http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=12&t=000438

I have a difficult decision coming up. The results of my PhD applications are still coming in, but I already have two offers between which I think I will have a lot of trouble deciding.

One is from a reasonably famous university. It is offering me a lot of money for four years, without TA/RA strings attached, and access to a famous department and lots of resources. The other is offering me somewhat less money for two years with TA/RA strings attached. The former is in a city, and in a location in a city, where I could definitely see myself living. The latter is in an OKish place to live, but not really where I hoped to end up. The latter offers me access to a supervisor who is working on something very similar to my current Master's work, which I like very much; the former offers supervision in similar areas, but if I were to pursue my current area, I would be more...peripheral to my supervisor's and department's work.

So...do I go with the famous university with the big money and the excellent conditions, and potentially sacrifice my current specific research topic? Or should I go to the place with not so good conditions, and work with people enthusiastic about what I'm already doing and already working in that specific area.

Note that both groups are working in the same general area; it's current specific position that is at issue. It's a major dilemma for me, because if I choose the less-money option, I could end up changing my mind about my research and cursing myself for not going with the famouser university with the big money. But if I go to the famouser university, I feel like I'm selling out in a sense, even though my work has little overt political content in it.

I'm peripheral to my advisor's research area, but we share the same geographic area of interest. Another committee member knows a bit about the techniques and technology I'll be using, but I think I can give him a run for his money. And yet I'm satisfied with where I am.

On the basis of that, I'd go with the first option, provided you can be sure you'll get the support you'll need throughout. That means your advisor not going off into another research area leaving you doing something they're now bored with, for example.

What was especially irritating was that some Canadian schools would fall over themselves to hire someone from the bottom of the class at Chicago, while not even looking at people from Canadian schools.

[ 19 March 2004: Message edited by: Oliver Cromwell ]

quote:

---

What was especially irritating was that some Canadian schools would fall over themselves to hire someone from the bottom of the class at Chicago, while not even looking at people from Canadian schools.

---

At the Famous place, there is mandatory teaching experience. I will have to TA, but for free, and only for a couple of semesters. I already have some teaching experience under my belt.

Then there's the money. It's nice to have a fellowship like that on a CV.

If the Canadian target comes through for me, I would be Second Pick. I'm not sure I like that. I was First Pick for the Famous US place, but I still feel better staying in Canada.

I have made a conscious decision to remain in British Columbia at the same university in which I am undertaking undergraduate studies.

I realize that there is supposed to be a certain extra amount of "cred" that mysteriously attaches to people who go to other schools for graduate studies, but I like it here in Vancouver and moving anywhere else is just not on.

As it is my university is a good university with at least two faculty who seem to be interested in having me work with them on future graduate projects, depending on where I want to go (nuclear chemistry versus heavy metal element chemistry).

The GPA requirement is not onerous, but does need to be maintained, and barring major difficulties I hope to have a path paved to grad school when I get my B.Sc

In my case I actually welcome a TA requirement since I want to get teaching experience under my belt.

[ 19 March 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]

If you *really* wanted to go to the UK, you might want to send an e-mail to the effect of 'FAU has offered me a fellowship worth X$/year, but I'd really much prefer to go to your school. Is there anything you can do?'

You never know...

[ 19 March 2004: Message edited by: Oliver Cromwell ]

You also indicated that you would be receiving significantly more funding and it wouldn't be tied to teaching [although you do want to do some TA work - I know that during my first job interview in academia I got a lot of questions about what courses I had taught, how much control I had over the curriculum, etc.] Definitely something to be said for creature comfort and the ability to focus on your studies without having to worry about juggling part time jobs, etc.

By the way, one question - can you take NSERC's outside of Canada now? At one time that was virtually impossible.

quote:

---

Originally posted by abnormal:
I think I'd have to go with the "very famous" school for a couple of reasons. First it is generally not a good idea to get all your degrees from the same place.

---

And why not?

Nobody's ever been able to answer this mysterious subject of why your "cred" somehow jumps magically just because of the name of the institution on your degree, and I've talked to several professors, who don't seem to have been able to explain it either.

[ 19 March 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]

quote:

---

By the way, one question - can you take NSERC's outside of Canada now? At one time that was virtually impossible.

---

You can definitely hold SSHRC grants at universities abroad, provided you're a Canadian citizen, natch.

quote:

---

Nobody's ever been able to answer this mysterious subject of why your "cred" somehow jumps magically just because of the name of the institution on your degree, and I've talked to several professors, who don't seem to have been able to explain it either.

