Choosing Undergrad Aiming for a PhD.

[Gil]

Hey Hivers, how much does your UGrad schooling matter if you want to go to top-tier selective school for a PhD from a homeschooled background (I don't' think it matters much, but I'd rather check now).

We have a good thing going with DE and Pal wants to continue locally for his full Bachelors (though he's eyeing a BS/MS program) so he can continue to enjoy the same school-work-life balance while I cover his living expenses. He's got a local mentor that he enjoys working with and doesn't want to give it up, but his mentor is encouraging him to go out-of-state for his (hopefully) PhD.

Pals' on track to get his Masters shortly after his BS. He's currently taking a ton of Math and CS classes because he's indecisive on whether he's CS or Math. There's a BS/MS program for both those fields and he still has time to decide since he's technically still just DE.

I don't know jack about Graduate School and honestly I don't support going out of state for school unless it's cheaper/pays better than staying in state, but I figure it's worth exploring.

 

[lewelma]

I would suggest you talk to 8filltheheart. She doesn't always frequent the accelerated board, so you may want to repost on the high school board. 

[Malam]

Most PhDs are (should be) free or pay you. The most important aspect of a PhD application is research. This is the time to start looking at the interests of the math/CS professors, doing background reading, and start reaching out.

One pro tip is to attend colloquia/seminars in math/CS. Most research universities have these, and they're basically regular events where visiting professors come and present and discuss their research. Attending these would both broaden OP's research horizons, help him decide between math and CS, and put him "on the radar" of professors. (This was how I got 2 research opportunities my first semester at college).

If his university doesn't have much of these opportunities, he should apply for REUs. There are plenty of other fully funded programs (e.g.)

Aside from that, letters of recommendation are also important, so it's helpful to have a good relationship with 2-3 professors who can speak to his abilites beyond what the GPA communicates.

P.S. what fields of math is he interested in?

Edited September 18, 2023 by Malam

[Alice Lamb]

 

5 hours ago, Malam said:

Most PhDs are (should be) free or pay you. The most important aspect of a PhD application is research. This is the time to start looking at the interests of the math/CS professors, doing background reading, and start reaching out.

 

Just to ensure that someone other than the original poster doesn't misapply Malam's good information:

Malam's point is true for math, sciences and most STEM areas, but not necessarily for all fields.  The professional schools, such as medicine and law, are notoriously expensive.  The humanities generally do not fully cover tuition and living expenses.

Edited September 18, 2023 by Alice Lamb

[philomama]

10 hours ago, Alice Lamb said:

Malam's point is true for math, sciences and most STEM areas, but not necessarily for all fields.  The professional schools, such as medicine and law, are notoriously expensive.  The humanities generally do not fully cover tuition and living expenses.

Malam's point is true generally for PhDs in the US, provided they are not in a "professional" field (e.g. clinical psych). It is not true for MDs, JDs, MBAs, etc., and funding in other countries will vary. (E.g. in the UK funding is awarded separately from admission.) PhDs in humanities fields are typically funded. Funding will include tuition and a stipend, which will usually involve some combination of fellowship (i.e. getting paid to do research) and teaching. How much the stipends are varies enormously by school. Many pay barely enough to scrape by, living with roommates. My alma matter now pays grad students $50k a year. (Outlier!) Either way, evaluating PhDs programs is not like evaluating undergrad institutions. Anywhere worth going to will cover your expenses, and generally the deeper the school's pockets, the more comfortable the grad students. While there are schools that will admit people unfunded, no good schools do, and no student should accept such offers, unless they are independently wealthy or have an outside scholarship. (FWIW, I have a PhD in the humanities from one of the "big three" Ivies, work at a good research university in the US, previously worked in a good research university in the UK, and have parents who are professors (one in math). I've advised many undergrads heading to grad school. 🙂)

Having been homeschooled won't be an issue with PhD admissions. They're not looking at anything pre-college. So the real question is just the importance of undergrad institution. One needn't go to a top undergrad institution to get into an excellent PhD program. But if you're coming out of a place no one's ever heard of, that's never sent anyone on to a PhD, it could be more difficult, as your letters of recommendation won't be as meaningful. (Saying someone's the best student you've taught in the past 20 years means something very different if you've taught 10 students who've gone to top PhD programs in the past ten years, versus none.) But doing an REU, as Malam suggests, could be both an excellent research experience and be a source of meaningful outside letters.

