I need to have a rant. I am a really good final year student (science), have a publication, year in industry, got a research summer grant from prestigious society to work on a project. Have a academic prize for every year, basically the highest ranked student in the department. I am applying for PhD's and some Unis wont even look at me (Cambridge, Oxford, Edinburgh). Some invited me for an interview for a prestigious studentship so I thought hooray! Later got turned down anyway and people with no experience but from the best Unis were offered places. I thought long and hard about this, went over the interviews in my head and I truly dont believe I was bad at all.

In one of the interview we had to do 10 min presentation followed by questions. I did this, answered all the questions right. Then had a 20 min meeting with the supervisor where he asked the normal questions. Why do I want to do PhD, why this project. That was basically it. Then proceed to tell me about the project and I did ask questions. I had direct experience with the techniques. Anyway, later I found I was unsuccessful and the position was offered to someone with no experience whatsoever but a Cambridge degree.

Another one.... I knew the questions because someone I know had the same interview the day before me. Sat down with my Uni lecturers and prepared perfect answers, showing knowledge way above an undegrad level. That someone had a degree from Imperial and told me he didnt know he should have picked a supervisor from each rotation and couldnt even name 2 out of 3. Guess what. He got offered the PhD.
Whilst I am genuinely happy for both of them I am really pissed of with the fact they cross me off because I have my degree from an ex-poly. I cant be anything else. I am very dishearten. I have worked so hard for this whilst looking after my family, working days and nights, working every summer in a lab.

Why do they even bother inviting me over when they have no intention of making an offer? They are just wasting my time and money.

Sorry about the rant, I am not even sure what answers I am expecting. I guess I want to hear a success story and that it is going to be ok

Welcome to the political world of Academia! You're not going to like what I say, but it might help bring some perspective.

1. Is it because you're from an ex-poly university that you're being denied a position? There is always this possibility, especially with highly competitive schools that are focused on name/branding/status. You should think about why you are applying to schools like Oxford and Cambridge if they are known for choosing candidates based on name/status. There are many, many great universities with PhD programs that may not have the prestige like an Ivy League school, but you could do very well there!

2. An invitation to an interview is never a guarantee that you'll receive a PhD offer. They are not necessarily wasting your time and effort if they feel that after interviewing you, you are not the right candidate for their program/research project (and are interviewing other candidates). If you are only going with the assumption you'll get a position without considering the possibility that you won't, then you might want to rethink why you're going for a PhD. You mentioned you had all the right answers with the interviews, right isn't always what they're looking for. Sometimes, over-preparing/having memorised responses for a PhD interview can make you come across as being unable to think critically/creatively on your feet. You may have come across as a bit robotic, and that might have steered them away.

3. Be careful in making assumptions about the candidates who were offered the jobs. You don't know how they did in the interviews or their experience/background. Are they undergraduate students like yourself? Do they have masters qualifications or other relevant experience that you lack? While it's great that you have academic awards and experience, sometimes this is just not enough, as many post-grads on this forum will tell you. Sometimes, it's about who you know, not what you know. It's not fair by any means.

The reality is that your situation is common for many potential graduates, and you will find a program that will suit you. Broaden your search, look at universities that don’t have the highest prestige.

Maybe have a small piece of humble pie. You should, of course, be proud of your accomplishments and I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't. But is there a chance that you might be coming off as a 'smug undergraduate' and rubbing potential supervisors the wrong way? Perhaps. The academic world, like the business world, is not just about experience, but also about how you present yourself, and whether you are willing to play the game effectively. Many Profs have been in the game a long time, and are easily annoyed by fresh blood that might come in with the pre-tense of knowing everything. Academia is just as much a people/politics game as it is research and higher learning.

Don't give up, keep pushing forward with your PhD search.

awsoci:
Thank you for your answer.
I have not memorised the answers, I was just ready. I was not robotic. I am quite smart and have had my share of interviews so I know I perform well. I was not expecting to be accepted everywhere but I have been to 5 interviews and the same scenario repeats everywhere. That cannot be a coincidence.

The other candidates have only done undergrad and they didnt have any relevant experience. I know this because we talked.

I also dont think I appear as a know-it-all. I dont know it all I just want a chance to study for a PhD. This post is a result of few months of rejections and a massive outburst of frustration. Please do not assume I havent put my interview skills under scrutiny. I have, I have also spoken to academics at my Uni about my answers, I did the presentation for them.

The reason I am applying to these Unis is their programmes and the facility. In my field I need to have an access to some very expensive equipment and again, these Unis have it.
I just feel disheartened because I worked for this very very hard.