---

I've never had a good answer either except that when it comes time to look for that first job (especially if you want to stay in academia) I think people do have a subconscious bias in favour of the individual that has more than one school on his resume. I know I've sat in hiring committee meetings screening resumes and the point has been raised about various applicants.

quote:

---

... of short-listed applicants from big U.S. schools and more modest Canadian universities.

---

The problem is getting short-listed in the first place. When you're faced with two hundred CV's and one postion you find yourself looking for reasons (excuses really) to eliminate applicants.

A lot of candidates get dropped at this stage. If you're a heavy hitter in your field the school you went to is less of an issue but if you're just starting out ...

He probably wouldn't be my supervisor there. He claims it is rare for him to tell a prospective student that they'd be better off elsewhere. But it's his personal feeling that I wouldn't fit in optimally there, and that out of all schools (I think probably including Famous Canadian University) LFAU is the best place for me.

I dunno what to think about this. My current supervisor and everyone else I have asked thinks that FAU would be the best place. (My current supervisor knows that FAU's godfather has told me this.) Also other people at FAU were enthusiastic about me--I wonder if that's changed.

[ 05 April 2004: Message edited by: Mandos ]

One thing to think about though: money. If FAU is the only one that can offer you a solid financial package, then it's hard to look elsewhere. If the Mighty Famous Bigshot (the phrase we used when I was a grad student) can actually pull enough strings at LFAU to get them to make a similar offer, then that may be enough to make the switch.

I'd really prefer to stay in Canada, and if Mighty Famous Bigshot can get me into FCU, it would be happy-making. But then...there remains the question of whether or not FCU is also financially viable, or whether FCU's people would also want me to change research direction or would be turned off by my current directions. I want an offer from FCU, at least, so I have the option between it and LFAU.

Mighty Famous Bigshot reveals some of his motives: he is no longer planning to take any more students. Others at FAU have precarious funding. The one I'm most interested in working with only has project proposals, but no guaranteed funding yet. If I go there, I might have to work with people farther and less interested in what I'm interested. They would take me, but would it require research flexibility on my part, and I run the risk of working with people who are rather far from my current research interests if things don't work out.

On the other hand, it might be healthy to start afresh. All this worrying makes it attractive.

LFAU is highly enthusiastic about me. They are offering less money than FAU, but not as much less as I originally thought. Their research is closer than mine.

FCU conked out for good. This is really disappointing.

However, Perhaps Somewhat Famous Québec University has put in a last-minute bid for me. It is closer to my interests than FAU, but much farther than LFAU. However, it is a short programme--3 years, as opposed to 5 or 6, since they recognize my Master's degree (US programme give no concessions to previous Master's degrees). They are offering me less money, but Québec is cheap to live in compared to FAU and LFAU's cities.

I don't really know the people at PSFQU very well, as I haven't visited them. The thought of being done in 3 rather than 6 years is highly attractive to me, because it means my years as a Master's student would not have gone to waste. I would become better fluent in French probably in the process, though they'd let me work in English (my field is technical and therefore mostly done in English). They are in Canada, not nearly as far from Ottawa as LFAU. But they are less prestigious, and I would have to find postdocs afterwards, most likely. Still, postdocs are better than being a total student.

However, if you're working mostly in English, chances are you're not going to improve your French that much anyhow - especially if the university is in Montreal. I found when I visited Montreal that as soon as people heard my English accent, they kindly and immediately switched to English for my benefit instead of letting me struggle along in French. Of course, had my French not been so incredibly, terribly pathetic, they might not have done so, and you said you would like to become "more fluent" which suggests to me that you're already functional in the language.

I'm in a Master's programme that I didn't really need to do, now that I'm going to the US. On the other hand, LFAU wouldn't be so overjoyed at my acceptance of their offer if it weren't that my Master's research topic incidentally matches up with their work very well. I'll be working with LFAU's own Mighty Famous Bigshot (not nearly as old or as famous as FAU's MFB). Anyway, their joy at getting me makes me feel like I made the right decision, so hopefully I'll get used to this...transitional...feeling over the next few months.

I'm 24 now, and I'll likely be 30 by the time I'm done, if I take the usual amount of time people do to finish their programme. From this end, it feels like a long time, and that I'll be rather older by the time I'm done, but maybe when I'm finished the programme I won't feel that way. But I guess it's a beau risque to pick something where I would do fundamental, basic research, a risk that would be harder to take if I were even older. PSFQU would have been a lot more superficial work.