is grad school what you expected? how important is prestige?

[spectastic]

I've been talking with a PI about starting my masters and then moving towards a PhD. This is a type of situation where the student must already have a professor willing to take him/her before the student gets accepted. We're compatible; he likes me, and I like him. There are two problems.

 

One of them is that he's not totally convinced that I know what I'm getting myself into, even though I've done research throughout undergrad, and think I have a pretty good idea. The thing is, I'm passionate about science and technology, and I don't think I can get a satisfying career with just a bachelors degree. I think the professor's concern stems from the fact that not all of his students are committed to their research, and because I have hobbies, he's worried that'll take up my time. I've already told him it won't happen, yet he still wants me to take some time and think about it. Perhaps I'm missing something... Was grad school a shock to you guys when you first started? If so, how did it affect your career outlook?

 

the other problem is the professor tells me he's concerned about funding, I think largely due to the fact that there's a guy with a super group (like 40 people in the group) in the engineering department that's sweeping up all the grants from the DOE. He told me there are some pretty sweet TA positions that I can get that will pretty much pay for my tuition, and then some, and that'll get me through the first year. But he still seems concerned about it, as if he's repeatedly asking me "are you sure you want to be in my group?" like it's a path down a dead end or something. Anyway, I don't get it, and I'm hoping someone on here can help me interpret. 

 

thanks

 

 

PS I met him twice now. We'll meet again next week to see if we're both good with what's being proposed. 

Edited March 10, 2016 by spectastic

[CreamyDog69]

A few questions. Why not go straight for your PhD? If you have tons of research experience and decent grades, don't waste time and money on a master's. If you don't know what your career goals are or if a PhD isn't going to help you with those career goals, then I'm not sure getting a PhD for "fun" is a great idea. 
If your PI doesn't want you to have hobbies, I wouldn't say that's a good sign, plus, it seems like he's very intentionally dissuading you from joining his group. To do undergraduate work, a masters, and then a PhD in the same lab could signal to people in the future that you're unwilling to get out of your comfort zone. If you can, go to another school for your PhD and at the very least, go to another lab so you can see what else is out there. 

[spectastic]

uuuummmm... nobody insinuated anything about getting a phd for "fun."

PI doesn't care if I have hobbies. He's just had a history of people who've had hobbies that interfered with their work. we've already established that's a nonissue.

he's not really dissuading me from joining his group. sorry if I miscommunicated that. he's asking me to think some more about this, even though I've pretty much made up my mind. at the very least, this is a foot in the door for me into a pretty awesome program, with abundant resources, and opportunities to move on after some experience. he seems pretty jaded and frustrated by the funding situation with the government, and told me straight up he doesn't know if he'll be successful about securing funding. No skin off my back if he's not able to fund me for a phd, I've got a TA option that can get me through the first year and worry about the other stuff later. at worst, I leave with a masters to do a phd somewhere else. seems like a good enough plan to me, I don't know what else he's worried about.

Edited March 10, 2016 by spectastic

[FeelTheBern]

@Ignis was trying to help you interpret the situation, which is exactly what you asked for in your original post. Instead of listening to his/her interpretation you became argumentative and went on to say that you have, "pretty much made up your mind". Why bother posting, if you aren't willing to listen to other people's advice and you have already made up your mind?

 

[spectastic]

I was clearing up misinterpretations by said poster, not trying to be argumentative. doing a phd for fun.. where did that even come from?? 

[spectastic]

anyway, I think I understand where the professor's coming from now. and admittedly, my post might have seemed vague in what it was asking.

[juilletmercredi]

he's not really dissuading me from joining his group.

But...he is. You want a PhD and he's made it clear that he's not totally behind that in your situation and he would only take you for an MA, at least initially. He's also voiced the concern that you are not committed to your research. Yes, he made the concern obliquely - by referencing his other students and your hobbies - but that doesn't make the expression any less real. He's also consistently asking you if you are sure you want to join his group and talking negatively about his funding. These are ALL of the signs of someone trying to dissuade you from joining his group.

You say that you've already established that your hobbies are a non-issue, but your first post doesn't make it sound that way ("because I have hobbies, he's worried that'll take up my time...and I've already told him it won't happen, yet he still wants me to take some time and think about it.") The last part of that statement signals to me that he doesn't believe you for whatever reason. It does, indeed, sound like the PI cares if you have hobbies.

