I’m always open to taking on new students, but I generally wait to make a decision about whether to accept a student until after I’ve heard from as many potential applicants as possible—usually at the end of January each year. Just to let potential students know what I look for in a student, acceptance boils down to the following issues for me:
(1) most importantly, I look for students who are question oriented and who recognize the broader significance of their questions. Specifically, I like to learn whether an applicant has interests that are more focused than “avian ecology” or “conservation biology.” It does not mean having a research proposal written, but it does mean that a student needs to show that (s)he reads widely, thinks deeply, and has what it takes to develop a top-notch research proposal. I make such an assessment from correspondence, personal interview, the substance of an applicant’s cover letter, and from other supporting materials (letters of support, field experience, publications) that may accompany an application. Specifically, I ask myself: “What sort of brilliant thoughts does this prospective student have about current issues in avian ecology?” The best of student prospects are already practicing scientists who can define what’s interesting and important, and can defend why they think a certain kind and manner of study is precisely what’s needed to resolve some intellectual issue. The worst prospects are those students who may be great technicians, but need a lot of intellectual guidance; they will perform a lot like any good high school student might under the same circumstances;
(2) “fit”--finding someone who appears to fit with the rest of my students and our research interests;
(3) the availability of funding for the prospective student. This is important, and if I have no new sources of support beyond existing grants (that already have students working on them), I will not take a new student; and
(4) the student’s academic strength. With respect to the latter, I generally seek students who look good on paper because that's what determines whether they’ll be competitive for teaching assistantships, outside grant monies, University scholarships, and so forth. (GRE scores of the top dozen applicants who apply to work with me are generally above the 80th percentile in all areas, for example).
In short, good grades and high GRE scores help, but intellectual focus is first and foremost. I also realize that the prospect of admission is fairly tough these days because competition is incredibly stiff for what little space is available for students here.
A new student would not be required to work on issues related to my own research interests, but that would certainly improve his/her chances of obtaining research funding through my lab.