How to improve graduate school applications after college?

[Unitary_operator]

I graduated 2 years ago with a degree in astrophysics. I went to a top school (depends on the source but top 3-5) but didn't do well or participate in research, I focused more on education and teaching. I've worked the past two years (one year as a physics teacher, the other as a data analyst) and took classes from a local university this year to improve my GPA and get letters of rec (perfect grades in classes so far). Since I am paying out of pocket for these classes I don't want to take any more than I have to.

I applied to graduate school (master's programs), both through my local state school system (CSU) and the APS bridge program (I am a low-income, first gen, underrepresented minority) but I am not hopeful since I wasn't contacted for interviews and the first wave of acceptances has already passed. I'm not surprised but unsure how to improve my application. I've tried asking for research but I was told I need to be accepted into their program before I can do that, but to get in it seems I need research experience. I similarly didn't have great luck in industry (it took a long time to get my current job, and even then, it's not glamorous by any means). Part of my reasoning for pursuing graduate school is that I couldn't really find anything in industry (the other reason being I genuinely like physics and want to learn more).

I've thought about applying to labs at schools as a lab technician or something just so I can physically be in one, but most of the jobs I've seen for this are in bio labs so I am not sure if this would be helpful for me or if I would find similar difficultly getting one of these positions.

What would be the best way to improve my application for the next cycle? More classes? Trying to get a more relevant job? Something else? Any guidance is appreciated since I seem to be in a catch-22 in both industry and academia.

 

[Vanadium 50]

As asked, the question is a little like "how can I improve my score in yesterday's game"?

I would turn it around - why should a graduate school accept you? (and accept you over someone else) Now, does your portfolio support that?

 

[Unitary_operator]

As asked, the question is a little like "how can I improve my score in yesterday's game"?

I would turn it around - why should a graduate school accept you? (and accept you over someone else) Now, does your portfolio support that?

Say my portfolio doesn't support a reason a school should accept me, what then?

 

[Vanadium 50]

If you can't come up with a reason why the school should accept you, how do you expect the school to?

 

[Unitary_operator]

If you can't come up with a reason why the school should accept you, how do you expect the school to?

I do have reasons, for one I applied to the school I am taking classes at post-grad and I have a letter of rec from a professor there where I have gotten perfect scores on every assignment (who himself said that he would be in favor of me doing grad there), which shows despite my performance in undergrad (which was in a top school) I can succeed in physics. I have other reasons but they are a bit personal. Regardless, my application clearly isn't showing this, so how can I fix this?

 

[CrysPhys]

I do have reasons, for one I applied to the school I am taking classes at post-grad and I have a letter of rec from a professor there where I have gotten perfect scores on every assignment (who himself said that he would be in favor of me doing grad there), which shows despite my performance in undergrad (which was in a top school) I can succeed in physics. I have other reasons but they are a bit personal. Regardless, my application clearly isn't showing this, so how can I fix this?

* What was your undergrad GPA?

* Did you take the PGRE? If so, what did you get?

* Did you ask the professor (who wrote a favorable letter of recommendation) to review your application? If so, what did they say? Are there openings for lab technicians (non-student) at their university?

 

[Haborix]

I second the idea of having someone review your application, especially any essays, statement of purpose, etc. I'm concerned your written materials may come across poorly based on how you have framed things in this thread.

 

[Unitary_operator]

* What was your undergrad GPA?

* Did you take the PGRE? If so, what did you get?

* Did you ask the professor (who wrote a favorable letter of recommendation) to review your application? If so, what did they say? Are there openings for lab technicians (non-student) at their university?

• I averaged a B-, with a slight trend upward in grades (stagnated during covid). With the classes I am currently taking, even with them being A's, will only slightly increase this.
• I did not take the PGRE since it seems to be phasing out and was not required (or even accepted) by some universities.
• My professor saw my application since he is on the committee, but I did not consult with him prior to sending my application for the bridge program (the application was due when I had only had him for 1 month). His letter will be for regular admissions for state universities since those are due in June or later. This is not preferred since the bridge program is funded, but I would still consider regular admission over waiting another year to apply. Not super hopeful that the letter will be enough since I didn't get any interviews for the 28 schools that I applied to as a part of the bridge program.
  
