You made the decision to go to grad school. Decided whether to do MS/PhD. You also decided on your field. Now, where to apply among the hundreds of universities around the world?
Wherever you go, you are going to stay there for quite sometime (2 years for MS and 5-6 for a PhD). Needless to say, your career is built on where you go. So, obviously you would like to go to the best place you can go to.
So, how do you decide where to apply? There are various metrics to evaluate universities. Rankings on certain websites are a good starting point. Then, you have the location of the universities - placements and other facilities are affected by them. The funding scenario is another. So, which metric should one follow. Here is my personal opinion regarding how one should go about selecting universities.
Each field has its own top conferences. The publications in such conferences are a direct index to many things. The universities from which these publications come, are the places where the good work happens. The sub-fields in which they publish are the areas in which the work is being done in the field. The existence of a good number of such people (who publish) in a university makes the university a good place to apply.
In case you haven't decided which field you are going to apply in, it becomes tough to go about this way. In that case, it would always help to start with some pointers (like university rankings) and then look at how "my" process fares in the fields you think you might be interested in.
This is all fine, but should everyone apply to these top places? No, some one who doesn't have enough "measurable" credentials (one might be very good, but his percentage and scores might not show the same) should apply to a lower ranked place also. In such a scenario, one can apply to places where there are fewer people who are doing the very good work or to a place where there are many people doing mediocre-to-good work.
It is a general practice that people apply to 2 top ranked places, 2 medium ranked places and 2 "safe-apps"(applications to places where they are sure to make). I have a slightly different opinion. One can have 1 safe-app and apply to a lot of medium-to-top places. It is always a good idea to apply to a place even if you think you have 0.1 probability of making it.
All said and done, the best of the students might not make it to a certain place while others do. It might help to see if the university has offered admits to students from your university in the past. It would also help if a fewer number of people better than you at your university are applying there.
With so many indeterministic factors, it is definitely a tough job to make a list of universities to apply to. One might need to go with the gut feeling (especially while choosing between two similar universities). I wish you all the luck in choosing the universities and hope that you would make it into universities of your choice.
Anyways, this is not all. There are more important things to do in the application process.
Note: In all cases where I call someone better, I mean better at measurable credentials.
Wherever you go, you are going to stay there for quite sometime (2 years for MS and 5-6 for a PhD). Needless to say, your career is built on where you go. So, obviously you would like to go to the best place you can go to.
So, how do you decide where to apply? There are various metrics to evaluate universities. Rankings on certain websites are a good starting point. Then, you have the location of the universities - placements and other facilities are affected by them. The funding scenario is another. So, which metric should one follow. Here is my personal opinion regarding how one should go about selecting universities.
Each field has its own top conferences. The publications in such conferences are a direct index to many things. The universities from which these publications come, are the places where the good work happens. The sub-fields in which they publish are the areas in which the work is being done in the field. The existence of a good number of such people (who publish) in a university makes the university a good place to apply.
In case you haven't decided which field you are going to apply in, it becomes tough to go about this way. In that case, it would always help to start with some pointers (like university rankings) and then look at how "my" process fares in the fields you think you might be interested in.
This is all fine, but should everyone apply to these top places? No, some one who doesn't have enough "measurable" credentials (one might be very good, but his percentage and scores might not show the same) should apply to a lower ranked place also. In such a scenario, one can apply to places where there are fewer people who are doing the very good work or to a place where there are many people doing mediocre-to-good work.
It is a general practice that people apply to 2 top ranked places, 2 medium ranked places and 2 "safe-apps"(applications to places where they are sure to make). I have a slightly different opinion. One can have 1 safe-app and apply to a lot of medium-to-top places. It is always a good idea to apply to a place even if you think you have 0.1 probability of making it.
All said and done, the best of the students might not make it to a certain place while others do. It might help to see if the university has offered admits to students from your university in the past. It would also help if a fewer number of people better than you at your university are applying there.
With so many indeterministic factors, it is definitely a tough job to make a list of universities to apply to. One might need to go with the gut feeling (especially while choosing between two similar universities). I wish you all the luck in choosing the universities and hope that you would make it into universities of your choice.
Anyways, this is not all. There are more important things to do in the application process.
Note: In all cases where I call someone better, I mean better at measurable credentials.