Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There is useful information about advisers. Perhaps not as much as is desirable, but certainly enough to avoid making bad choices. Very important: what happened to their old students?

My adviser: all students got academic jobs (some multiple offers) and finished in 5 years (5 years from B.S. to Ph.D. is normal for math). The most recent student, with whom I had overlap, said he rocked.

Another adviser I considered: fastest student took 6 years. One student took 9.5 years, and told everyone "pick a different adviser". Several never graduated. I scratched him off my list.

As for the "three dates", it's not optimal, but you can eliminate some bad choices. If the guy forgets to show up for "date #2"? He'll probably do that a lot. He probably doesn't care. One guy (perfectly decent fellow) was very formal, which doesn't really work for me. Several women students mentioned to me they want someone encouraging. The point of the meetings is to judge whether your personalities are compatible.

There is information out there, but lots of people don't actively seek it out. Then they become miserable grad students. One guy in my year ignored the advice of "9.5 years", and went on to become a miserable grad student (and now a happy actuary with an M.S.).

I had a fantastic adviser, which might have been luck. I had an adviser who didn't suck, which was the result of good choices.



My adviser: all students got academic jobs (some multiple offers) and finished in 5 years (5 years from B.S. to Ph.D. is normal for math). The most recent student, with whom I had overlap, said he rocked.

Okay, great! I feel confident in recommending your advice: If you want an academic job and can find an adviser like this, go to grad school. Otherwise, do not go.

Of course, if everyone followed this advice I think you might be able to fit all the world's grad students in a high school classroom, because your adviser was freakishly good.

How does the funding work in the math department? Lots of the theorists I knew seemed to be TAs almost until the day they graduated -- and in their field, unlike the experimental sciences, salary seemed to be a major fraction of the expense of keeping a grad student. In the experimental wing, where it can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to keep (e.g.) a genetics student stocked with reagents, the whole problem of adviser choice has an additional, frustrating degree of freedom: If your adviser doesn't have money to hire you, it doesn't matter that she's the greatest person in the world.

It might be possible to find someone who scores highly on the flush-with-cash axis, the graduates-students-on-time axis, the good-reputation-in-field axis, the track-record-of-successful-students axis and the provides-useful-research-advice axis... but such folks have their pick of grad student talent, and once they're done the other students have to pick among the remaining advisers, balancing the various factors and hoping to get lucky. Or, of course, they can quit, which is probably a better idea, though it is hard to make yourself do it once you've gone that far.

One overwhelmingly useful thing is to have independent funding. I had a fellowship and I cannot overstate how helpful it was -- I was able to shop for advisers in situations where my fellow students felt trapped by financial realities. If you find yourself headed for grad school, apply for every fellowship you can.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: