PhD Applications: A Synthesis of Faculty Perspectives

1. Research Potential is Everything

All five faculty members emphasize that PhD admissions fundamentally assess one question: How likely are you to become a great researcher?

Dettmers ranks the factors in clear order: (1) Recommendations from respected professors with personal connections, (2) Research experience measured by publications and first-authorship.

Andersen explicitly states admissions committees try to "look for signals of research success, which are somewhat different from the signals of academic success."

Harchol-Balter emphasizes that a PhD is about depth, not breadth: "By the last couple years of your Ph.D., you will typically be working on only one narrow problem."

2. Letters of Recommendation Are Critical

There is unanimous agreement that strong letters are the most important part of an application, but faculty offer specific guidance on what makes letters effective.

Dettmers provides detailed categories: strong letters include anecdotes demonstrating creativity and persistence, come from writers personally known by potential advisors, and discuss research done outside the writer's own lab.

Andersen introduces the term "DWIC" (Did Well In Class) for letters from professors who only taught the applicant in class, calling pure-DWIC letters "almost fatal." He emphasizes: "I'd take a passionate letter of rec from someone I don't know over a 'DWIC' from MIT any day."

Antoniak connects this to personal experience: "Getting to know a professor through a class or through independent research can be really important for getting strong letters of reference."

Smith is blunt: "generic letters do not help your case. Please try to get letters from people who can give specific examples of what makes you a promising researcher."

3. Research Experience Demonstrates Capability

Faculty universally prioritize demonstrated research ability over potential based on coursework alone.

Harchol-Balter describes what research experience proves: "You've tried research and you liked it" and "you have experienced the roller-coaster of research."

Dettmers is explicit about publications: "First author papers in the top conferences in your area are the most prestigious type of papers that you can get and they have immense value in the application process."

Antoniak notes: "Having some kind of documented research experience is very important for getting into a CS PhD program." She clarifies this could be research internships, capstones, or honors theses – formal publications aren't strictly necessary but helpful.

Mental Health and Persistence

Antoniak is remarkably candid: "Your mental health will very, very likely take a hit... in academia, you are constantly competing and being judged, with infrequent and irregular positive feedback." She emphasizes that "a much higher than average percentage of PhD students report mental health problems."

Harchol-Balter describes the reality: "Research can be very rewarding and very frustrating. Most students describe graduate school as a roller-coaster with tremendous highs and tremendous lows." She shares a typical story of a top student realizing "maybe he's not the best" and the growth that follows.

Smith looks for "drive" in applications: "There are a lot of people who're smart. But succeeding in a top Ph.D. program requires also a high degree of self motivation, and dogged determination to get you through the inevitable setbacks."

How to Request Strong Recommendation Letters

Dettmers provides a detailed two-email strategy:

1. Ask if the person can write you a "good or strong" letter (knowledgeable writers will decline if they can't)
2. When they agree, provide information as anecdotes rather than bare facts. Example: "You told me in a meeting that with some extra work we could make it for the NeurIPS deadline. In the next two weeks, I developed an improved architecture..." vs. "Jane and I published at NeurIPS."

Harchol-Balter adds specific guidance on whom to ask: "Ideally, your only responsibility will be research" under an RAship, and your advisor relationships during this work become your letter sources.

Antoniak emphasizes: "Since I'm not a professor, I don't have as much experience reading and writing these. However, my impression is that these letters are very important."

Application Materials: What to Prioritize

Dettmers: Don't "tune" your CV by phrasing things nicely or making it look creative – "this is a waste of time. Just list what you have done."

Smith: "Please don't repeat details from your CV" in your statement. Focus on "why the project was significant, what your contribution was, and how it informs your plans."

Antoniak: "Put the most effort into" statement of purpose, letters of reference, and research experience, and "not worry as much about GPA, GRE, CV, and other details."