For Prospective PhD Students
Everything on this site that is useful before you enrol: how to build a shortlist of supervisors, how to compare programmes, what to check before committing, and how to write the first email.
Check my manuscript, it's freeNo account required · Results in ~5 minutes · PDF, Word & LaTeX
What a prospective PhD student needs, and what we publish
A prospective PhD student is someone applying to a doctorate rather than doing one, and the problems are different at that stage: finding researchers who work on your question, working out whether their group is funded and recruiting, comparing programmes whose structures are not comparable on paper, and writing to strangers who receive a great deal of unsolicited email. This page collects what we publish for that year. It is written material and free tools; it is not an admissions service, we do not place students, and we have no relationship with any university. Once you are enrolled and writing papers, our pages for PhD students cover the submission side instead.
The application year has a shape, and most of the effort that gets wasted is spent in the wrong month. Scholarship competitions frequently close nine to twelve months before the start date, referees need several weeks of notice rather than several days, and the exchange with a supervisor who ends up backing your application usually takes a month or two on its own. Working backwards from the start date you want is the difference between choosing between offers and taking whatever is still open.
The other thing worth knowing early is which of the three admission routes your target countries use, because they ask for completely different work. Where a funded project is advertised, nobody wants your own proposal and the application is a reply to a specification. Where a department admits a cohort, the personal statement and the referees carry the weight and the supervisor is chosen later. Where you are expected to arrive with your own project, the email exchange comes first and the paperwork second, and no amount of polish on the forms compensates for not having a supervisor who has already agreed.
The application year, working backwards
1. 18 to 12 months before
Build the pool of names from your reading, from conference programmes and from position boards. Read group pages, check recent first authors, and note which admission route each target uses.
2. 12 to 10 months before
Narrow to eight to twelve candidates and write to them individually, spread across countries and routes. Ask the funding question in the first email rather than the fourth.
3. 10 to 9 months before
Ask two or three referees, and give them your CV, your target list and every deadline in one message. A referee approached at 48 hours notice writes a short letter.
4. 9 to 6 months before
Submit the formal applications and any scholarship forms. Prepare for calls and interviews, and speak to a current student and a recent graduate from each group you are serious about.
5. 6 to 3 months before
Compare offers on the things that decide the next four years: the funding source and its end date, the expected duration, the monitoring committee, the teaching load and who supervises day to day.
6. Before you sign
Get the funding source, its end date, the start date and the second supervisor or committee in writing. If two offers arrive at different times, say so plainly and ask for an extension.
What is here for the application year
The full route to a supervisor
Where the names come from, what to verify about a group, and what each application route asks you to submit.
Programme versus supervisor
The two decisions separated: funding mechanism, structure, country and cohort on one side, the person on the other.
Warning signs you can check
Concrete signals in the publication record, the group and the funding answers, each with the public check that settles it.
First email templates
Three copyable variants: with a master's, changing field, and answering an advertised funded position.
Follow-up templates
When to chase, what a good follow-up contains, and the point at which to stop.
A shortlist from your proposal
The supervisor finder reads a research document and suggests researchers publishing on the same topic, with the overlap stated. It never contacts anyone.
Checks relevant to this topic
Part of our 80+ automated checks
Master's thesis into a first paper
Structure, abstract completeness and citation consistency when a chapter becomes a submission.
Reference completeness
Every in-text citation matched to a bibliography entry, which is the most common gap in a first manuscript.
Abstract structure
Background, objective, methods, results and conclusion, the elements editors look for first.
Formatting consistency
Headings, figure and table numbering, and the journal's basic submission requirements.
The practical edge your peers already use
Across disciplines and career stages, researchers reduce bottlenecks and submit with confidence: clearer drafts, easier guideline compliance, and less back and forth with co‑authors and reviewers.
I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.
Ilyass
Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal
I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.
Manon
Master's Student in Speech Therapy
I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.
Afonso
PhD Candidate, UFPE
It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.
Félix
Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology
A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.
Oleg
Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.
Ilyass
Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal
I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.
Manon
Master's Student in Speech Therapy
I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.
Afonso
PhD Candidate, UFPE
It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.
Félix
Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology
A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.
Oleg
Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
For Prospective PhD Students questions
This page is about the year before a doctorate starts: choosing a supervisor, choosing a programme, and making contact. The PhD students page is about the work once you are enrolled, which is mostly turning thesis chapters into journal submissions and getting them past desk rejection. Different problems, different tools.