- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 2,263
- Reaction score
- 2,638
This time of year everyone is waiting for the calls/emails about interview offers. I want to remind those of you waiting a few things that are easy to forget (from my point of view anyway, as both a former applicant and as a faculty now). I suspect it would be good for students to hear from faculty about how hard this process is, so I made this thread. Others - please add your own perspective.
1. This is a REALLY HARD process for faculty, sometimes delays are just them cycling between the different candidates trying to narrow it down. We really struggle with making the choices we HAVE to make because we have a limited number of spots to interview. More often than not, people want to interview more than they can. We struggle with this process every year because we know that admission decisions are not a perfect science, or anywhere near it.
2. Relatedly, just because you are not invited doesn't mean you were not considered. When I say considered, I don't just mean 'glanced at', I mean looked at in depth, talked to your advisors on the phone, and went back and forth numerous times about if we should invite you. Not getting an invitation DOESN'T mean we didn't want you.
3. Applying to the same lab again in the future isn't a bad thing. Personally, I like to see that and I like to see people get my feedback on what they can do to take their competitiveness up a level and then address it. Not everyone follows this thinking because they get overwhelmed, but don't take rejection NOW as rejection in the FUTURE. These are very different things.
4. Keep in mind that decisions may be influenced by late-breaking grants and/or research projects that the faculty identified other candidates as offering something to that you may not have. This is why future applications aren't bad - you may normally be a great fit but due to chance, someone JUST BARELY edged you out for an interview.
All these things are also true of acceptance offers. Don't let rejection mean something to you that it doesn't actually mean. There is no shortage of amazing candidates.
1. This is a REALLY HARD process for faculty, sometimes delays are just them cycling between the different candidates trying to narrow it down. We really struggle with making the choices we HAVE to make because we have a limited number of spots to interview. More often than not, people want to interview more than they can. We struggle with this process every year because we know that admission decisions are not a perfect science, or anywhere near it.
2. Relatedly, just because you are not invited doesn't mean you were not considered. When I say considered, I don't just mean 'glanced at', I mean looked at in depth, talked to your advisors on the phone, and went back and forth numerous times about if we should invite you. Not getting an invitation DOESN'T mean we didn't want you.
3. Applying to the same lab again in the future isn't a bad thing. Personally, I like to see that and I like to see people get my feedback on what they can do to take their competitiveness up a level and then address it. Not everyone follows this thinking because they get overwhelmed, but don't take rejection NOW as rejection in the FUTURE. These are very different things.
4. Keep in mind that decisions may be influenced by late-breaking grants and/or research projects that the faculty identified other candidates as offering something to that you may not have. This is why future applications aren't bad - you may normally be a great fit but due to chance, someone JUST BARELY edged you out for an interview.
All these things are also true of acceptance offers. Don't let rejection mean something to you that it doesn't actually mean. There is no shortage of amazing candidates.
