The importance of getting funding during the PhD.

Assuming that academia is the goal after the PhD, how important is funding for junior fellowships and post-doc's? As in, would a candidate who has self-funded or done their PhD part-time be viewed negatively?

Hi all,

The current application cycle will be coming to an end in a few months and I would like to start preparing the next step of my career. I'll be embarking on an MPhil in the fall and would like to apply for a PhD afterwards (at least, I'm 80% sure).

Assuming that academia is the goal after the PhD, how important is funding for junior fellowships and post-doc's? As in, would a candidate who has self-funded or done their PhD part-time be viewed negatively?

Thank you!

There is no generic answer really, it's part of the package. The ability to gain external funding, by writing persuasive cases, by having strong research topics, by hunting out the money, by being able to generate money etc are all valuable skills in an academic career. However, they matter more the more senior you are, so no-one would reasonably expect a PhD student to understand the nuances of cultivating a HNW donor, but you'd expect a senior academic to 'get it'.

So, depending on your subject and the general availability of funding on your area, it's much like having an extra publication - it's a good thing, but not a vital thing. If you can discuss funding opportunities sensibly, if you can demonstrate you know the places to go, the timings, the tactics etc, appropriate to a JRF/post-doc, then the fact you self-funded will not count against you.

The part-time issue depends on the role you are applying for. If you studied part-time and are applying for a part-time role, then you are applying to an employer that wants that working pattern, so there is no issue, so long as you can agree timings. So that's the same as negotiating the benefits package etc.

If you studied part-time and are applying for a full time role, you need to be able to convince that your circumstances have changed eg 'now the kids have left home, I want to return to full-time work' - and if you've got a clear reason like that, it's fine.

If you are applying to a full time job but want to do it part time, then you may well struggle. Flexible working requests don't kick in immediately.

There are a few things to note though. One is the importance of the supervisor, and ensuring they will support you & push for you both during the PhD, and afterwards. Both of the self-funders I know who seem to be getting on ok in the post-PhD market have very 'interventionist' supervisors - they try & create opportunities for both themselves and their students to get a leg up on others. Examples I can think of include a supervisor pushing for a student to be included in a panel at a conference, even though the organisers were looking for someone a bit more senior; equally, the supervisor also pushed for the student to have a written piece included in an edited volume. My supervisor is a lot more hands-off than this, and mostly I 'create' my own opportunities and apply for things myself. There are positives and negatives to both approaches, but my self-funded friend is probably in a better position than me right now for a job next year, as her supervisor pushed to have a temporary job opening designed around her, more or less (when you read the desired criteria & research area, it's exactly this student), so that's a huge advantage arising from the supervisor.

Second thing is to never underestimate the importance of networking and getting to know people. Meeting other academics, having them listen to your work through papers, and even having them read things for you, can be hugely helpful. If you get to know people well enough they might even act as a referee for you, and having your name 'out there' as someone active, engaged etc. doesn't seem to hurt.

The final thing is not to take lightly the financial side. Unless you're very wealthy independently or from family, the PhD years (and especially the initial few years afterwards) can be very precarious financially. Postdocs and temporary lectureships are often paid shockingly badly, so if you've already struggled to pull yourself through the PhD, it could break you if you're facing several years of low pay, possibly in high-cost cities where many of the good universities are located. Of course, I don't know anything about your personal circumstances, but it's just something to bear in mind.

If you're doing a part-time PhD around a substantial job, your university experience is quite different. You enter that strange world of studying at evenings and weekends, at times when the university library is often quieter and frequently shut (and I'd say that Cambridge is pretty rubbish for out-of-hours libraries, check the opening times for the library of your subject or the UL & you'll see what I mean - I miss the 24-hour library of my Masters university a LOT). Also the cafes close just when you need that extra coffee to keep going.

Self-funded doctoral students develop a certain mentality which can't be avoided. The temptation to work out your cost per contact hour is sometimes irresistible, especially in non-science subjects: 'I'm paying thousands per year for this and I've only seen my supervisor twice this term…..' This is, of course, a rubbish argument, because you're getting lots for your money but I reckon every self-funded student says or thinks this on occasion.

Part time students can get forgotten, as gutenberg says. I'm lucky in that my department is extremely proactive, with an excellent course leader and administrator, but it's not the same for every subject.

In my subject (a social science) there is limited funding anyway, so absolutely no stigma attached to self-funding. If you make a name for yourself during the doctorate, with networking and publications, there will be post-doc opportunities. Don't know how much this applies to other subjects.

There is anecdotal evidence (there's probably actual evidence but I wouldn't know where to find it) that self-funding students are less likely to finish than funded students.

Would I advise someone to self-fund? - probably not, actually, not until they'd explored every option for funding over a couple of application cycles if necessary. This isn't because of any effect on their future career opportunities, it's more that I wouldn't encourage anyone to take on a financial commitment of that size if there's a chance that someone else could pay the bill for them..

To speak from my perspective of prospective international student, it might also matter where you would like to pursue your career. Here, in East Europe, nobody knows about any funding and nobody cares - the symbolic capital of Cambridge degree is immense and even in academia, nobody knows anything about the scholarship schemes. From my knowledge, in Germany it is more or less the same, and I reckon everywhere on the continent.

