On average, how much do graduate assistantships/fellowships pay?

[Nystul]

I was in the PhD program at the U of MD. One of the top 5 areas in the country for cost of living expenses but they had shitty stipends- around 18k. They were almost always perpetually short on TA's so there was never really a problem if people didn't have an RA or fellowship available. At my school the TA positions were supposed to be high priority to 1st/2nd year students and students without funding since it's common to have 1/2nd years not have funding in place yet.

Grad student housing at my school was like 900 a fucking month for a 1 bedroom apt. I could have gotten cheaper off campus or I could have shared but I didn't want to and my parents were willing to help me out a bit with living expenses. I was still able to live reasonably comfortably and I didn't really borrow much from my folks. My buddy in Law school at NIU had a 2 bedroom apt with utilities included for like 500 a month. But that school is in the middle of nowhere. I guess my point is that you shouldn't look at stipend size (and you should be able to get that info from the university) but rather compare stipend to cost of living in the area you're going.

[Bobbity]

Currently a first year PhD student in the UCLA physics department. All of my (out of state) tuition is payed for by the department, though they do expect out of state students to establish California residency by their second year. As far as assistantships and fellowships go, they front-loaded my offer: this year I get about 20k in department/university fellowships on top of a 25% TA position for about 28k total. After this year, it'll go down to about a 18-20k per year for a 50% TA or RA position (assuming I don't receive any external fellowships). None of the other grad students seem to have any financial problems that I can tell; though certainly none are living extravagantly, either.

Other programs that accepted me offered relatively similar pay. Tuition was always payed in full and a TA position was offered at the bare minimum (lowest of which was 16-17k per year from UT-Austin, I believe). Sometimes the school might offer some department or university fellowships - I remember Iowa offered me a nice 30k+ per year fellowship - though these certainly aren't common.

[Osede]

Michigan Tech paid about 6.2~6.5k per semester, depending on whether you have taking qualifying exam, or have you done your proposal defend.

[Eliseos]

I definitely missed a chance to respond with "a lot less than an engineer".

[Woozie]

I was in the PhD program at the U of MD. One of the top 5 areas in the country for cost of living expenses but they had shitty stipends- around 18k. They were almost always perpetually short on TA's so there was never really a problem if people didn't have an RA or fellowship available. At my school the TA positions were supposed to be high priority to 1st/2nd year students and students without funding since it's common to have 1/2nd years not have funding in place yet.

Grad student housing at my school was like 900 a fucking month for a 1 bedroom apt. I could have gotten cheaper off campus or I could have shared but I didn't want to and my parents were willing to help me out a bit with living expenses. I was still able to live reasonably comfortably and I didn't really borrow much from my folks. My buddy in Law school at NIU had a 2 bedroom apt with utilities included for like 500 a month. But that school is in the middle of nowhere. I guess my point is that you shouldn't look at stipend size (and you should be able to get that info from the university) but rather compare stipend to cost of living in the area you're going.

Yeah, that's why I had asked for people to post where they went to school if posting their experiences. I really just want to know if the whole "you can't have another job" thing is going to hurt me. I've always held at least two jobs at a time for the past few years (right now I'm working three if you count tutoring). When I started looking up stipend sizes at different colleges, it was hard to tell whether or not it would be enough to get by. It didn't seem as if colleges matched the standards of living in their area because in some cases I'd see huge differences between two colleges in the same area, meaning one was too low or one was too high.

For example, there seems to be like a 6k difference between the University of Akron and Case Western (I'm assuming the person who posted Case Western meant in Cleveland. Afaik, Case Western doesn't have any other campuses, but I could be wrong).

[Zieara]

Yeah, I meant here in Cleveland. I also did some asking around for you (and me lol), and I am getting underpaid since I started in the spring. Seems I'll be going up to ~12k/semester come this fall.

[Woozie]

Woah, holy crap. So there's literally a 12k difference per year between two schools in the same region (and same cost of living). Maybe I'm mistaken, but I'm pretty sure Dr. Young told me that the University of Akron is 12k/yr. That's a pretty huge difference @_@

[joft]

BTW, get out of the midwest if you can

[Woozie]

Why? Are our colleges worse or something?

[joft]

Well, I don't know if I'd say worse on average, but there's just so much more of everything on the coasts. There will be lots of large universities all within short range traveling distance of each other, at least one of which will be a top school. There's a much greater variety of places to shop, including bigger and better grocery stores and malls, etc. You'll always be an hour or two from some major tourist attractions (read: places to go on holiday weekends and breaks) like NYC. There will be more cultural attractions, greater ethnic diversity, probably better weather (if you stay away from CT-Maine), better economy (including jobs and internships). In general just a much higher density of interesting stuff.

edit: With respect to the universities themselves, I would say that most of the leading research centers are on the coasts. There are a few exceptions like Chicago and Ann Arbor, but the midwest in general is just slower paced and on the decline.

