minimum GPA

[gusl]

I might make this an email template, as I might need to send several emails like this:

Dear Prof. _________,

I am interested in your research, and intend to apply to the ________ PhD program offered by your institution.

The application page seems to suggest that a minimum GPA of ___ is required. My Bachelor's GPA was 3.25 (3.33? in CS major; 3.3? in Math major), which is below that.

In the last year, however, I have acquired significant research experience at CMU, as will be made clear by two of my recommenders. With one of them, I am close to submitting a paper to UAI.

Should I still bother to apply, or will the minimum GPA rule automatically disqualify me?

Gustavo

Do admissions committees really consider something as flawed as raw GPA? If not, then why do their webpages suggest otherwise? Are GPA-cutoffs institution-level requirements (like the requirement of submitting GRE scores)?

Comments

[pbrane.livejournal.com]

Every rule can be bent, by the right administrator. That having been said, you won't get seen by the right administrator if you don't make it by the initial screen, which can sometimes include throwing out applications that don't meet various minimum requirements.

Many schools/programs pride themselves on fully reading every application (PhD level) that comes in (case I know of: Stanford phys, UCSC astro, UWashington math, UWashington cs), others are machines that if you don't find some other way to get noticed (like the emails you are sending/planning on sending), you will never even stand a chance (e.g. I've been told Berkeley is like that, in many grad programs).

Send the email for best results, I say. But most good schools will look at your whole application. My undergrad program (UCSC) *didn't have* grades when I went there, and I still got into Stanford and UChicago for grad school, even though both programs stated a variety of "minimum requirements".

emailing faculty

[gustavolacerda.livejournal.com]

UCSC, a *state* school, didn't have grades??? I am very curious!

The "sending an email" thing is interesting. Most faculty probably want to have email communications with serious prospectives. I find it a bit odd that most faculty members have a policy of "don't talk to me unless you've already been accepted", because it makes their choice blind, relative to what it could be. The "it's not my decision" thing is only a half-truth: an admissions committee that didn't listen to faculty's preferences would be a bad system, and it's probably pretty rare.

It's understandable, though, that they say that, given the number of such emails that they receive. In these cases, the whole "it's not my decision" spiel is pretty useful.

Re: emailing faculty

[altamira16.livejournal.com]

I would think this is most faculty at highly competitive schools. If your school accepts 10% of applications, talking to the other 90% of applicants who will likely bug the snot out of you is probably a waste of your time.

Re: emailing faculty

[gustavolacerda.livejournal.com]

Yes, I agree. Replace "serious prospectives" with "me". I am sort of in the field already, so I would normally think that of such an email as a "legitimate" introduction.

Of course, professors who operate by categorical imperatives, will tend to put me into that bin, and understandably so.

Re: emailing faculty

[altamira16.livejournal.com]

If you are in their field, I would ask them about a paper they wrote under the premise that it is related to your current research. Professors love talking about their own work.

Re: emailing faculty

[gustavolacerda.livejournal.com]

Saying that it's related to my current research would in most cases be dishonest... "future research" might be ok. But really, "future research" is something best left implicit... One doesn't usually need an excuse to ask a good question.

Your last point is something I've been noticing about humanity in general, and geeks in particular.
The majority of the time, people are too preoccupied with their own interests to even notice others', let alone see where they're coming from. I am no exception, of course, but I am fortunate enough to have friends who are.

This lack of empathy (whether it's due to a theory-of-mind deficit, hyperfocus, lack of interest, or a combination) has dismal consequences on the quality of teaching and supervision (as compared to my preconceptions), especially across disciplinary boundaries, but it's not like this problem hasn't been noticed before.

Re: emailing faculty

[spoonless.livejournal.com]

UCSC had narrative evaluations instead of grades, all the way up until around 2001 or so (plus or minus a year, I forget). Now, we have both grades and narrative evaluations, so for instance every quarter I have to write up a paragraph (or just a couple sentences sometimes) about each student in my class when I TA.

I was just having lunch with an ex of mine yesterday, and she mentioned that she was around when they voted to start having grades and there was a huge student protest--the biggest she's ever seen (and it's very much a protest school). Now she's applying to grad school and hoping that the schools will take her evaluations as seriously as grades. In many cases, it's better since it's kind of like getting free recommendations (as long as they're positive).

Re: emailing faculty

[gustavolacerda.livejournal.com]

"they voted"

who is they? Students? Faculty? Administration? Trustees? Everyone?

Re: emailing faculty

[spoonless.livejournal.com]

Just the administration I think.

doesn't your master's matter more?

[serapio.livejournal.com]

I think more important than your undergrad grades is your MS, since that better shows what kind of student you are now. I also had ~3.3 undergrad, but then had much better grades in my master's program. (That probably had more to do with grad linguistics classes at SDSU being easier than upper division physics classes at UCSB, but it still looks better on transcripts.)

Re: doesn't your master's matter more?

[gustavolacerda.livejournal.com]

yes, I agree.

My Master's grades were on a 0-10 scale (or 1-10?), so GPA doesn't apply straightforwardly. Nevertheless, my master's grades are unfortunately probably worse than my undergrad.

After a "good" first semester in Amsterdam in which I completed half of the class requirements, my tolerance for classes took a sharp downhill turn.

[radiata-prime.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't worry about it too much. Apply, and keep on pressing them. Your body of work and constant badgering can easily override raw numbers.

Re: emailing faculty

[marymcglo.livejournal.com]

I would remove the phrase "should I still bother to apply", leaving it at "Will the minimum GPA rule automatically disqualify my application?" It's a little blunt coming from a complete stranger.

You could ask CMU profs you know if they're personally acquainted with professors you're interested in working with. They might be able to e-introduce you.

Re: emailing faculty

[gustavolacerda.livejournal.com]

Thanks.

I like the e-introduction idea. It's sensible, but it feels somewhat unnecessary. It's probably uncommon, since I've never heard of it.

Re: emailing faculty

[marymcglo.livejournal.com]

Christos is pretty crazy about e-introductions. I once was involved in a 3-hop e-introduction. A student who worked with one of Christos' collaborators in a govt lab emailed Christos asking advice on a fellowship application. Christos then e-introduced her to me, since I'm funded by that fellowship but he doesn't have direct experience with it. Granted, it was really only 2 hops since she emailed Christos directly, but I assume she got his name from her mentor.

I have to admit I wouldn't have worked so hard replying to her if she got my name off of the internet. And I have a lot more time on my hands than most research professors do. Taking advantage of connections that way wouldn't be necessary if time were not a limited resource. And perhaps you would get the same effect if you were in a position to say, "Hi, my friend (CMU professor) recommended I contact you on this issue" After, of course, you get the CMU prof's permission to say such a thing. :)