Other things that might be worth knowing... In general, it's frowned upon to do one's PhD at their undergrad institution. (The idea is that you need to be exposed to a diversity of ways of thinking.) If he's wanting to go on to become an academic, the institution he attends for his PhD will likely matter a lot. Going to random local school for his PhD could definitely shoot him in the foot if he's eventually wanting to be a professor himself. (When the time comes, he can look at the placement records of the schools he's thinking about to get a sense.)

[8filltheheart]

My response pretty much echoes what you have already read.  UG institution does not matter any where near as much as UG research and completed coursework.  Recommenders can come from REU mentors as well as home university.  My ds's UG U was not a physics powerhouse by any stretch.  Yet, he was accepted to tippy top grad programs.  He did research at his home U starting freshman yr and participated REUs multiple summers.  He also took multiple grad courses as an UG.  Lots of kids from top Us were not accepted to the programs he was accepted to, so obviously his low ranked U didn't automatically eliminate him from consideration. 

[Frances]

16 hours ago, Alice Lamb said:

 

Just to ensure that someone other than the original poster doesn't misapply Malam's good information:

Malam's point is true for math, sciences and most STEM areas, but not necessarily for all fields.  The professional schools, such as medicine and law, are notoriously expensive.  The humanities generally do not fully cover tuition and living expenses.

But people don’t generally get PhDs from professional schools, they get terminal professional degrees (MD, JD, DVM, etc). It’s generally true that social science PhDs are also fully funded.

[Frances]

5 hours ago, philomama said:

Malam's point is true generally for PhDs in the US, provided they are not in a "professional" field (e.g. clinical psych). It is not true for MDs, JDs, MBAs, etc., and funding in other countries will vary. (E.g. in the UK funding is awarded separately from admission.) PhDs in humanities fields are typically funded. Funding will include tuition and a stipend, which will usually involve some combination of fellowship (i.e. getting paid to do research) and teaching. How much the stipends are varies enormously by school. Many pay barely enough to scrape by, living with roommates. My alma matter now pays grad students $50k a year. (Outlier!) Either way, evaluating PhDs programs is not like evaluating undergrad institutions. Anywhere worth going to will cover your expenses, and generally the deeper the school's pockets, the more comfortable the grad students. While there are schools that will admit people unfunded, no good schools do, and no student should accept such offers, unless they are independently wealthy or have an outside scholarship. (FWIW, I have a PhD in the humanities from one of the "big three" Ivies, work at a good research university in the US, previously worked in a good research university in the UK, and have parents who are professors (one in math). I've advised many undergrads heading to grad school. 🙂)

Having been homeschooled won't be an issue with PhD admissions. They're not looking at anything pre-college. So the real question is just the importance of undergrad institution. One needn't go to a top undergrad institution to get into an excellent PhD program. But if you're coming out of a place no one's ever heard of, that's never sent anyone on to a PhD, it could be more difficult, as your letters of recommendation won't be as meaningful. (Saying someone's the best student you've taught in the past 20 years means something very different if you've taught 10 students who've gone to top PhD programs in the past ten years, versus none.) But doing an REU, as Malam suggests, could be both an excellent research experience and be a source of meaningful outside letters.

Other things that might be worth knowing... In general, it's frowned upon to do one's PhD at their undergrad institution. (The idea is that you need to be exposed to a diversity of ways of thinking.) If he's wanting to go on to become an academic, the institution he attends for his PhD will likely matter a lot. Going to random local school for his PhD could definitely shoot him in the foot if he's eventually wanting to be a professor himself. (When the time comes, he can look at the placement records of the schools he's thinking about to get a sense.)

I went to grad school with those in a clinical psych PhD program and had several classmates from undergrad get PhDs in clinical psychology, they were all fully funded. Admission was extremely competitive, even for programs that were not top ranked, but the funding was complete tuition paid plus teaching or research stipend.  I think many schools now add health insurance as a benefit. Perhaps you are thinking of PyschD degrees?

