I did not know any of the following before I went to graduate school at Texas A&M University. I finished my doctorate, including my ten courses, in nearly two years (yes, really, 25 months, to be precise). So, I can not complain and I really enjoyed my short stay there. But then, I did realize the importance of choosing the right research university and the right advisor. 

Choosing The Right Research University

Though choosing a research topic is important, choosing a good school to do research is of prime importance.The first criteria should be the rank of the university. Yes, I am talking about rankings that are often labeled as biased and unfair but saying that they do not matter is silly. You are in Indian Institute of Science and not in some unknown college because this Institute is ranked highly.  The doctorates from the top 25 universities constitute the top 80% of  all faculy hires in USA. As a prospective student, especially if you have any academic ambitions, you should apply only to one of these places. It is possible that you can receive excellent education in a 100th ranked institution and get hired but, remember, the chances of that is 20% and not 80%.The following link provides you with the rankings of the top engineering schools and chemical engineering departments in the world.

RANKINGS - 2003;

RANKINGS-2009


The second most important criteria is the effectiveness of the program. If the students graduating from the universities find good placement, either in industry or academia, then it is a good place. While some information can be obtained from brochures, it is best to talk to past and current students of the college.

The third criteria is that the academic strength of the program. It is essential one does a doctorate in a large school. Many graduate students (> 100) always makes it a vibrant and intellectually stimulating place. The size of the faculty ensures that different research areas are represented and a presence of critical mass of faculty in similar areas of research. To define large, I would say at least 15-20 active faculty (my friend defines active as some faculty who publishes at least 3 papers every year).

Possibly, the last criteria is finances. In India, it does not matter because all institutes pay the same and you stay in a hostel, whose charges are nearly similar everywhere. The applicant should first examine whether the offered position is a teaching/research assistant. The former, while giving you teaching experience, will take away your research time invariably prolonging your graduating time. Secondly, some departments require that you pay "some" tution and fees (instate, reduced out-of-state etc.). The applicant should be sure what he can expect to take home. The other things that the applicant should make sure is the cost of housing, need for transportation to commute and health coverage. The cost of housing varies widely between even counties in the USA and is better to check with the present students or the indian association. Unlike India, you need health insurance: so make sure that you are covered. The cost of buying and maintaining a car in the first year of graduate school when you are new to the country is going to be difficult and it is better to enquire about the cost of housing near the department.

Choosing The Right Research Advisor

By RICHARD M. REIS

"The adviser is the primary gatekeeper for the professional self-esteem of the student, the rate of progress toward the degree, and access to future opportunities."

 S. E. Widnall, past president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science

Choosing a research topic and finding an adviser are clearly linked, although generally speaking the first precedes the second. You want an adviser who is in a research area in which you have, or seek to develop, a strong interest. This element is essential, given all the inevitable difficulties you are going to experience. At the same time, you want a professor who understands that "finding the right problem" is half the battle, and that he or she needs to give you the encouragement and time to do so.

Joanne Martin, professor of organizational behavior in the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University, and one who has studied the adviser-advisee relationship in some detail, notes:

"Topics you approach with passion lead to the best research. You want to get out with something significant, something you care deeply about (rather than the purely pragmatic) choice, so select a topic that is a window into your soul."

It is also important to keep in mind that in addition to a primary adviser you will most likely want to find one or two secondary advisers who have an interest in your research and are prepared to offer counsel along the way. In this way what one adviser is lacking in experience and temperament can often be found in the others. For example, one adviser may be from industry, another from a different department, and another with strengths in a particular specialty.

If you are interested in a future academic career, consider advisers who will give you opportunities to do some teaching, write research proposals, supervise other students, and in other ways let you begin doing some of the things you will do as a postdoc or professor.

In his book Graduate Research: A Guide for Students in the Sciences (ISI Press, 1984), Robert Smith says that the choice of an adviser should be based on the person's:
 

Mr. Smith refers to three types of advisers: the collaborator, the one with a hands-off style, and the senior scientist. The collaborator is more likely to be young and hungry for results. His or her success depends to a larger extent on yours, so he or she has a vested interest in how well you do. Often this can mean rapid progress toward your degree, but be careful. In such cases topics are often chosen more by the adviser than by the student. The topics may be less risky, and the adviser may want more than the appropriate share of credit. The key with young faculty members is to see that your interests overlap with theirs.

