trainees who will be well-served by the experiences shared herein. I'm so proud to be part of a community of colleagues like her and our fellow commenters who so willingly and selflessly share their experiences and advice. I think there's something to this academic blog thing.
P.S. Papa Isis must be amazingly proud of you now.
Posted by: Abel Pharmboy | March 1, 2009 9:18 AM
There is another, perhaps more subtle point, that all these kind folks relating their stories of horrid undergraduate GPAs are failing to make.
The sorts of intellectual skills, habits and talents that make for the difference between an A+++ undergraduate record and a B+ undergraduate record have essentially zero to do with those necessary to succeed as a post-graduate trainee or even a PI.
Don't get me wrong, you have to be able to learn stuff. But the modes of the learning and the expression of that learning are totally different.
Long way of saying not only can you be successful at getting into grad school but also successful once in grad school even if your academic record is less than perfect
Posted by: DrugMonkey | March 1, 2009 9:56 AM
Agreed. My experience has been that GRE scores are much more predictive of success in grad school than undergraduate grades. Accordingly, I put substantially more weight on GREs than undergraduate grades when I assess grad school applicants.
Posted by: Comrade PhysioProf | March 1, 2009 11:06 AM
I'm intrigued by this, PhysioProf. Can you tell us what it is about the GRE that you believe offers insight into one's potential for success? I'm not being contrary. I'm sincerely curious about your experience.
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | March 1, 2009 11:08 AM
My experience is that high GRE scores--particularly the verbal section--correlate highly with intellectual horsepower, ability to think quickly, focus and determination, and attention to detail.
Posted by: Comrade PhysioProf | March 1, 2009 11:19 AM
Another route around an abysmal undergrad transcript is to take grad courses part-time,* on a non-matriculated basis. (Schools vary on how many credits one can take.) If you do well, you can document "this is the new me, on a graduate level." Also, faculty at large schools still tend to take an interest in graduate students, so they write more forceful recommendations for grad students that impress them (as opposed to undergrads where they may only say "s/he got an A in my class").
*While one has a regular job. That job can give one impetus to apply oneself to studies.
Posted by: Joe | March 1, 2009 2:40 PM
Thanks for the insight, Comrade. I suppose the GRE is certainly the most recent indicator of one's aptitude and of one's ability to perform under pressure.
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | March 1, 2009 3:41 PM
What a week!
This post is tremendously encouraging. Thank you for coming (farther) out of the GPA closet and writing it.
Posted by: Juniper Shoemaker | March 1, 2009 9:44 PM
Another route around an abysmal undergrad transcript is to take grad courses part-time,* on a non-matriculated basis. (Schools vary on how many credits one can take.) If you do well, you can document "this is the new me, on a graduate level."
This is what I did, and I have to say it was extremely helpful. Because of my spotty record as an undergrad, I had serious doubts about my ability to succeed in grad school. Going back to school--and blowing away the competition (because of my maturity, not because of superior intelligence)--has done wonders for my self-confidence. It definitely helped my chances of admission, because I got much better LoRs than I otherwise would have.
I've only been accepted to one place so far--still waiting to hear from eight. But one place is far more than I thought I would get six months ago.
My experience is that high GRE scores--particularly the verbal section--correlate highly with intellectual horsepower, ability to think quickly, focus and determination, and attention to detail.
CPP, I wish there were more folks like you on chemistry admissions committees! BTW, I think you rock. :-) And thought so long before this comment.
Posted by: UnlikelyGrad | March 2, 2009 10:15 AM
"Long way of saying not only can you be successful at getting into grad school but also successful once in grad school even if your academic record is less than perfect"
Conversely, you can be successful at getting into grad school with a great undergrad academic record, and fail rather spectacularly at grad school.
"My experience is that high GRE scores--particularly the verbal section--correlate highly with intellectual horsepower, ability to think quickly, focus and determination, and attention to detail."
Well, as someone with high verbal GREs I'm pleased to hear this. At the same time, my experience is that intellectual horsepower, ability to think quickly, focus and determination, and attention to detail matter a great deal less to success as a PI than I would have anticipated prior to grad school. There seem to be a lot of slow-but-steady deep thinkers, or (on the opposite extreme) ADHD-type poor focusers that seem to be getting some nice R01s and Science covers around here (albeit often a decade 'behind schedule').
Posted by: becca | March 2, 2009 11:02 AM
I believe currently my department is so hard up for students right now that they are being quite generous with the 3.0 GPA cut off. However, in the past they have been known to be rather firm on the cut off, but if your potential supervisor is willing to go to bat for you, they will usually over look your GPA if you are close to the cut off.
