4

I am an international student who will apply for the Fall 2025 graduate school intake in the US (high energy theory). I have been looking at interesting papers and schools and, somewhat surprisingly, managed to schedule a few online calls with potential advisors I was considering at somewhat strong departments (I say surprising because in the US, advisors are chosen at least a year after admissions - as far as I know).

Regardless, I met these faculty online and had (what seemed to me) very fruitful and nice discussions on their future research directions, my interests and some other relevant questions (mostly pertaining to funding situations). All of the faculty seemed to encourage me to apply, were very positive about working with me (and at least a couple explicitly said that they would recommend my admission if I get shortlisted by the central committee).

This brings me to my question - how much importance should I attach to these informal meetings and encouragements?

The programs I am talking about are probably within the top 20 - 30 or so in the US and I know that faculty everywhere are too busy to just spend time on a chat with a random unknown student they haven't ever seen in their lives. But, I know that admissions are extremely competitive and, going through some of the profiles on sites like gradcafe that got rejected, I can't see how I have any shot at these places.

(The reason I ask this is because my budget is limited - so, I want to strategize accordingly and apply to places where I do have a good chance)

Improve this question

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
8

With some exceptions, the people you have spoken to are not the ones who will decide your admission. And they might not be the ones directly responsible for your funding. And, finding a supervisor prior to admission is rare here, unlike, say, Germany.

Doctoral admissions in the US is normally handled by committees of faculty, largely to assure fair treatment of applicants. A faculty member not on the committee may have no say at all, though there are exceptions.

So, while what you have heard is encouraging, it is no guarantee. A committee will look at your record, grades, CV, etc. and will pay special attention to letters of recommendation.

You also indicate that you have only spoken to people at a narrow range of high rated institutions. If you apply only to those, you lessen your chance of admission. Competition is high and similar institutions are likely to rate you in similar ways. Cast a broader net.

See the following canonical question for more on doctoral admissions in the US and elsewhere: How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in Country X?

Improve this answer
8
  • Thanks for the pointer! I know that the faculty who talked to me will not be on the committee (in fact, I think if they were on the committee, they would probably not be talking to me in the spirit of fairness). I am familiar with the US system - its part of the reason I am kind of surprised I got to talk to people at all since individual faculty don't intervene in the process. I am definitely trying to cast a broader net but its hard to assess the strength of a specific department from the outside - my supervisors, who are the most familiar with me, are pushing me towards the higher end...
    – Kakashi Hatake
    Commented Sep 28 at 10:40
  • ... And I am not exactly sure about it. I want to remain in academia (at least, for now) and most faculty I see are from the absolute top programs. But at the same time, I am quite sure that I will not get past the initial screening at the very top places. Its somewhat confusing for me and I am afraid of exactly what you're saying - that my net might be too narrow.
    – Kakashi Hatake
    Commented Sep 28 at 10:46
  • 1
    You don't need to avoid the "high end" and it might be a mistake to do so, but don't restrict your applications to just that. The higher you go the stiffer the competition and the more qualified they are.
    – Buffy
    Commented Sep 28 at 11:51
  • 2
    This is completely not how it works in all of the 4 US schools I've attended and worked at. In fact, one adjacent very highly ranked department discretely tells students that if they don't have a potential advisor at interviews, then they should plan on going elsewhere. I think it's bad advice when an advisor relationship is important to getting in to many US schools.
    – user71659
    Commented Sep 28 at 18:39
  • 1
    This is highly dependent on the field and the particular department. In computer science, admissions at some places are run mainly by the committee, and a potential advisor saying they like an applicant is a moderate plus; at some places (R1, highly ranked), the situation is much more that if a potential advisor says yes then they get in, as long as they're not glaringly unqualified. I think it's hard for an outsider (or even a student in the department who hasn't been involved in admissions) to know which kind of place a given department is.
    – Danica
    Commented Sep 29 at 16:44
3

It sounds like a good sign that potential advisors were willing to meet with you and that the conversations went well. In my experience, it's always good to make contact before submitting your application so that the professor knows who you are and to expect your application.

But when it comes to assessing your application, they may not be the (only) ones to do it and things such as the quality of your CV, your grades, and motivation will be much more important. This depends on the field you're in and the universities you're applying to. In my case (my field is quantitative psychology), the potential advisor had (or at least appeared to have) complete control over whether I was accepted into the program following an initial interview. I was invited for follow-up interviews, introduced to other faculty whose work I might find interesting, and invited to conversations with current graduate students. This might just be my experience and may not generalise very well.

In general, I'd recommend choosing schools to apply to based on the quality of their program and whether you find the work the potential advisor(s) does interesting. Perhaps it's also useful to talk to current students, that's something that really helped me. It's also a good idea to apply to both safety schools and reach schools so that you're not left without any options in case your preferences or opportunities change.

The most important thing for graduate school admissions is your motivation and the quality of your CV. Show that you're truly interested in the field you want to study and give examples of how you've been working on your knowledge and skills. Make sure you prepare well for interviews, and you should be just fine :) Best of luck!

Improve this answer
2
  • Was this in the US or elsewhere?
    – Buffy
    Commented Sep 28 at 18:26
  • This was in the US and Canada
    – ambiguditi
    Commented Sep 28 at 19:44
2

I'm only a sample of one, but all the advisors I spoke to wanted to get grad students to do research with them. They'd take as many as their institution would give them, and were motivated to encourage students to apply. They would talk to random unknown students. And they always were interested in the research they could do with grad students. (Not at all like their reaction to unknown undergraduate level students, who they avoided to the point of rudeness).

No importance at all to selection and admittance.

Improve this answer
1

It is harder to tell from a single conversation. Ultimately, it matters if they invite you back for more discussion or with their students/postdoc and how much of an influence they have on admission committee.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .