A little over a month ago, I found myself being asked for tips on the JEE. Having completely cut myself off from the system for over two years, I realized that I had become incapable of providing any meaningful advice. And while that will not happen with the grad school application process, for reasons including but not limited to there being fewer elements of chance and subjectivity, when asked to write something “similar to my intern blog”, I wasn’t going to say no. This is very different from the former though, being more advice-heavy and less personal (though I chime in as needed). Incidentally, I feel the need to mention how nearly everyone who read the former, in spite of my leaving the ending ambiguous, expected that I would actually join TI, missing the point entirely (being that you have to give time for things to settle, and they usually have a way of working out). Clearly, I must do a more transparent job this time around, and that this certainly is.
It’s unlikely that you’ll find anything in this blog that hasn’t already been written somewhere. Most of what I write is regurgitated from the innumerable articles I read going through the same process in 2021, many of which can be found in the colossal https://github.com/shaily99/advice. And still, here is my own attempt at such a blog, as much for the benefit of others as for myself. I feel like enough time has passed since the process for me to be able to view it as objectively as possible, but not so long that I forget specific details. I do my best to bring those out here.
The focus of this blog is on universities that have application deadlines in early to mid-December, which was the case for all of my target universities but is in no way sacrosanct (I choose this merely to provide a timeline that works since most other deadlines happen to be after December). Since this has become way longer than I had anticipated when I began writing, here is an outline for easy perusal:
Master’s/PhD
Prerequisites
Tests (GRE and TOEFL)
Identification
Letters of Recommendation
Curriculum Vitae (CV)
Statement of Purpose
Interviews
Random Thoughts and The End
Master's/PhD:
This is not something I thought about very much, and subsequently, I have little to say about it. If you’re like me, sure of doing a PhD eventually and have a pretty good idea of what you want to work in, a PhD is what you should apply for. If not, talk to people who know what they’re talking about, use the Internet, look at what different programmes cover, and find out what looks best for you.
That being said, this is a blog primarily for PhD applicants, simply because that is what I was myself. Much of the process might be identical for Master’s applicants (but not MBA) as well, but it would be dishonest to say that with any authority. On the rare occasions I am sure of something also holding for/being directly contradictory to the Master’s process, I make that explicit.
Prerequisites:
Here is what you should have ready before you decide to apply (ideally the summer before your final year). I realise that most of you are reading this at exactly this point or later, so this is more for me to set context than anything else. If you’re looking for a PhD, you should have good research experience. This is helped if supplemented by research internships and publications, but they’re not the be-all and end-all: I had neither in my application and still got into one of my top 3 picks (this is also heavily field and topic dependent). CPI definitely helps (more so for a Master’s): the higher the better, in general.
Tests:
Typically, you will need to submit GRE (General) and TOEFL (iBT) scores (for both Master’s and PhD applicants), which are best written, in that order, in the summer before your final year. Finding slots may get harder later into the season, so it’s best to be done with these formalities as early as possible (I wrote both separated by only the first week of the Fall semester). There are books that provide neat tips for both, which you may or may not find on typical book-finding websites that may or may not be legal. While nearly all universities require TOEFL, an increasing number no longer have the GRE as a mandatory requirement. If you find that most of your target universities (more on this later) don’t need the GRE, you may consider skipping it. For more information on the exact modality of these tests, look around the ETS website.
GRE: I refer to the GRE General test, not the GRE Subject test, which is a specialised test that you may need (I did not) - check your own programme requirements to find out if you do. The amount of preparation you need for the GRE can be anywhere from weeks to months, depending on both your ability to write and your knowledge of uncommon words that ETS likes. The most efficient way to improve the latter is by using a GRE-specific flashcard app (such as Magoosh, which I used); the former comes through practice and familiarising yourself with possible writing prompts (all 300-odd of which are available on the ETS website). Apart from English, you will also be tested on your basic mathematical ability in the quantitative section; it’s unlikely that you will require too much (or any) preparation for this. It’s a good idea to attempt two practice tests: one after a few days of preparation, when you think you have a good idea of what to expect in the test, and one a day or two before the actual test. The goal is to finish with 325+ (out of 340) and 4+ (out of 6) in the writing section (being slightly under will not be terrible if you have an otherwise incredible profile). I had 333 and 5.
TOEFL: Once you’ve prepared for the GRE, this becomes incredibly simple. The hardest part for me was the speaking section, but a week of practice should be more than enough. A week after GRE is probably as good a time as any for TOEFL. Most universities have a strict minimum requirement not more than 100 (out of 120), which is comfortable, but the speaking section in particular may have a stronger constraint (again, check programme requirements). I had 116, with 30 each in reading and listening, and 28 each in speaking and writing.
Identification:
This is a process that starts fairly early on, but one that takes long and deserves a good bit of attention. The first step is to figure out what areas to apply to, based on your experience and interests. They shouldn’t be too specific, but shouldn’t be from unrelated domains; you want a common thread running through those topics (that you will look to describe in your Statement of Purpose - more on that later).
