Admissions PSA -- Contact PI's before applying to graduate school in the US

[QuarkyMeson]

Given the current funding situation, you should contact potential departments or research groups before you apply and pay any application fees. Many programs are not taking new graduate students at all this cycle because of funding uncertainty, unless a specific advisor can show they already have money to support you for five years. This is what I’ve heard directly from 20–30 programs.


Do not waste money applying blindly.

 

[Choppy]

It's always been a good strategy to do some deep research into the programs you're applying to and the people you're interested in working with.

Even if funding is technically available, there are lots of reasons why an otherwise highly competitive candidate might get a no. A PI might be heading off on sabbatical or retiring. A PI might already have a saturated research group and be more concerned with graduating existing students. The research group could be pursing other avenues. They might have an opening, but be happy with a current student who has been very productive with a summer project or senior thesis work. Etc.

There is also a strong case for making sure (to the extent that anyone can) that the person you're likely to end up working with is a good match for you in terms of personality, mentoring style, etc.

 

[QuarkyMeson]

That's definitely fair and it's probably a good practice anyway. I just wanted to warn others that we live in strange times at the moment.

From the departments I've spoken to, several that normally admit around 10 first-year PhD students are admitting 0 this cycle. This doesn't seem to be fully explained by current funding levels. Instead, university leadership is worried that funding may decline over the next few years, and they're cutting admissions now to limit future financial commitments. This is on the back of last years lower than normal offer rates and will probably continue until funding uncertainties go away.

I've been explicitly told by some university admin that while they're technically accepting applications they don't plan to extend any offers to anyone.

So, it would behoove the graduate candidate to do their research and not throw money at an app that has a zero percent probability of being looked at.

 

[gwnorth]

I've been explicitly told by some university admin that while they're technically accepting applications they don't plan to extend any offers to anyone.

That seems rather unethical on the part of the universities to me.

 

[CrysPhys]

That's definitely fair and it's probably a good practice anyway. I just wanted to warn others that we live in strange times at the moment.

From the departments I've spoken to, several that normally admit around 10 first-year PhD students are admitting 0 this cycle. This doesn't seem to be fully explained by current funding levels. Instead, university leadership is worried that funding may decline over the next few years, and they're cutting admissions now to limit future financial commitments. This is on the back of last years lower than normal offer rates and will probably continue until funding uncertainties go away.

I've been explicitly told by some university admin that while they're technically accepting applications they don't plan to extend any offers to anyone.

So, it would behoove the graduate candidate to do their research and not throw money at an app that has a zero percent probability of being looked at.

This is important (and sad) to hear. You brought up a specific instance of a small physics dept that normally admits only around 10 PhD students. Did you also reach out to large physics depts that normally admit around 100 PhD students? These physics depts are typically part of universities that have large numbers of undergrad science and engineering students who are required to take physics classes; hence, the physics depts have need of many first year PhD students to serve as TAs (teaching assistants). Typically these PhD students will not enter a research group until sometime in their second year or so, after they have passed their quals. A good chunk will also not pass their quals after the maximum number of tries and will leave the program. I'd be interested in how these physics depts are balancing their need for TAs vs their uncertainty in future research funding.

 

[QuarkyMeson]

This is important (and sad) to hear. You brought up a specific instance of a small physics dept that normally admits only around 10 PhD students. Did you also reach out to large physics depts that normally admit around 100 PhD students? These physics depts are typically part of universities that have large numbers of undergrad science and engineering students who are required to take physics classes; hence, the physics depts have need of many first year PhD students to serve as TAs (teaching assistants). Typically these PhD students will not enter a research group until sometime in their second year or so, after they have passed their quals. A good chunk will also not pass their quals after the maximum number of tries and will leave the program. I'd be interested in how these physics depts are balancing their need for TAs vs their uncertainty in future research funding.

The largest department I reached out to was MIT, and I haven’t heard back yet, which isn’t surprising. At this point in the year, professors are likely flooded with emails. Schools like the Ivies can afford to be selective and fill their programs without needing to respond to every inquiry or concern about what the federal government is doing I'd imagine.

Or I'm just not worth their time. Either/or.

The smaller state R1's and R2's have been much more responsive. I have managed to find someone who agreed to fund me from their RIF and start me off as a RA, so it's not hopeless. My SoP is one line and just says "X has agreed to fund me from their RIF."

Anyway, if other grad seekers are around maybe they can add in their experience to this thread.

 

[Muu9]

I've been explicitly told by some university admin that while they're technically accepting applications they don't plan to extend any offers to anyone.

If that's the case, I doubt they'd admit it publicly to anyone who asks, so I don't see the benefit of asking. It also seems like a pretty unnecessary question (why would they be accepting applicants if they don't intend to admit anyone) and thus might reflect poorly on the applicant asking such a question to a place where the official answer is "of course, why else would we be accepting applicants?".

 

[CrysPhys]

That seems rather unethical on the part of the universities to me.

