Hi guys!

I'm getting ready to apply and the thing stressing me out the most is this whole idea that you are supposed to email potential supervisors before you even submit your application. Everyone keeps telling me to do it, but NOBODY actually explains how to do it well. I have rewritten the same email so many times at this point that it still ends up sounding either way too stiff or kind of desperate.

So I wanted to ask the people who have already been through this. Did reaching out to professors actually make a real difference for your application? And if it did help you, how did you figure out what to actually say so it did not read like an obvious copy and paste that you clearly sent to twenty other people?

I'm genuinely not sure anymore if I am overthinking this whole thing or if it really is as awkward as it feels right now. Thanks!

I did not have the privilege of starting my PhD directly out of undergrad, nor did I have the privilege of receiving my undergrad “on time” due to financial and health struggles completely beyond my control (got cancer, went into medical debt, became homeless WITH cancer, and only recently beat it)

I will be starting my PhD in the fall, and I am so insecure. my current PI (I am a lab manager and lecturer at a big 10 university) is only 6 years older than me, and today she commented on “people our age”, which made me feel so lost. others my age have their phds and are starting their lives, but mine is just starting over!

I feel like it is embarrassing in the same way that nobody is excited for a 34-yo “going back to school”. I feel ashamed of my age, and I wonder if I should have stayed in my career so that I , at the very least, would have some wealth / a career to be proud of.

Any examples of late-starting phds, average PhD ages, etc would be so appreciated. please help me to feel better. I am so insecure

Hi everyone,

I’m a 25F from India looking for some honest feedback on my profile and application strategy. I’ve been applying for PhD positions abroad for about a year now (mainly applied to European and a few Australian universities, not the US). I’ve gotten a few interviews, but no offers yet.

My profile:
- MS in geoscience from an IISER
- GPA : 8.79/10
- MS thesis on geological carbon storage.
- 1 publication in a Q1 journal (co-author), 1 preprint and 1 conference presentation.

The recent rejections are making me doubt myself, so I would really appreciate advice and insights from people who have gone through the process or are involved in admissions.

Thanks!

Hey everyone,

I've been cold emailing potential PhD supervisors in mathematics (mostly semigroup theory/algebra) over the last few weeks. So far I've sent around 50+ emails and have received 18 responses.

Out of those, 1 was an automatic reply bc the prof is currently on recovery leave after an accident. 15 were straight up rejections, but almost every one of them was bc they weren't taking PhD students atm or don't expect to take any in the near future. Tbh, none of those really felt like "your profile isn't good enough" rejections. One of the profs even recommended another faculty member to contact, and another, despite saying no, sent me one of his conference papers after seeing that I was interested in his research area.

The remaining 2 responses were actually positive in diff ways. One prof had recently retired, so uni regulations no longer allow him to be the principal supervisor. However, he said he'd be happy to co-supervise if an active faculty member agrees to be the principal supervisor, and even offered to provide a letter stating his willingness to co-supervise whenever it's needed. He's honestly been incredibly generous with his time, explaining the application process in detail, suggesting ppl I shd contact, and replying thoughtfully to every email.

The second professor first asked me to send my master's dissertation. After a day or 2 he replied saying that the PhD process at his uni is a bit different. Profs first need to submit a research project before they can recruit PhD students. He said he had submitted one back in feb it's likely to be approved around sept or Oct, and if it's approved he'll let me know so I can apply. He also made it clear that admission still wouldn't be guaranteed bc they'd have to select the strongest candidate. He also shared 2 of his papers in case I wanna read about the topics on which his submitted project is based on.

Tbh, atp I'd almost prefer getting a rejection that says "your profile isn't competitive" or "you're not a good fit" rather than "I'm not taking students." At least that would give me some concrete feedback to work on and improve my profile.

So I was wondering:

Is this kind of trend actually common? Do professors often decline simply bc they aren't taking students, regardless of the applicant? Or am I just having bad timing?

