Is it easy to transfer after the first year...

[macroeconomicus]

Originally Posted by moomber123

I am not suggesting that academia is like mafia, but the reality is that it is probably more mafia-like than most people who have this idealistic, respectful image of academia would expect. My best advice is to conduct yourself as scholarly as possible, so others in the field would have to treat you as such. Opportunistic behavior is generally not well respected.

I agree somewhat, but I don't think that people getting pissed of at you is as much of a problem as getting _solid_ letters of recommendation. Let's say you go to UC Davis for a year and a half, pass prelims, and now you decide to apply to UCLA. The UCLA adcom will expect to see some good LoRs from UC Davis faculty. You need a letter that not only says that such and such took my class and did well (just like all other PhD students UC Davis). You need a letter that implies that you are an extraordinary individual and the top student in your class. Otherwise, why would UCLA want you? They know Davis as a school is a tier below UCLA. They don't want just an average UCD student. And despite its ranking, you would be surprised just how many really smart and dedicated individuals attend the universities ranked just like UC Davis or even much below and how difficult the coursework can be at such schools. Pissing off the faculty, should be of secondary concern. I really doubt that any professors will jump through the hoops to wreck your academic career just because you wanted to transfer, like moomber described. I think that what he said is a bit of exaggeration. Nonetheless, I suspect some professors will be less than thrilled to find out that students in good standing want to leave their program.

However, such "transfers" do happen every once in a while, at least in econ. Those can be classified into two categories: 1) Individuals who really could have applied and be accepted at a better place without doing any additional graduate coursework, but for some reason they just didn't apply to better schools; 2) very smart, hardworking individuals who indeed stayed on top of their coursework AND managed to secure good LoRs. But just because such transfers happen, I personally would suggest not to count on being necessarily able to move up this way.

[macroeconomicus]

..........

[moomber123]

Originally Posted by macroeconomicus

I really doubt that any professors will jump through the hoops to wreck your academic career just because you wanted to transfer, like moomber described. I think that what he said is a bit of exaggeration. Nonetheless, I suspect some professors will be less than thrilled to find out that students in good standing want to leave their program.

I wish I were exaggerating, but personal experience with horror indicates otherwise. I would not discuss more details than that!

But I do have to stress that such case is extreme and is not a common occurrence. The key point is that academic circle is much "closed" than one would expect. You never know what happens behind that closed doors, or who so-and-so calls to talk about you "off the record." With a rigid hierarchy and powerful incentive (or controlling power) tenure system, the extent of politics is likely more problematic than most people would like to believe. Most academics are decent people doing it for passion, but there do exist vicious academics who behave more like politicians, mafia, or the like. They just don't usually show that side of their personality out in the open.

But regardless of how "dark" or "healthy" academia is, applying for a lower ranking program with the sole intention to use it as a stepping stone is most likely going to fail. For one thing, as you accurately stated, getting a good LOR is going to be extremely difficult. For another thing, it is simply unrealistic that one can drastically improve his/her academic standing by going to a lower ranking program and work "extra hard." This line of reasoning assumes no one else would work "extra hard," and that is simply not going to happen in such a competitive environment.

The bottom line is this: once you have reached the level that a PhD program is under consideration, it is very hard to drastically alter your standing in terms of program placement. If you are still a freshman in college and wants to do something to improve your odds, then we have a lot more to discuss. This might sound very cruel, telling people who are already done with, or nearly done with undergraduate degree with less than perfect profile that there isn't much you can do to improve your standing, but as discouraging as it might be, it might be the very reality a lot of people have to deal with.

My advice is to think hard and deep why you want a PhD. I find a lot of Asian students (risking furthering a stereotype) wanting to do a PhD for reasons that are simply wrong. Family expectation, cultural background that puts a PhD at a very respected position in the society, or the like. When in reality, PhD is a very serious commitment that puts people into a very narrow range of profession. In this sense, engineering/CS PhD degree is more flexible, because there are quite a lot of R&D jobs in industry for PhD holders. This would not be true if you are getting a sociology PhD. But even with that broader career options, it is still a very serious commitment that might not be suitable for everyone, no matter how gifted s/he is. You simply need to figure out what is the best for your career before jumping into a PhD program.

Programs at lower tier are more commonly accepting students who are not necessarily heading into an academic career. This happens because 1.) those programs are less able to send their students to academic positions, not that they do not want to. 2.) To survive in the "marketplace of PhD program," they might have to settle with students who are not as dedicated to academia to keep the programs running. Now, if that is not a problem, then I don't see anything wrong with going down that road. However, top tier programs are very serious about their placement, and you will most likely feel the pressure (intense, in many cases) from your professors, and peers to pursue a pure academic career. I know of one PhD student at USC who is contemplating about going into industry for better money (family reason), and she found her advisor very upset about that decision, and the sense of disappointment really bothers her. My point is, if the point of a top ranked PhD program is just the prestige, the reputation, but not based on a genuine desire to enter academia, it is very likely a failure and less than satisfying experience.

Success in life can be defined in so many different ways. Getting a good solid master degree to further advance your technical knowledge, and leverage that to have a successful industry career is nothing less respectful than a successful academic career. Unless there is a very intense desire to enter academia (based on fully informed decision and genuine desire to become a scholar, not just some shallow desire to have that "glory" - many in academia would tell you that such "glory" is purely imaginary by the outsiders.) I really don't see the need to put much efforts to force a placement to places where there is no fit.

With that harsh words being said, I do have to stress that transferring among doctoral programs is indeed possible, but mostly for "legitimate" reason. Your advisor might feel that your research interests fit other programs better, and decent professors sometimes even HELP you transfer. But again, that is not for reason like "transferring up" the rank. Another situation is that your advisor moves to other department, and for the purpose of continuity, s/he might want to take you along. Now that is purely by chance. You can never manufacture that opportunity before hand. So the best approach is to only join the program that you would not regret "settling" for, and if such opportunity presents itself to transfer to a "better" place (for the right reason), then go for it.

[macroeconomicus]

Well, I know such vicious mafia-like professors exist in every field, not just econ. However, they are an exception, not a rule. Plus, you probably will find out who they are before you take any actions like asking a letter of recommendation.

[moomber123]

Agree. They are exception than rule. But I wish someone would have warned me before I committed myself into a program. Long story short, perhaps we should start a completely anonymous thread to "out" those exception. I sure could have used that info before I jumped in. =)