text:
I will fail 1 (or 2) classes this semester as a master's student. Should I forget about PhD applications to schools in US?
I am an engineering master's student, and I could not cope with the quarantine during the last few months, and I will be failing one or two classes this semester.
I just finished my year, and I had a very high GPA in my first semester. Is this red flag a dealbreaker for PhD applications in the US? I am not sure if I should bother applying.
I also had this unusual situation where I was about to transfer credit from a former university where I was a graduate student but received no degree, and it was too late to drop by the time my grades were transferred, because quarantine caused delay when I was obtaining documents. So hopefully I will have completed a decent portion of my credits, but realistically I am not hopeful.

Does your university offer free withdraws because of the pandemic?

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/147022/should-i-be-worried-about-low-undergraduate-grades-during-the-covid-19-crisis-af

Is this the US? Were the courses in your major if so?

@buffy, No, it's outside the US but my department usually ranks in top 30. One of the courses is outside my major, the critical one is.

You mean you failed or you just got a low score? If you failed the class, it would be bad; if you just got a "C," then it wouldn't be that bad. I applied a US PhD program from another country, and it didn't affect me a lot even if I had a "C" in my master degree transcript.

Where I am courses are graded on 0-100 scale, not letter, so I am pretty sure they will be low. It will be like I have 90s in my first semester, and semester a class will be maybe 25, and other 50-60.

@AzorAhai--hehim, unfortunately no, it was too late by the time I had transferred my credits.

@lookingforsomething Please don't vandalize your posts here. If you want the question to be deleted, you can flag a moderator instead.

If getting a PhD is something you really want to do, I suggest applying. If your failing those classes is truly not a reflection of your abilities or motivation, but - as you said - relating to effects of the pandemic/quarantine, then hopefully the rest of your course grades and other application materials will make up for those two failed courses.
When I applied to PhD programs, my own bit of insecurity came from the fact that I had graduate credits from another university where I didn't receive a degree (it was my first attempt at a PhD and it just wasn't a good fit). I decided to address it in my personal statement. I acknowledged that I attempted my PhD before but quit, explained why, and quickly moved on to explain how it was still a learning experience for me in terms of coursework, gaining teaching experience,and learning more about myself and what I valued/prioritized in a PhD program.
I would suggest you do something similar in your personal statement (if engineering programs require them), and to keep it brief. Acknowledge the failed courses, offer an explanation for why you failed the classes in such a way that they understand that this was an atypical experience for you, and then come back with a statement of some sort that illustrates why - despite what you just shared - you're still a great candidate for their program. None of this should dominate the personal statement, I would keep it to just a few sentences.


text:
Is it common to contractually require that a professor works with other faculty members in their department?
My adjunct contract states that I have to work with other professors and share information with them about the work. While I'd love doing that, I find it bizarre that it is part of my contract. This is particularly concerning to me since the head of the department has been pushing me to work with/learn from a certain faculty member whose teaching methods and approach are radically different from mine. I don't want to be "forced" to meet and chat with people just because the department's head thinks it would be good for me.
What would you do in a situation like this? Thank you!

Are they suggesting it because they think it would be good for you, or because they like this faculty member's methods and approach and hope you might adopt some of them for the good of the students/department? (note: someone may say the former when their actual motivation is the latter...)

You need to tell us which country, because "adjunct" means a very different thing in USA vs Canada vs elsewhere. Adjuncts in USA are often paid, adjuncts in Canada are never  (as far as I know) paid by the university.

I sat in this particular faculty's class as part of the hiring process. I will just say this: she collected students' phones because she couldn't control the class. Didn't have anything nice to say about the student body. Had assigned a reading for an undergrad intro level course that I read in an advanced MA level course. It was bizarre! So, I am stressing out!

It's an American University in Eastern Europe. I get paid...thankfully!

@user112640 Skoltech?

Did you go to school in the same Eastern European country? I am asking this since they often cover in undergraduate classes topics which in NA are covered at Master level.

