0

I wanted to know how much weight the college someone got a master's from matters while applying for a doctoral program?

So for instance, if a person is enrolled in a college which is not well known and his application is great in terms of research projects, CPI score, TOEFL, GRE scores etc., then would that person's application be considered worse than a person who is doing master's from a very good college (well-known)?

In particular, I wanted to ask this because I have heard that those Indian students are preferred for PhD programs in Physics in good colleges in US who have done Master's from a top IITs like IIT Kanpur or IIT Madras and students who apply from a lower ranked IIT get frequently rejected.

P.S: Those who have no idea about IITs can take the question in a general context from my first paragraph.

Azor Ahai -him-
  • 30,111
  • 9
  • 88
  • 115
Malajapan
  • 9
  • 1
  • 1
    Better known schools are, well, better known. Previous students from a given school likely weigh heavily in determining if an applicant meets the desired standards. – Jon Custer Apr 13 '21 at 17:23
  • Would this be a deciding factor even if the application otherwise was great? – Malajapan Apr 13 '21 at 17:34
  • 2
    There is no one deciding factor. – Jon Custer Apr 13 '21 at 17:35
  • 1
    @JonCuster, perhaps you should expand a bit into an answer. – Buffy Apr 13 '21 at 17:41
  • @JonCuster How much does it weigh in comparison to other factors ? This might seem repetitive but as far as I know the recommendations, research experience and SOP weigh heavily so, could these factors compensate for the good college tag deficiency? If no then is there an alternative way you could suggest that an applicant can try to compensate for this? – Malajapan Apr 13 '21 at 17:48
  • @Malajapan There is nothing a person at a less well-known college should do that a person at a very well-known college shouldn't do. Other than transferring, you should continue to excel at your research and classes. I am not sure what answer you're looking for ("do double good"?) – Azor Ahai -him- Apr 13 '21 at 17:53
  • 1
    @Malajapan There's no way to quantify this because no PhD program that I know of uses any sort of strict formula. It's people (and all the variance and individuality that people evaluating come with) evaluating stacks of other people (and all the variance and individuality that people applying come with). – Bryan Krause Apr 13 '21 at 17:53
  • @Azor Ahai -him- I am enrolling into a masters program of a "not well-known" college that is why I am asking this. I am confused whether I should take a drop year and prepare to get enrolled in a better college for masters so that my chances of selection get improved or whether I should just focus on building a really good application from whatever college I got this year. – Malajapan Apr 13 '21 at 18:01
  • @Bryan Krause Okay. I understand that. Personally, what advice would you give? Should I even try for applying into a good college considering my masters college is not good or is that a futile attempt altogether? – Malajapan Apr 13 '21 at 18:04
  • Why do you think your masters is "not good"? – Buffy Apr 13 '21 at 18:21
  • @Malajapan Can you work with someone who publishes their research in journals with a good international reputation at the school you're enrolling in? The only guarantee is that if you don't apply to a school you will not get in. Know also that there are a lot of good schools in the US, not just the most internationally famous ones. Very few people attend one of the "most famous" schools regardless of their background. – Bryan Krause Apr 13 '21 at 19:53
  • @Buffy "Not good" refers to the fact that the institution isn't very well known outside of India, even though the course is rigorous and complete. – Physiker Apr 14 '21 at 08:14

2 Answers2

3

This answer applies to doctoral admissions in the US, and, while not universal, is pretty regular.

First, your successful admission will depend on a weighting of many things. There won't be a standard, published, weighting, but only the general sensibility of the individual faculty members on the admissions committee. Note that most (not all) doctoral admissions is by committee, not by individual PIs/advisors.

The important factors, varying for every candidate and for every committee member, in a rough order of importance, are grades, especially in the field for which you seek admission, letters of recommendation from professors, standardized exams (some places), writing ability in English (some places), research experience (more important if you have a MS, than otherwise), and intangibles. A gap or two in your education can normally be made up as most degree programs are relatively open ended in time.

Among the intangibles might be the place(s) at which you studied, but letter of recommendation from people who know you well would be much more important. A good student from a mid range place might be greatly preferred over a mediocre student from a great institution.

If your previous education is at relatively unknown places then it is likely to be ignored except in a few exceptional cases. If a university already has some experience with others from your place, then their success might help to make a prediction about yours. But it is, I think, much more likely to be a favorable impression made by a good student than the opposite situation.

And note that some great and demanding professors can be found at quite unknown universities. You can learn a lot from them.

The committee needs to make a fairly accurate prediction of the likely success of a candidate. Grades and supportive letters, along with prior research experience are very important. It is much more important what you have done so far and what others think of you, than other things.

Wherever you study, work hard, make a good impression. Stay in contact with professors who support you. But also know that the competition is very fierce.

Also note that most students in the US enter doctoral studies immediately after their bachelors degree. A MS is seldom required and can often be earned along the way.

Buffy
  • 363,966
  • 84
  • 956
  • 1,406
1

This is a long comment, not an answer, but I often see this misconception in particular with students from India considering graduate admissions in the US.

Graduate admissions in the US are decided by committees of professors in the department that will admit you. The professors will read your application, and then they will make a collective, subjective, judgement about which students are most likely to succeed in the program, and admit those students. There are no other criteria. Different professors may have different opinions based on their own experiences of what indicators make a student likely to be successful (and different definitions of success!), but these tend to average out in committee discussions.

This seems strange to someone from India, where these kinds of decisions tend to get made based on some formula involving various numerical criteria. You might complain that the US system is subject to bias from the professors and even possible corruption. It is, but in the US we have decided that the benefit of being able to take into account subtle, unmeasurable considerations outweighs (in our context) the disadvantages of bias and the risk of corruption.

It is, of course, possible to make some generalizations about whom committees tend to admit and what they tend to consider in admissions, but these are predictions about human behavior, not rules.

Alexander Woo
  • 24,741
  • 3
  • 59
  • 91
  • "we have decided that the benefit of being able to take into account subtle, unmeasurable considerations" Actually, it is that for each research project, the PhD student who is most likely to succeed is a bit different. There is no formula which accounts for the diversity of doctoral research. – Anonymous Physicist Apr 13 '21 at 22:08