hi,
this is vishnu,doing my fianl Semester in PG biotechnology..

Can any one tell how can or should get an funded Ph.D in abroad....?




please reply me on bioviski@gmail.com


bye !!!

Probably not no.

Bioviski, you sound like you have no brain.

While there are some absolutely amazing international phds/students there are others that take the biscuit.

I used to serve on the postgraduate research committee for a large well known Russel group university. There were two PhD representatives, one for home students (me) and another for international students. I was absolutely astounded by the double standard that was constantly favoured foreign students (that brought in lots of lovely revenue each year) and home students (mostly that had accrued funding by grants/studentships that were already paid in advance so didn't matter).

Issues around longer than average submission times and "adequate" use of English in manuscripts would crop up and invariably relate more to international students than home students (who had been rigourously pre seleted by MRC/ Wellcome etc already). However, the other rep advocated all international students should have free proofreaders and double supervision time because they "paid more". I would advocate that international students learn the language properly before they decided to write a 100,000 word in it.

In these meetings a few supervisors of international student used tofrequently complain that their students lacked any ability for critical enquiry, learned by rote, and that they had to damn near write their student's thesis up themselves to avoid the penalties that came with failure to submit.

Similarly, we used to have a limited budget for conferences, training. The foreign rep used to argue that since "Home students already had fees paid and stipends granted, the majority of this budget should go to international students as they paid more". My counterargument that "Conference funding should be allocated on merit alone" was met with hostility and accusations of favouritism.

Alarmingly EVERY committee convened for doctoral failures (non-awarded PhDs after viva) that I sat at was for a international student. There was huge pressure placed on the uni to let them pass otherwise they would litigate or get their government to threaten us by not sending more students. (Like its a UN diplomatic matter or NATO pronouncement)

This clearly didnt apply to every international student. There were several that had obtained funding and were doing excellent work. However, there was a significant proportion that had clearly just bought their way in by self funding and it was galling to see that they were being rewarded on their financial status rather than merit.

Perhaps this explains my somewhat extreme behaviour when I see a poorly phrased, vague post by a clueless applicant that wants someone else to do the research to find them funding.

BHC, i see your point but i think the problem lies mainly in the universities' admissions decisions, rather than in international students, self-funding, buying themselves in.

i think universities should either only accept students who have enough funds to complete their studies (from a funder, or privately) in the given time, OR else indeed make sure those underfunded students they do accept, get "preferential treatment" so as that they can complete in time. what's the point in accepting underfunded students and then letting them fail (because they can't afford to do all that it takes to do a PhD)? That's lose-lose, far from win-win.

i do indeed wonder at times, what international students pay all that money for.

also, not to be forgotten: many "overseas" students are native english speakers, whereas many "home/eu" students aren't.

"Issues around longer than average submission times and "adequate" use of English in manuscripts would crop up and invariably relate more to international students than home students (who had been rigourously pre seleted by MRC/ Wellcome etc already)."

I know this was only a minor point in your overall argument, but I've seen some shockingly bad written English coming from native speaking PhD students. In my experience they are generally worse than overseas students who've actually been trained to speak (and write) correct English.

True but in my opinion if you can't write a coherent sentence at the BSc, MSc student level, what the hell are you doing looking for a PhD post!

@Shani. I agree absolutely that the uni has a part to play in this. I am not sure about "preferential treatment" for ANY group. I always believe that people should be judged on merit alone, rather than affirmative action or social engineering.

@ Juno: I am aware of the poor standard of English in some Brits too, and as postgrad rep I had to deal with these issues. However, I found it a relative rarity, as presumably after their supervisor and MRC had done their selection, the weaker candidates were filtered out.

Regardless, I feel all students (international, domestic or from mars) should be able to communicate well, independent, be able to think in a reflective critical manner and be judged on their merit. If they cannot do this they have no place reading for a PhD.

i just came across this site, as I am an international student interested in postgrad studies (got an year in my degree left though).

@badhaircut, As Shani pointed out, its the entire fault of the uni isnt it? Clearly, asking for GRE/SAT/TOEFL scores would be a simple method of weeding out students with english unsuitable for postgrad studies. But no, the unis are clearly more interested in the money from these students (10,000GBP+ per year), so I see them as being duped in a way - a sad level for a uni to stoop down to.

Please dont be bitter at those international students - if anything, have some sympathy for them, and the cash they have been robbed of. It would be more helpful for yourself if you made a complaint on your uni's admission policies.