I think this is, at the very least, a PI making it very clear that he is not your strongest advocate or supporter. You want a PI that believes in your abilities and skills and isn't constantly questioning you from the outset. Because of that, it doesn't really seem like this person is a great fit for you at this time. Best case scenario you have to constantly worry about proving yourself in the first 2 years of your relationship rather than knowing that this is someone who has wanted to sponsor and support you from the outset. And there are many things that can go wrong: if he has high standards and is easily disappointed (which frankly sounds like the case), then you may find him unpleasable.

No skin off my back if he's not able to fund me for a phd, I've got a TA option that can get me through the first year and worry about the other stuff later. at worst, I leave with a masters to do a phd somewhere else. seems like a good enough plan to me, I don't know what else he's worried about.

Well, it's not a great plan at least. It kind of depends on the terms of the agreement.

Generally speaking you shouldn't enter a PhD program without full funding to take you through at least the coursework phase (and ideally through the whole thing). Don't just worry about it later - that can end you up in some tremendous debt that you won't be able to repay and that will hobble the beginning of your career. Leaving with a master's from a PhD program to go somewhere else is logistically and emotionally more difficult than most people imagine. You'll need your advisor's support, for one.

That said, it sounds like he's only taking you for an MA program, in which case your plan isn't so bad on face. Having one year completely covered and only having to pay for the second year, with the understanding that you are only there for the MA and will apply to the PhD program like anyone else (including considering other programs) isn't such a bad thing - in fact, that's pretty good for the MA.

But that's again ignoring the fact that this professor doesn't really sound like he wants to advise you at all.

[CreamyDog69]

On 3/10/2016 at 11:34 AM, spectastic said:

uuuummmm... nobody insinuated anything about getting a phd for "fun."

You've made it obvious that you don't have any concrete career plans. When you say " I'm passionate about science and technology, and I don't think I can get a satisfying career with just a bachelors degree ", it seems like you don't actually know what you want to do. Getting a PhD is a long haul and if you don't have specific career plans with which you know the PhD will help you achieve, you're setting yourself up for disappointment when you graduate if you don't have something very specific to work towards. Of course, your plans can change as you go through school, but you should at least have a more solid idea of what you want to do than being passionate about science and technology because that's a very big world with a lot of things in it. If you don't have those plans, you might as well be doing it for fun. 

[St Andrews Lynx]

There are a lot of academics out there who don't have the best social skills. There are plenty professors who can diplomatically tell a prospective student that they don't have funding/space* and think you should join another research group. But to me this sounds like a professor who doesn't really want you to join their group but isn't managing to give you an outright rejection. He's stalling for time ("go away and think about this"), bringing up multiple concerns (funding, hobbies, do you know what you're getting in to). I mean, accepting someone into a research group isn't difficult ("You want to join our lab? Great! Let's meet next week to talk about projects."). 

It's like when someone is trying to dump you: "I don't know if I want a serious relationship," is a face-saving way of saying "I don't want a serious relationship with you." Except in this case "Are you sure you want to do a PhD in my lab?" could well be a way of saying "I'm not sure that I want you to do a PhD in my lab."

 

 

* Sometimes academics use a concern about funding as a way of rejecting someone they feel would be a bad fit personality for their group. Because you can't argue with a lack of funding in the same way you could argue about "motivation" and "fit", and it avoids hurting the grad student. 

[spectastic]

11 hours ago, St Andrews Lynx said:

There are a lot of academics out there who don't have the best social skills. There are plenty professors who can diplomatically tell a prospective student that they don't have funding/space* and think you should join another research group. But to me this sounds like a professor who doesn't really want you to join their group but isn't managing to give you an outright rejection. He's stalling for time ("go away and think about this"), bringing up multiple concerns (funding, hobbies, do you know what you're getting in to). I mean, accepting someone into a research group isn't difficult ("You want to join our lab? Great! Let's meet next week to talk about projects."). 

It's like when someone is trying to dump you: "I don't know if I want a serious relationship," is a face-saving way of saying "I don't want a serious relationship with you." Except in this case "Are you sure you want to do a PhD in my lab?" could well be a way of saying "I'm not sure that I want you to do a PhD in my lab."