  

 

[Unitary_operator]

I second the idea of having someone review your application, especially any essays, statement of purpose, etc. I'm concerned your written materials may come across poorly based on how you have framed things in this thread.

Definitely possible. I should mention that although I didn't get an official interview for the program, a professor from one of the schools personally reached out to me and met with me to talk about her research because my statement of purpose resonated with her, although she said she wasn't in charge of admissions.

 

[CrysPhys]

My professor saw my application since he is on the committee, but I did not consult with him prior to sending my application for the bridge program (the application was due when I had only had him for 1 month). His letter will be for regular admissions for state universities since those are due in June or later. This is not preferred since the bridge program is funded, but I would still consider regular admission over waiting another year to apply. Not super hopeful that the letter will be enough since I didn't get any interviews for the 28 schools that I applied to as a part of the bridge program.

<<Emphasis added>> You can't do anything about the applications you've already submitted. But you should ask him for feedback on your overall application prior to submitting new ones.

 

[Vanadium 50]

A few things you need to think about.

(1) The deadline for accepting a (funded) offer was two weeks ago. If you didn't get accepted before that, odds are, you won't.

(2) A deadline of June? I never heard of such a thing. They may be talking about spring admissions, but these are very, very rare things. Not least of which because you'd start half a year behind.

(3) "so and so did really well in my class" is a weak letter. It says nothing that's not already on your transcript.

(4) A B- is bad. Bad enough to exclude you from many places, no matter what your letters say. There will be someone on the committee who will say "It doesn't matter how good a researcher he is if he can't get through the coursework."

(5) Given the above points, you cannot afford to turn up your nose at the PGRE. You need to demonstrate that despite the low GPA you are prepared. Further, you need to do well: if you come in at the 30$ percentile, it will do you no good.

(6) Your competition is Mary, a student with a 3.6 from Wisconsin, an 75% score on the PGRE, who poked around a few research labs as an undergraduate and learned plenty, but didn't do anything remarkable. Why should the committee pick you over her? You absolutely need an answer to this question, and it absolutely has to come through in your application. Sending out a bunch of applications to see what happens is unlikely to work and indeed seems not to be working now.

(7) your best hope is a smaller school that does what you are interested in and not much else. However, this is the last thing that needs to be addressed.

 

[Unitary_operator]

A few things you need to think about.

(1) The deadline for accepting a (funded) offer was two weeks ago. If you didn't get accepted before that, odds are, you won't.

(2) A deadline of June? I never heard of such a thing. They may be talking about spring admissions, but these are very, very rare things. Not least of which because you'd start half a year behind.

(3) "so and so did really well in my class" is a weak letter. It says nothing that's not already on your transcript.

(4) A B- is bad. Bad enough to exclude you from many places, no matter what your letters say. There will be someone on the committee who will say "It doesn't matter how good a researcher he is if he can't get through the coursework."

(5) Given the above points, you cannot afford to turn up your nose at the PGRE. You need to demonstrate that despite the low GPA you are prepared. Further, you need to do well: if you come in at the 30$ percentile, it will do you no good.

(6) Your competition is Mary, a student with a 3.6 from Wisconsin, an 75% score on the PGRE, who poked around a few research labs as an undergraduate and learned plenty, but didn't do anything remarkable. Why should the committee pick you over her? You absolutely need an answer to this question, and it absolutely has to come through in your application. Sending out a bunch of applications to see what happens is unlikely to work and indeed seems not to be working now.

(7) your best hope is a smaller school that does what you are interested in and not much else. However, this is the last thing that needs to be addressed.

For points 1 and 2, I am applying for master's programs, not Ph.D. programs. For funding, I specifically applied to the APS Bridge Program which sends its first waves of offers on May 2nd and the second wave on May 16th, both waves will have funding since the funding comes from the program. This application was due March 15th. The applications for the state schools (California State University) have deadlines for their master's programs for Fall 2024 June 1st, and July 1st ( agree this is unusually late but I have confirmed this information).