Any idea how this can be done? I sometimes find it very difficult to understand how PhD students can network.

How does one figure out if a supervisor will be good? It can be difficult to gauge these things from the 'outside'.

Are there associations or societies one must join to network with academics?

This is something I'm definitely aware of! I'd ideally be living at home, if I do decide to go down the self-funded route.

Thank you so much for your detailed response!

This is something voiced by a friend of mine at Oxford as well. Do you struggle to work at home or do you need the resources in the libraries?

I do wonder what resources one pays for as PhD - is it the library resources, access to archives, etc...?

I'm not sure if you're in the History department, but without giving too much 'irl' information away, would you happen to know what it's like for part-time History PhD students at Cambridge?

Any idea how this can be done? I sometimes find it very difficult to understand how PhD students can network.

I do wonder if that's perhaps because students underestimate the cost of a PhD?

This is definitely not the first time I'm reading this (I saw a few posts both on TSR and other forums regarding this) - Would departments not view multiple applications negatively?

Thank you so much for your reply, Jantaculum!

Go to additional lectures and hang around afterwards. You don't have to ask some mind-blowing question in the Q&A session with a global superstar, but hang around for the drinks afterwards, or go to departmental get togethers and take part in discussions. Be engaging and interested, and as your knowledge matures your questions and engagement will become richer and more valued. You will start to piece things together - and even being able to say 'I was listening to Dr X the other day and he made a similar point about y in the context of z' and people will listen, pick up, take on the conversation, but remember you as someone who had an interest, and lo and behold you've begun a network.

Be generous with the standard social media networks, flatter senior academics (!), be seen and be seen to be engaged and the network will flow. If you aren't a natural networker, a) there will be others around you that are - copy them and b) it doesn't take the brazen chutzpa that many imagine. Over 3 years it can be a slow burner and can be done via frequency of general conversations rather than fireworks and being a confident, social butterfly.

Unfortunately there is no surefire way to tell. Try to get in contact with some of the supervisor's other students and see how they find them, bearing in mind of course that everyone will have a different experience with the same supervisor. A student who is a supervisor's 'favourite' (and it does happen!) will likely be much more positive! But all you can do is (very discreetly) ask around as best you can.

No. Threeportdrift gave a good summary below - just make sure you attend events, and don't be afraid to stay for the drinks/dinner afterwards if you can, and just chat with people. Conferences (especially smaller ones) are good for this too, since most people there will have a common interest. Most likely your university will have a regular or semi-regular seminar in which both external and internal speakers present their research. Make sure you go to these, it's a good way to meet the other academics and postgrads in your department, as well as some interesting external people. As threeport said below, it doesn't have to be some brazen, handing-out-your-business-card approach, it's really just being friendly and engaged.

No worries. I see you asked Jantaculum below about part-time History PhDs. I can honestly say that in my subject group (I'm in History, but it is divided up into subject groups within it), I haven't come across any at Cambridge. Everyone who is self-funding, is full-time for some reason. Although as I said, at Oxford it seems to be much more common, and I can think of several people in my broad subject area who are self-funding, and going part-time. Perhaps Oxford just has better supports in place for that, or really pushes self-funding people to go the part-time route, I can't really say. I have met one or two part-time PhDs in other subject groups (I encountered one or two in the Modern history group), so there obviously are a few. From my brief interaction with them, they seemed happy enough, and they were invited along to participate in things like the Graduate Research Day and so forth.

I don't think they would. My daughter has just done her third round of PhD applications, some of which have been to the same department in the same university. After two years of rejections, she got two offers this year, one of which is an absolute dream of a PhD with extra contributions from a sponsor and good job prospects (either in or out of academia) at the end of it. The department didn't view multiple applications negatively, in fact they pointed her in the direction of the one she got this time round. They understand the funding problems.

This is very interesting! So, brand > funding + scholarship? Is this the case across Europe, e.g. Switzerland and France as well?

How does one figure out if a supervisor will be good? It can be difficult to gauge these things from the 'outside'.

Don't even try to go in French Academia.

Once you're in Oxford, ask other students about their supervisors. You'll also be able to see whether your current supervisor is good enough.
Some of them also tell on their personal page their former PhD students and where they are working now.

Do you want to go back to the USA after your PhD or stay in Europe?

No worries. I see you asked Jantaculum below about part-time History PhDs. I can honestly say that in my subject group (I'm in History, but it is divided up into subject groups within it), I haven't come across any at Cambridge. Everyone who is self-funding, is full-time for some reason. Although as I said, at Oxford it seems to be much more common, and I can think of several people in my broad subject area who are self-funding, and going part-time. Perhaps Oxford just has better supports in place for that, or really pushes self-funding people to go the part-time route, I can't really say. I have met one or two part-time PhDs in other subject groups (I encountered one or two in the Modern history group), so there obviously are a few. From my brief interaction with them, they seemed happy enough, and they were invited along to participate in things like the Graduate Research Day and so forth.

Appreciate the help. From you experience, do the 'superstar' supervisors tend to be a little more arrogant than the less known ones?

I understand. Two follow-up questions, if I may:

a) How important is the subject group? Do you find it easy to network with people from outside the subject group?
b) When you make an application for a PhD at History, do you have to specify the subject group you would like to be a part of?

Thank you again for your responses, gutenberg!