Is it really good to receive a fully funded PhD offer from a top university without being interviewed?

The PhD research work is proposed by the University but the university is not funding. It has a tie up with a funding agency and this funding organization will fund the PhD and will not conduct any interview. Neither the interview will be taken by the university. There is direct selection.

I am confused whether to join or not. Please guide me.

The university is in Germany and I am from India. I have submitted the IELTS score as well. I have good Masters record and has a good and consistent academic profile throughout. Is this the reason that there is no interview?

It is maybe borderline with the domain of this community but I’m convinced I could get some interesting feedbacks here.

For some business exercise at my university (KTH) we imagined a new business model for content providers on the Internet who currently mostly rely on advertising. The ubiquity of advertising on the web and especially the lack of alternatives for publishers to get money is a matter of debate.

Can you please fill this little survey with your opinion about this? Would be very useful for our case!

Don’t hesitate to share your thoughts, it’s an interesting problem to discuss. 🙂

Please, if you are a content provider yourself (blogger, journalist, or creating any service on a website) monetizing your work, please answer this survey:

I’m an American, and I’m considering – sometime in the future – getting a PhD in computer science. My impression is that Europe is a lovely place, both in general and because of its sane work culture. If I decide I would like to become a professor in Europe, what steps should I take?

For example:

  1. Does one need to get a PhD from Europe, rather than from the U.S., to be a professor there?
  2. If not, does a PhD from the UK qualify one to be a professor in continental Europe?
  3. Are classes in continental Europe generally taught in English?
  4. If not, does one need to be a native speaker to teach them?

An individual I know is in an interesting situation and I was just wondering what you guys thought about it.

This individual had an exam conflict and emailed the instructor to arrange an alternate exam time to get rid of this conflict. Meanwhile the rest of the class would be taking the exam for this course at a later time that day.

After the alternate exam was finished, this individual answered questions and provided specific topics regarding the exam by his peers who would be taking that course exam later that day.

Now this individual received an email from the instructor accusing him of leaking information and reported it to the academic misconduct board.

Now I was just wondering if this is truly a form of academic misconduct.

Just a few notes to add:

  • I have fellow peers who have done the exact same thing and not face a single threat of being reported to the academic board.
  • Is it not the instructor’s responsibility to prepare a different version of the exam for both the individual and rest of the class?
  • Furthermore, is it not also the university’s and/or the instructor’s responsibility to highlight the confidentiality of an alternate exam and notify the possible consequences? In all the rules and regulations, there are no clear cut rules for alternate exams or any offences that can take place.
  • Does this just come down to miscommunication and failure to provide reasonable notice?
  • From the rumours going around, the evidence gathered is a screenshot of a facebook conversation, is this even enough evidence?
  • And if so, would it not be a breach of privacy?
  • Another update: The individual did not know that it was going to be the same exam.

Thanks again and I would love to hear your thoughts about this.


As a user pointed out, the second part to this question is how can this individual minimize the damage and not face severe academic misconduct?

I have recently submitted a paper to a journal, with the format required by the journal itself.

Now I am submitting on Arxiv a version of the paper with the same content but a different formatting (not the journal format, just a generic one).

I am wondering: should I keep the acknowledgments in this Arxiv preprint?

This situation I’m in currently is the following. This is all based in the UK (England, more precisely). I’m at university A with full EPSRC for a maths PhD. However, I’m not getting on well with the university, and would like to change to university B. (The particular reasons for this aren’t pertinent to this question.) I’ve looked on the EPSRC website and I can’t see anything that says this isn’t an issue. Ideally I’d like to move to university B at the start of next year (so not wait until the new academic year).

I’ve spoken with university B about this, and they are happy to have me, subject to being able to be funded. The person I spoke to said they were unsure if I could get funding, as they’d heard that EPSRC will only fund someone once, and so since I’ve already had a term of funding, they wouldn’t fund me again. They aren’t sure on this though.

Does anyone have any knowledge of such things? Surely while changing university during a PhD wouldn’t be common, it can’t be that uncommon?

Note the close relation to this question “Is transferring to another university an option for an unhappy PhD student?“, but that mine is slightly different. The university to which I would transfer have said that they would have me, subject to getting funding, so this is not an issue.

It seems like funding in the lab I work in is getting tight, and since I usually end up spending a fair amount of money buying supplies for the lab, It’d be nice to have an accurate picture of the lab’s financial situation so that I could make more informed decisions. I’ve pretty directly indicated to my adviser that I’m interested in more details about how the funding situation in the lab is, but it seems my adviser doesn’t want to talk about it. On the couple cases I’ve mentioned it, they’ve avoided directly talking about it or have given me very vague and not very useful responses.

I’m currently self-funded, so I’m not particularly concerned about losing my job or anything. I’m sure my adviser would tell me before things got too crazy bad, but I’d just rather not be so in the dark about these things. How unusual is it for advisers to hide this info from their students? Would it be appropriate / inappropriate for me to push further? I realize that funding is probably a somewhat sore & frustrating subject for many professors.

While most other schools seem to have some recommended length (e.g. 1000 words) for the statement of purpose, MIT (maths) simply states

Please explain why you are a good candidate for graduate school. You should describe why you wish to attend graduate school, what you would like to study, and any research experience you have. Describe one or more accomplishments you are particularly proud of that suggest that you will succeed in your chosen area of research.

As a mathematician I would like to keep it short because if I was in their position the last thing I would want is another long essay. However, since there is no possibility to upload a CV (and I am afraid they won’t take a very close look at my website) I am inclined to describe my research experience as well as experiences with researchers (showing that I do take initiative, am not easily discouraged, etc.) there. This rather detailed description turned out to have 995 words.

Should I try to keep it shorter at the expense of, say, descriptions how I got interested in a particular field?