I had a horrible experience with the photo-chemical science PhD program at BGSU that I'd like warn current and prospective students to stay away from this program.
I was offered admission without funding, which is not an arrange a reputable US PhD program will make and accept. The supervision style here relies on excessive micromanagement with low transparency on broad project idea and requirements in milestones like the qualification exam and graduation, tricking students into doing works beyond their degree and course requirements. The advisor demands "research productivity" in the 1st year in a US program without adequate training in basics and without any funding, and will leverage academic backing for that. I made clear in my application that I intended to pursue research in computational photo-chemistry, faculty attempted to redirect me into doing experiments; resisting that pressure provoked further threats and withdrawal of support. Faculties in the program use grades as bargaining counters in multiple occasions to "persuade" me to change advisors, obey their arrangement and not to file any complaint. The program coordinator told me he decided to assign me a "C" in a course, but no grade was officially posted for a month. Once I mentioned that I would exercise my student right to initiate a grade appeal, I immediately got an "A". I was also told that recommendation letters would be withheld should I sought to leave and reapply to a better program, effectively using students' future careers as leverage for forced unpaid labor. Some faculty members, including the advisor, are violating my student privacy right by leaking class activities and academic standing to third parties (like parents, professors and advisors in other institutions) without my written consent, and without ever being selected as my references. This, combination-- "I don't respect students' personal boundary" and "I want to avoid conflict", "I will not recommend you" and "I will informally and secretly leak you academic standing"--demonstrates a self-centered approach in which student welfare is disregarded whenever it inconveniences the advisor. When they give advises their main concern is at extracting as much free labor from the student as possible, not at serving the student's best educational interest.
The program's website advertises a "safe, accepting, unprejudiced, and fair learning environment",which cannot be further away from the truth from my personal experience as the only Asian student. My academic standing stored there is definitely unsafe as it could be accessed and disclosed by faculty without my consent. I was the only one expected to work without financial support but with a good academic standing in the first year and was singled out when I questioned this disparity. The graduate coordinator specifically told me not to request for funding because I would "get paid 100k+/year after graduation," Students are micromanaged to do repetitive, grinding tasks disguised as "training" which are not meant to train students into independent researchers. In sharp contrast to the advertising, expressing contrasting scientific opinions is also met with accusations of distrust from the advisor and filing complaints will trigger retaliation by withdrawing academic backing. These practices are incompatible with fostering students' potential or providing equitable treatment, and they demonstrate systemic prejudice, intimidation, and retaliation--which further reinforces my opinion that the program is prejudiced, unsafe, unaccepting, and discriminatory. The implied underlying true "value" seems to be the maintenance of deception, manipulation and exploitation rather than the education and development of students.
I strong advise against anyone to apply to or stay in this program that provides a discriminatory, coersive and toxic working environment to PhD students. If you have a high GPA and a better background, and don't want to be used as a lab-monkey, please kindly do yourself a favor and apply to somewhere else. read more