Since you must know whether or not you’ll need GRE scores, you should at least have a preliminary list of universities that interest you (around 15 in number) before you write the test(s). You can also send your scores to 4 universities for free during the registration/test, as opposed to later (when you have to pay additionally to send scores of tests that you paid to write). This list could come from anywhere - research groups whose works you may be familiar with, places you know seniors from similar areas have gone to, perhaps even plainly looking at university names from global ranking lists - but you should also ask professors that you are currently working/have worked with for advice and recommendations. For each university, make a list of faculty whose works interest you and scour their websites - What areas are they/will they be working on? Do they want new students? Are they going on a 2-year sabbatical starting next year? Are they taking up a new position elsewhere? Do they require that you email them apart from applying to the programme if you wish to work with them? - every bit of relevant information helps. Thus begins the process of pruning your list to a target of 10. You can take as long as you want right until the deadlines, in principle, but it’s best to have your 10 settled in early November, along with a handful of professors from each (it’s a good idea to have at least 3-4 people that interest you at each university; they are humans after all and you do not want your future resting on the shoulders of a single fickle mind). Your 10 should be split into 3 categories: around 3-4 long shots (that are above your level - an honest assessment of where you stand is needed, seniors from similar areas and the professors you work with are your best sources for this), 3-4 achievables (that are realistic but not essentially guaranteed) and 3-4 safes (where you are basically assured of admittance, but still places that you would be happy going to). My 10 were: MIT, EPFL, Stanford, Caltech, Cambridge, UIUC, UT Austin, UCLA, UCSD, and Purdue (in order, 4 long shots, 4 achievables, 2 safes).
Letters of Recommendation (LoRs):
Most places require 3 LoRs, and it’s recommended (haha) that they are all from professors that you’ve directly worked with (i.e. done research with) for at least 4 months. You want them to be able to testify to your capacity as a researcher, and not just write a generic letter that while not necessarily bad, certainly won’t help. For this, with at least around 2 months to go until the deadlines (but the sooner the better, it becomes easier and more expected if you’ve already discussed your application and possible target universities with them earlier), you ask them, ideally in-person if possible, if they would be willing to write you a “strong LoR” (which also makes it easier for them to say “no” instead of “yes” but not really helping your application with an average LoR). Some of them might need reminding of the exact highlights of your profile, so be sure to share your CV with them. Remind them of all deadlines and maintain a spreadsheet keeping track of submitted letters. I have also heard of some professors asking you to write the letters yourselves, which is not only illegal and deeply unethical but also unavoidable and unfortunate because this is not the sort of thing you look for or are even aware of when you start a project.
If you don’t happen to have 3 professors that can attest to your research abilities, fret not. You could also ask a professor who knows you well in a positive way through participation in courses or otherwise, but bear in mind that they might not be willing to write a strong letter in such cases. There are also universities that require only 2 LoRs, you just have to find them - more work in the Identifying stage for you then. On the other hand, if you happen to have more than 3 professors, make sure you distribute them well across your 10 schools. Some of them might have connections at some universities, ask them where they would prefer to write LoRs and work it out.
Curriculum Vitae (CV):
In your rather dramatically named “Course of Life”, you shall summarise your academic career, keeping in mind that it will be used, not to directly evaluate your fit as a PhD student, but to give the reader a high-level view of your profile. All this is really, is an exercise in compression, very fact-based and ordinary (unlike the statement of purpose, which we will get to). You want to include things like research, internships, publications, projects, achievements, teaching, talks, (in that order) and anything else that you think goes well with a PhD application. Be specific, use data wherever possible, and keep it clear and to the point. Use a nice LaTeX template (there are plenty available online). Add links for websites, GitHub repositories, publications, and other online material. Keep it to a maximum of 3 pages, unless the committee explicitly recommends a certain number of pages. I don’t have much else to say here because that’s all there is. Ask yourself “How does this look when seen through the eyes of the PhD admission committee?” before putting anything in and more often than not, you’ll have your answer. For a better guide to the content of a grad school application CV, Google exactly that (or look in the repository from the second paragraph) and you’ll find loads of material.
Statement of Purpose (SoP):
This, together with your LoRs, forms the core of your application. Unlike your LoRs, the contents of which you have little control over and will in all likelihood remain oblivious to, the SoP is entirely yours to shape. While the exact prompt and requirements will vary from place to place, the basic idea is the same: present a concise, coherent narrative describing in concrete terms your journey so far and its influence in shaping the researcher you are now, and how it might unfold if you were to be admitted at said place. It should leave the reader with a clear understanding of your experience and interests. It should be packed with content and not be over 1.5-2 pages long.
Start with a simple statement that describes your interests. Then go on to elaborate on all of your relevant research experience in as much detail as possible, while being decipherable to someone not necessarily from that field. Take care to be concrete and evidence-based, with short, crisp sentences (very much unlike this verbose blog) that are easy to understand on first reading. Don’t repeat lines from your CV, instead provide the context that gives them meaning and show how your work fits in the grand scheme of things. After you finish with your research experience, you may write about other experiences that you believe make you a solid fit for a PhD: teaching, mentoring, and so on, but remember that the research density is what makes your application strong; the rest is just to round it off nicely. You then mention specific faculty that you are interested in from that university and why (without including generic statements that do not say anything about you). The ending should be powerful and neatly summarise everything important that you’ve said. You’ve got yourself a solid SoP. Easier said than done.