It is unethical in the sense that applicants need to pay an application fee.

If that's the case, I doubt they'd admit it publicly to anyone who asks, so I don't see the benefit of asking. It also seems like a pretty unnecessary question (why would they be accepting applicants if they don't intend to admit anyone) and thus might reflect poorly on the applicant asking such a question to a place where the official answer is "of course, why else would we be accepting applicants?".

It would be odd for a dept to admit this publicly. So a discreet inquiry would be needed.

I have to say though that I'm aware that companies have behaved similarly in their recruiting practices. That is, even if Company X does not have current openings (and in fact may be laying off), they still might send recruiters to universities and job fairs and take applications. Of course, there is no application fee in this instance. Rationales are (1) budget might become available, (2) if an outstanding candidate pops up, they might make special arrangements, and (3) they want to maintain a pipeline to major research groups for hires in future years (the hope is that no one will find out about their current dire straits and that their situation will improve in the next year or two).

 

[Muu9]

It is unethical in the sense that applicants need to pay an application fee.



It would be odd for a dept to admit this publicly. So a discreet inquiry would be needed.

I have to say though that I'm aware that companies have behaved similarly in their recruiting practices. That is, even if Company X does not have current openings (and in fact may be laying off), they still might send recruiters to universities and job fairs and take applications. Of course, there is no application fee in this instance. Rationales are (1) budget might become available, (2) if an outstanding candidate pops up, they might make special arrangements, and (3) they want to maintain a pipeline to major research groups for hires in future years (the hope is that no one will find out about their current dire straits and that their situation will improve in the next year or two).

I don't see how a prospective applicant could perform a discreet inquiry - I would consider them to be part of the public if I was an admin. I certainly would not be admitting to the above practice if indeed it was taking place in either a phone call to a prospective applicant or an email.

The other big benefit to ghost jobs is to prevent employees from believing the company is in bad shape and jumping ship as well as making investors think things are going better than they actually are.

 

[QuarkyMeson]

If that's the case, I doubt they'd admit it publicly to anyone who asks, so I don't see the benefit of asking. It also seems like a pretty unnecessary question (why would they be accepting applicants if they don't intend to admit anyone) and thus might reflect poorly on the applicant asking such a question to a place where the official answer is "of course, why else would we be accepting applicants?".

https://www.statnews.com/2025/02/19...dent-postdoc-acceptances-paused-nih-research/

This is from last year:

At the University of Southern California, faculty in some departments were told last week to pause admissions, and not formalize offers to students — even those who had visited and been given verbal acceptances. “The awkward part is that we already told these applicants that they were provisionally accepted and invited them to an in-person recruitment day; many have already purchased flight + hotel reservations,” one professor said in a faculty discussion list-serve observed by STAT.

I think you're giving university admins more credit in subterfuge than they deserve. These students were ultimately admitted.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-03417-6

This is from this year. I mean you don't need to take my word for it. If you're applying to graduate school this cycle you should reach out yourself.

 

[sbrothy]

That seems rather unethical on the part of the universities to me.

This is a question of political/economical survival, isn't it? And in this day and age, as there are no guarantees anywhere, I'm sure I don't have to state the very obvious "system broken" argument...

 

[Choppy]

If that's the case, I doubt they'd admit it publicly to anyone who asks, so I don't see the benefit of asking. It also seems like a pretty unnecessary question (why would they be accepting applicants if they don't intend to admit anyone) and thus might reflect poorly on the applicant asking such a question to a place where the official answer is "of course, why else would we be accepting applicants?".

For what it's worth, I think there are a lot of specific details that could come into play. These would include having to make a decision to run the application process before budgets are finalized, that departments might still be willing to accept students that come with major external scholarships, openings for "internal" candidates such as a graduating MSc applicant who is applying to a PhD in the same program, etc.

Good questions ask when visiting a potential school include:

• I'm interested in sub-field X. Do you know how many students your X group is looking to take on in the next cycle? Which supervisors are actively seeking students?
• How are graduate students funded? What level of support is guaranteed, for how long, and under what conditions?
  (It's important to understand required TA time, and whether financial support will vary over the spring/summer semesters where there aren't as many TAs needed.)
• You can also ask about specific projects within a group. What are students actively working on and what are they expected to work on over the next year or two? If they have no immediate plans for projects in an area that you're interested, that might be a sign that it's not a good program to apply to.

 

[CrysPhys]

I don't see how a prospective applicant could perform a discreet inquiry - I would consider them to be part of the public if I was an admin. I certainly would not be admitting to the above practice if indeed it was taking place in either a phone call to a prospective applicant or an email.

A "discreet inquiry" would entail a personal connection. Student A at University A is considering applying to University B. Student A knows Professor A at University A. Professor A calls up his old buddy Professor B at University B: "Hey, how's life at University B these days? ..."

