Read on Twitter
I recently interviewed for my 2nd PhD studentship and thought I would give some insight into what made for a successful applicant. I had over 80 applications for a single PhD studentship, so competition was high and small things made a difference. A thread…
TL;DR: Application - Customise your CV and cover letter to relate to the position you are applying (rather than using completely generic documents). Interview – be confident and enthusiastic, read up on the project area, and have some appreciation of the groups previous work.
Disclaimer 1: This is my perspective and might not be applicable to other PIs. Some of this might be common knowledge, but I did not consider myself when applying 10+ years ago and many applicants did not.
Disclaimer 2: Of the 80 applicants I selected a top 10 and between myself and the co-supervisors we shortlisted 5 for interview. 10+ years ago when I applied for a PhD, I would not have made this shortlist based on my PhD application.
CV 1: CV should make it easy to find pertinent information. I liked the CV to start with a sentence on two on “research interests”, where the applicant made it clear they were interested in research relating the advertised position (contrived, but demonstrates intention)
CV 2: Highlight grades relevant to the position you are applying. Most applicants had a 1st Class Hons at undergrad, so knowing the % mark for related modules highlights specific skills. This is especially important when from the degree title it is not immediately obvious.
Cover Letter 1: Show enthusiasm and passion for the research. Make it clear you are interested in the area and that you are a great fit. Demonstrate you are aware of the group by mentioning a couple of recent publications. If you enjoyed reading the groups work, say this
Cover Letter 2: Make this look like a ‘letter’ (i.e., add the address at the top and signature at the bottom). Make sure to address it to the PI. And make sure you spell their name correctly. If no length or word count is suggested, aim for around 1 page of text
Cover Letter 3: Draw on aspects of the CV that overlap with the project, such as you really enjoyed X module and scored highly during exams, that you have lab experience for the techniques needed, that you chose X subject for a literature review or essay, etc.
The interview 1: If asked to give a presentation, make it easy for the panel to follow, especially if unrelated to PhD project you have applied. Mention how techniques / experience you have gained in previous work has set you up well for the current PhD you are applying too
The interview 2: Listen to the question and keep to topic in your answer. Some deviation from the Q to make a key point is ok, but if you end up talking about something completely irrelevant wastes precious time to tell the PI what they want to hear.
The interview 3: If you don’t know the answer to a question, its okay to say sorry I am not sure. If you can, you could follow that up with something related that you do know.
Talking to the PI before applying 1: Very few students emailed me asking to meet in person/virtually prior to them applying. My personal stance on this is there is no disadvantage to speaking to the PI and getting on their radar.
Talking to the PI before applying 2: While an informal 1:1 chat is not an interview, it is important to impress. So if you request a meeting with the PI, have genuine questions and highlight your enthusiasm for the subject/research. You can only make a first impression once.
Misc impressive things 1: Mentioning you have attended a conference (virtually or in-person) and why you enjoyed it, reading papers from the group and other groups in the area, wanting to drive the research once you get up to speed with the techniques…
Misc impressive things 2: … Having some idea of why you want to do a PhD and what you ‘plan’ on doing after, and being able to demonstrate resilience (e.g., troubleshooting lab issues and enjoying understanding more about the method to overcome problems)
In closing: Sending the emails to notify the unsuccessful applicants sucked. All shortlisted applicants were great and more than capable of doing a PhD, and it really did come down to very fine margins. If you are unsuccessful at first, keep going. Best of luck!