For point 3, the letter should be more than just that I had a good grade, since I interacted with this professor through office hours, in class asking questions and guiding discussions, solving problems from lectures in class on the whiteboard in front of everyone, and generally helping classmates out (I would stay after and explain concepts from lecture and general problem-solving strategies to students). I have this professor for 2 classes that have 10-20 students so he should be able to say more than just I got high scores. I should also mention that it is not like everyone in the class has an A, many students are struggling with assignments while I have not missed any points, so even in this regard alone, I think I have stood out. Having done research with him would have been preferred but he and all professors I talked to at this university said I need to be admitted before doing research.

For point 4 I agree anything below a 3.0 is bad for graduate school, however, I would argue that the fact it was at a top school should make a difference (I am finding these graduate courses at my local state school to be easier than my undergraduate classes, if I did my undergrad at this state school my GPA would certainly be above a B-) although I realize this is not a popular opinion, at least to the degree that is my experience with the two (the popular opinion seems to be GPA first, caliber of school second). I would also like to show that I have improved since then with new courses post-grad. If I am passing your graduate classes now with flying colors that should mitigate some concerns over my previous grades.

For point 5, I agree that I should give the PGRE a try since my GPA is low.

For point 6 I should mention that the Bridge program automatically sends your application to all partner schools (and for free). For the state schools through regular admission, I am only applying to 4 (which are the ones that don't require a 3.0 or above).

For 7, not sure if you mean to take courses/try to do research, or apply to a smaller school. Many of the schools in the bridge program are terminal master's programs, and all of the CSU schools have terminal master's degrees with small physics departments. For research interests, I remain pretty open considering I haven't done research so I don't know what I like. I have an inclination for quantum gravity and astrophysics, but I am very open to condensed matter or biophysics. I have also thought about physics education research given my experience as a teacher and how rocky my education with physics has been thus far.

 

[Unitary_operator]

<<Emphasis added>> You can't do anything about the applications you've already submitted. But you should ask him for feedback on your overall application prior to submitting new ones.

yeah, I'm taking it as a no for now, so I'm trying to find out what I should do for the next year so my application is stronger next year. Having a professor look over my application will certainly help.

 

[Vanadium 50]

A lot of students think a MS is a ticket to a PhD program if they didn't do well as undergrads. If this were true, entering PhD classes would be full of such students. They are not. Be aware this plan looks better on paper than in real life.

Further, depending on how the MS program is structured, it may or may not help you. This is why it is critical you take a long, hard look at the "why me?" question and pick a program that is most likely to help you.

You seem to be counting on that LoR making a huge difference. It will not. I have seen maybe 100 letters like that (which tells you they are not exactly rare) and have yet to see one push a student over the line.

Finally, "I would have got a better GPA elsewhere" is mighty weak tea. Shoulda, woulda, coulda. Your "elite school" may have a record of grad inflation. A B- from MIT or Chicago will be looked at differently than the same grade from Harvard or Brown.

 

[Unitary_operator]

A lot of students think a MS is a ticket to a PhD program if they didn't do well as undergrads. If this were true, entering PhD classes would be full of such students. They are not. Be aware this plan looks better on paper than in real life.

Further, depending on how the MS program is structured, it may or may not help you. This is why it is critical you take a long, hard look at the "why me?" question and pick a program that is most likely to help you.

You seem to be counting on that LoR making a huge difference. It will not. I have seen maybe 100 letters like that (which tells you they are not exactly rare) and have yet to see one push a student over the line.

Finally, "I would have got a better GPA elsewhere" is mighty weak tea. Shoulda, woulda, coulda. Your "elite school" may have a record of grad inflation. A B- from MIT or Chicago will be looked at differently than the same grade from Harvard or Brown.

What do you mean by "ticket"? I plan on doing my Ph.D. after my master's, but I'm not expecting to get into top programs or for it to be easy. I just think that I stand a better chance of getting into a master's first, then a Ph.D. as opposed to a straight to Ph.D. with a subpar undergraduate record. All the Master's for the Bridge programs are designed for you to move onto a Ph.D. program. This is a statement from their website:

"The APS Bridge Program is a post-baccalaureate program lasting one to two years that provides students with research experience, advanced coursework, and coaching to prepare them for a graduate school application.

