Graduate school applications in Biomedical Engineering (BME) are steadily rising, making competition stiffer, applications more complex, and reviews more resource intensive. Holistic reviews are being increasingly adopted to support increased diversity, equity, and inclusion in graduate student BME admissions, but which application metrics are the strongest predictors of admission and enrollment into BME programs remains unclear. In this perspectives article, we aim to shed light on some of the key predictors of student acceptance in graduate school. We share data from a three-year retrospective review of our own institution's graduate BME applications and admission rates and review the influence of grade point averages (GPA), standardized test scores (e.g., GRE), and prior research experience on graduate school admission rates. We also examine how the waiver of GRE requirements has changed the landscape of BME graduate applications in recent years. Finally, we discuss efforts taken by our institution and others to develop and implement holistic reviews of graduate applications that encourage students from underrepresented backgrounds to apply and successfully gain admission to graduate school. We share five key lessons we learned by performing the retrospective review and encourage other institutions to "self-reflect" and examine their historical graduate admissions data and past practices. Efforts aimed at engaging faculty to overcome their own implicit biases, engaging with underrepresented students in hands-on, research-intensive programs, and networking with diverse student populations have strong potential to enhance the diversity of BME graduate programs and our STEM workforce.
Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43683-022-00080-5.
Keywords: Biomedical engineering; Diversity; GRE; Graduate admissions; Holistic reviews; Networking; REU; Underrepresentation.
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Biomedical Engineering Society 2022.