How will a very short undergrad impact PhD applications?

Question

I am a mathematics undergrad looking at applying for PhD programs in the coming fall. Due to a combination of AP credit, dual enrollment, and high courseloads every semester, I am on track to graduate within two years instead of the regular four. While this definitely benefits me in certain ways (especially financially), I worry that this could also be a big issue for me when applying for programs. I feel that due to my short undergrad, I have not been able to get very much done yet since I have had so little time in my undergrad, which I think will lead to me having worse letters of recommendation and less research experience than other applicants. In addition, I am not entirely sure which field of study I want to get a PhD in - my research so far has been mostly in the fields of computational biology and mathematical biology, but I am not entirely sure that those are the fields that I want to spend the next half decade of my life working on, so I am also considering applied mathematics.

As such, I have two main questions:

1. Should I expect my accelerated undergrad to be something that will be harmful towards the competitiveness of my PhD applications? beneficial? neutral?

2. My university offers a one-year master's program in mathematics that I could also do. Would it be worth it to get a master's this way before going into a PhD to get more research experience and to get more experience with different fields of research?

Answer 1

I encountered some version of this problem during my undergrad a decade ago. My local advisers recommended against an abbreviated degree, and I continue to think that was a good call. The following are all somewhat general considerations. You could be good-to-go on one or all of them, but it's hard to be. To your two questions:

Should I expect my accelerated undergrad to be something that will be harmful towards the competitiveness of my PhD applications? beneficial? neutral?

The duration of your undergrad is unlikely to be considered directly in PhD applications. Departments are looking for students who they think can succeed in their program. The downstream effects you've started to identify likely will impact you negatively, though.

• Students at the most rigorous schools take 4 academic years to complete a math major, and frequently include courses near the end that are considered introductory graduate level elsewhere. With only 2 years, you're almost certainly behind on these.
• You've likely had less time to study for the Math Subject GRE than students who take 4 years. It's a poor exam, but a (thankfully decreasing) number of PhD programs still use these scores to winnow down their applicant lists.
• The number and quality of your recommendation letters is likely lower than what students who have spent a bit more time around some specific professors can muster up.

It's hard to be successful on all these points in only 2 academic years.

My university offers a one-year master's program in mathematics that I could also do. Would it be worth it to get a master's this way before going into a PhD to get more research experience and to get more experience with different fields of research?

I'd talk to a professor you trust in your local department about the local option, including costs/benefits. In my case, it was cheaper with close to the same output as a local masters degree to do the following with the full four year time frame. The choices are somewhat personal, but they give an idea of what you can do with the amount of time available.

1. Double major in computer science. The skills and degree still provide an ongoing job-market boost.
2. Take several courses my state university offered as introductory graduate level, but cross-coded as undergraduate courses (at undergraduate tuition rates). Over the full 4 years that let me get in a year of graduate intro. point-set topology, abstract algebra, and analysis.
3. Spend the summer + fall of senior year interning in software development. I don't necessarily recommend exactly this, but the general point is that you have more time and competitiveness to get funding for some kind of extracurricular thing or another during at least the summer of any additional years. The money didn't hurt.
4. Write a bang-up undergraduate research thesis over the course of the year or two.

One other alternative to some of these ideas on the Masters level you can look into is applying for short masters courses and funding abroad. Coming from the US, you have a few different pots you could look at. Just as a few overly-UK-centric examples because I ended up doing something like this in the UK after undergrad: The Rhodes scholarship (very hard, but you miss 100% of the shots you don't take), Marshall scholarship, Gates-Cambridge, Fulbright often has some funding, and I'm sure a good number of others.

These sorts of things are all competitive, of course, and take a chunk of effort to prepare applications for. The window of time coming out of a US undergrad on a good pace is about the only time you can try to take advantage of them, however. Once you start a US PhD these specific opportunity all close down rather quickly, though there will be other opportunities to travel abroad.

Answer 2

Ph.D. committees try to identify individuals who are going to be successful in the Ph.D. program and also after graduation. Being able to graduate early would seem to be rather indicative that you are a hard worker who can function under stress, which would be a positive.

Given the other points you are making, your strategy overall might have been "sub-optimal", but this is largely water under the bridge. Given your current ambiguity, an intervening MS degree might be very helpful to you for figuring out what you want to do, but also for a Ph.D. admissions committee to assess your suitability and chances of success.

Answer 3

I agree with Thomas Schwarz that the short duration of the degree is more likely to be positive than negative.

But I don't think that spending an extra year on a masters will be beneficial, at least in the way you think. First, one year is probably not enough time to get any significant research experience. That requires time and there is no schedule for such things. You might wind up spinning your wheels. Second, there is no guarantee that such a degree is strongly compatible with the early years of a typical doctoral program, which, in the US, involves (generally speaking) advanced coursework leading to passing of the comprehensive qualifying exams. You'd (IMO) be better off starting a doctoral program immediately. And a masters program is seldom funded and often expensive, whereas a doctoral program normally comes with some kind of funding, usually a TA which typically covers most costs as well.

