No Funding = No Go?

[gatorsoc85]

Has anyone received an offer without funding?

If not given funding, should one really even consider attending that program?

[Marchesini]

gatorsoc85, I have no funding and I am not american. I was accepted to a Public Administration PhD and I really want to go, but I will have to quit my job and will have a lot of expenses.

I am trying to discover what are the real chances of getting funding during the PhD. I was told that it is very common to do this.

Anyone disagree?

[MashaMashaMasha]

I strongly recommend not going without multiple years of funding. Apply again next year. The job market is awful, you do not want to incur more debt by taking out student loans for your PhD.

[MashaMashaMasha]

gatorsoc85, I have no funding and I am not american. I was accepted to a Public Administration PhD and I really want to go, but I will have to quit my job and will have a lot of expenses.

I am trying to discover what are the real chances of getting funding during the PhD. I was told that it is very common to do this.

Anyone disagree?

Did your acceptance offer say that funding information would be sent to you? If not, they might not be expecting to fund you. You will need to call your department and ask. Don't just wait to get your bill! Funding should be an upfront discussion, and something that is a major factor in your decision to go or not go to any one program.

[jormniel]

I absolutely will not go if I am not funded. I want to get my PhD, but I simply cannot afford to pay for it myself. Well, I could, but the costs would outweigh the benefits.

[ThisSlumgullionIsSoVapid]

no way

Don't go without funding

[Marchesini]

Ok, let me explain: I don't want and cannot pay for a PhD, but I was told by the university that I am in a "short wainting list" for funding. Besides that, my girl will also go to USA for a PhD, so it is time for me to take some decisions.

So, I guess it is not that easy to say yes or no. In general I would just go with funding, but I have to consider other things right now.

[tt503]

Ok, let me explain: I don't want and cannot pay for a PhD, but I was told by the university that I am in a "short wainting list" for funding. Besides that, my girl will also go to USA for a PhD, so it is time for me to take some decisions.

So, I guess it is not that easy to say yes or no. In general I would just go with funding, but I have to consider other things right now.

A couple things...

...I've heard that, in some cases, it is harder for international students to get funding than American students. I'm not sure what the details are regarding this, but I imagine it has to do with work status/visa, those types of things. You might want to check into what you may need to do if you are accepted for funding and start work on the paperwork NOW.

...it may be possible to defer a year. A friend of mine was accepted into the PhD program of her dreams, but without funding. She asked to defer a year and to be considered for funding in the next round, and she was given priority during the next admissions cycle (during that year, she did fieldwork to add to her qualifications). She's attending her dream program fully funded, instead of just declining an offer.

...I wouldn't advise attending a program without funding. Everybody that I've talked to has indicated that this is an extremely unwise decision. Because I'm headstrong, I went into a Master's degree unfunded (none of my cohort was funded), and I got extremely lucky that I was able to work as a TA after my first year. As a result, I was one of two students who is fully funded in their second year, in an incoming group of 16. I'm not even TA-ing in the department I was technically admitted to...it just so happens my skill set matches with another department's needs for a TA, and I knew people in the department who told me about it. I emailed the chair and lobbied for the position. It's mostly who you know and selling yourself (based on previous hard work) once you get the opportunity, but you can never count on having that opportunity.

Some (not all) departments are extremely fickle places, and unless you're guaranteed an amount, they have no responsibility to help you out (especially with other professors being concerned about their own works and getting their own grants, etc.). It just sounds like added stress when grad school is already a pretty stressful environment (though one I absolutely love). I would explore all your options before you commit to one.

[lovenhaight]

If departmental funding isn't an option, ask about work opportunities in other departments or administrative offices. Those don't usually come with tuition waivers, in fact I'm not sure I've ever seen one come with a tuition waiver, but you should definitely email your POI and/or the administrative person. Sometimes they'll have alternative sources that they can point you to.

