The Media Lab is totally different than the Symbolic Systems program and both are completely different than the CS programs at their respective schools (and any other school.)

The Media Lab does not require the GRE nor does it require that you even really have any formal training in computer science or engineering. It's more like an MFA program than an engineering degree. However, you do have the opportunity to take cool engineering courses if that is your bag.

The Media Lab is a joke academically but it is the easiest way to get a graduate degree from MIT. If you align yourself with the right projects and professors it can be a much better experience than a "real" master's program and you can parlay the experience into a cooler career than most. If you align yourself with the wrong projects it is a massive waste of time. It is unique in that it is a funded master's program so at least you won't waste any money.

The way to get into the Media Lab if you didn't go to MIT as an undergrad is to create a portfolio of cool projects that look like what the research groups you are interested are producing. For instance, if you want to get into the computational photography program you should start writing some photo manipulation programs and build a blog about them. It also helps to become friends with the professors there.

If you didn't get an undergraduate degree in Symbolic Systems at Stanford you are ineligible for the master's program. It is a "co-terminal" degree which means it is essentially just an extra year after undergrad.

You no longer need an undergraduate degree from Stanford to do a symsys masters:

http://symsys.stanford.edu/ssp_static?page=msinfo.html

Thanks. I thought this would be a (major) detail I wouldn't have overlooked. :)

Concentrate on what you love. Honestly, there is too much focus on getting into "great" or elite programs. Every school has advantages and disadvantages, and graduate programs function VERY differently than undergraduate programs.

The best thing you could possibly do for the next two years is hone in on a specific area of interest. Try to be as introspective as possible. Are you fascinated by the physics of gaming? Do you want to improve human-computer interaction? Are you an expert code-monkey who just wants to create a useful and intelligent program with new tools?

If you can establish yourself as an expert, more or less, graduate schools will take you on without question. They will evaluate you on your ability to be successful. Everyone knows that the GRE (and sometimes a GPA) are horrible metrics for success in graduate school, but sometimes they are the only pieces of information a school has to evaluate you. The worst thing that can happen is that they hire you (for a PhD program) or offer you a scholarship, and you end up flunking out, quitting, or never finish.

However, if you follow your heart and show your competency in one or two specific areas, you will be a gem. Then you will also get the most out of graduate school. You will have access to so many excellent resources like free journals, experts in the field, and open up doors for future careers.

Graduate school can be an incredible opportunity or somewhat depressing. What I've found is that those who are most ready, emotionally and academically, do amazing things, but those who are not tend to flounder.

You want to be ready, so do yourself that favor.

Please feel free to contact me if you want to chat a little bit more about the experience.

If I could respond to my own comment, I would also like to offer one other piece of advice:

If you're learning towards graduate school, research the GROUPS and not the schools. Even within departments you will have a variety of experiences, and knowing what you want well in advance is key. Here are some observations about advisers (if you change your mind and end up applying for a PhD program):

- Young professors generally are trying to build their name in the community and will work you like no other. You will probably publish often. Stress is common.

- Middle-aged professors at the height of their career will generally be not available to you. This is when they travel to conferences and meetings. Your real adviser will probably be your Post-Doc.

- Retirement-bound professors will be freely available and have a wealth of experience through which you can draw upon. They generally care less about department politics and more about your personal happiness and success. However, they probably won't pressure you as often to get things done (may be good or bad).

Apply for a PhD. If you get in, you can bail after you get your master's, and they pay you if you are a PhD student. A professor at a top-25 CS grad school once told me they accept almost every American citizen who applies to the PhD program because it's so much cheaper - so worst case, you should be able to go to a well-known school that has merely a good CS program.

> "because it's so much cheaper"

... cheaper to pay Ph.D. students than full time staff you mean? Or am I reading this wrong?

As I wasn't exactly an all-star in undergrad (3.52), I'm trying the route of getting a masters at a second tier school (and attempting to be an all-star while I'm there) in the hopes of leveraging that to get into a top tier school.

Also gives me an easy way to bail if I find I don't like it as much as I hope I do.

Of course, if this plan is idiotic, someone should point that out. The CS school employs a lot of Masters students for TA/RA positions, so I'm not too worried on the money front.

No, he means its "so much cheaper" to pay for American Grad Students versus foreign ones who need Student Visas. I've been told by a professor who's brought in Chinese grad students (he himself is Chinese) that its really hit and miss. And you put up a bond for their visa -- they bail on your program or commit a felony, that's your grant/research/grad student funding money going out the window. It doesn't happen very frequently, but it does happen.