If you need to spend extra effort, I'd suggest working to shore up your relationship with a few math faculty who can write you letters of recommendation, which are especially important in US. Note that relatively few doctoral applications here have significant research, again due to time constraints in the typical undergrad curriculum.

Answer 4

Ask yourself honestly: Are you some kind of prodigy, meaning all that studying in that short time was "totally easy" for you and you can just go on and on? Or do you feel burdened actually, because of the fast pace and uncertain future (or feel otherwise forced-to-be-faster)? If you feel inbetween, what is your tendency to either extreme?

In the first case, I think you are likely capable of going on studying, making a PhD or whatever as fast as you feel like it. In this case a short undergrad is maybe a sign of "you are faster than others anyway" and you do not need to bother to much. Getting into a PhD program might be difficult, if you cannot convince them of your skills and they filter you out, because of the short times... but this is hypothetical. You need to find some better clues to that question than to ponder about it yourself. Go get some advice from someone of such programs who are in charge of selecting, let them "pre-evaluate" you or something, I'd strongly suggest.

In the second case (and also in the first case, actually), I recommend being extra careful on packing on more and more load. Step back, take it easy, make a vacation, relax, come to rest and strength. Think about your future meanwhile. Then take the next steps. And also: Do request help of some of your professors or other student counselling (maybe asking parents and friends is a good start as well) and be totally honest about your feeling towards your future career and a probable overloading/burn-out - only then they can help you for real. They are able to check your grades and ask you questions on the spot and are far more experienced in giving the right advices.

But be careful: perfect scores everywhere can either be a sign to be a prodigy, but it is also very likely a sign of being on the burn-out track.

Good luck, mate! Hope you do well!

Answer 5

I'm going to approach this from a slightly different angle, which is the risk of "studying-fatigue". There comes a point as a young adult where you might get tired of being a student and instead want to be financially independent and learn a job. I think it happens to quite a few people, but it's hard to predict. I've certainly seen it happen to people in PhD programs, but the sunk cost logical bias (plus their own vision of success/failure) pushes most people in that case to continue with the program even if they're deeply unhappy.

For context: I got a master's level graduate degree in France in 5 years, then took a year working before starting an MS at a top-tier US university, which I graduated from in 2015. That MS in the US was great, but I didn't make the most of it because I somewhat fed up with studying at that point.

Studies can easily give you the feeling of being in a rat race – everything you do is graded, and the next part of your studies depends on those grades (and as a result, it can feel like the rest of your life depends on it).

The reason I'm mentioning it is: you're looking at this question of timing only from the perspective of that race, and how you're going to be evaluated. I think you should also think about from the perspective of personal development/happiness. Once you're in your PhD program, a key element of success will feeling good with yourself, feeling like you are where you want to be etc...

How you get there depends on your own tastes and aspirations. It could make sense to graduate in 2 years, then go get a job for 2 years so that you don't stay in academia because you feel you have to, but because you want to. It could also make sense (as others have pointed out), to enjoy the next year or two in college, take more advanced classes in the subjects that interest you.

In my case, spending a little more time outside of academia would have given me a hunger for studying again, which I didn't quite have anymore during my master's (but that I did get back a few years later).

In any case, my point is that you shouldn't focus solely on getting through the PhD program admissions, but on getting through the PhD program itself.

Answer 6

Q1. I don't know. You could argue it either way: you're smart enough to do a PhD straight through but you are young and this may worry supervisors liking minimal personal management.

Q2. See below . . .

Not an everyday question but an interesting one.

There are two issues here: the purely academic progression one and the broader educational one, i.e. personal development during college years.

Due to the heavy workload of the past 2 - 4 years, I would expect that you've had little time to 'savor' your studies. And while you may well have done enough math to get a respectable degree, that doesn't mean that you have covered enough of the principal topics of modern math, in enough depth or properly integrated them all in your own mind. This might be a factor in your not being too clear as to which direction to go in your future career. Then again, anyone at ~ 20 (my estimate of your age) might not be able to be any more decisive than you are now.

Given that you are young enough and have the funding available, I think a good 2-year Math Master's combining taught courses missing in your curriculum so far plus a decent dissertation - and maybe a bit of research assistance to a professor - would be right for you academically now. If your current department can offer a wide range of courses maybe you can stay there. Otherwise try to get a 2-year MS at a better math school. I disagree with user176372's suggestion of taking parallel software development course. A math graduate like you is simply too good for this kind of work - employers will just turn you into a high-performing but low-paid tester.

After the MS you will (a) know what PhD topic is right for you or if you want to so a PhD at all; and (b) have racked up enough letters to take you into any school your abilities merit.

I also think 2 more years at a more leisurely pace so you can enjoy college life more would also be good for you from the all-important standpoint of personal development.

You have worked very hard over the last few years so I wish you well whatever you decide to do.