 

 

* Sometimes academics use a concern about funding as a way of rejecting someone they feel would be a bad fit personality for their group. Because you can't argue with a lack of funding in the same way you could argue about "motivation" and "fit", and it avoids hurting the grad student. 

 

 

13 hours ago, juilletmercredi said:

13 hours ago, juilletmercredi said:

 

 

But...he is. You want a PhD and he's made it clear that he's not totally behind that in your situation and he would only take you for an MA, at least initially. He's also voiced the concern that you are not committed to your research. Yes, he made the concern obliquely - by referencing his other students and your hobbies - but that doesn't make the expression any less real. He's also consistently asking you if you are sure you want to join his group and talking negatively about his funding. These are ALL of the signs of someone trying to dissuade you from joining his group.

You say that you've already established that your hobbies are a non-issue, but your first post doesn't make it sound that way ("because I have hobbies, he's worried that'll take up my time...and I've already told him it won't happen, yet he still wants me to take some time and think about it.") The last part of that statement signals to me that he doesn't believe you for whatever reason. It does, indeed, sound like the PI cares if you have hobbies.

I think this is, at the very least, a PI making it very clear that he is not your strongest advocate or supporter. You want a PI that believes in your abilities and skills and isn't constantly questioning you from the outset. Because of that, it doesn't really seem like this person is a great fit for you at this time. Best case scenario you have to constantly worry about proving yourself in the first 2 years of your relationship rather than knowing that this is someone who has wanted to sponsor and support you from the outset. And there are many things that can go wrong: if he has high standards and is easily disappointed (which frankly sounds like the case), then you may find him unpleasable.

 

 

Well, it's not a great plan at least. It kind of depends on the terms of the agreement.

Generally speaking you shouldn't enter a PhD program without full funding to take you through at least the coursework phase (and ideally through the whole thing). Don't just worry about it later - that can end you up in some tremendous debt that you won't be able to repay and that will hobble the beginning of your career. Leaving with a master's from a PhD program to go somewhere else is logistically and emotionally more difficult than most people imagine. You'll need your advisor's support, for one.

That said, it sounds like he's only taking you for an MA program, in which case your plan isn't so bad on face. Having one year completely covered and only having to pay for the second year, with the understanding that you are only there for the MA and will apply to the PhD program like anyone else (including considering other programs) isn't such a bad thing - in fact, that's pretty good for the MA.

But that's again ignoring the fact that this professor doesn't really sound like he wants to advise you at all.

 

11 hours ago, St Andrews Lynx said:

There are a lot of academics out there who don't have the best social skills. There are plenty professors who can diplomatically tell a prospective student that they don't have funding/space* and think you should join another research group. But to me this sounds like a professor who doesn't really want you to join their group but isn't managing to give you an outright rejection. He's stalling for time ("go away and think about this"), bringing up multiple concerns (funding, hobbies, do you know what you're getting in to). I mean, accepting someone into a research group isn't difficult ("You want to join our lab? Great! Let's meet next week to talk about projects."). 

It's like when someone is trying to dump you: "I don't know if I want a serious relationship," is a face-saving way of saying "I don't want a serious relationship with you." Except in this case "Are you sure you want to do a PhD in my lab?" could well be a way of saying "I'm not sure that I want you to do a PhD in my lab."

 

 

* Sometimes academics use a concern about funding as a way of rejecting someone they feel would be a bad fit personality for their group. Because you can't argue with a lack of funding in the same way you could argue about "motivation" and "fit", and it avoids hurting the grad student. 

 

he's told me that his ideal scenario is for me to do super awesome in my masters and transition into a PhD with his group, and that if I decide to do a Master's and decide to go elsewhere, that's fine too.. I think he's worried if I don't do well, then that's bad. And if I do do well, then I would have incentive to go somewhere else for my PhD (due to his uncertainty with funding), which is also sort of bad because a PhD is a much better long term investment. I think that overall, my situation is a little unorthodox compared to other Master's students here, which has taken professors aback. I speculate that also plays a role here. Anyway, we're meeting next week. I've already laid out my cards on the table. The rest is up to him.

Also, we get along great. I don't remember if I already mentioned that he told me he likes me a lot, which was why I was a little confused in the first place why we're still not set in stone. 