This is worth considering.

Sometimes it can be in a negative way - nepotism, old boy's clubs etc. But not necessarily. There are many valid ways in which a known candidate is preferable to an unknown. Regardless of qualifications and prizes, if an undergrad has already done a project in a group and proved him/herself capable then they are likely to be favoured over a complete unknown. You only have the 15-30 minutes of the interview to prove yourself; they may have had several weeks. A PhD is (in theory at least) a big investment from both sides, so it's safer to choose a candidate whose strengths and weaknesses are well known.

Something that will stand you in good stead when you do start a PhD is networking. I don't mean schmoozing (which a lot of people negatively interpret networking to be), I mean getting to know people in your field, and them getting to know that you exist and what you do. It's harder to do that pre-PhD but at the very least if you see an advertised PhD that you really like I would send an email to the supervisor prior to applying. It can be on the pretext of asking for further clarification on the role, but it is also an excuse to introduce yourself and lay the foundation for the interaction you will have in the interview.

Maybe the ex poly thing is a factor, but maybe it isn't. It's best not to get too hung up on it though as it might negatively affect how you approach future interviews.

Thank you HazyJane.
I would normally email but these interviews were for Wellcome Trust projects where you can't really email supervisors. You only see the panel and they will decide. PI's don't have any input whatsoever unless you have expressed an interest in somebody at the panel.

I am not quite sure how would that negatively affect my approach to future interviews thought. Obviously I am very positive about the projects.

Does sound disheartening Cloud - and frustrating. Reminds me of the classic piece of educational sociology looking at why kids from working class backgrounds went on to get working class jobs. Long story short it was because they didn't share the habitus (Bourdieu) of the teachers but the habitus of their working class peers. Those that shared a similar habitus as the teachers were the ones who were educationally successful. Basically, this is how class reproduces itself in education even though the rhetoric of education is that it is suppose to be transformative to class. Its not, still isn't. Is it fair? - no. Is it disheartening and frustrating?- yes

Besides empathising with you, I would suggest that you look at not the overall status of the university but what universities have good research profile in your discipline and in your area of interest. These are not always the big ones. Also explore what researchers/academics you share similar research interest with. Start contacting them, see if they are taking on PhD students or know of some funding coming up in your area of interest. Unfortunately, you are going to have to do some leg work and not get your cake handed to you on a silver platter. Not coming from a source of privilage (whether that be class, race, gender, disability or even educational privilage) usually means you have to work twice as hard to get half as far unless you are the tiny minority who rise above through sheer luck (and then are usually heralded as examples of how fair the system is)

I wish you well!

Thank you Weetzie for your kind words.

I dont give up. I am prepared to work twice as hard to get one:) I will make sure my child (if suited to an academic life) dont make the same "mistake".
I wasnt born in the UK and Unis in my country are at same level really (there is "the best" and the rest basically but nobody looks down at people from a certain Uni). I just went to the nearest Uni because of my commitments with the course I was interested in. Oh boy.
I dont dispute the fact the intake of student is not as selective but I believe that a student with first is a good student.

Hi cloudofash,

I was lucky enough to do my PhD with a scholarship. The reason I got the scholarship was that I had a journal publication at the time.

I would suggest, if possible to publish your master's dissertation, it would greatly improve your chances.

Take care

Weetzie, could you post a link to that research please? It sounds interesting.

Hi DrJeckyll. Thank you very much for your advise.

I am a BSc so no masters but I do have a publication.

I think you've got some good advice already. But if you are in science, and only have the BSc, one thing you may need to think about is that nowadays the science degrees at 'better' universities are almost invariably 4 years (or 5 years with a year in industry) and end in an undergraduate Masters qualification. So you probably have covered less material than some of your competitors even if you are convinced you are better. There is some funding available for science MSc degrees, so (if as I assume you've done you've asked for feedback on why you were unsuccessful) that might be a route worth pursuing if the feedback is always x had a better background.

Hi Bewildered. Thank you. I mentioned that the other candidates had BSc as well.
I didnt say I was better, I said we had same qualifications and I actually had more experience than them because they didnt have the year in industry I had or the summer placements. Their experience was a research project in their final year which was in both cases completely unrelated to the PhD project.
I did asked for a feedback, got told no feedback will be given by 3 places and "you were so great but the competition is very high this year" at the other places.

I think the world of application has changed significantly over the last few years, maybe due to the number of candidates to the point where even proper feedback isnt readily given.

Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs

PE Willis - 1977 - Columbia University Press