Your SoP should be uniquely yours and make your application stand out. While these words may not mean much to you at this point, they hopefully will after a few rounds of feedback and corrections spread over around 2 months. Make a list of people that you think will be willing to help (current PhD students, young professors that know you well, even your friends - as long as they know what they’re looking for), and get feedback. Your first draft is going to be bad, everyone’s is. Don’t waste your time trying to perfect it. Instead, get some feedback on it, and start the iterative refinement process. Soon enough, your SoP will take shape, and knowing what to look for following initial feedback, even you will be able to spot improvements on coming back to it following a few days away. This delicate balance between brevity and density and specificity is difficult to achieve and should not be rushed, which is why I remind you again to get that first draft out by the end of October at the latest.
For Master’s applicants, check the programme website for specific details on what they are looking for in potential applicants - this could be different at different departments and universities (some may be research-oriented, some may be professional and course-oriented); present your profile to match those requirements.
And with that, you have everything ready. Submit at least a day before each deadline to provide leeway for application fee payment mess-ups and/or portal failures (don’t mess up international time conversions) and forget about it (I think it is fitting to mention without further elaboration that I took a week-long break without access to the Internet starting December 14th, a day before 8 of my 10 deadlines) until…
Interviews:
Between the end of December and mid-April, you may be contacted by faculty who have seen your application and would like to interview you. These interviews can be extremely different in style and intensity, though they’re almost always under 30 minutes long. Some may simply want to chat about your interests, while some may ask technical questions (usually from your projects); in any case, it’s best to be well-prepared and brush up on the finer details of your research that you may have forgotten over time.
Then you wait again, hopefully not too long, till you get an email saying you’ve been accepted. And that’s the end of this exhausting process. I didn’t have to suffer too much while waiting because I was really lucky to get early acceptances with my first and second interviews (on 31.12.2021, Cambridge: the professor told me during the interview itself that he would forward my application to the next stage from which point it’s essentially a formality, and on 24.01.2022, EPFL: I received an acceptance email, around a week after my interview). These were before I had even heard from anyone at any other university (bar Purdue, but this hardly mattered now that I had acceptances from higher preferences); they usually start scheduling interviews around early February, and decisions come out around mid- to late March. Having to go so far without any sort of confirmation would have been an interesting test, one that I’m glad I did not have to take.
Random Thoughts and The End:
And here’s a bunch of things that I think merit a place somewhere in this blog, in no particular order.
Should you email professors (prospective advisors) before applying? If their website specifically asks that you do (not), you should (not). Otherwise, it’s up to you. If the admission is centralised, it’s unlikely that much will come out of the conversation (if you get a reply at all), but it may help to know, for example, if they are interested in taking any students at all next year (if they’re not, that’s one person off your list and you may have to reevaluate whether that university is still something you want to consider). Keep the email concise, polite, and specific to that professor; a generic cold email will likely do more harm than good.
There are sections of the internet (they shall remain unnamed) that like to discuss the process in great detail at every step: avoid them. Especially during the waits for interviews and decisions, it’s very easy to get drawn into constantly checking for updates. These do nothing but make you a nervous wreck and no one wants that.
Choose your places wisely: this is key to eliminating the risk of ending up with no admits. Have enough safe schools but also don’t undersell yourself - spend long to actually determine your level and ideal 10. Speaking of choosing the 10…
Ultimately, good research happens in a lot of places, not just in the top-ranked ones. More importantly, the best research for your specific area might not even be at a top-ranked university. The best researcher may not even be the best advisor, which is a completely different question. A PhD is a long-term commitment, so the location and culture of the place should also be, while not decisive, a factor nonetheless. This game is a multi-objective optimization and you should prioritise what is most important to you. Conversely, this also means that there’s almost always something to like about most places, so you shouldn’t worry too much about ending up at a “bad” university (as long as you do the identification stage well).
You may also want to talk to people working in some of the groups that you are interested in, especially after you are admitted, before you make your decision, either to feel more confident or to choose between comparable options.
Most universities take a ridiculously high amount of money as “application fees”, and in between this and ETS’s fleecing, the process can be terrible for your finances. But hey, “capitalism breeds innovation”. Anyway, I’m sure they have their reasons so the point is not to be judgemental; this is just something you have to be aware of before setting out on this path.
In closing, this is a journey where you have the opportunity to really think about the why and the what of you as a researcher. The identifying process will take you through so many different flavours of the problems you have seen and tried. This will embed your understanding in a much larger dimension, which allows you to grow and see things in a different light. While this is no easy process, it is enriching, and could also end with a neat reward. Ensure that you appreciate the process, keep your end of the bargain, and good luck!