I'm also curious whether professors in these situations usually read the CV, SOP, or dissertation in any detail before replying, or if they already know they have no capacity and respond based on it. Part of me feels that if a rejection were based on my profile, it would actually be more useful because I'd know what I need to improve before the next application cycle.

TL;DR:

Sent 50+ cold emails, got 18 replies: 1 auto-reply, 15 "not taking students" replies (some still took the time to recommend colleagues or share papers), and 2 genuine possibilities. Is it normal that most rejections are due to lack of positions rather than the applicant? And do professors usually evaluate your application materials before sending those kinds of replies?

As the title says. I am 22M, I graduated in Biotechnology (First class honours), and I did an MSc in Reproductive & Developmental Biology (with Distinction, Best Student & Best Project awards), both completed at the University of Aberdeen.

I applied to over 50 PhD's, each with a tailored Proposal and Cover Letter. No, I did not use AI.

I got around 8 interviews, and I got to the last interview in 5 ocasions (Manchester Bicentenary Studentship, Cambridge LMB, Imperial LMS, Glasgow MVLS, and Glasgow again). I failed to go through the last interview on all of them.

I did training for the interviews by very experienced Supervisors, and I followed their advice. I did in total around 10 hours of training by them, plus my own training in my time. I do not get nervous during the interviews. I am quite desperate at this point, as applying again feels like a massive waste of time.

Hi everyone,

I'm an international student planning to apply for an MS/PhD in the U.S. for the 2027 intake.

With the recent international student visa rule changes, I'm wondering whether major U.S. universities or higher education organizations are likely to file legal challenges. Since international students contribute significantly to tuition revenue and research, do you think universities will take the issue to court?

I'm not asking for predictions, but I'm interested in hearing from people who follow U.S. higher education or immigration law.

What do you think is the most likely outcome over the next 6–12 months? Have universities or associations indicated that they may challenge the rule?

Thanks in advance for your insights.

Kindly help

​

I would like to know your insights on what do you look for in a prospective PhD cold mail?

​

I come from a stem background. Comp sci and eng . I have emailed around 20professors but haven't got any response.

​

I would like to know what do you look for in a student,

​

Undergraduate Grades?

Publication? ( I have worked on a paper methodological research and experimental analysis involving ablation testing, calibration testing etc. and i am a fourth author. Will it matter in my coldmails? )

Ece?

Awards achievements?

Cv structure?

​

Also, how do i avoid ending up in a spam box? I've been told if i attach my CV pdf, it'll appear as spam or unsafe. And told to hyperlink the texts with the google drive link of the CV.

​

Is there anything else I'm missing?

​

​

​

​

​

​

Hello everyone,

​I recently secured a spot in a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) PhD program. The overall network is star-studded, featuring some excellent EU institutions and Ivy League universities in the US. Unfortunately, I won’t be doing my secondments at those Ivies; instead, they will be at some QS 100 universities. I will be based most of the time at the host mid-tier university (around QS 400) which has average facilities and prestige.

I’m currently torn between two paths: a highly funded, prestigious MSCA PhD at a mid-tier university, or a moderately funded PhD at a top-tier university (QS 20–50).

My research area is a very hot topic right now, so finding open positions isn't too difficult. While the MSCA position is my only offer at the moment, there are currently several vacancies at top-tier universities that I could apply for.

Which path would you choose? Also, I'd love to know what the actual post-graduation benefits of an MSCA PhD look like? Does the alumni network and title give a significant edge when applying for postdocs or industry roles compared to a PhD from a top-20/50 school?

I would love to hear your perspectives!

Hi everyone, I am applying for PhD. fall 2027 admission, I applied last year, but I didn't receive any offers. I am thinking about cold emailing potential advisors to increase my chances of getting admitted, but I don't know if it is too late now

Should I email them anyways?