[spectastic]

12 hours ago, Ignis said:

You've made it obvious that you don't have any concrete career plans. When you say " I'm passionate about science and technology, and I don't think I can get a satisfying career with just a bachelors degree ", it seems like you don't actually know what you want to do. Getting a PhD is a long haul and if you don't have specific career plans with which you know the PhD will help you achieve, you're setting yourself up for disappointment when you graduate if you don't have something very specific to work towards. Of course, your plans can change as you go through school, but you should at least have a more solid idea of what you want to do than being passionate about science and technology because that's a very big world with a lot of things in it. If you don't have those plans, you might as well be doing it for fun. 

I have aspirations. They're not plans. How many 5 year, 10 year plans actually turn out to be true? In my experience, very few. I recall reading a poll on here a while back about how PhD's career outlooks changed, and about half of them ended up working in a different field than they had originally started. I doubt most people have a real career plan when they enter a PhD.

[CreamyDog69]

16 hours ago, spectastic said:

I have aspirations. They're not plans. How many 5 year, 10 year plans actually turn out to be true? In my experience, very few. I recall reading a poll on here a while back about how PhD's career outlooks changed, and about half of them ended up working in a different field than they had originally started. I doubt most people have a real career plan when they enter a PhD.

You do you. Don't know what you're asking for advice if you're not going to listen. 

[AP]

On 3/9/2016 at 8:23 PM, spectastic said:

I've been talking with a PI about starting my masters and then moving towards a PhD. This is a type of situation where the student must already have a professor willing to take him/her before the student gets accepted. We're compatible; he likes me, and I like him. There are two problems.

 

One of them is that he's not totally convinced that I know what I'm getting myself into, even though I've done research throughout undergrad, and think I have a pretty good idea. The thing is, I'm passionate about science and technology, and I don't think I can get a satisfying career with just a bachelors degree. I think the professor's concern stems from the fact that not all of his students are committed to their research, and because I have hobbies, he's worried that'll take up my time. I've already told him it won't happen, yet he still wants me to take some time and think about it. Perhaps I'm missing something... Was grad school a shock to you guys when you first started? If so, how did it affect your career outlook?

OK, FYI I haven't read the responses because I don't want to be influenced by them  (Sorry if I reiterate)

Honestly, I don't think anyone knows what they are getting themselves into. We all want a sense of control, we talk with PIs, we talk to other grad students, we go to the recruitment weekends... but, let's face it, nobody can really tell you how things are going to be like because nobody is you. 

My piece of advice that I want to be clear about is: this is a job. This is not school, like undergrad. This is a job, poorly paid, high-demanding, but a job. Personally, I wouldn't have accepted ay offers (or even applied) in schools where "life" was impossible. I mean, it is not that I have a lot of time for hobbies, but I do play sports and go to church. There are moments in the program that require more of my time (like now), and moments were you can relax more. This is me. Many may not agree with me. 

For me, it was not a shock because before coming here I was teaching 300 high school students so my life was taken up anyway hahaha. No, seriously, I am an international student. I got accepted in a place I didn't expect and I said yes. When I moved here, it was the first time I visited the US. Ever. And everything turned out to be fine I don't know how. 

So: make it your own experience.

[xolo]

My advisor (before I was admitted) bluntly told me that a PhD in the humanities is signing-up for a life of poverty. I think that was the epitome of honesty on her part, not an attempt to dissuade me from the program. She also admitted me with 6 years of funding, which is one reason I am attending that school.

So, I think you'll have to figure things out on your own, hopefully semi-random internet postings will give you some different angles on the issues. And I agree about long-range plans, the same advisor who admitted me based on my "plans" tried to get an idea how open I was to changing my interests (ie, she wanted her students to be flexible about research topics).

I go to a prestigious state school and LOTS of students are here in part because of its reputation (It's just obvious). To answer the thread topic, grad school is completely different from what I imagined. I only took language classes in undergrad, in grad school fluency is taken for granted (I teach language classes now). So that was a BIG change (maybe just applies to language programs, but it's almost impossible to know what to expect from casually reading the grad handbook)

[spectastic]

Got the good letter.. I guess we can call it officially grad. I've got a good feeling about the pi. I think he could be a good mentor. Time to get to reading..

[Neist]

2 minutes ago, spectastic said:

Got the good letter.. I guess we can call it officially grad. I've got a good feeling about the pi. I think he could be a good mentor. Time to get to reading..

Congrats.  Good luck with your decision!

[spectastic]

Thanks