Young faculty members usually have quite a bit of energy. While they lack experience in supervising graduate students and postdocs, they remember more clearly what it was like to be in such a position. Also, how well these professors supervise graduate students, or at least how many they graduate, may be a factor in tenure decisions -- possibly to your benefit. Of course the existence of this factor can also be a problem in terms of pressure on you to perform. As one graduate student with such an adviser noted, "no laid-back six months to browse the literature in my situation."

The hands-off adviser is generally a mid-level academic with other responsibilities, but may be "less greedy for results," in Mr. Smith's words. Such a person can be a source of wise counsel and might let you choose areas of greater risk and significance.

The senior scientist type is a well-established faculty member with varying amounts of time. Mr. Smith thinks the quality of attention from senior scientists may be the best of all because of their extensive experience. However, while older faculty members may not compete with you, as might their younger colleagues, they may also think they know it all, are less likely to help you learn the ropes, and may not be as available. Also, their energy level may be lower, and they may be out of date or living on past glories.

Professor Martin also likes to classify advisers into three types: in this case, authoritarian, coach, and laissez faire.

The authoritarian adviser is likely to set the goals and lay out tasks for the research, usually in some detail. Such advisers welcome conflict, expect you to speak up, and are active throughout the research process.

The coach, on the other hand, will seek to set goals jointly with the student. There may be a lot of guidance in the beginning or planning phase, but not much during the research itself. "Active in the planning stage, passive during the process, and active in the evaluation stage," is how Ms. Martin puts it.

Laissez-faire advisers are friendly and constantly supportive but it's not certain you will learn much from them. They will be relatively inactive on the research task unless you take the initiative but supportive throughout and generally available. Attractive as they may first appear, working with a laissez-faire adviser is a high-risk strategy and is only likely to work if you have strong research skills, are independent, and know what you want.

Although it is tempting to match Mr. Smith's collaborator, hands-off, and senior scientist, with Ms. Martin's coach, laissez faire, and authoritarian, the real point here is not to force people into categories; after all, everyone has some of all six characteristics. In fact, some advisers are able to combine elements of all three styles as the student evolves. However, each adviser probably fits one description more completely than any other, and you need to be aware of these differences and make decisions and adjustments accordingly.

Look at the styles of various professors, how they treat their graduate students, how many students they have, and their track record in graduating students. Consider how much direction and supervision you want and need. Be willing to push your boundaries, but not to an extreme. You need to be somewhere in your comfort zone, but not too comfortable. Above all, you want at least one adviser who will be demanding. In the words of a graduate student in biology, "you want your anxiety level to go up a little when you get an e-mail message from your adviser."

 If possible, talk to the students and postdocs of potential advisers. Ask lots of questions. Do the students and postdocs see the big picture? Are any of them doing compelling work? Do they have high expectations for themselves and others in the group?

Plan to attend one or more of these meetings and pay attention to the interactions. Consider what your relationship will be with the other students and postdocs in the group. Who will give you survival tips? Who will mentor you? Are there postdocs involved, and what is their relationship with the professor and graduate students? Where are recent graduates and former postdocs now working?

By following the guidelines outlined above and the suggestions in last month's column on identifying a research topic, you should be on your way to a productive dissertation experience.


Have a question or a suggestion for Richard Reis? Please send comments to catalyst@chronicle.com

Richard M. Reis is director for academic partnerships at the Stanford University Learning Laboratory, and author of Tomorrow's Professor: Preparing for Academic Careers in Science and Engineering, available from IEEE Press or the booksellers below.


Getting the most out of the relationship with your research advisor

by Wanda Pratt.  Send comments or suggestions to: pratt@smi.stanford.edu

Making continual progress on your research


Characteristics to look for in a good advisor, mentor, boss, or committee member

It is unreasonable to expect one person to have all of the qualities you desire. You should choose thesis committee members who are strong in the areas where your advisor is weak.

There are no rigid rules to do research. Like cycling or swimming you do it by doing it. Research requires a reasonable amount of analytical and experimental skills but requires common sense and perseverance. Extraordinary intelligence, let alone genius, is rare. You can read the advice to Young Scientist by Sir Peter Medawar and the transcript of an excellent talk by Richard Hamming on how to do excellent research.

I personally feel one should read the following link carefully, So Long, and thanks for the Ph.D


YOU JUST MIGHT BE A GOOD GRADUATE STUDENT IF... (Strictly for humor, or is it ?)