What should a PI look for in a physical sciences PhD candidate when hiring?

  • Context: Admissions 
  • Thread starter Thread starter feynman1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Phd Physical Pi
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the qualities that a Principal Investigator (PI) should consider when hiring a PhD candidate in the physical sciences. It explores various attributes that may contribute to a candidate's potential success in graduate studies and research environments.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that diligence, knowledge about the field, cleverness, and a willingness to follow the PI are important qualities to look for in candidates.
  • One participant emphasizes the need for academic capability, indicating that candidates should demonstrate the potential to pass graduate courses and exams, though specific thresholds may vary by supervisor.
  • Another viewpoint highlights the importance of a candidate's ability to adapt to the PI's mentorship style, noting that some require a rigid structure while others thrive with flexibility.
  • Open and honest communication is mentioned as a crucial factor for both the supervisor and the candidate.
  • A genuine interest in the research beyond superficial engagement is considered desirable, with some participants advocating for candidates who actively seek to learn more about the field.
  • One participant argues that interest and the ability to learn new things may outweigh subject-specific knowledge, particularly in contexts where research begins immediately, such as in some European PhD programs.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions on the qualities that are most important, indicating that there is no consensus on a definitive list of attributes. Different supervisors may prioritize different qualities based on their individual experiences and expectations.

Contextual Notes

There are varying interpretations of what constitutes "academic capability," and the discussion does not resolve how to measure or define this concept. Additionally, the importance of mentorship style and communication may depend on specific contexts and individual preferences.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals involved in hiring or mentoring PhD candidates in the physical sciences, as well as prospective PhD candidates seeking to understand expectations from PIs.

feynman1
Messages
435
Reaction score
29
What should a PI look for in a physical sciences PhD candidate when hiring? Among diligence, knowledge about the field and cleverness, willingness to follow their boss, complementary skillsets if they are from another discipline, what's your favorite? What else?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I suspect you actually mean to ask what qualities supervisors typically look for in graduate students. This varies from supervisor to supervisor, but in my experience...
  • The student needs to be academically capable. By that I means that all signs suggest the student is going to be able to pass graduate courses, a comprehensive exam, candidacy, etc. Specific thresholds here are variable, however most supervisors know they aren't doing anyone any favours by taking on a student who's very likely to struggle.
  • Ideally you want a student who's going to learn well from your particular style of mentorship. Some students (and supervisors) need a rigid structure to be successful. Others need flexibility.
  • Open and honest communication tends to be a big one on both ends.
  • As a supervisor you also want a student with a genuine interest in the research. Ideally this goes beyond "I looked up your webpage and your work sounds cool" or "I just want to get in somewhere and you're accepting students." You want a student who will read up on the field beyond just what is assigned or what's been taught in class.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: feynman1
thanks a lot. any other opinions?
 
feynman1 said:
PI
Principal Investigator, typically a professor, for people unfamiliar with abbreviations in the US.

In my experience interest and general capability to learn new things are more important than subject-specific knowledge, especially for e.g. a PhD in Europe that directly starts with research. Courses won't cover your specific research topic in detail anyway, and while more background knowledge is very useful it's something you can acquire over time.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: feynman1

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K