I suspect that most departments don't want to hire an adjunct who would not interact with the rest of the faculty at all - just come in, teach the class, and leave. Kind of defeats the purpose of a 'faculty'. Just like few businesses want to hire somebody who will not interact with anybody else. Perhaps some previous hires had enough issues that they felt they needed to be explicit that interaction was required. But, if you really don't want to work with the people your boss wants you to work with, well, that may not end well.

Thank you so much, everyone! I appreciate the advice.

You should learn from other faculty about their teaching methods.  In most cases, you should follow their advice.  Consider it an experiment.  If there is unambiguous evidence their advice is not effective, don't follow it.
Your alternative is to decline the contract.  If you are unwilling to try new teaching methods, I recommend taking that alternative.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
How to guide more number of graduate students?
I am researcher (Assistant professor ) in computer science. I work on topics which takes more than one year to publish a single paper. Due to my interest I work in these kind of topics. There is one problem which I am facing due to my interest which is as follows. I will not able to advise lots of students due as the field in which I work is not hot and publication takes longer time. I came to academia with a mindset that I will advise as many students as possible. I feel motivated when my graduate students discuss research problems with me and other kind of discussions also. Due to my field in which I am currently working I can only advise one graduate student. The one solution which comes to my mind is to pick a hot topic and start working on that topic and then many students will approach me but I may not be that much interested in these kind of topics.
Question : How to guide more number of graduate students?
Note that the meaning of 'more number' is to advise roughly like 13-15 students in the entire career. I am also interested in producing quality students instead of just quantity.

Anecdote: My doctoral advisor and I met at a conferences a famous prof in my field. They were laughing at my supervisor because I was employed 30 hours. "You should employ two students for 15hours - they will work the same number of hours but you get twice the students!" Definitely not recommended and unethical.

What country are you in?  This matters mostly because the way students connect with advisors are different in different countries.  2) Is the issue purely that not many students want to work with you, or are there 'bureaucratic' hurdles of other kinds?

@Alexander Woo south east Asia. The issue is my research topic not any  'bureaucratic' hurdles

I will advise as many students as possible.

Don't do this.  It's unethical.  Graduate education, especially for PhD students, should be about quality, not quantity.  If everyone worked to maximize the number of PhDs, then there would be far more PhDs than are needed.  This has already happened in most fields, but maybe not yours.

How do I recruit more graduate students?

If you insist, then

Raise funds, probably through applying for grants.
Advertise that you have money to pay graduate students a competitive stipend.  In my experience most faculty underestimate the current free market stipend.
Publish frequently.
Ensure your students graduate promptly.
Treat them decently.
Help them find jobs.

If you have a reputation for these things, you will have plenty of students - unless your university has a reputation for not doing these things, in which case you will have to move.

I don't agree that quantity equates to poor quality.   Also, getting students is easy, but getting good students is a function of your university's reputation.

I didn't say anything about the relationship between quantity and quality, I just said that maximizing quantity should not be the goal..

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
How can I deal with a professor who refuses to communicate?
Required information: Germany, maths, and undergraduate
Situation: In order to finish my undergraduate degree, I have to do one final oral exam with two professors (A & B). However, A and B refuse to communicate directly with each other and use me to communicate. The first exam was "postponed" indefinitely due to pandemic and now I have to organize a new one.
Problem: Professor A is very odd. He does not use email. He does not answer his phone (I was told to call him by the exam office and professor B) and now with only online learning, I had to communicate with A using text messages.
I asked him for available exam dates and he replied with a "yes" and nothing else. He then ignored my other messages. The examination office said if both A and B agree, I can do each part separately. Of course the B replied immediately with a yes. A did not reply at all.
Should I try to reach out to other professors or the dean? I have to do this exam to graduate so I can start my graduate studies, but I do not want escalate the situation.

If you don't escalate then you will flounder where you are, if you do escalate then prof A may not be happy. Dammed if you do and dammed if you don't.

Tell Prof A every relevant detail of exactly what you want, and that the Office and Prof B agree.
Tell Prof A you assume all of that is acceptable and unless he sees any difficulties, Office and Prof B will make appropriate arrangements.
Make very sure both Office and B understand exactly what you're doing, and why.

I've dealt with people like Professor A before. They are never good news. The bottom line is, deal with someone else if you can. Try to get someone else appointed. Preferably someone you would actually like to deal with.

