Programs Should I go to a big name school for my PhD?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Topher925
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Phd School
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the decision of whether to pursue a PhD at a higher-ranked engineering school or remain at a smaller institution that offers strong industrial ties and support. The individual expresses concerns about being treated as just a number at larger schools and doubts the practical skills of graduates from top programs. However, advice suggests that the reputation of the PhD advisor is more critical than the school's ranking, emphasizing the importance of finding someone with industry connections and a successful track record. There is also a debate about the nature of a PhD as an academic degree versus its applicability in industry roles. Ultimately, the decision hinges on balancing the desire for practical education with the potential benefits of a degree from a prestigious institution.
Topher925
Messages
1,562
Reaction score
7
I got my BSME from a small not well known school(Oakland University) and am currently getting my MSME there as well. When applying for grad schools I looked at some of the bigger name and higher ranked engineering schools but got frustrated very quickly by being treated as just a number and being denied support so I stuck with OU. I'm also not a big fan of the "academic only" kind of learning that top schools have.

I have a good amount of industrial experience and worked with many other graduates from a lot of the top schools in the NE and I was never impressed by their education. They could solve any problem in a textbook but when it came to the real thing they just couldn't keep up very well.

So I'm thinking about maybe trying to get into a larger and better rated school for engineering to get my PhD but I feel that if I do I will be taking a hit in my education. Although a degree from a higher rated school might open many more doors for me. I'm looking to go into research and development in the industry more specifically alternative energy.

So what should I do? Stay where I am at in a school that is surrounded by industrial research and development but to small to be rated, or go for the best school that I can get into?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's more important to pick the right Ph.D. thesis advisor than to pick the right school. Figure out who's doing research that you're interested in, and find out how their students have fared. Once you've chosen the two or three researchers you'd like to work with, contact them and apply to whatever schools they're at. Your Ph.D. advisor is your mentor; the right one can help ensure that you pursue a fruitful research direction and provide contacts when you graduate, and his/her reputation will also reflect on you.
 
I've helped hire engineers in industry and am now completing a PhD in materials science, and I would encourage you to apply to the higher ranked school, assuming there are a few people there doing research you're interested in.

I think your post contains a few misconceptions. First, I don't think you'll be "treated like a number" at a better school, especially in grad school. In fact, I think you'll be valued more by your department and your peers. You'll also likely be pushed to achieve more. Second, your chances of support (i.e., through funded research projects) seem better at a higher ranked school that wins larger grants. Third, your employment chances are better.

It sounds like you're worried about being surrounded by a bunch of egghead academics who've never experienced the real world. To avoid this, make sure you choose an advisor and group with strong ties to industry and a track record of enabling real-world products and processes.
 
Topher925 said:
I'm also not a big fan of the "academic only" kind of learning that top schools have.

Wait, what? Unless something has changed, a Ph.D. is an academic degree. If you don't want academic training, stay in industry. That said, when I was an undergrad almost all the engineering professors had strong industrial ties, and while many of them did very "academic" research, I don't think that they found themselves struggling with "the real thing."

Anyway, as ksvanhorn said, more important than the reputation of the school is the reputation of your advisor, however well ranked schools tend to attract more visible advisors. You only get your Ph.D. once, so you might as well do it at the best place that will accept you.
 
Thanks for the advice.

Mapes said:
It sounds like you're worried about being surrounded by a bunch of egghead academics who've never experienced the real world. To avoid this, make sure you choose an advisor and group with strong ties to industry and a track record of enabling real-world products and processes.

Yes, this is what I am afraid of. I don't like doing work that doesn't serve a purpose or application to real world problems.

My current school does offer research I am interested in and is well tied to industry. And when I was applying for my masters it was the only school that would directly offer me any kind of support without jumping through a lot of hoops. All professors (except the ones at my school) I contacted about research opportunities gave me the typical "come back after you have passed the quals" speech. Should I assume this would be different for directly going into the PhD program?

Unless something has changed, a Ph.D. is an academic degree. If you don't want academic training, stay in industry.

I never really thought a degree could be just an "academic" degree. After all, not all PhD graduates go into academics. I thought about just getting a masters but I don't believe it will allow the opportunities to perform the type of work that I want.

As for reputable advisers, well I am not really sure about who is reputable or not. The only thing I really have to base that on is the number of publications and the success of their work. However, how that is recognized in the field of their research, I don't really know.
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
968
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top