[Enkidu]

One thing I would caution you about is don't just aim for a top school, aim for specific PI's. If you get accepted to a top school, but the famous PI in your area can't take any more students - don't go with some average Joe or new guy to the department. In the end you'll just have a fancy header on your degree and that's about it.

When people interview you for post-docs or jobs they don't care what school you went too, especially if the person hiring you has a PhD. They care about your publications and your PI. Both need to be great to get a great post-doc/job.

[Woozie]

So how exactly do I go about choosing a graduate school? I don't really know of anyone in the fields I'm likely to go into (some branch of solid state physics or some area of theoretical math. Not sure specifically what I want to do yet). I have no clue who's good and who isn't, etc.

[Enkidu]

Your best bet to finding the top PI's is by talking with your professors. The top PI's are almost always going to be their biggest competitor. You could also read through some literature, check your library for the latest journals.

What are some journals in your area? I have SciFinder access, but I'm not really sure if it covers you physics junkies. Generally the PI's with the most publications in the best journal in your field are the experts.

Remember the thing about journal entries is that the review process is pretty intense. Most of the reviewers are the experts in the field (so also look up the reviewers of said journals!) and they wont let shitty entries get to print. So the PI's with the most entries are generally the premier experts in the field.

Oh and some PI's are great scientists, but horrible people. I know of a few famous chemistry PI's who've driven multiple students to suicide... To find out stuff like that, try to contact grad. students in a different field of physics at that university, then ask them about that prof. Their opinion should be rather non-biased as it doesn't really pertain to their research.

[Tristam]

I would strongly encourage anyone entering any field to also consider smaller labs. If you can hitch yourself to a newly tenured up and coming PI, you might find yourself in an amazing atmosphere. If they have good connections, you'll have all the fancy equipment available just as if you were in a big lab. I joined a lab that never had more than 6 people in it, but we were all extraordinarily productive and every graduate has since gone on to better things (it helped when I made my decision that my PI had trained postdocs who had since gone on to become professors at Yale and King's College London to name a couple). Some fields are more democratic than others, but in biophysics/biochemistry I wouldn't necessarily suggest someone join a big lab unless they were already extraordinarily independent and ready to take the next step on their own. You may find yourself meeting with your "adviser" once a month, and end up writing your own letter of recommendation later on.

Also remember, you're there to learn. Not just be a data producing machine. I came to grad school with a background in biochemistry but knew I needed to shore up on physics. So I chose a program that specialized in biochemistry/biophysics and picked a smaller lab so that I could learn directly from my boss. Of course the most important thing was the project. I started out in familiar territory (protein-lipid interactions), but after one publication on that theme I branched out in a completely different direction for my thesis work. It ended up being a great experience, I've learned a ton, made lifelong friends, and added alot to my scientific "toolbelt" so to speak.

Some fields/schools encourage you to rotate among different labs before you make a final decision. For many reasons, I like this model. Some fields and schools might expect you to choose a PI before matriculating or while you're taking a year of classes exclusively. In that case, you must talk to people. If you can't contact other students who work for him/her directly, ask a prospective PI to give you contact information of *former* lab members, and if that PI refuses (they won't), I would not consider joining that lab for a second. Most good labs also have webpages with publication lists.

Ask alot of questions during your search for a lab. What conferences do people go to? How do they network and develop collaborations? How accessible is the PI? How often are lab meetings? Where do former lab members end up? How long does it take people to graduate? Does the PI spend lots of time out of the lab (or even the country?). What are the teaching requirements?

Look at University web pages and just surf around alot. If you find a lab webpage that interests you, check the publication list and read up on some stuff. It's always a good idea to learn how to critically read literature outside of your field anyways. If you look at the best PIs, I think the true litmus test isn't just their publication/citation record but watching how their science has developed/adapted over time. That gives you some insight into their creativity, which is an often overlooked but important quality. When I went on interviews, I made a point of reading at least one paper for every PI I wanted to interview with. It never came up in conversation, but I didn't go in blind.

edit: forgot to mention where I went to school, Philly, 25k/yr, lived in a studio apt. for 750/month. More than enough to be happy and have fun on the weekends, apts are shit in philly though. Also, no car, not worth it in that town.

[Eliseos]

You guys in academia really make me want to get into research, but I really hate speaking in front of groups of people (IE, teaching/TAing/etc).

[joft]

btw, WTF is a PI?

[Enkidu]

Principal investigator.