Chemistry Graduate Students

[dababus]

Am applying to graduate schools for a Ph.D in Chemistry.

I want to know from any graduate chemistry students about what schools they applied to, who accepted them, and who rejected them, their GRE scores and may be a some GPA info.

And brad if you are reading this, then it includes you too. 😀

 

[Slappy00]

U of Illinois is a good school if you are into analytical chem (hell on earth imo) they have several good studies concerning molecular modeling and maleria. as well as an advanced computing building for modeling and what not. Top ten or something but as long as you score well on your ACS tests and GRE you can get in anywhere you want, just show interest. I have a buddy that wants to do his ph.D and go on to do research in neural-chem, problem is that he can't find a program he likes, and good school or not, if the program does not interest and engauge your thinking then you will not enjoy your stay. My advice is look for research you like or are interested in then go and visit the school, meet the profs and see if you get along with them and the group you wil be working with. If its a decent school then go by all means. I dont know what field of chem (organic inorganic biochem) you are going in but in my experience working in biochem the team you are on is very important as a daily motivator to do well and enjoy your time learning.

 

[dababus]

My focus is organic/bio-chemistry. It has been my primary focus in terms of undergraduate research. I just cannot afford making trips to the school. All I can do is call the profs or email them the most.

 

[bradbowl]

Good career choice!

From what I've seen a good GPA (~3.5), a GRE score greater than 1800, and some undergrad. research experience would make you a competitive applicant to most schools. Ph.D. programs are MUCH easier to get into than Masters degrees as masters' degrees are mainly given to students who can't finish their Ph.D. programs. Apply to a bunch of nice school in Cali., they will fly you out for free 🙂 My best advice would be to find a prof. that you like because you'll be a lab rat for a LONG time.

Oh yeah, and you'll enjoy teaching nerdy undergrads who love to phase change cool their AXP mobiles 🙂

Hope this helps.

 

[dababus]

Glad you dropped by, brad.

Well, am working towards my GRE and I have to take the subject GRE as well. Research work is on its way.

I'll be applying to 10-15 schools the most.

I want to know what my choices are as it is not going to be easy to get in the top ten schools.

 

[Slappy00]

masters' degrees are mainly given to students who can't finish their Ph.D. programs

I tend to disagree as maybe in the snobbish ivy-league that is true that Master's degrees are given away to people "who cant cut the prime-time", but for a vast number of people who dont want to teach clueless undergrads and or are not interested in begging for grants or competing for a few well paying jobs at that level, Masters is just fine thank you.

I had a prof that finished at UMish, worked for the USDA post-doc and then went to teach. I was asking him about bioinformatics (as i finished with Bio(Micro)/CS as an undergrad, and was planning to do biochem as a graduate student) and if i need to get a Ph.D to get any sort of pay in that field? He responded to me by saying that his only regret in his time as a graduate student was getting a Ph.D after his Masters because it narrowed his oppertunites significantly, making him overqualified for most and then being in the wrong field for others, while others with their Masters (the parting-gift as it were) educated themselves at workshops or took additional classes and made boat-loads of money.

Your greatest assest as a substandard "Masters" student as (brad apparently believes) is that you are flexable in your learning and have not been overly focused into a particular area as Ph.D programs tend to do. This is a good thing if you are interested in going into industry, as companies will see a person that is not stubborn (as Ph.Ds tend to be) and willing to learn new things or move to differnt areas outside his or her area of expertise. Further once you finish undergradute work your grades mean squat, everyone has a 4.0 and you will be judged on what research you performed. I firmly believe a published, knowledgeable, Masters student that has lengthy experience being shackled to a bench has a very good chance at landing a good career.

So take that eliteist garbage somewhere else, its all about he research you do, with whom you do it, and how good and knowledgeable you are at what you did and the equiptment and techniques you used.

 

[Zebo]

I applied for a materials science (now called materials engineering) graduate program. I was mainly interested in organo and fluoro coatings after I liked O-chem and polymer chem so much.

 

[dababus]

anyone else wanna share their story..........

 

[ThaChemist]

I graduated from a local liberal arts college with a good GPA, a bit of research experience, ho-hum subject GRE (~80%, I think), and a decent general GRE (~2100). I had some good recommendation letters backing me up; applied seven places and got rejected by MIT & Stanford. I got into:
UNC
U Washington
UT Austin
Northwestern
Caltech <-- where I am now

Although I had a biochem background, I'm working on nanotech now (sensing &amp; devices). I think my recommendations were a pretty critical part of my application; everything else is how hard you work. It really doesn't matter so much whether you're at MIT or State U - I'm willing to bet that you can develop roughly the same skills both places. That said, shoot for the best, as you'll have more money on hand for better equipment, cutting-edge research, etc.

Edit: Oh yes - and every school flew me out to visit, so don't worry about that...

 

[maziwanka]

Originally posted by: ThaChemist
I graduated from a local liberal arts college with a good GPA, a bit of research experience, ho-hum subject GRE (~80%, I think), and a decent general GRE (~2100). I had some good recommendation letters backing me up; applied seven places and got rejected by MIT &amp; Stanford. I got into:
UNC
U Washington
UT Austin
Northwestern
Caltech <-- where I am now

Although I had a biochem background, I'm working on nanotech now (sensing &amp; devices). I think my recommendations were a pretty critical part of my application; everything else is how hard you work. It really doesn't matter so much whether you're at MIT or State U - I'm willing to bet that you can develop roughly the same skills both places. That said, shoot for the best, as you'll have more money on hand for better equipment, cutting-edge research, etc.

Edit: Oh yes - and every school flew me out to visit, so don't worry about that...

good info thechemist.