Low ranked university, but fully funded and great supervisor

N

Hi,

I'm currently a fully funded first year PhD student at a sucky ranked UK university (in most UK rankings around 80-100). My department is not particularly research oriented and has at the moment not too much cash to throw around. The university has just recently started to try to cut their spendings; staff, resources, travel expenses, conference fees, and so on. However, until now I have felt like a wonderboy that the department has gladly funded to go to conferences, but not anymore. Most of the other PhD students are not good. In some cases they are horrible. I am the only one that is funded.

My supervisor is very ambitious and has a really (!) impressive network. His/her research record is alright, not mind blowing, but OK. She/he is really keen that I produce papers during my time there, go to workshops/conferences, and get opportunities to teach. She also shares the same alternative research interest as me.

But I am starting to think that I may be shooting myself in the foot by doing my PhD at this very low ranked and poor university? Will it fuck up a potential academic career?

I have a bachelors and a two-year master's degree from a university that is ranked top 100 in the world. The faculty is well-known for their research and I have awesome grades.

I have been shortlisted for two PhD positions before. One of them was at a faculty that is specialised in my area of interest, research oriented, and is quite well-known internationally. I didn't get the position but I was ranked 2nd out of twenty applicants. Their PhD positions are always salaried.

I'm starting to doubt the choices I have done and would need some helpful advices. Should I quit? Should I hang in there? Should I wait and try to apply to the faculty that almost took me in before when a positions opens up? Any suggestions?

E

I was at a low-ranked university, PT, self-funded student. I chose that uni because it was easier to access it (I work and live abroad) and because I liked the supervisors when I had my interview.
During my studies, they were enthusiastic, helpful and supportive. During my studies and with my sups help I managed to build a good cv with many presentations at international conferences and a few papers at journals.
I passed my viva with (very) minor corrections, and now (less than 6 months later) I have secured an academic position at a good uni in my country,
So, in a nutshell, my experience was not negative at all.

S

Don't get so hung up on prestige. You are funded and have a good supervisor. Lots of people would love to be in that position.

T

Yep, the grass isn't greener elsewhere. You're lucky to be fully funded and have a supportive supervisor. If you want extra money for conferences or workshops, apply for funding from relevant scientific societies - this will look good on your CV too.

D

Definitely the funded one. I would never do an unfunded one. It is just not worth it. Big job opportunities after the PhD are rare, so you should not take the risk. Universities and supervisors are just exploiting you. Rankings are overrated. If you publish great stuff it will be recognised ;) It is also much easier to produce good work if you don't have to worry about money.

B

Two thoughts.
1) The financial outlook given the HE Bill, Brexit and probable new limits on international students is poor throughout the UK HE sector. Cuts are the new norm, so you might be experiencing this wherever you were.
2) if your supervisor is noticeably more research active that her colleagues, then she's probably trying to publish her way into a more research-oriented post. That means she has a vested interest in your success in publishing etc - that could work in your favour more than being one of a very large crowd of PhD students in a stronger dept.

E

Having a good supervisor who you get on with and who will actively support you to publish etc is a huge advantage, and in the end your publication record will count for more than the ranking of the university when it comes to applying for post doc opportunities.

I went to a high-ranked uni but had a poor supervisor who in the end didn't even bother to read my thesis, never mind any papers...

P

Quote From nastygocart:
Hi,

I'm currently a fully funded first year PhD student at a sucky ranked UK university (in most UK rankings around 80-100). My department is not particularly research oriented and has at the moment not too much cash to throw around. The university has just recently started to try to cut their spendings; staff, resources, travel expenses, conference fees, and so on. However, until now I have felt like a wonderboy that the department has gladly funded to go to conferences, but not anymore. Most of the other PhD students are not good. In some cases they are horrible. I am the only one that is funded.

My supervisor is very ambitious and has a really (!) impressive network. His/her research record is alright, not mind blowing, but OK. She/he is really keen that I produce papers during my time there, go to workshops/conferences, and get opportunities to teach. She also shares the same alternative research interest as me.

But I am starting to think that I may be shooting myself in the foot by doing my PhD at this very low ranked and poor university? Will it fuck up a potential academic career?

I have a bachelors and a two-year master's degree from a university that is ranked top 100 in the world. The faculty is well-known for their research and I have awesome grades.

I have been shortlisted for two PhD positions before. One of them was at a faculty that is specialised in my area of interest, research oriented, and is quite well-known internationally. I didn't get the position but I was ranked 2nd out of twenty applicants. Their PhD positions are always salaried.

I'm starting to doubt the choices I have done and would need some helpful advices. Should I quit? Should I hang in there? Should I wait and try to apply to the faculty that almost took me in before when a positions opens up? Any suggestions?


