Especially at the doctoral level, the candidate is judged on the originality of research that would add to the existing corpus of knowledge, albeit incrementally.

The emphasis is on depth, drilling deep into the subject matter, and one is expected to know more than the advisor.

Independence of thought and ability to critique the works of others are necessary traits that a candidate should cultivate.

The first one-two years are spent on taking the core and allied courses (typical of the US system), the latter forming the minority areas that are relevant to the research.

The candidate will need to organize and synchronize the different work elements (the lab, the field, the computer programing, the reading, etc.) in a time-controlled environment so as to bear on the identified research.

That said, graduate study is by no means working in a vacuum; there is always a healthy support system comprising lab technicians, library stuff, fellow graduate students, Ph.D. holders (both old and recently minted), and advisors and other faculty members. It’s an art for the candidate to be able to optimize the access to and gleaning relevant information from this disparate group of people who are governed and driven by individual goals and exhibit different character traits, or flaws for that matter.

The last but not the least, it was instilled into me earlier in the doctoral pursuit that one’s supervisory commitee, whose individual members hold sway on whether one would earn that haloed appellation “Ph.D.” at the end of a seemingly endless journey, is set to find out what you know, and NOT what you don’t know.

However, I did regret not applying to those at the upper end of Tier 1 schools to see where I would have stood. But to the two I’ve gone, one on the east and the other on the west, there were memorable sojourns, more so because my wife and kids were with me who provided unrestrained moral support through it all.

For SOTAs (students over the traditional age) like me, emotional support is a critical element. Many a time when all seemed lost, and those times are by no means rare (lab material not forthcoming, fumbling in the qualifying, reseach going no where, etc.), what sustained me were the very thought of my family and their unreserved trust on my capability.

And I never claimed that “critical mass” meant a 1:1 ratio. Again, as I noted in my last post, it just means enough women so that being a woman doesn’t seem so strange.

One thing that I wish departments did more often is to keep an updated registry of their PhD alumni. This would tell a lot of prospective students about how successful (or unsuccessful) former students from the department or particular advisor are, or how many years it took them to complete their PhD’s for example. There’s a lot of wishful thinking that needs to be disillusioned early, even if some dreams (like graduating in 5 years) need to be broken.

Other things - like getting critical mass of faculty, is something that will happen over time, but cannot unfortunately occur overnight. Even if departments stop hiring men altogether, it would take most departments several decades to reach equal ratio. I hope most people realize this simple math…

I wonder if someone could comment on what qualities make the department “female friendly” or “unfriendly”.

Here are some things that can help a place friendly for women in science. Note that not all are required for friendliness, that these tend to be tangible characteristics and not intangibles like colleagues’ attitudes and behaviors toward women, and that there are certainly others I haven’t listed. Also, when I use the term “critical mass,” I’m not talking about a specific number, but only “enough so that women aren’t unusual or rare, and don’t stand out simply by virtue of being female” at a particular rank. Oh, and you may also notice that many of these things also make a place friendly for men. What a coincidence!

For undergraduates:
a critical mass of women in their major courses
female professors who teach courses and advise students
opportunities for interaction with female grad students, postdocs, professors, and visitors
support from the department such as advising, a student lounge, peer study groups, and information or workshops on things like research internships, grad school, and potential career paths
clearly defined campus policies regarding discrimination and sexual harassment, including a well-publicized office where occurrences can be anonymously reported
active mentoring by older students, grad students, postdocs, and/or faculty
a campus group focusing on issues related to women in science

For grad students and postdocs:
a critical mass of women among their peers
female professors who teach courses and advise students
clearly defined guidelines for success in the graduate program, including course grades, prelim/qual exams, and expectations for the dissertation/thesis
departmental willingness to help make arrangements for a trailing spouse or partner
institutional policies for maternity/family leave
affordable campus housing and child care
reasonable salaries and family health insurance for teaching and research assistants and postdocs
clearly defined campus policies regarding discrimination and sexual harassment, including a well-publicized office where occurrences can be anonymously reported
colleagues and admissions committees who are aware of the issues surrounding women’s representation in the sciences and behave accordingly
access to current information regarding the academic job market and non-academic career paths
active mentoring by older students, postdocs, and/or faculty
a campus group focusing on issues related to women in science

For faculty members:

a critical mass of women in their department and among their administrators
clearly defined guidelines for promotion and tenure
clearly defined salary structures
departmental willingness to help make arrangements for a trailing spouse or partner (including spousal-hire or position-sharing policies)
institutional policies for maternity/family leave, part-time work, and temporary stopping or slowing of the tenure clock
home-buying assistance and affordable child care
clearly defined campus policies regarding discrimination and sexual harassment, including a well-publicized office where occurrences can be anonymously reported
colleagues and hiring committees who are aware of the issues surrounding women’s representation in the sciences and behave accordingly
departmental and university officials who conduct periodic assessments of the status and satisfaction of women within their ranks, taking into account salaries, progress toward tenure, lab space, students, and other forms of official support or reward
active mentoring by older colleagues
a university committee or office focusing on issues related to women in science