Posted by: specstudent | March 2, 2009 2:20 PM
I forgot to mention, that my PI was on academic probation in when he was in undergrad, and failed his qualifying exam the first time around in Grad school, and turned out to be a kick ass researcher.
Posted by: specstudent | March 2, 2009 2:25 PM
On the topic of GREs - what do people think of the subject test? I'm in bioengineering, where they seldom even request it. But my undergrad performance was so-so, and I'm looking to show that I actually learned some stuff...even if it's just "Enzyme Cofactor Bingo".
Posted by: Sunflower | March 2, 2009 2:34 PM
I can tell you that I am the perfect example of someone who had a terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE undergraduate career--and yet I was just accepted to PhD program at Some Terrifically Awesome Mid-Western University (STAMWU). An unlikely candidate, I earned a 0.5 over the two semesters of my 3rd year, which put me into sub 2.0 territory overall and thus probation. I ended up leaving that school and taking a semester off to collect myself.
After my break, I took two classes at another school (the third I'd attended), did well, and then proceeded to earn a B- and three F's the second semester. Finally I managed to straighten myself out at my fourth and final school over 5 semesters and two summers and swung a 3.22 at graduation despite some hiccups (a D+, a D-, and an F).
So how did I achieve the miracle of getting into a PhD program? Luckily the admissions committee does not look at just your grades. Other things are important, and I think should be more important--your recommendations, your research experience, and how well your interests are in line with the department. I suppose you can tack GRE scores on to that list, but that probably depends on the school. I think the previous three are more universally important.
I happened to luck out on those three things, I think. My "research" was a philosophy paper that I presented at a conference, something that I could do on my own and required no lab equipment. The luck part is that I'm going into cognitive science, where philosophy is still relevant to the overall field, which is not the case with most fields. I suppose with computer science and math your research can also be solitary. But definitely not biology (unless you study ants in their natural habitat?) and not psychology.
The recommendations I lucked out with because one of the faculty on the review committee just so happened to know one of my recommenders and holds him in high regard. That's plainly luck--even if you know your professors are well known at your target schools, it doesn't mean the people they know there have decision making power. Also, as far as recommendations go--you obviously need to have at least gotten good grades in these people's classes and/or impressed them with your motivation and intelligence. If you can't find at least three professors who will recommend you, then you're dead in the water. Not everybody has to be ecstatic about you, but at least three people must be.
Finally, I think I got REALLY lucky because I found (and was found by) the Professor of Obscure-But-Still-Well-Respected-Subfield that is absolutely exactly what I'm interested in doing. I guess this is where you're supposed to do your research and find the people you're interested in working with, but to be honest I was looking at so many schools I mostly overlooked this one person who is now likely to be my advisor. Of course, once I found out they wanted to interview me, I read up as much as possible about them.
So, to summarize, don't worry about your past. Worry about your present and recent history, and try and get experience where it counts. Having A's in a whole bunch of general education courses won't help you too much, and even getting D's and F's in them won't hurt as much as you'd think. Do the right research, impress the right people, and find the right program for you. And then, stir in some luck for good measure.
Posted by: wikiterra | March 2, 2009 6:15 PM
Dr. Isis, truly you are a Goddess! I have been terribly anxious that I will never do really awesome science because I didn't get into grad school right out of undergrad. It was terribly depressing, because I didn't have any backup plan. (Having advisers who are in the same hemisphere and know anything about your planned grad studies also makes a big difference. UW Madison is *not* a backup school for infectious disease! Having a undergrad school that takes pride in not giving good grades to the point that only 5 people have ever graduated with 4.0s also affects the application process.)
After a terrible biotech job and a pretty good research job I decided to try for grad school again (don't want to re-take those GREs!) Some days I really feel like I've got a train bearing down on me if I want to get an advanced degree, get married, and have kids. Some days it seems impossible, especially when my co-workers all say grad school is a terrible stupid idea (even the ones with PhDs!) and that I'll just make it impossible to get a job.
And then the Goddess tells me that I can have it all, or take as much as I want. You. Are. Awesome! Thank you!!!
Posted by: JustaTech | March 3, 2009 2:59 PM
I was a 3.1 at Berkeley, which was underwhelming. I am a neurochemist, and I got Cs throughout my chemistry career. I rocked the GREs, which was important. Also being a co-author on 2 papers as an undergrad helped my application waaaay back in the late 80s.
Now I am a full professor at an MRU, and am livin' the dream (hehehe, the dream....*sigh*).
Professors who are on the admissions committee at most places care about whether you will make a good scientist, not whether you are a member of the golden key society....most of them were slackers too....
Doc F
Posted by: Dr. Feelgood | March 4, 2009 6:56 AM