Through the Bridge Program, APS is working to increase the number of physics PhDs awarded to underrepresented minority (URM) students, identified as Black, Latinx, and Indigenous, by creating sustainable transition programs and a national network of doctoral-granting institutions. The Bridge Program also provides students with the opportunity to receive mentoring so that they can successfully complete PhD programs, build and strengthen their professional networks, and explore new career paths."

For the CSU programs, some are geared towards industry while others are more so prep for Ph.Ds. Is there an alternative path for students with poor undergraduate performance to eventually get a Ph.D? Or are you saying it's essentially not possible to recover from a poor undergraduate record?

I mentioned in a previous response that I don't expect my LoR to push me over the edge, since I didn't get any interviews, I'm not even near the edge. I just don't think that my LoR is a weak point.

As I said before I know my opinion is in the minority, but I think my current grades should give my claim credit. I will take the PGRE but I wonder if more A's in coursework will be worth my time to prove I'm not a B- student, or if my time (and money) is better spent elsewhere.

Thanks for the insights thus far.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The APS Bridge program is a good thing, but. More than a decade in and it has failed to reach its goal of having URM PhD rates equal BS rates. Do not expect miracles.

I saw a third time. You need to come up with a reason why a grad school should accept you over some other candidate, and you need to prepare yourself and prepare your application to advance that argument.

 

[Unitary_operator]

You need to come up with a reason why a grad school should accept you over some other candidate, and you need to prepare yourself and prepare your application to advance that argument.

Well, this applies to anyone applying anywhere for anything. In my specific case would more classes help or should I try getting a lab technician job, would a bio lab (since these are the majority of positions) benefit me? Is there anything else I can do to improve my application profile in general? Once I have a decent profile and I am getting interviews, I can narrow down why I am stronger than x candidate.

If you would rather point me to the same argument that I need to find a reason why they should accept me, can you give an example of a "good" reason and an example of a "bad" reason?

 

[Choppy]

Maybe I'm a little late to the conversation but the first big challenge to graduate admissions is even getting to the assessment stage. Most graduate schools have a hard GPA cut off for graduate admissions of 3.0. So when you apply, if your grades don't convert to a 3.0 GPA by however that particular school does the calculation, the faculty of graduate studies (or whoever handles the applications) may not even forward your application on the admissions committee in the first place. Sometimes this is done by the admissions committees themselves, but in my experience there's almost always some kind of preliminary sorting that happens. Without meeting the minimum standard, your application won't be seriously considered. And it won't matter how much research experience you have, or what school you came from.

The way to fix that is by what you're doing. Take more classes. Get higher grades. But while this strategy can sound straight forward, students who struggled during their BSc tend to end up struggling in the after-degree courses as well. Not always, but you need to really consider what's going to be different this time around.

In your specific case, it sounds like you're doing well in these courses. So--awesome!

Once you have your foot in the door, this is really just an invitation to compete though. Sure research experience helps. But the most competitive students will also have research experience... probably tonnes of it... and in some cases with the professor they are hoping will supervise them.

 

[Vanadium 50]

To add to what @Choppy said, it can take a lot of courses to move a GPA. If you have 4 years at 2.6 and get a 3.5 for year 5, yes, that's awesome. But it gets you to 2.78. A 6th year? 2.9.

Some places will consider the trend. Some won't.

What's a good reason? "Showing promise in research as evidenced by LoRs". What's a bad reason? "I couldn't find a job I liked so I thought I'd try an advanced degree."

 

[gwnorth]

I would argue that the fact it was at a top school should make a difference

At the undergraduate level the name of your school is not as influential. Physics curricula tend to be fairly standardized. What matters is the strength of your transcript and what you accomplished while you were there. Top students from local state and regional schools can be just as competitive for admission to PhD programs provided they can present an equally strong profile. In fact if they can, I'd be inclined to give them the edge over a student from a top private R1 that had access to oodles and oodles of resources. Now if you're a top student from a top school then that's a different story. But you're not.