[giacomo]

So, how realistic is it to get off the "funding" waitlist (in comparison with, say, getting off the admissions waitlist? does anyone have a success story or general knowledge to share on this issue?

(or should I start a thread of its own?)

[sciencegirl]

Is this at a public school? I know the UCs are a bit notorious for having to hustle for $. It's a large amount of stress on my friends in those programs. In most cases, the good students find funding, and when they are "waitlisted" its sort of like an initiation process of weeding out the not so strong... and I often hear about success stories of getting funding, but this may also be self-selective as the ones that don't probably don't continue..

[giacomo]

In most cases, the good students find funding, and when they are "waitlisted" its sort of like an initiation process of weeding out the not so strong...

Can you please expand on this? I'm not talking about the students who are already in the programs but those who just got accepted but are on the funding waitlist. At this point of the process (i mean, after the actual admissions process), could they even tell or care who really are "good students"? Isn't the admissions process itself enough of a "weeding out" process?

[sciencegirl]

In the immediate case, it could simply be seeing who decides to enroll, and then the faculty voting on who to fund based on who has committed to programs. Another case may be where a few university fellowships are available but need to go through the graduate school/university.. sometimes these fellowships are lost if a student wins them but goes to another school.. so what they may do see who enrolls, and then nominate people from that pool for university fellowships knowing for certain that they will be at the school if they win them.

My comment highlighted above is that once students get in, they spend that first year applying for university grants, fellowships, outside TA-ships etc and it does become a weeding out process.

[giacomo]

My comment highlighted above is that once students get in, they spend that first year applying for university grants, fellowships, outside TA-ships etc and it does become a weeding out process.

just to clarify, you mean those who were not guaranteed to receive funding for, say, 5 years when they were accepted to the programs, correct?

Edited March 4, 2012 by giacomo

[bubawizwam]

This discussion seems to be focused on unfunded PhD programs. What are everyone's thoughts on unfunded masters programs that will likely lead to funded PhD programs?

[sciencegirl]

Yup. This situation seems to happen a lot at sink or swim schools, mostly publics. The privates generally seem to have the philosophy of guaranteeing a lot more funding and spelling it out in writing. This makes sense though - when your school depends on public funding, after seeing what's happened the last few years, it would be unwise to "guarantee" anything beyond a few years, in case the bottom truly fell out of the state budgets. (I don't think anyone will know what the UC school system/California budget will be in 2017, 5 years from now) When you are a private school, things are generally more predictable with the future funding situation.

@bubawizam - I think that should be a separate topic maybe since the OP seemed to ask about unfunded phD programs, and the unfunded master programs debate could take a few pages

[giacomo]

Yup. This situation seems to happen a lot at sink or swim schools, mostly publics. The privates generally seem to have the philosophy of guaranteeing a lot more funding and spelling it out in writing. This makes sense though - when your school depends on public funding, after seeing what's happened the last few years, it would be unwise to "guarantee" anything beyond a few years, in case the bottom truly fell out of the state budgets. (I don't think anyone will know what the UC school system/California budget will be in 2017, 5 years from now) When you are a private school, things are generally more predictable with the future funding situation.

Thank you for your insights. What's your take on the following, though? As you have pointed out, I, too, hear time and time again (from friends and here) that grad students from public schools (who are already in the program) fiercely compete for the few available funding sources, but if you see their programs' websites, they usually say something in the line of "all admitted students are guaranteed 5 years of funding, etc.etc." What gives?

[splitends]

At my financially unpredictable public school, I get the impression that the grad students are "guaranteed funding" through RAships or TAships, which will generally mean less money than fellowships offer. So the competition may still be pretty fierce for the best positions, and for any money that comes without teaching requirements attached.

Also, I know at least Wisconsin-Madison has moved in the last two years or so from having large cohorts fiercely competing for funds to having small cohorts with guaranteed funding for five years. So even though they've changed tactics and are offering a reasonable package, I have grad students and profs warning me about the competitive atmosphere there based on outdated information.