Edited September 19, 2023 by Frances

[regentrude]

I can speak to physics and assume math is similar. The UG institution doesn't matter much. The biggest factor will be that he builds a strong record of undergraduate research, possibly with publications but at least some conference presentations. and has good letters of recommendation. Taking some graduate classes in UG helps.

My ds did his UG at a good school but which didn't have a particularly strong physics program and no grad program in physics. He started research early and worked with several profs, and he took grad classes asynchronously online from a different uni ( since his didn't offer any). He got into a top notch grad program.

Edited September 19, 2023 by regentrude

[philomama]

7 hours ago, Frances said:

I went to grad school with those in a clinical psych PhD program and had several classmates from undergrad get PhDs in clinical psychology, they were all fully funded. Admission was extremely competitive, even for programs that were not top ranked, but the funding was complete tuition paid plus teaching or research stipend.  I think many schools now add health insurance as a benefit. Perhaps you are thinking of PyschD degrees?

Good to know! Thanks! (This wasn't the case when my mother was in grad school, or at the PhD program she taught at, and she attributed this to the fact that it was more of a "professional" discipline. Not sure if that has to do with how competitive the schools were? Or with times changing? Either way, good to have an expert in the area to correct! )

[EKS]

As a person who is getting a second bachelor's degree in math at a regional state university, my experience is that the education I'm getting is not even remotely what it would be at MIT or even the state's flagship.  You wouldn't necessarily know it by looking at the course descriptions or textbook lists.  It's more in how the classes are structured--grade inflation is rampant.  Way, way too easy to get an A.  And most, perhaps all, of the classes are way too easy period.

So my point is that I would think that someone like myself, who has done about as well as it is possible to do in my program, going from my institution to a tippy top graduate program would have a very hard time due to lack of preparation.

[8filltheheart]

As a counterpoint, my ds thought his physics classes at his state U were far superior  then UG classes where he was a TA. He felt at his undergrad University that the professors really cared about their students and would offer them support and mentorship. He said where he was a ta that professors had nothing to do with the undergrads.

[EKS]

1 hour ago, 8filltheheart said:

As a counterpoint, my ds thought his physics classes at his state U were far superior  then UG classes where he was a TA. He felt at his undergrad University that the professors really cared about their students and would offer them support and mentorship. He said where he was a ta that professors had nothing to do with the undergrads.

The point is that you can't just assume that any undergraduate mathematics program is going to be of a certain quality.   And you can't necessarily use course descriptions, syllabuses, or textbook lists to help you figure out which programs are rigorous.

[kirstenhill]

2 hours ago, EKS said:

The point is that you can't just assume that any undergraduate mathematics program is going to be of a certain quality.   And you can't necessarily use course descriptions, syllabuses, or textbook lists to help you figure out which programs are rigorous.

Tangent to the original topic, but if you can't use those items you listed to find out the rigor of an undergrad math program, what do you think you can use to learn something about the rigor as a prospective student? (Asking for the benefit of my DS16 who is planning to major in math and wants a rigorous program). 

[daijobu]

I've also heard anedotally that some PhD programs place larger requirements on their PhD students than others.  I was chatting with a guy whose wife was earning a PhD and she chose her institution over some Ivy because the Ivy expected more hours to be spent as a TA, handling office hours, grading exams, etc.  At her generally less prestigious institution, she can spend more time on her research, and graduate earlier with more papers.

I'm curious if this is generally true, or an outlier?    

[lewelma]

My ds did do an UG at a top university, but that did not assure him entrance to PhD programs in physics. Based on our experience, research is key. He applied to 9 of the top 10 grad programs in physics. 

He did 2.5 years of research in particle physics with CERN, applied to 4 programs, and got into 3.

He did one summer (3 months) of condensed matter theory research with a very well respected researcher, applied to 5 condensed matter theory programs, and got into NONE.

The applications were the same (including rec letters) with the exception of his 2-page essay talking about what field he wanted to study and how he was prepared to do well in it. Basically, he did not have enough experience in condensed matter theory for them to be assured he could do this kind of research, so he didn't get in anywhere.  Theory programs are notoriously difficult to get into in physics; however, this was very eye opening.

Now, once you are in, you can change fields if you can get a professor. So he got into Cornell with a particle physics application and is now doing research condensed matter theory.  So all ended well, but I agree with all the above posters. Doing research with outstanding professors who have a reputation in their field is critical.

