How would you choose school when you're open to different research fits?

[zhtmahtm]

I've been trying to decide between two PhD programs, and I've been trying to put research fit as the most important factor in my decision, since I really don't have a geographic preference and the PIs in both schools were really nice and great people. My problem is that, I'm just finishing up my final semester in my undergrad institution, and I've been just working on a very specific topic (which I'll just call topic X from now on...). I definitely want to explore more outside of X, and at this point I can't tell if I'd end up doing a PhD on something other than X. But anyway, I applied for projects that had at least some degree of overlap with topic X. I was also aware that my current undergrad institution was one of the best school for X, but since I wanted a change of environment, I hadn't applied to my undergrad institution. So I'm expecting a much less vibrant atmosphere - at least on X - in both of my options (a risk I was willing to take to study at a different place)

Now my options are...

School A is basically the top school in the general field of my interest. Based on my current  interest in X, however, I'd say the research fit is about 50%. Considering the size of school A, only a very small proportion of faculties there work on X. During the school visit I figured out that there's one other person who does something 90% related to X, but since he was on a field trip I wasn't able to contact him for a while, and I don't even know when he'd return...

School B is a good school, although definitely not on the same tier as school A. The people I've talked to basically all agreed that there are people who does really good science in School B (and, of course, others who don't do as 'well'), and that the PI who's taking me in is one of the best people who does X. Since it's smaller than school A, the absolute number of faculty who does X is about the same with school A, but in terms of proportions B has a larger emphasis on X than A. Currently the research fit would be about 80%. However, apart from X, this school doesn't have as much resources as school A in the general field, and there may be more limits if I actually want to switch from studying X in school B than in school A.

So (this might be a reiteration, but) making a decision is really hard because I don't know how much I'm dedicated to X, or exploring things other than X, especially since I haven't really done any research outside X. School A would definitely be better if I want to explore things, but if I'm going back to X I'd kinda still regret not choosing B - but I'm pretty sure that going to school B would make me stick to X for my PhD. Maybe I should have had a better idea of what I wanted to do and applied for a masters first... I really don't know at this point... I was hoping if anybody had a similar experience or had some words of advice?

Edited March 12, 2016 by zhtmahtm

[rising_star]

I would go to School A, assuming the funding is equivalent. My logic is this: you know you're interested in X but not sure about other areas so the research breadth you could/would be exposed to at School A would help you make sure that X is what you really want to be studying. If it isn't X, you have other options without having to transfer. And, if you stick with X, there are resources available to you. 

[TakeruK]

I agree with rising_star! School A sounds like the better fit for all of the same reasons.

Also, an important factor if you are valuing research fit is also the reputation of each school in topic X.

And, it sounds like you are using "fit" only to mean how many other researchers at each school work in topic X. But, I think research fit is more than just the topic. Each program tends to have its own style of "doing research" and I think this is an important part of fit too. For example, I really valued being able to work on multiple project and with multiple faculty members and I really liked my program because they really encourage multiple advisors and "cross-project" work. We all have offices on the same floor and everyone's doors are always open so I can pop in to talk to Prof on topic Y if I'm working on something that is related to both Topic X and Y. In fact, just yesterday I wrote to two other people doing related work to ask them to do some analysis for me and join my paper as coauthors as I thought of something I wanted to do but didn't have the expertise. This is something that I really valued and I'm glad I found it in one of the schools I applied to! Other places I visited had much less collaboration---students were put into offices based on their advisor and the student body was split between 5 different floors of the same building.

So, if the topic isn't as important to you, look for research fit beyond just the topic. Ask yourself: does the department fit your preferred working style?

 

[zhtmahtm]

Thanks to both of you for the tips!

@TakeruK That sounds like a really important point too. The 'interesting' thing is that almost every faculty that I talked to (from schools other than A and B themselves) agreed that school A has a really competitive atmosphere (e.g. labs competing against each other) compared to other schools... except that I didn't really get that vibe during campus visit. I'm wondering whether I just didn't realize that atmosphere during the visit, or whether school A moved toward a more collaborative atmosphere since the faculties who I were talking to have been there...