 

[jtbell]

Did you also reach out to large physics depts that normally admit around 100 PhD students? These physics depts are typically part of universities that have large numbers of undergrad science and engineering students who are required to take physics classes; hence, the physics depts have need of many first year PhD students to serve as TAs (teaching assistants). Typically these PhD students will not enter a research group until sometime in their second year or so, after they have passed their quals.

I had that thought, too, because I did my PhD at such a department (U of Michigan), although I don't remember having that many fellow incoming grad students. Maybe 30 or so, based on my vague memory of the number of students in my first-year graduate classes. Many of the big state universities in the midwest and southeast are probably like that: Ohio State, U of Illinois, U of Texas, etc.

(and this was 50 years ago)

 

[gwnorth]

Did you also reach out to large physics depts that normally admit around 100 PhD students?

While there may be Physics programs with that many total graduate students enrolled, I do not believe there is any program that admits 100 grad students as part of a single entry cohort. The largest programs might admit around 40 students (which in some departments may include master's students).

https://aip.brightspotcdn.com/0e/41/624e71434acb86addf99ba182cfc/phyroster-24.pdf

 

[CrysPhys]

While there may be Physics programs with that many total graduate students enrolled, I do not believe there is any program that admits 100 grad students as part of a single entry cohort. The largest programs might admit around 40 students (which in some departments may include master's students).

https://aip.brightspotcdn.com/0e/41/624e71434acb86addf99ba182cfc/phyroster-24.pdf

[ETA: I read this wrong.] The report you cited states that enrollments have been declining in recent years. Still, under the category of first year graduate students for 2024, there are some universities with sizable enrollments, much greater than 40. The top four I found were:

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC): 86
University of Wisconsin at Madison: 83
University of Colorado at Boulder: 78
Brown: 60 (I was surprised that Brown came in this high).

But you're right, an entering class size of 100 is outdated. I'm of the same vintage as @jtbell. I was a physics grad student at UIUC around 50 yrs ago. Then the typical entering class was ~100 (all PhD program; no terminal master's program), out of which ~50 passed the qual and continued on to research (this attrition rate was intentional at the time). My understanding is that the acceptance criteria and qual policy are different now, and the attrition rate is much smaller; but I haven't followed the developments there.

 

[jtbell]

I might well have underestimated U of Michigan's 1975 incoming class. That lecture room was fairly large after all, not auditorium sized, but bigger than the ones than I've taught in since I left there.

The department recently hit me up for another donation, so I'll send one in. In the past, I've gotten a thank-you e-mail from the chair, inviting me to stop by if I'm in town. The next time I get one of those, I'll respond and ask if he can have someone in the office look up the stats for my incoming class.

 

[QuarkyMeson]

I might well have underestimated U of Michigan's 1975 incoming class. That lecture room was fairly large after all, not auditorium sized, but bigger than the ones than I've taught in since I left there.

The department recently hit me up for another donation, so I'll send one in. In the past, I've gotten a thank-you e-mail from the chair, inviting me to stop by if I'm in town. The next time I get one of those, I'll respond and ask if he can have someone in the office look up the stats for my incoming class.

Maybe you can see if there are plans to limit the 2026 class of first year physics graduate students. :)

https://www.aps.org/apsnews/2025/04/physics-departments-shrink-graduate-programs

Here is another data point, this paints a better picture than I was getting this year, but this was published back in April.

 

[Muu9]

[ETA: I read this wrong.] The report you cited states that enrollments have been declining in recent years. Still, under the category of first year graduate students for 2024, there are some universities with sizable enrollments, much greater than 40. The top four I found were:

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC): 86
University of Wisconsin at Madison: 83
University of Colorado at Boulder: 78
Brown: 60 (I was surprised that Brown came in this high).

But you're right, an entering class size of 100 is outdated. I'm of the same vintage as @jtbell. I was a physics grad student at UIUC around 50 yrs ago. Then the typical entering class was ~100 (all PhD program; no terminal master's program), out of which ~50 passed the qual and continued on to research (this attrition rate was intentional at the time). My understanding is that the acceptance criteria and qual policy are different now, and the attrition rate is much smaller; but I haven't followed the developments there.

Maybe Brown includes 5th year BS/MS students as first year grad students.

 

[gwnorth]

From the article

Others reported that their departments have limited their funding offers to only cover the first year of study or have removed language that commits to providing funding.

IMO it's unethical to be admitting graduate students if you can't guarantee funding for the full amount of time required to get the degree. I get that these are challenging times but that doesn't mean that you throw out ethical standards. What's a student supposed to do if say after 3 years investment into getting a PhD their funding gets cut? Are they just supposed to pack it in? Start all over again in another program if they're even able to get one?

Maybe academia in the US needs to revisit their graduate education model. Having to commit 6-7 years to getting a single degree leaves students highly exposed to the vagaries of fortune and the politics of academia. Perhaps they should consider adopting the academic model of other countries that split out the master's and PhD into separate degrees.