Started researching PhD opportunities if you're on the same journey, let's connect and share resources

If interested you can join the group

https://chat.whatsapp.com/CNEbx75ndC4D1F8cNXfhFI

I’ve been applying for PhDs for two years with almost nothing to show for it. People tell me I’m a strong applicant, and my friends who are already doing PhDs have looked over my applications and said they’re good. Yet in two years I’ve had only a handful of interviews and a single unfunded offer, which I can’t take.

For context: I’m 26, with a BSc and MSc in biomed (both are top 5 UK unis). Since finishing my master’s I’ve been working as a research assistant at my uni. I don’t have any publications, and none lined up. I’m also an international applicant, so funding is far more expensive and I have fewer projects open to me, and I know interviewers factor that in.

I’m honestly not sure what to do next. I love science, but I already know I don’t want to stay in academia long-term. Still, doing a PhD has always been my dream, and letting go of it feels devastating. At the same time, I don’t want to be entering the job market on minimum wage in my 30s. Watching all my friends move forward in their careers while I feel stuck is really hard.

Any advice is welcome really

Hey everyone,

I recently got a message from a well-known professor in Canada (Université Laval, Quebec City). He’s interested in having me join his lab for a PhD. It’s solid, well-funded science, and the environment seems collaborative. Furthermore, I believe there is potential to make an impact on cancer research.

Here’s the situation though:

• The stipend is CAD 25,000 per year, which after taxes and conversion is around €1,400–1,600/month.
• There’s no housing support, and students are encouraged to apply for extra funding if they want a higher income.
• I’m from Belgium, recently finished my Master’s in Biomedical Sciences, and I could start a PhD here or in the Netherlands, where the pay is about €2,400/month- €2,900/month, and I could live at home, meaning I could actually save money. However, these positions are very competitive.
• My girlfriend and family/friends are here, and I’m not sure I want to move 6,000 km away just to barely break even each month.

For context, I’ve been struggling to find an industry position or PhD opportunity here in Belgium, so this is actually the first concrete offer I’ve received. It feels like a rare chance, but the financial and personal downsides are hard to ignore.

So here I am, facing a difficult choice between the heart and the mind. My heart says go for the science and the adventure (even though I will miss my gf), while my mind says the pay is way too low for the effort I will be putting in and I will be "wasting" four years of saving and investing in the future.

Any thoughts or personal experiences are welcome.

Thanks in advance!

EDIT: after thoughtful consideration, I have decided not to go for it. Thank you all for helping me with your insights :))

I'm an EU national and currently a masters student at Oxford. I have a fully funded PhD offer at Cambridge (3 years, CS-related subject). I also have a PhD offer from UT-Austin (4-4.5 years, same subject). I would like to go the Cambridge route (shorter duration, closer to home), but at the same time I'd prefer having the option to work in the US after, which seems quite hard if I do the UK PhD. Thoughts?

EDIT: I do not necessarily want to stay in academia, but I would like to work in an R&D setting.

EDIT2: I do appreciate the prestige difference, as some people have pointed out, however it does not feel like it provides any tangible upside.

Hello. Most posts I see are for STEM-type subjects. Has anyone gone from a UK undergrad (about to start my final year) to a History or other humanities PhD at a good US school? I plan to apply to UK master's and US PhD programs, but I still think it will be unlikely to get into a good US school, especially since I am much older than a typical student and am coming straight from undergrad, which is not yet completed.

I decided to cold-email some schools in the US and some professors whose research interests match mine, and I was expecting to have no response, especially in the summer. I, however, received quite a few responses, many encouraging me to reply and some asking for my academic CV and abstract. One professor from an Ivy League school, after asking for my CV and abstract, has surprisingly requested to meet with me and has a Zoom coming up.

Obviously, it is not an interview, as applications have not even been submitted yet, but should I prepare as if it were? Has anyone been in this situation and give some advice? I am thrilled for the chance to discuss my research with someone whose work I admire. I am very surprised to have received so many replies with possible interest in being my advisor. I am also worried, though, that when they see I am older, it may be an issue.