You seem to have an unhealthy obsession with rankings. The university you graduated from is irrelevant. It is also a little odd to see a first year student who feels qualified to make judgemts on the publication record of their supervisor. I am surprised your "awesome grades" didnt attract attention from your alma mater to be honest.

N

Thanks for all the responses! They have been very helpful!

You seem to have an unhealthy obsession with rankings. The university you graduated from is irrelevant. It is also a little odd to see a first year student who feels qualified to make judgemts on the publication record of their supervisor. I am surprised your "awesome grades" didnt attract attention from your alma mater to be honest.


Well... I have not really cared about rankings before, but then I started to read up on it and it got me a bit nervous. I have not studied in the UK before so I don't really know much about the academic "culture" over here.

On a side not, why shouldn't I be qualified to make judgments of my supervisor's publication record? Just because I'm a first year student it doesn't mean I'm unqualitfied to do so. And my "awesome grades" did attract attention, but what I wanted to do didn't really match with that faculty's research focus.

P

Quote From nastygocart:
Thanks for all the responses! They have been very helpful!

You seem to have an unhealthy obsession with rankings. The university you graduated from is irrelevant. It is also a little odd to see a first year student who feels qualified to make judgemts on the publication record of their supervisor. I am surprised your "awesome grades" didnt attract attention from your alma mater to be honest.


Well... I have not really cared about rankings before, but then I started to read up on it and it got me a bit nervous. I have not studied in the UK before so I don't really know much about the academic "culture" over here.

On a side not, why shouldn't I be qualified to make judgments of my supervisor's publication record? Just because I'm a first year student it doesn't mean I'm unqualitfied to do so. And my "awesome grades" did attract attention, but what I wanted to do didn't really match with that faculty's research focus.


I am taking you at face value here. In one post you have described yourself as a wonderboy with awesome grades. You have then severely criticised your university and cast judgement on your supervisors publication record.
It sounds like you are blowing smoke up your own backside and in the UK we have a delightful habit of teasing people like that. I hope you are not actually voicing these opinions. are you? To your colleagues?

Perhaps when you have finished your phd or have a decent publication record yourself you will be able to answer your own question about why a first year student should not be critiquing their supervisor in this way.

To return to your original point, and the reason I am addressing you in this way, is that your biggest problem here is your attitude. forget your supervisors record, your university ranking, your awesome grades and your wonderboy delusion. NONE of it matters. Get your head down, start publishing and let your work do your talking for you. That is your best chance of a successful phd. That is my advice.

B

You have then severely criticised your university and cast judgement on your supervisors publication record.
It sounds like you are blowing smoke up your own backside and in the UK we have a delightful habit of teasing people like that. I hope you are not actually voicing these opinions. are you? To your colleagues?

Perhaps when you have finished your phd or have a decent publication record yourself you will be able to answer your own question about why a first year student should not be critiquing their supervisor in this way.

To return to your original point, and the reason I am addressing you in this way, is that your biggest problem here is your attitude. forget your supervisors record, your university ranking, your awesome grades and your wonderboy delusion. NONE of it matters. Get your head down, start publishing and let your work do your talking for you. That is your best chance of a successful phd. That is my advice.


Yes this. You don't say where the source is from for the rankings but a uni can be poorly ranked OVERALL, but have excellent prestige in a single department. At PhD level who you know counts the most, rather than the overall uni. Grades mean very little in getting onto a funded PhD. I got the standard 2:1 degree, but with multiple publications that's what got me to where I am.

Another point, staff will always be warm and encouraging to get you started. Then they will leave you to it and assume that you're getting on with things.

P


Yes this. You don't say where the source is from for the rankings but a uni can be poorly ranked OVERALL, but have excellent prestige in a single department. At PhD level who you know counts the most, rather than the overall uni. Grades mean very little in getting onto a funded PhD. I got the standard 2:1 degree, but with multiple publications that's what got me to where I am.

Another point, staff will always be warm and encouraging to get you started. Then they will leave you to it and assume that you're getting on with things.


Absolutely. Part of the rankings come from the opinions of undergraduate students!!! Why on earth would anyone give credence to this sort of thing bearing in mind that it is very well known that people most likely to fill in feedback forms are those with a grudge.
You are also correct about it being about who you know rtaher than what you can do.
That's of course not to say that grades and ability aren't important but in my experience in industry and academia the main thing is who you know. It might not seem fair but it is absolutely obvious why it works like this. I have run my own company in the past and first and foremost I want to be able to trust my mortgage with this member of staff. The key is to be good enough to be able to get things done. Everything else is about personal relationships. The only people who want to work with arseholes are proctologists.

47909