Fundamentally you have 2 issues to overcome to get admitted to a graduate program in Physics. First you need a very strong GPA. It appears you're working to remedy that so that's a point in your favour. Secondly you need relevant research experience of which you have none. This is what you need to figure out. How to get the necessary research experience to be able to demonstrate to admissions committees that you know what it means to do research and show some promise in being able to do so. You also need strong LORs but if you can fix the research component that should also take care of the LORs. Beyond that for a research master's or PhD you also need to find programs that are a strong research fit.

I do disagree that a master's degree will not be helpful to improve your profile for admission to a PhD, but it needs to be one that's research/thesis-based and not just course based. A bridge program could also be a good choice and you should expand your applications to beyond the APS program. There are others out there. Maybe this will be helpful.

Best of luck.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I agree with @gwnorth in part and disagree in part.

The factors that matter most are grades, PGRE and LoRs. I don't believe researcvh per se is necessary, but. If you are at a SLAC with little or no research prospects, you'll be considered. The problem here is that the OP had the opportunity and didn't take advantage of it. He went to a top school, as he keeps telling us.

I know we disagree about the value of a MS. As I have said before, if this were an effective path to grad school, we'd see an army of people who took this path. We don't. Why not? I can only speculate, but suspect: It may be these students who did poorly as undergrads also did poorly in MS programs. It may be the MS programs that were available to them were weak. It may be a combination. It may be something else. But I hesitate to recommend that someone spend their hard-earned money on a MS program given the track record.

At the risk of piling on, the OP has yet another problem. His BS is in astrophysics, not physics. In the best of cases, this would be an obstacle, as people will wonder if he can pass the coursework. And this is not the best of cases. To compare curricula, I looked at Chicago's programs. Astrophysics has no Classical Mechanics, no QM2 or QM3, and no Lab. This is a problem for PhD programs, but it is also a problem with decent MS programs.

 

[Unitary_operator]

I agree with @gwnorth in part and disagree in part.

The factors that matter most are grades, PGRE and LoRs. I don't believe researcvh per se is necessary, but. If you are at a SLAC with little or no research prospects, you'll be considered. The problem here is that the OP had the opportunity and didn't take advantage of it. He went to a top school, as he keeps telling us.

I know we disagree about the value of a MS. As I have said before, if this were an effective path to grad school, we'd see an army of people who took this path. We don't. Why not? I can only speculate, but suspect: It may be these students who did poorly as undergrads also did poorly in MS programs. It may be the MS programs that were available to them were weak. It may be a combination. It may be something else. But I hesitate to recommend that someone spend their hard-earned money on a MS program given the track record.

At the risk of piling on, the OP has yet another problem. His BS is in astrophysics, not physics. In the best of cases, this would be an obstacle, as people will wonder if he can pass the coursework. And this is not the best of cases. To compare curricula, I looked at Chicago's programs. Astrophysics has no Classical Mechanics, no QM2 or QM3, and no Lab. This is a problem for PhD programs, but it is also a problem with decent MS programs.

I should mention I've taken classical mechanics, a year of quantum, and a semester of quantum field theory. The only difference is I did an astronomy lab while physics majors did an electronics lab.

I wouldn't be considering more school unless I thought about what I could do differently so I don't have a B- average. Other than the environment being completely different, I reviewed all my undergrad math so I have a much stronger foundation, keeping ahead with the readings for lectures, completing homework in a scratch work notebook, and "cleaning" it up by rewriting on a separate sheet to catch errors and make the logic flow smoother among other things. So far I have an A+ average post-grad so I have reason to assume these changes work for me.

It's not that I have zero research experience, it's that I have zero physics research experience. I have research in education (specifically STEM education, a lot of which is for physics). I imagine many schools may view this as still zero experience, but in general I suppose it's better than nothing. I never did physics research since I was busy with this and visiting schools to get my teaching credential.

Physics curricula tend to be fairly standardized.