Another situation with foreign grad students is that they get here, and after a year or two of abuse in a lab, they go get a life, and get married or (iff female) get pregnant. Then, their work ethic trends "Average American" and they adopt the "take this job and shove it" attitude.

Just in case you didn't know, publish. Your research - as evidenced by publications - has more weight than your GPA when you apply to Ph.D. programs.

I did not know this about American citizens, but it seems unlikely. My intuition is quite the opposite: because Ph.D programs are drastically more competitive than master's programs (higher average test scores, GPAs, and lower rate of admissions, at least at my university), my chances of being accepted into a super-competitive program would be more feasible on the master's level.

I'm a Ph.D. student in Computer Science. I originally only applied for Master's programs. I was rejected by all of the schools I wanted to go to. I eventually ended up in a good Ph.D. program, but that was largely by chance.

You're better off applying for a Ph.D. program, then bailing after earning your Master's. It's not good for the school, but it's better for you.

Your understanding of the problem is what's wrong, not your analysis. You're thinking of the Ph.D. pool and the Master's pool as independent of each other. They're not. Funding for Master's and Ph.D. students comes from the same pool, and many programs won't admit students they won't fund. So the question sometimes comes down to, "Do we admit this Master's student or this Ph.D. student?"

Ph.D. students are an investment: they eventually publish papers with the university's name, and in academic settings, the university's name will forever be attached to that person. Master's students often don't publish, and upon graduation are generally not in circles that care about pedigree.

I applied to master's programs because I wasn't sure that I was going to get a PhD. It was a mistake. Top schools don't like master's students, and don't fund them by default. Some professors were confused as to why I didn't apply for a PhD after reading my application. One professor told me to never mention that I wanted a master's degree. Some top schools consider master's students to be a lower form of life than PhD students, and they have to reapply to switch to PhD status. Professors don't take you seriously if you're a master's student. I got accepted into my top choice, but it meant absolutely nothing because there was no funding and little chance of professors acknowledging a master's student's existence.

It's a silly game, and you have to play it right. If you want a master's degree and are unsure about the PhD, apply to a PhD program. If you just want a master's, apply to a PhD program. If you would rather stab yourself than stick around for a PhD, apply to a PhD program. If you want to be treated decently, have research opportunities and perhaps some money, apply to a PhD program.

In a nutshell, if you want to go to grad school, apply to a PhD program.

Luckily I was accepted into a decent school with an assistantship and the ability to switch to PhD if I want to.

Any idea why it's "so much cheaper"

I'm not at all convinced that this rumor is true. Having said that, there is certainly a big pile of grants and fellowships that preferentially target US citizens.

I'm not a student at the Media Lab, but I do go to MIT and have some friends there. From what I have seen, it helps to have some good artsy-techy projects under your belt.

I don't think they require the GRE to get in, and I'm not sure how important grades are if you've done some interesting projects. I think they want some form of "accomplishment" combined with decent coding skills.

Admission is to specific research groups, so I'd look at the site, find a group doing work that interests you and contact the professor or some of the researchers in the group. Can't hurt to ask them what makes a strong candidate.

Do research. Read the journals where the professors you'd like to work with publish, and work on research in that area. If the program you're applying to is primarily focused on research, this is the most important thing they're looking for-- your ability to publish and do research.

If it's the MIT media lab you really want, which always seemed like an amazing experience, then figure out a way to visit, meet the people, and understand what they are doing.

Doing your own projects/research and publishing them would help to get your name out there. I'm not an 'academic' by any stretch, but that's what I would do if there was a job/opportunity I really wanted.

Do something amazing and doors will open.

Apply through the 'machine' and there will always be hundreds of people competing in the GPA/undergrad arena, and chances are they all have a better GPA than you.

I agree with the advice already given that the best way to be admitted to the programs you desire is to be ready to apply to a strong Ph.D. program.

But why do you desire the master's degree? Can't you meet great minds in private industry?

> But why do you desire the master's degree? Can't you meet great minds in private industry?

You absolutely can. However, I enjoy the academic environment as a platform for personal development and have made achieving a graduate degree a personal goal. I actually desire a Ph.D., but the 5+ year commitment doesn't exactly align with my other goals. I am also attracted to entrepreneurship and feel I would reach a point of diminishing returns at the 3-4 year mark. Hence, a master's degree (notably the programs I mentioned) are a good compromise.