Also, there was a section on most applications for graduate school classes you had taken. It was generally known that you should have an As in at least 1 grad class before you apply - meaning you have to take one in your junior year.  Then you need to be taking more in the first semester senior year because you do send them the grades for that term before decisions are made. Top school want to make sure you can handle grad level work before taking you on. DS got a B in graduate-level condensed matter theory class in his first semester senior year, so that could also have killed his chances at getting into a condensed matter theory program. Possibly unfair given it was in the middle of covid and living on campus was more than a bit difficult, but that's life.

Just our experience from 2 years ago. 

 

Edited September 19, 2023 by lewelma

[EKS]

9 minutes ago, kirstenhill said:

Tangent to the original topic, but if you can't use those items you listed to find out the rigor of an undergrad math program, what do you think you can use to learn something about the rigor as a prospective student?

I honestly don't know how you can without taking a course (and likely more than one).

You could try talking to the students (or better yet, former students who have had the chance to see how well prepared they are), but you'd have to hit on the right ones to get a good picture of things.  What I mean by this is they would need both to know that something is amiss and not be afraid or ashamed to admit it.

[lewelma]

One data point, Cornell gives ds $42,000 per 12 months (he just got an 8% raise because of inflation). That is for TAing for 1 class each term and summer research. The TA job cannot take him more than 15 hours per week under contract. This year he is on a fellowship, so no TAing.

[lewelma]

50 minutes ago, kirstenhill said:

Tangent to the original topic, but if you can't use those items you listed to find out the rigor of an undergrad math program, what do you think you can use to learn something about the rigor as a prospective student? (Asking for the benefit of my DS16 who is planning to major in math and wants a rigorous program). 

DS took 2 second-year math classes at our local 4 year university. At the age of 15, he earned 100% on both final exams where the mean and median were 60%. This experience led him to find a more rigorous program. We researched the programs in NZ by talking to professors, and the ones we talked to said that their classes were of equal difficulty to the ones ds had taken at our local university. So NZ was out. When we went to the US and Canada to consider programs, we did face-to-face chats with professors and students on campus and asked very pointed questions. We came to understand that you can't have difficult classes unless you have top students. So how do the programs attract and support top students?

1- Because my ds was in the competitions, we asked about that. We found out that CMU has an excellent program because Po Shen Lo (the USA IMO team leader) is a professor there and woos students from the IMO camp to come to CMU by offering to be a very hands-on mentor and by running a very-strong Putnam club. We found out that Waterloo in Canada gave a full ride scholarship to any student from any country who medalled in the IMO.

2- We also found that some schools use an honors program, collecting the top students for more difficult classes, but still running easier classes for the rest of the kids. CMU did this.

3- We asked about research opportunities for UG and found that U of M was very good at mentoring kids into research, which is super important in becoming a mathematician and having a rigorous education. You can have easier classes, but if your focus is on research with a professor who is a good mentor, then you can be as rigorous as you want.

4- We also talked to administrators to find out if you had to actually take all prereqs or if you could place out / self-place into higher level classes. That way you could take harder classes from freshman year and skip the easy ones. Places like Virginia Tech did not allow this, so that school was out for my ds.

Basically, you just need to get your nose into it and figure out *how* universities can offer difficult classes without all the kids failing, and figure out how accommodating they are for kids that are stronger than the average at the school. To give a rigorous education to a top student, the program needs to attract AND support top students. 

Edited September 19, 2023 by lewelma

[Dmmetler]

FWIW, I know of a homeschooled-early college at a local, not super selective state -Harvard Physics PhD student, so it definitely can be done, although it depends on your field. She took full advantage of research opportunities and had a pretty wide ranging background (did UG over 6 years and got a triple BS, mostly due to the fact that she didn't want to leave home yet).

 

L is currently starting the PhD program search (looking at doctorates in Neurobiology) and is looking heavily at who is doing projects and potentially has funding in areas of interest vs the other way around, as well as looking for funded projects to do during the summer or remotely as well as the research projects offered at school (L's at a LAC where everyone does a capstone, and for STEM majors, that means research). We'll see how well that works in a couple of years. 