Perhaps in terms of content but not in terms of rigor. For example, at MIT they use Goldstein, generally considered graduate-level classical mechanics, for undergrad mechanics. While at my local state school, they use Taylor with a large focus on pre-Lagrangian material, and only a few weeks on Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formalisms. At the end of the day, it's not my opinion that matters though, it's admissions.

A bridge program could also be a good choice and you should expand your applications to beyond the APS program. There are others out there. Maybe this will be helpful.

Thanks for this list, I imagine the deadlines have passed but I can try for the next cycle.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I have research in education (specifically STEM education

Have you considered applying to schools with strong PER programs? Have you considered PER yourself?

 

[Unitary_operator]

Have you considered applying to schools with strong PER programs? Have you considered PER yourself?

I applied to schools that had PER groups, although I only recently considered it (a professor reached out to me after seeing my application and asked if I was interested in PER, prior to this I didn't know this was a field). I like education and think it is important, my only concern was how technical the work would be since I left teaching to learn and do more physics. It seems to vary from project to project but overall the research seems interesting and I think I would be excited to pursue this.

 

[Vanadium 50]

If you want to pursue PER, then a) picks schools that do it, b) make that the cornerstone of your application, and c) consider more teaching. That will help you more than being a data analyst.

And ace the GRE.

 

[CrysPhys]

I applied to schools that had PER groups, although I only recently considered it (a professor reached out to me after seeing my application and asked if I was interested in PER, prior to this I didn't know this was a field). I like education and think it is important, my only concern was how technical the work would be since I left teaching to learn and do more physics. It seems to vary from project to project but overall the research seems interesting and I think I would be excited to pursue this.

This previous post might be of interest to you: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/physics-education-phd-then-msc-physics.1005999/post-6526916.

 

[symbolipoint]

Say my portfolio doesn't support a reason a school should accept me, what then?

Probably not an answer, but could you attend a few courses, small number in consecutive 'school' terms, picked to improve your employability,... and worry about qualification to a graduate school later?

 

[Unitary_operator]

Probably not an answer, but could you attend a few courses, small number in consecutive 'school' terms, picked to improve your employability,... and worry about qualification to a graduate school later?

Consecutive school terms imply at least a year of school, at which point I think I'd rather focus on creating a stronger grad school application. Not super keen on taking courses that will only help with employability (data analyst classes) when my passion is with physics.

 

[symbolipoint]

Consecutive school terms imply at least a year of school, at which point I think I'd rather focus on creating a stronger grad school application. Not super keen on taking courses that will only help with employability (data analyst classes) when my passion is with physics.

I figure what I responded would not be much of an answer to your question. My response was more a way to step to the side instead of a way to step ahead academically. If you are not likely to gain admission to a grad. program, maybe improved employability would give quicker success - but that weren't what you want. Then ask yourself carefully, what coursework are you missing which would contribute to qualifying admittance to a graduate school? Or in what coursework areas are you deficient and prevent your admittance to some graduate school programs?

--

I just took another look at your post #1. What courses would give you valuable practical skills to appeal both to academic physics research faculty and to industry employers? If you can make those choices, then you will know what to do.

edit: small sentence structure wording for clarity

 

[CrysPhys]

I just took another look at your post #1. What courses would give you valuable practical skills to appeal both to academic physics research faculty and to industry employers? If you can make those choices, then you will know what to do.

Well, the OP is considering programs in the US. So PhD physics programs in the US are structured substantially differently from PhD physics programs in, e.g., many European universities. There many PhD positions are posted just like any other employment positions: PhD supervisors seek PhD candidates with specific academic training and specific research experience. In the US, prospective PhD candidates do not apply for specific research positions; they apply for admission to graduate school. Admissions committees seek excellence in all the core physics courses.

 

[Unitary_operator]

To anyone reading this in the future, it seems that I got into multiple programs despite my lackluster profile.

 

[gwnorth]

Congratulations! Were these master's or bridge programs?

 

[Unitary_operator]

Congratulations! Were these master's or bridge programs?

One of them was, I also have an interview for another bridge program.