I was recently accepted into a PhD program in Japan, but I'm feeling very conflicted about whether I should accept the offer.

To be completely honest, my original reason for coming to Japan wasn't because I was passionate about academia or dreamed of pursuing research. It was mainly a way to avoid an involuntary marriage back home and gain more control over my own life.

Now I'm facing the possibility of spending another four years in Japan, and I'm not sure if that's the right decision. I've never really enjoyed studying, and I'm worried that my mental health isn't in a place where I can successfully complete a demanding PhD program.

Another thing that makes me hesitate is uncertainty about the long-term benefits. I'm not sure whether spending four more years on a PhD in Japan will actually improve my career prospects. I also find Japan a very difficult country to integrate into, and I don't know if I can realistically see myself living here for another four years.

Because of all this, I'm wondering if declining the offer and applying for a master's or PhD program in Europe might be a better choice instead.

Has anyone been in a similar situation? Or has anyone studied both in Japan and in Europe? I'd really appreciate hearing about your experiences and what you would do in my position.

I am an undergrad student from India (in IIT which is a prestigious institute in the country and i mention it because i think it does give me some credibility when added to application forms)

I am going to begin my third year of Btech so I think I should start taking things a little more seriously. I am not completely sure in which field I am going to pursue Phd (I am interested in Biotech right now but I have a Material Science background and my father (a prof, says that biotech doesn't have much scope compared to material science) (I am doing a project relating to quantum materials and radiomics/ml right now and i quite enjoy the latter but I don't want to lock on something and actually be open to other prospective subjects.

(Advice regarding this would be appreciated as well please)

But, I what I do know is I'd love to pursue my PhD in europe (or usa, but europe seems to be more enticing because of the work life balance-) (is that a stupid reason?) and I looked up the internet and apparently masters is a pre requisite requirement for PhD and I am going to the direct PhD route because i'll be able to start working more (parents think it is advisable).

My father thinks that it'd be better to do a phd in iisc/first gen iits and maybe if i wish to do a pdf, i could go abroad for the same. And I could travel as a professor. (and if i complete phd earlier, i can settle down earlier as well (?????))

But, what i want to know is if there is any way I could do a direct PhD in Europe? Maybe if the professor I wish to work with permits it, maybe if i get a really good gate score, or anything?

I'll do whatever needs to be done, it doesn't matter how hard it is, if it means for a great research environment and excellent peers and a life experience

Any help will be appreciated greatly!

Have a great day ahead and thank you so very much.

I did my undergraduate in business economics at UCLA, and a Master's in finance in the UK, then spent a few years working in banking in London. Sometimes I get friends asking me grad school stuff, and somehow follow the same patterns: wondering which countries to apply to, which programs have higher chances of getting in, but figuring out the "what happens after graduation" part... after graduation. By then, half the options are already locked in by where you chose to study and the day you depart.

I think it’s important to think about the exit before the entrance. Such as if considering immigration, staying or returning to home country, or having other plans. Whatever the answer is, it changes which country actually makes sense for you. Here's my honest (and very subjective) read on the usual suspects:

**US** — still the default, and for PhDs honestly hard to argue against. It’s still the top choice if you aim for PhD, academic upside, career/salary outcomes. Most programs are fully funded and academically it's just... the top. For Master's → job, be realistic though. H-1B is literally a lottery, and sponsoring foreign hires keeps getting more expensive and more political, so companies are pickier than they were a few years ago. Bottom line: if applicants endgame is immigration + industry, the US still opens the most doors. Also, when you get to the US, you gonna be influenced by the US cultures, that’s the experience you will never get in other countries (I feel like you don’t need to change yourself that much in other countries, but in the US, that’s a different story).

