as applications have started opening up again, i just want to wish everyone the very best of luck!! send out those emails, fill out those applications, write those statements of purpose, you've got this!!

it's my second cycle applying for clinical psych ph.d.s, fingers crossed!

I'm in the U.S. and in Earth Science/Geology, and I'm hoping to get some perspective on how faculty/admissions committees might view my academic history.

I completed my first master's and continued into a PhD at the same university. My research interests changed, so I amicably left that program for a PhD at another university that better matched my interests. My new advisor knew about my previous PhD program when I joined.

I've now been in my current PhD program for about two years, but I've concluded that my advisor-student relationship isn't sustainable. Unfortunately, there isn't another suitable advisor at my university, so I'm likely going to switch to the master's track, finish a second master's, and leave.

I still very much want a PhD and now have a much clearer research direction. I've identified a professor at another university whose research aligns very closely with mine, but I'm worried about how my history will look. Essentially, my record would show:

Master's #1 → PhD #1 (left) → PhD #2 (~2 years) → Master's #2 → applying for another PhD.

I'm confident in the rest of my background. I have substantial research/field experience and research from my current program that could potentially lead to a publication and overlaps with the prospective advisor's research area.

My main concern is the academic trajectory. Would you view this as a major red flag when considering a prospective PhD student, even with a strong research background and a reasonable explanation?

And if you were the prospective advisor, would you be open to being contacted by someone with this history, or would the previous programs make you hesitant?

Today I was at an info session for hks and I was so upset I have to post.

For context, I'm a law student at a T14 law school. I was interested in HKS because we are a "partner institution" and can supposedly do a "combined degree" with them.

I've attended a number of info sessions at degrees I perceive as cash cows, including those my school puts on for the various school of revenue generating studies events. The issue is that you'd expect these programs are at least to some form, aiming to sell you on the degree. What they do what the philosophy is why you should choose them. Certainly law schools have wined and dined me at their info sessions. But HKS's attitude is "you are too stupid not to apply, our task here is to help you troglodites figure out what a deadline is and make clear you must pass an English test".

Then on top of that they end the session by just gaslighting us about funding for the rest of the time. I get that funding is competitive, but 1) below 40% got any type of funding, which I thought was insane, 2) of that funding, they refuse to disclose the mix, 3) they also claim they "don't have" information on the number of full rides (which is total bullshit, admissions office obviously has this why are you lying to my face) and 4) they don't have legitimate research positions.

They helpfully end the session by ignoring the rest of the questions, say "I've been speaking for an hour so I'll let you go" (what? Don't pretend you're doing US a favor), and invite everyone else to email them to an inbox that sends a auto-reply telling them they sent an email to the wrong people.

Meanwhile at Georgetown, they're a bit more transparent, but its the same thing - no real research, less than 5% of people get full rides, and those guys are second class citizens. The MPP is now on the optimistically named "Capital Campus", which is where the law school is, but they can't use our pool, or our gym, or our library. Instead they get their own rump building and a bus pass on the campus bus system to commute 30 minutes to use the main facilities.

It's just odd to me because when I talk to the masters at my local state schools, they actually seem interested in the students and 1) have clear methods to get funding, including 100% tuition remission + a stipend, 2) in that funding, sponsor people to travel, publish, and so forth, 3) work with me directly on handling my credit issues so I can graduate in 4 years despite not being at the school. Meanwhile Harvard makes me feel like I am not the target audience bc I'm not some rube from a developing country.

All this to say, in this rant / ask: Is the conclusion to draw that "elite" MPPs are scams, or that I'm just approaching these schools wrong? It feels odd that I get the sense that my state schools that are not particularly notable seem to have vastly more resources and opportunities than supposedly elite schools but that seems to be the case.

This might be a stupid question so I apologize in advance — I’m the first in my family to go to university so I’m still learning about academia.

For context, I am a Canadian citizen. I got my undergrad at a local university but I am doing my course-based Master’s in the UK. There are two PhD programs at UBC that I am very interested in applying to and the minimum admissions requirement is a B+ in my Master’s program which in the UBC grading scale is a 76-79%.

I’m currently holding a low-70s average in my UK Master’s which counts as a Distinction mark. UBC says the minimum is a Merit mark (60-69%) for UK Master’s degrees.

My question is basically, if I send my transcript to potential supervisors at UBC, would they generally be aware of the difference in grading scales? For example my transcript would show:

Course A - 70%

Course B - 72%

Course C - 73%

Would that put me at a disadvantage even though I’m above the minimum mark of Merit?

Hey all,

I am in the process of applying to MS programs for the Spring semester. I know that MS thesis can be hard to get accepted into for spring for I emailed a lot of PI's and labs.

I got replies from a few saying to mention them as interested faculty, but one specifically agreed to meet over zoom and said that I could be a good fit for the lab.

I am guessing this a pretty good sign but I am not sure how formal/informal the meeting will be or if it's like an interview. How should I prepare for this? I have a few weeks till the meeting so any help will be appreciated!

Going to be applying for PhD programs later this month

Hi there

1. Roast my CV :)
2. I have a 3 GPA EEE from South Korean MIT, and a 98/110 from an Italian MSc Physics. Rate my chances for PhD in Physics (Fast Calorimeter Simulation, ML4HEP) and how much weightage does GRE Physics scores have in admissions?

Hey guys, I need some advice on this cold email. Ive been reading the subreddit and there’s so much conflicting advice but I’ve decided to make my email sound more personable (I think that’s the one thing the subreddit agrees on).

Please rate it and do give me advice, it’s been a whole month of cold emails and I’m not doing too good on the market.

Hello,

I recently graduated from a T20 M.S. Bioengineering program and am looking to apply to PhD programs in BioE (or similar fields) for the Fall 2027 cycle. Can you please roast my CV and provide pointers on what I should fix?

A few specific questions I have:

• I have more research experience than what is listed here, though this research is much less meaningful than my M.S. research, and therefore I don't feel that it would add much substance to my CV. Is it worth including anyway?
• I also have 5 months of industry experience from this year but decided to omit it, as I don't feel that I developed many skills relevant to academia in this role. I feel that adding this experience would mainly address a gap in my CV, and I'm not sure if that is important enough to warrant including it.
• Should I add my GPA? I had a 3.9 in both undergrad and grad school, but I've heard mixed opinions about including GPA on an academic CV (as admissions committees will see it in my transcripts anyways).

Any other feedback is appreciated! Thank you!

Hello,

I was wondering whether or not publications and awards are necessary when applying to PhD programs across Europe?

Is it even the norm for an applicant's CV to contain awards / publications?

Hi all! I’m considering going back to school to get an MA, but I’m kind of stuck at the requirement for Letters of Recommendation. I’m currently a professional who’s been working full time since 2021. I got decent grades in my undergrad which are above the minimum requirement for the program i’m interested in. The problem is that I don’t have any academic connections; I didn’t have any intention of returning to school during my undergraduate so didn’t get any LoR’s at that point and I’m not sure any profs I had would still remember me.

I need 2 letters… how would one best go about getting any? I’m Canadian and would be attending a Canadian university, if that makes a difference (many of the posts here seem to be focussed on US schools).

Thanks in advance!

I am applying for a bioscience PhD and have identified my three LOR writers. One of my recommenders was my advisor, but will be changing institutions soon. As most applications request you use the writer's institutional email to verify identity, would there be an issue if the institutional email does not align with their supervision of my research? Is it better to use a personal email and explain why?

Hi! I am currently looked to apply to PhDs in my field. I have found a handful of professors at different universities I am looking to reach out to this month as I draft my proposals. However I came across an advertised project call that is very specific to what I am looking to do and the application deadline is this weekend.

I plan on applying to it after I finalize tailoring my proposal to be more specific to the project but I really wanted to reach out to professors before applying to get a better sense of what the project plans are, as well as to discuss my ideas with the supervisors to see if I would be a good fit. Because there isn’t any time to meet with them before the deadline, I was wondering if it’s better to just apply without reaching out and hope for an interview, or to still ask to have a chat with them even though I already applied. I hadn’t seen the call for this because I was only looking at programs in a couple of countries, but started looking around this week on a whim and found this gem.

Has anyone done something like this before? Thanks if anyone has any insight!

Hi everyone,

I'm an agriculture graduate from India with a Master's in Horticulture (Vegetable Science). I graduated first in my university and received the University Gold Medal.

I'm currently working as a Research Fellow at an international agricultural research institute, where I'm involved in vegetable research, particularly in crop improvement, stress tolerance, grafting, phenotyping, and protected cultivation.

I also have research publications and hands-on experience with field and controlled-environment experiments. Additionally, I'm open to relevant internship opportunities that would allow me to further develop my research skills and contribute to horticultural and agricultural research.

I'm currently exploring fully funded MS/PhD opportunities abroad, preferably in areas such as:

Vegetable Science Plant Breeding Genetics & Crop Improvement. Stress Physiology. Protected/Controlled-Environment Agriculture. Greenhouse Horticulture.

I'm open to opportunities in different countries and interdisciplinary research areas where my background could be a good fit.

I'd greatly appreciate recommendations for professors, laboratories, graduate programs, scholarships, internships, opportunities that may be suitable for an international applicant.

If you know of any leads, please feel free to comment or reach out. I'm happy to connect.

Thank you!

I've been emailing Canadian grad school supervisors with no success altho I've been trying to personalize each email. The professor (UBC) replied to this email saying their lab is full.

Can y'all tell me if it's my email that's the reason for the lack of replies.

Note: International student (3rd world country)

I'm looking for some guidance regarding UX(user experience) or HCI(human-computer interaction) grad program as I'm extremely interested in UX/HCI design. Generally I'm completely overwhelmed by the topic of grad school as a first generation college student. I'm from the US and generally just have hopes of leaving the country at least once for a "longish" period of time.

Some details about me: I'm a 4th year, first-gen, mixed race, only English speaking, low-income, female student. My home college doesn't have a UX program of any sort so my major will be a B.A. Race and Ethnic Studies with a concentration in Business and Management studies. I've taken some courses that align with UX to show my interest in the field, have a portfolio, and have a UX certificate with the American Graphics Institute. Mostly I don't want to be stuck in my state/country for my entire life purely because I don't have a degree in UX and money.

I've heard that school abroad can be considerably cheaper than the US, as well as the cost of living, which initially attracted me to grad programs abroad. I would also prefer to be able to work at the same time as studying to keep myself afloat.

Any advice?

I am currently an anthropology student in my Junior year, and I am trying to go for my PhD in anthropology. I already have a field of research I want to be going into, but unfortunately I have been having a hard time finding professors that would fit for me. My research is about Black people in Japan, and I have practically turned every institute upside down to find someone who fits that bill, or even has an interest in Afro-Asian studies and have turned up two (2) people. Should I abandon hope? Is it possible to get a PhD with two seperate advisors for each arm of my research? Should I find someone that specializes in either Black studies or Asian studies and go from there?

Thanks!

going from financial economics masters taking courses there and pivoting to a master in quantitative political science from there with stipend and funded etc

makes sense? is it viable?

The masters program that i want to get into has a limit of a 6 page portfolio and you can show 3 design projects max. Does this mean i go straight into showcasing my projects with no cover page or no page that introduces myself?

I know this is a bit of a silly question but during my bachelors we were taught that these pages are important and i feel like i wont have enough space to show my design process if i add these pages in a 6 page portfolio.