PhD application introductory meeting?

So I found a PhD that sounded interesting to me and was really similar to what I did in my MSc dissertation and so I reached out to the supervisor with a short intro on myself, etc. He told me my background sounded very relevant and encouraged me to apply and that 'following your application, we can arranage an introductory meeting to discuss specific interests and details of the project'.

So I submitted my application and sent off the reference report forms to my referees to fill out. The uni application form/process does say:
"Your application cannot be considered until references have been received by the University." And then emailed the supervisor to ask if we would be waiting till after the references had been received to have the intro meeting or if before was ok.

He replied saying not to worry about the references and that they would go through my application and arrange for an introductory discussion.

So I guess my question is - what is this 'introductory discussion/meeting' going to be like? What will I have to prepare? Given that it doesn't seem like the 'proper' interview stage of the application.

Thank you!

Edit: Also, the application says: 'Candidates should hold or expect to gain a first-class degree or a good 2.1 (or their equivalent)', but I got a bad 2.1 at undergrad (60/61) but got a distinction (72? i think) for my masters and an 86 for my dissertation (which really is very similar to the project advertised. My MSc dissertation involved computer vision AI in histology, this project involves computer vision AI in histology, just in another field + obvs goes much deeper into detail as you would expect of a msc dissertation vs a whole degree dedicated to the project). However, I also did badly for a research project during my MSc (58) due to a supervisor who was unbelievably unhelpful during the project. How badly will my chances be hurt by these mistakes on my transcript?

How important this meeting is will depend on how the PhD is funded, and specifically whether the supervisor is the one who decides whether you get the PhD or not. In all likelihood it will be fairly informal, but you should prepare properly for it. Make sure you've read the project description thoroughly, and all of the suggested reading. Think about questions you could ask - thoughts about directions to take the PhD in would be particularly useful.

Thank you! Can you expand more on how the funding determines the importance of the meeting? Is it that if it's funded by a body the supervisor has less weight? Vs...? I'm an international student so have never dealt with funding before as I've always had to self fund my previous degrees.

There is no suggested reading on the findaphd listing for it, but I'll look up the relevant fields to try and get a better understanding of the project area if the supervisor does reach out for that intro meeting.

There is only a limited amount of PhD funding available and a VERY limited sub set of that for non UK students. This means that a funded studentship is much more competitive than an offer of a place for a self-funded project.

Thank you! Can you expand more on how the funding determines the importance of the meeting? Is it that if it's funded by a body the supervisor has less weight? Vs...? I'm an international student so have never dealt with funding before as I've always had to self fund my previous degrees.

There is no suggested reading on the findaphd listing for it, but I'll look up the relevant fields to try and get a better understanding of the project area if the supervisor does reach out for that intro meeting.

I'm assuming the PhD is funded, because you should never do an unfunded PhD.

If the PhD is funded through a grant the PI/supervisor received, they will be the one doing the recruiting, so this is the situation where it's arguably 'most important' to make sure you've made a good impression. If the PhD is run through a DTP/CDT/etc. then the supervisor is probably not going to be directly involved in selection. Sometimes there is a multi-stage process where supervisors first nominate students to apply for funding (e.g. for most DTPs I applied for, supervisors were allowed to nominate two students to apply for their proposed project), but then it's an independent selection panel that decides which of the nominated applicants ultimately get funded.

Don't read too much into this comment though - you want to be making the best impression with the supervisor, regardless of how the PhD is funded. Do your due diligence, read all of the recommended papers, try to come prepared with novel ideas, and do your best to come across as a friendly, enthusiastic, and sane student. Also, don't forget that this is a two-way process. Most supervisors are good, but bad supervisors do exist, and they can ruin your PhD and academic career - this initial meeting will be useful for you to gauge whether this is somebody you can foresee working closely with for the next 3-4 years of your life.