 

 

 

 

[EKS]

1 hour ago, lewelma said:

2- We also found that some schools use an honors program, collecting the top students for more difficult classes, but still running easier classes for the rest of the kids. CMU did this.

My university has an honors program, but it doesn't use it to funnel top students into special sections.  Instead, it uses an embedded honors model, where students take the same class as everyone else, but then do an extra project to get an honors designation on their transcript.  The honors version of a course shows as being a different section in the course scheduling page, but it isn't.  So just knowing that a school has an honors program or honors courses isn't enough to go on.  You need to understand how they work.

1 hour ago, lewelma said:

To give a rigorous education to a top student, the program needs to attract AND support top students. 

And this is the issue.  A program won't attract and support top students if it doesn't already have and support top students.  And the programs that have and support top students are generally the top programs--not programs found at second or third string state schools.

[lewelma]

1 hour ago, EKS said:

My university has an honors program, but it doesn't use it to funnel top students into special sections.  Instead, it uses an embedded honors model, where students take the same class as everyone else, but then do an extra project to get an honors designation on their transcript.  The honors version of a course shows as being a different section in the course scheduling page, but it isn't.  So just knowing that a school has an honors program or honors courses isn't enough to go on.  You need to understand how they work.

Completely agree. You need to do your homework and not just see a metric and assume it is what you want.  I brought it up because CMU definitely funnelled its top 20 students into a special set of classes. It was not an 'honors' program, but was highly effective because the professor took those same students and had a separate program for the Putnam. Basically, you can't use metrics to find what you want. You have to dig deeper and talk to people. 

I also think this is true for hunting down a PhD program - you can't rely on metrics. I can only speak for what ds did when hunting down places to apply.  A 'top' physics program does not mean that there is anyone doing research in your area of interest.  You need to look closely at the program. For example UIUC is considered the top condensed matter theory program, and they have 5 professors.  However, two are old (68 and 74 - and PhDs take 6 years), 1 has no reputation and doesn't seem to be publishing much, 1 is considered a jack ass (he had 2 independent people from 2 institutions tell him this), this leaves only 1 professor to work with.  If anything goes wrong with that relationship, there was no one else to work with really so you would have to switch subfields.

Another thing that happened for ds is that not all professors take students each year. So the year my ds started his PhD, 20ish students were newly accepted, and 7 of them wanted to work with 1 professor that was only taking 1 student. Because a PhD is like an apprenticeship, professors are VERY picky about who they take. Different professors vet their students in different ways: My ds had to do oral exams on the whiteboard every 2 weeks for a term to prove he could handle the work, others give trial research projects to see if you can research at a level they want. Some programs have you do a rotation through the labs, and then professors will choose who they want to work with after seeing your work. So just because you got into the program does not mean that you get to work with the person you want to work with in the field you are interested in. This is another reason to do undergraduate research if you want to go into a top graduate program -- in the first year you are jockeying for position to get in with the best professors so you need to already have some research skills walking in. Its quite a game to manage. 

Edited September 19, 2023 by lewelma

[8filltheheart]

1 hour ago, EKS said:

And this is the issue.  A program won't attract and support top students if it doesn't already have and support top students.  And the programs that have and support top students are generally the top programs--not programs found at second or third string state schools.

My ds dual enrolled at 2 different 4 yr Us in different states (we moved 14 hrs away mid jr yr) plus the 4 yr U he attended.  Honestly, the bolded is not what he experienced at all.  His profs at the lower ranked schools all acknowledged that he was not their norm student.  He was able to skip pre-req classes.  He was offered mentoring outside of the classroom.  (They would invite him to their offices to discuss theory that they couldn't cover in their classrooms.)  He was able to start taking grad level classes very early on.  (I don't remember exactly when, but he took 400 level electromagnetic wave theory his freshman yr, so it was before jr or sr yr for sure.)  

My dd found the same thing with the Russian dept at her state U.  

I'm pretty sure their letters of recommendation are why they were so successful in getting opportunities that aren't easy to get.  For example, ds was accepted to 3-4 REU programs that he applied to every single summer.  He applied to 5-6 in hopes of getting 1 offer.  A very high percentage of students are offered 0.  Dd was accepted to CLS 2 summers in a row.  Again, CLS has a low acceptance rate.    