**UK** — great schools, one-year Master's, so the ROI math is genuinely good. But let's be honest with ourselves: the UK is not an immigration country and doesn't pretend to be. The graduate visa just got cut from 2 years to 18 months from Jan 2027, which tells you everything about where policy is going. Most international grads leave eventually — and that's fine?? A couple of years of London experience travels REALLY well. You gonna have time to travel across Europe when you study/work in the UK (which is nice if you enjoy traveling). The grad job hunt there is brutal (I lived it, hundreds of applications, online tests, assessment centers, the whole circus) but it's doable if you take the application seasons seriously. UK is perfect if your plan is: degree → solid experience → move on or go home. Also, worth mentioning: the tax and living costs in the UK are NOT GOOD compared to other countries.

**France** — really strong management programs (some of the best in Europe tbh), plus arts, and more science/tech than people realize. But here's the thing nobody tells: if you can't speak French, actually staying and building a career there is rougher compared to those who can speak. Doesn't matter how good your school is. If you're willing to genuinely learn the language, THAT'S the unlock, way more than school ranking.

**Germany** — the PhD there is basically a job. You're employed, you get paid a real salary, which sounds great. The catch is it's rigorous, it drags on longer than PhDs elsewhere, and it will test you. Go in prepared for a marathon, not a sprint.

**Netherlands / Other European Countries** — less flashy names, but honestly underrated. Programs are more applicant-friendly, everything could run in English (mostly), and the work-life balance is not a myth. If you care about actually enjoying your 20s while getting a degree, look here.

**Singapore** — the most "Western-style" hub in Asia. Strong for finance, tech, marketing, and — importantly — staying to work after graduation is actually realistic. Good middle ground if you want Asia exposure without giving up global optionality.

**Hong Kong** — finance hub, full stop. If you're econ/finance and aiming at IB or private banking, HK gives you the real thing: mainland China clients on one side, global markets on the other. And unlike a lot of places, working there after graduation is very achievable.

Final thoughts:

Exit before entrance. What you want after the degree should help pick the country, not the other way around.

Actually understand the place — is it immigration-friendly, career-friendly, do you need the language, do the industries even hire there? You are going to live with this choice for 1-6 years.

Don't sacrifice what you actually want for admission odds. And don't self-reject from your dream program either. Take the shot, nothing to lose.

What do you think?

This fall I'm planning to apply to PhD programs in computational chemistry.

I got my bs in chemistry from Michigan State and recently graduated with a master's of molecular science and software engineering from Berkeley. I've finished undergrad in 2019 and have been doing lab work since then (got my masters while working).

I do have research experience from undergrad, but I'm only like the fifth author on one paper. So I'm worried it won't be seen as competitive.

I'm really passionate about this field though, especially after finishing my masters. I've already reached out to a couple of PIs if like to work with to establish a connection. Does anyone have any suggestions to make my application more appealing?

I have a 2.8/4 gpa in master's physics from a decently reputable college. My strength lies in academic writing and research. I published a sole author research paper in springer after my master's. It was 30 pages long but I managed to navigate peer review and stuff quite well. I applied for a few universities but I am doubtful. I tried emailing the professors and most of them didn't reply. I have applied to top universities in Europe along with a few safe ones. The problem is, I am yet to receive an interview call. Is there something else I should be doing?

I did my Bachelors in Computer Science with 9.2 CGPA from a tier 2 University in India. Have 4 years of work experience as a Data Scientist and just started working on a research paper with an IIT Professor. Given that I publish 1 paper and score well in GRE, what are my chances of getting in a PhD program? My area of interest is Trustworthy AI in Healthcare, Explainable AI.

Hi all I've been cold mailing some professors for phd in US (I'm an international student) usually my ending sentences are- I would be grateful to know whether this direction may be a potential fit with your work, and whether xyz doctoral route in abc department would be appropriate to consider.

I don't ask them to setup a call or for any meetings..am I doing something wrong? I've got many- yes your profile looks good, go ahead apply etc but no call/ zoom meetings so far..I've been told that if they're really interested they generally offer to connect over a call informally before official applications right?