Yes, the findaphd listing says it's a funded EPSRC studentship. Oh that's interesting, so for PhDs run through a DTP/CDT, it's possible that a panel chooses who gets the funding without the supervisor's input at all even though the supervisor is the one who will be the one working with/mentoring the candidate?

How exactly the admissions process works depends on the DTP/CDT (as mentioned, a lot of them have two-stage processes where a supervisor can nominate X students to compete for funding) but yes, for all the DTPs I applied for, the decision of who ultimately got funding was entirely independent of the supervisor.

Can you talk about your experience of thinking about, looking for, and applying for PhDs? I know literally nothing (I had to google DTP/CDT) and would like to hear from people who have gone through the process

So as it turns out, I think the supervisor meant the meeting to be the actual formal interview as I've just got an email from the department inviting me to an interview where I have to speak about my 'Research/work highlights' which will then be followed by questions and discussion. If any one has any tips on prepping, please let me know! Presentations are so anxiety-inducing 😭

The email says they'd like to meet with me in an interview setting to discuss my priorities and the requirements for the proposed work. What does this mean?

Edit: also is it normal to hear back so quickly? I only applied 5 days ago and the deadline for applications is 24th july, which hasn't even passed. The ad says interviews would be held w/c 7th august.

Best presentation prep I can suggest is to know what you're talking about. You ideally do not want to over-rehearse an academic presentation (if you're writing a script, you're doing it wrong). Since you'll be talking about research you've done, you'll hopefully know it well enough to talk authoritatively about it (after all, you're the expert).

Them wanting to discuss your priorities and requirements for the proposed work is exactly what it sounds like. The proposal will have set out the main aims for the PhD and probably a broad/loosely-defined methodology, but it looks like they're hearing in what your particular interests are for the project. As an example, one of the PhD projects I applied for was on modelling the transport of marine plastic pollution to Antarctica, and I talked about how I was interested in looking at the role sea-ice might play in this transport. It's an opportunity for you to show that you've thought carefully about the project, and to start to show evidence of academic independence.

I wouldn't read into the timings - absolutely no way to interpret that without knowing what's going on behind the scenes.

With their description of 'Research/work highlights', is there a need to include an intro about myself or anything? Or can I present only about my msc dissertation? i.e. the title slide(*edit) is the title of my msc dissertation

Its always sensible to introduce yourself and say a little bit about your background and broader research interrests before getting into the more technical stuff. That does not need a whole slide on its own however, you can just to that as part of the intro with your name and talk title up behind you on slide 1.

The email says they'd like to meet with me in an interview setting to discuss my priorities and the requirements for the proposed work. What does this mean?

Ok sounds good, thank you! I've been given 10 minutes for the presentation which will then be followed by questions (I'm assuming around 5 mins or so). The interview slot is 45 minutes, do you have any tips on what else should I prepare? I was planning to look at the supervisors' most recent papers, general read around the latest publications in project area, and then prep for some general interview questions like why this uni, what are your strengths and weaknesses.



Also, do you have any idea what 'requirements for the proposed work' means? I understand the priorities part - what specific parts of the project would I like to research more closely/specifically etc, but not sure what requirements mean - do they mean technical i.e. do I have experience coding or non-technical i.e. am I able to move to the city where the uni is?

What a wild ride these 2 weeks have been - from impulsively finding the PhD and writing up a PS and filling out the application form at 1am on a monday because I couldn't see myself doing my job as a career to getting and prepping the interview to now, when I've just got the rejection email. Honestly, given it was only 2 weeks, the rejection hurts much harder than I thought it was going to.

I don't know how hopeful I should/can be especially given I'm international and funding is very limited for us, in their rejection email they said: "Although we are unable to offer you the position you interviewed for, we have already engaged with our funder to allow us to extend an offer to you on an alternative project with significant technical overlap. We will be contacting you once we have a formal response."

Anyway, I wanted to thank you both for helping me through these 2 weeks, I really appreciate it!

edit to add @s, apparently TSR removes empty quotes: @Plagioclase, @Mr Wednesday