ETA:  I should add that when they were going through the college app process that we specifically met with depts.  It was easy to filter out depts that would not have done the above.  They eliminated depts of any school that didn't want to work with them to meet their specific needs.  (And that included a top ranked U for ds bc UGs worked for grad students, not profs.  The dean of the dept told ds that he already had more direct research experience than their UGs as a high school student bc he worked for one of his DE profs and had attended SSP.)

Edited September 19, 2023 by 8filltheheart

[EKS]

I just wanted to clarify that I’m not arguing that there aren’t second and third string schools out there that do a great job.  I’m just saying that the idea that it doesn’t matter where you do your undergrad is false.

[Frances]

12 hours ago, 8filltheheart said:

As a counterpoint, my ds thought his physics classes at his state U were far superior  then UG classes where he was a TA. He felt at his undergrad University that the professors really cared about their students and would offer them support and mentorship. He said where he was a ta that professors had nothing to do with the undergrads.

Same. Many, including myself, who went to top grad programs felt sorry for the undergrads in the classes we TAd compared to our personalized LAC experiences with amazing mentorship and relationships. These were all math and science majors, so maybe others might find it different for humanities and social sciences.

[Frances]

13 hours ago, EKS said:

As a person who is getting a second bachelor's degree in math at a regional state university, my experience is that the education I'm getting is not even remotely what it would be at MIT or even the state's flagship.  You wouldn't necessarily know it by looking at the course descriptions or textbook lists.  It's more in how the classes are structured--grade inflation is rampant.  Way, way too easy to get an A.  And most, perhaps all, of the classes are way too easy period.

So my point is that I would think that someone like myself, who has done about as well as it is possible to do in my program, going from my institution to a tippy top graduate program would have a very hard time due to lack of preparation.

Nm.

Edited September 20, 2023 by Frances

[Malam]

15 hours ago, EKS said:

As a person who is getting a second bachelor's degree in math at a regional state university, my experience is that the education I'm getting is not even remotely what it would be at MIT or even the state's flagship.

Are you comparing ito MIT via OCW? How are you comparing it to the state's flagship?

[EKS]

11 hours ago, Malam said:

Are you comparing ito MIT via OCW? How are you comparing it to the state's flagship?

Yes, OCW with regard to MIT--so in that case I know that the input is much different.  With regard to both input and output, I have talked to people who have taken courses at both my school and the state's flagship. I also have some knowledge of how things are at a fairly comparable state flagship.  

Perhaps I should be specific about how things are dumbed down in my program.  Not everything on this list has happened in every class but at least one has in each class.

• Homework problems are almost exactly like example problems
• Exams consist either entirely or almost entirely of review and/or homework problems
• CAS enabled calculators are allowed on exams
• Course material is based on lectures that are dumbed down to the point that the material in the textbook seems alien
• Much less material is covered than is covered in equivalent courses elsewhere, like up to 50% less
• An extreme number of extra credit opportunities are available

Edited September 20, 2023 by EKS

[lewelma]

The OPer's kid wants to do a PhD at a top-tier selective school coming from a typical UG. In my eyes there are 2 different things that need to be considered.

1) How to get in. Clearly from all these posts, research (and good quality research) is key. This leads to good rec letters also. These 2 things can be obtained from a typical UG if you find an outstanding mentor.

2) But being prepared for the rigors of a top-tier PhD program is also key (at least in my ds's experience).  Not all UG coursework is created equal. It seems it would be useful to identify how to get a rigorous education when your university is more typical (like what EKS is experiencing). A few things have been brought up. 1) working with professors on advanced material during office hours, 2) joining a putnam club with students who want to go beyond just classwork, 3) skipping prereq classes and get into the grad classes early on, 4) doing research that pushes you to learn. I'm curious if there are other methods.

Edited September 20, 2023 by lewelma

[Frances]

10 hours ago, lewelma said:

The OPer's kid wants to do a PhD at a top-tier selective school coming from a typical UG. In my eyes there are 2 different things that need to be considered.

1) How to get in. Clearly from all these posts, research (and good quality research) is key. This leads to good rec letters also. These 2 things can be obtained from a typical UG if you find an outstanding mentor.