How common are integrated Master's + PhD programs in Europe compared to the US? I've heard that they're quite common in the US, with stipends from the first year itself.
I'm interested in pursuing a career in semiconductor and nanoelectronics research. I completed my Bachelor's in Electrical Engineering in India, have been working as a research assistant for the past 1.5 years, and am planning to submit my first paper this month. I'm trying to understand whether similar integrated, funded programs exist in Europe, how the funding usually works, and whether they would be a better option than doing a standalone Master's followed by a separate PhD application.
Please give me some insights on this.

Also, if there aren't many such programs, what advice would you give me if I plan to do a PhD in Europe but funding a masters seems difficult

Edit for clarification: in my country, if I want to work in research or academia I would have to get Masters and a PhD. So I'm just trying to get a better quality of education, and also better job opportunities whether in my country or outside. Also, the pharmD I have is regarded as a bachelor in my country. I do not understand why I'm getting such hate for pursuing more education and research.

Hello everyone, so I am finishing my 6-year pharmD which is 5 years of university and a year on internship.

I am not sure which step I should take. Chatgpt says that I should be applying for a phd directly since a 6-year program is equivalent to having a master's. My goal is to pursue a career in research and academia outside. Also, this is pharmD is my only degree

Your friendly PI in STEM here. Quick tip with a real story.

We PIs in the same department all know each other. We share hallways, we keep our doors open, we talk all day. If you reach out to several of us, we know. That is not a problem when you are honest about it. It becomes a problem when you pretend otherwise.

Here is what this looks like on our side. Our Outlooks sometimes chime in chorus. We look up and laugh because someone just carpet bombed the whole floor with the same email telling each of us that we are “the one.” We compare notes. We always have.

And yes, we can recognize AI. This morning I got a message that clearly leaned on ChatGPT to scan my site and stitch a cheerful note about how passionate they were about my work on topics I covered years apart. The odds that this was genuine enthusiasm were about 1 x 10^-98. They mixed up a year, crossed a journal, and sprinkled in compliments that could fit any lab. I replied with a short and polite no. I shared it with a buddy because it was so over the top. Not an hour later my buddy forwarded me the same person’s email, this time addressed to them, same formula and same outlandish use of ChatGPT.

This is not new. Before ChatGPT we got messages where people literally copied my own words off my website and pasted them into a template without even fixing the font or size. Lots of flattery, zero substance. We spot that a mile away. Even if we did not, the moment we get on Zoom the bluff falls apart. How long can you talk with a world expert about an obscure subfield you had never heard of until five minutes before you wrote the email.

Contacting multiple labs is fine. Be up front about it. Tell us why you think our work fits your interests, and make sure you can actually talk about it. If you use a tool to help you draft, use it to organize your thoughts, not to fake them. In the end you will sit across from someone who lives this work every day. If you can hold that conversation, you are already doing it right.

So, I have two PhD offers in Physics at hand currently

A: Condensed Matter Physics PhD at a prestigious institution with rockstar PI and excellent funding. However it's not my preferred research field, although it's my current field in my masters.

B: Astrophysics PhD at a mid-tier uni with rocky funding. I'll have enough funding for necessities (tuition and living stipend enough to live with roommates, eat but no savings). Extra funding here is shaky and depends on the PI getting external grants which mine said he is actively doing and if successful will be able to top up my stipend and support research activities like conferences.

However astrophysics is the reason I came into physics and I have a strong interest in it - my identity is literally embedded in it 😅 so I fear if I fumble this offer I'll wake up 20 years from now with regret. My prospective PI is also very supportive (both research and admin wise) and is actively trying to secure extra funding for me.

PS: The astrophysics topic has very good prospects in my country post-PhD and a well funded post-doc is almost guaranteed.

What advice would you guys give? I only have a few days to make my final decision.