[yogi77]

You won't be able to pick up on the competitive vibe from just a site visit - I would either trust the reputation that you have heard of or try to get more specific information. 

[TakeruK]

On 3/19/2016 at 4:28 PM, yogi77 said:

You won't be able to pick up on the competitive vibe from just a site visit - I would either trust the reputation that you have heard of or try to get more specific information. 

My experience has been different---I would personally rely more on the vibe I get from the visit and the information from the current students instead of reputation heard from other sources not currently there (even alumni can have out of date information). I feel that it's easy for misinformation to spread (e.g. you hear about a bad thing that happened in a particular year with a particular person but you don't know if it's still an issue and also through telling of the story, details can evolve and change). I'm not saying you should ignore things you've heard from people, and you should especially pay attention if you are hearing something from a person who left a program because of a bad environment, but like all research, I think it's important to treat direct information and secondary sources appropriately.

[yogi77]

On 3/25/2016 at 2:04 PM, TakeruK said:

My experience has been different---I would personally rely more on the vibe I get from the visit and the information from the current students instead of reputation heard from other sources not currently there (even alumni can have out of date information). I feel that it's easy for misinformation to spread (e.g. you hear about a bad thing that happened in a particular year with a particular person but you don't know if it's still an issue and also through telling of the story, details can evolve and change). I'm not saying you should ignore things you've heard from people, and you should especially pay attention if you are hearing something from a person who left a program because of a bad environment, but like all research, I think it's important to treat direct information and secondary sources appropriately.

On the other hand, what generalizable data can you really gather from a site visit? Current students and professors may not be completely upfront if you ask them directly about the presence of a competitive culture. It's unlikely that a school with a reputation for being competitive is actually not. 

[TakeruK]

3 hours ago, yogi77 said:

On the other hand, what generalizable data can you really gather from a site visit? Current students and professors may not be completely upfront if you ask them directly about the presence of a competitive culture. It's unlikely that a school with a reputation for being competitive is actually not. 

I recognize that my own experience cannot be generalized to everyone else. But with that said, at all the schools I've been at, I have always been fully honest with every prospective student I've met. And I think prospective students are smart enough to figure out when grad students are lying. Personally, I believe I can judge the environment from observing how grad students interact with each other and how they talk about each other etc. during a visit. You don't have to directly ask upfront.

Faking friendships and good relationships is a very tiring thing. I think you can tell when you see the current students interact with each other during the visit days. Their interactions show you how much they know each other, whether they are friends or just colleagues or barely acquaintances. If the environment is bad, I think it will be even less likely that everyone will cooperate to put on a fake show of collegiality. I have visited schools where I didn't feel the students gelled as well and it definitely impacted my decision (of course, what is a good environment for me could be terrible for another person---I'm not saying everyone should go to a place where everyone is BFFs if that's not what they are looking for).

Also, the school I am at actually has a huge reputation for competitiveness. It was one of my biggest worries prior to the visit. I later learned that it is not what the reputation says it is, and also most of the reputation comes from another department but then the rumor mill distorts the information, exaggerates it and applies it to the whole campus. And, some of the information was true of the students a decade ago, but grad student populations have short lifetimes. I've only been here 4 years and I would already say our current grad student population is noticeably different than it was when I started. 

And finally, especially at schools with competitive reputations, there are many people like me that were initially apprehensive about the program, visited, found out what it was like and stayed. We understand the concerns because we had them too. So, if we are asked, we are definitely honest about it. I think it's more likely that we will be up front because we understand why the question is being asked. 

But again, this has been my experience with the small number of schools I've visited and attended. There are probably bad places to be that somehow fool students into thinking they are good places. I personally would prefer to place more weight on my own observations/data of the program in question than to rely on second-hand accounts of reputation, which may or may not refer to the right program, people, or time.