2) But being prepared for the rigors of a top-tier PhD program is also key (at least in my ds's experience).  Not all UG coursework is created equal. It seems it would be useful to identify how to get a rigorous education when your university is more typical (like what EKS is experiencing). A few things have been brought up. 1) working with professors on advanced material during office hours, 2) joining a putnam club with students who want to go beyond just classwork, 3) skipping prereq classes and get into the grad classes early on, 4) doing research that pushes you to learn. I'm curious if there are other methods.

My undergrad LAC allowed one on one independent study courses with profs in advanced topics for course credit, just like a regular class, if a prof agreed to it. I did one that was fantastic.

[Gil]

Thanks Hive Mind.

The pocket of the academic world we're in is smaller than some schools, but quite cozy when it comes to mentorship. Pal's Math mentor is really wonderful and has been very generous with his time also. I honestly feel that Pal is loathe to truly leave his mentor, but he does have a real knack for math so if he decides to go that way we want him to have "the best" opportunity and exposure. He's been able to participate tangentially in some research stuff, but his bigger benefit has been the one-on-one study with a real mathematician.

[FreyaO]

I think one should consider the reasons behind pursuing a PhD program. What does the child envision as long-term goals? (Obviously, these may change, but good to ponder nevertheless). Is long-term academic/research career a possibility or goal?

My experience is with a different field, not Math/CS, but staying local through one's PhD would not be a plus. Changing locations/branching to a slightly or even significantly different field are often appreciated, seen as evidence of motivation, adaptability, open-mindedness. And to some extent they are. Kid will mostly likely benefit from a different mentor. I think 2-3, max 4 years are more than enough to learn most of what a mentor has to offer.

Again, I'm not directly familiar with Math/CS, but in my field, PhD students are supported through mentors' funding or through personal fellowships. These are all more abundant and easier to obtain in top universities.

 

[Frances]

8 hours ago, Gil said:

Thanks Hive Mind.

The pocket of the academic world we're in is smaller than some schools, but quite cozy when it comes to mentorship. Pal's Math mentor is really wonderful and has been very generous with his time also. I honestly feel that Pal is loathe to truly leave his mentor, but he does have a real knack for math so if he decides to go that way we want him to have "the best" opportunity and exposure. He's been able to participate tangentially in some research stuff, but his bigger benefit has been the one-on-one study with a real mathematician.

His mentor is absolutely correct that he should go elsewhere for his PhD, it’s rarely a good idea to stay at one’s undergrad institution for a PhD. Leaving his mentor does not have to mean leaving the mentoring relationship. My husband’s undergrad mentors (one for each of his majors) are still significant people in his life over 25 years after graduation. For his fields (math or CS), money should not be an issue, as he should not consider anything except fully funded PhD programs, so in state or out of state is irrelevant. Doing a Master’s first might not save him any time, but I understand given his age that he might want to stay local longer before moving away. He needs to find PhD programs that have people who he would be interested in doing research with as that will be the bulk of what he will be doing in a doctoral program.

[Not_a_Number]

I might be late to the party, but here goes . . . 

It matters and it doesn't. 

You don't need a "brand name" school. I didn't go to a brand name undergraduate school and I got into all the top graduate programs I applied to. But on the other hand . . . 

1) I went to a school known for its undergraduate program. It attracted excellent students and had advanced coursework. You wouldn't be able to get that everywhere. 

2) It had at least some faculty that published in top journals. You do want recommendations from people respected in the field -- recommendations from someone who isn't research active aren't going to go far. They don't have to be at the very top, but they have to be for real. 

It's pretty hard to tell the difference from the outside. I'd recommend you ask around -- ask someone you can give enough details so they could actually evaluate your choices. Not knowing exactly what the institutions and professors being considered are makes it impossible to give good advice. 

[Atlas]

Why PhD? It's a very difficult career path.

[kirstenhill]

3 hours ago, Atlas said:

Why PhD? It's a very difficult career path.

Not the OP, but PhD isn't a career path?  Academia isn't the only place PhDs get jobs.  My husband has a PhD in an engineering field and has worked in industry basically his whole career (in R&D and product development).  He works with a multi-disciplinary team that has people with PhDs in a number of different fields.  

Edited October 11, 2023 by kirstenhill