How much does undergrad matter if planning on going on to a Ph.D.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
I agree that GPA and research experience are critical and would add recommendations. If you can publish a paper or three before applying, so much the better. SLACs and honors programs are great places to get research experience. My DC went to a SLAC but lost some opportunities thanks to COVID-19 (like her study abroad and a couple of summer research positions that probably would have resulted in getting her name on a paper). She left college unsure whether to apply to med school or a Ph.D. program, so she worked in research at a T5 university for two years while she made up her mind. During this time, she got published, earned some recognition for her paper, and decided on a Ph.D. She got great recs from some heavy hitters and was accepted into her first-choice Ph.D. program.
Your DC might want to work in research for a year or two before applying to a Ph.D. My DC benefitted from the experience and maturation of working before going to grad school. |
Anonymous
Attending an elite private National University is better than attending an LAC or a public flagship honors college. Lots of sophisticated research opportunities which involve close interaction with professors. And, no, not all research opportunities are reserved for grad students; however, paid research opportunities may give preference to grad students--as they should. |
Anonymous
Statistically, Swarthmore is best undergrad school to attend. Harvey Mudd, Cal Tech, Reed and Carleton all produce more Ph.D.s per capita than larger private universities |
Anonymous
I think this depends. I'm a prof at a R1 that is highly regarded in my field in STEM. We have a hard min of 3.0 GPA and a soft min of 3.5 for PhD admissions (meaning if you're below a 3.5 we need to understand why and it needs to be offset by other factors). But over 3.5, we're looking at the quality of the undergrad institution and what we know about past students coming from there in terms of preparation. One thing about SLACs is that we usually don't have a lot of students applying from the same school in a given year so they are less in competition with each other. GRE is more of an "are there any alarm bells here" from low scores than valuing the highest scores--though very high scores are attractive. But middling scores don't really help or hurt your chances much. Research experience is critical--so do the 'optional' capstone project and try to get involved in faculty research. It's so common now that if someone doesn't have it we want to know why. LoRs from undergrad faculty are very important also. Fit with faculty research interests matters a lot so it's best to identify several faculty at a school that are doing work of interest to you than just choose a particular program based on reputation. At many programs it's the faculty who advocate for candidates who meet all the threshold criteria as it's often the faculty who generate the lines of PhD funding through their grants. |
Anonymous
Here's the data from the NSF's research, showing overall and per capita numbers for undergraduate institutions sending students on to Ph.D. programs, overall and by field: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs Per capita, SLACs send more students to Ph.D. programs than universities. |
Anonymous
I'm a humanities prof at an R1, and I endorse everything STEM prof said here. We have eliminated the GRE requirement and softened our GPA floors a bit in the wake of the pandemic and as we try to diversify our graduate student population, and both of those changes mean that we now place even more emphasis on prior research experience and ability to articulate research ambitions. One of our interview questions is often along the lines of "explain a research project you'd like to carry out and how you would do it." We are looking to see if the candidate is prepared to conduct research, **and** we want to see if their interests are aligned with work going on in our department. Of course, we also care about Letters of Recommendation. I have spent a lot of time on PhD admissions over the years--was Director of Grad Studies for 5 years and on the committee even longer--so I've seen us admit students from all kinds of institutions, but I'd say SLACs, unselective LACs, and other small schools are the most common. (I've also spent a lot of years teaching in our own undergraduate program, where most of our students get zero research opportunities and don't build significant relationships with tenured and tenure-track faculty. It's just the nature of an R1, in most fields. There are exceptions of course.) I have to disagree with a PP's insistence on the honors college at a flagship public. I also teach in the honors college on my campus, and there is no collaborative research going on between faculty and undergraduates in the honors college. There are other special research oriented programs on campus, so it's worth checking out what every school offers. |
Anonymous
Except many schools are still not requiring GRE’s. |
Anonymous
|
My kid just got accepted to two fullyfunded grad programs. She went to a CTCL that people here laugh at.
She had published multiple papers and won prestigious internships/awards in her niche STEM field. She took initiative and that stands out. |
Anonymous
Which is why this PP’s response is suspect and the other two researchers ring true. Even in their heyday, standardized test scores didn’t have this much impact. |
Anonymous
| I did a PhD at Chicago and am familiar with a few other top programs in my (humanities/social science) field. The vast majority of students in the largish PhD programs come from better SLACs and the better research universities/ivies. Pedigree matters everywhere, but in PhD admissions SLACs really excel |
Anonymous
I'm the humanities prof above, and even when we were considering GREs, it was always just one factor among many. We typically maintained a floor at the 80th percentile, but we found anyone above that certainly had the intellect to conduct scholarly research. So then we were looking for the other factors--the passion for research, experience managing large projects, aptitude for reading, listening, and collaborating, etc. I would a thousand times over rather have a 80th percentile GRE student who excels at these other things than a 97th percentile GRE student with no demonstrated track record with research projects. On that note, I want to clear up another misconception that seems to be emerging in this thread. In our admissions decisions, we simply **never** advocate for or against a particular student based on the caliber or character of their undergraduate institution (CTCL vs. public flagship, for instance). Rather, we are looking for significant research experience and collaboration with research-active faculty (which can be evidenced in the research products themselves, the student's personal statement, and/or or in letters of recommendation from faculty). Students coming from certain types of schools--those without graduate programs, in particular--more often have that kind of research experience. But it's not like we ever compare a student from College of Wooster with one from Ohio State and choose the Wooster student specifically because of their undergrad. It's always because of the experiences that their undergrad experience has afforded them. (Of course, the Ohio State student might be just as capable, but if they haven't put together the same portfolio of experience, they're a way bigger risk for us.) |
Anonymous
|
When I was applying to grad school my GPA was meh, but it was from a T5 department. And the rest of my application was strong (IMHO), so I think that helped me get in to grad school.
The same GPA from a no-name school probably wouldn't have cut it. |
Anonymous
| Matters a lot more than for professional school. You need strong preparation for PhD. Those dead end degrees are extremely competitivez weirdly. |
Anonymous
How do you know? |
Anonymous
What major? |