Publication versus courses for a PhD application

Question

I am currently a second year Master of Statistics student at a university in Asia. Next year I will start my first year of a doctoral degree in Statistics at the same university, however, I will also be applying for PhD programmes in Biostatistics in America and Canada (it is common to do this at my university, and the faculty here supports it).

During this year, I basically have two options:

1. Try to extend the work in my Master's Thesis to get a publication, take only 1-2 courses, be a TA for 1 course.

2. Take 3 courses each semester and TA 2 courses.

Which option will be better for my PhD application? There is no guarantee that I would be able to get a publication if I choose option 1, however, I would be doing 'real research' and I would hopefully develop skills. If I choose option 2 I would be taking courses that could be useful later such as Advanced Survival Analysis, Optimisation, Randomised Algorithms, Nonparametric Estimation, Design of Experiments, Time Series.

What I fear is that I try to extend my Master's Thesis, it doesn't work out and it will appear like I haven't done much during that year. As of now, I cannot tell if the work in Master's Thesis will be of publishable quality, my supervisor isn't sure either.

Answer 1

I can't answer for Canada, but in the US it wouldn't make much of a difference, provided you do well in the option you choose. A masters isn't required for entry into a doctoral program here. Most applicants have only a bachelors and little real research experience. Advanced courses might get you closer to the point of taking comprehensive exams. A "taste" of research is a positive.

The other aspect, however, is that entry is competitive and so you need to do well and get good letters of recommendation. Don't apply to only top institutions. Cast a broad net.

But either path is viable here (US).

---

Note that even if you do the research, a publication within a year isn't especially likely in a reputable journal. That takes time even for a good paper. You might have something publishable and in process, but not likely "published". But that is still a good thing.

Answer 2

You need to gauge your funding. If your advisor and department have funding, you should focus on publications first. If your advisor and department have limited funding, you should focus on academics (near perfect grades).

Although there are rare instances of free journals such MIT's JMLR, making publications is an expensive process these days. However, note that publications will make your resume stand out if you are applying to US or Canada based universities. Now, you should note that your publications must be somewhat useful. There are published authors who have many publications, but all of their publications are mostly survey reviews. Survey reviews are useful but not as useful as other types of publications.

Answer 3

When applying for PhD programmes, it is useful to directly get in touch with the professors who may potentially be interested in taking you.

Writing to a professor, you may want to explain why exactly you would like to join their group (probably, because you are fascinated by their research). This, however, will not be sufficient, because you also have to persuade the professor that you can contribute to their work.

Your application will therefore look better in the professor's eyes if you already have some research experience -- especially if your experience is of relevance to the professor's work. Hence an advantage of doing research prior to applying for PhD programs. Having a paper published in a respected journal would be ideal.

Good luck with your applications!