Do they have secretaries/assistants? It might be easier to use a proxy to reach them, than to try direct communication.

Given the reluctance of anyone else to communicate with Prof A, it seems less a case of you not knowing the secret handshake to get in touch with him, but more a case of Prof A simply not communicating. It is unlikely that anyone (including the dean) can make him communicate in a reasonable way.
What you need to do is to make sure that the path-of-least-resistance for your department is something that ends with you graduating very soon. My guess is that the best bet for that would be to get someone else to examine you. The "Vorsitzende(r) des Pruefungsausschuss" should be able to authorize such a thing. Phrase it as "Prof A is unavailable for examinations", not as "I failed to get in touch with him". If they claim that Prof A is available, ask them to demonstrate by telling you the date for the exam. Be polite but persistent.

Indeed. You are wise.

Very good. Put the responsibility on the claimer of a falsehood.

If prof. A is indeed as 'odd' to communicate with as you indicate, the problem will be known by the rest of the faculty, probably including the dean. If you want to move forward, you need to escalate. But if you do it in a respectful manner - keeping the focus on your need to move forward, and not on the oddities by prof. A - you can probably manage to do it without hurting any fragile egos too much. A nice trick here, is to blame external circumstances, instead of a persons' inability to communicate.
So: Write to the dean. Tell him or her that you have unsuccessfully tried to set up an exam date with prof. A in these trying times of COVID, but to no avail. Tell the dean that you have already set up an exam date with prof. B, but would like the dean's help or suggestions to set up an appointment with A.

Personally I'd focus on getting away from Prof. A.

Don't bring up COVID - it's got nothing to do with it.  The student requires action from a professor to complete their degree.  The professor is delinquent and has demonstrated a lack of intention to fulfil their professional responsibilities.  End of story.

In this sort of impossible situation in life in general, it is generally best not to focus on blame or complaint about someone else's behaviour.  Instead (preferably in consultation with a neutral advisor) formulate what you think is the best way forward. In other words, you need to find the solution.
The reason is that no-one (at whatever level) like to be presented with a problem. Everybody likes to be presented with the answer to a problem.
For example:

Dear X
I am having trouble arranging *****. It's difficult to see a way
forward although I have done my best.  Would it be possible for me to
have the following alternative? Blah blah blah. If so I would be most
grateful if you could direct me to the right person to help me achieve
this. Many thanks.

To whom is the example message addressed?

The professor most likely has a secretary taking care of administration. Visit and talk to them, it is likely that they are aware of these difficulties. If you explain your situation and politely ask for help chances are that they will help you communicating with the Prof. to get what you need.

I went to the secretary of his institute (there is one for each "field") and she told me to call him as he does not answer emails. I will try to talk to her again.

That's what I would try. Explain what you tried and ask if they can somehow mediate.

I would not expect the secretary to be able to do more than a student in this case. The kind of professor who communicates usefully with their secretary does so as well with students. This one doesn't seem to be of that type, and the secretary has precisely zero leverage.

@StephanKolassa I think you underestimate secretaries ...

@Roland: believe me, I have deep respect for the informal power of secretaries. However, if a professor is so dysfunctional as to leave a student hanging out to dry, I strongly doubt even the most savvy secretary will be able to communicate with them (as the OP confirmed in this instance), or set up an appointment for the prof that they will actually honor.

Speak to your department and explain the situation. Many faculties have directors of studies whose job it is to deal with issues such as this. If you are concerned about irking your examiner(s), you can also mention this to the department and ask for appropriate discretion. They should be able to advise you best and clear this up sooner rather than later, even if it means assigning you a new examiner.


text:
Choosing between letters of recommendation
I am in the process of preparing an application for a grad school/PhD program in Economics. The program I want to apply for requires two letters of recommendation so I was wondering which professors to approach to maximize my chances. There are basically two major research fields I am interested in and I could get a letters from a professor in each of the fields. However, there is also professor at a higher ranked university I attended a course at who could give me another letter of recommendation in one of the fields.
My question is whether it is better to have two letters from professors in a single research field rather than from each of the fields?

Which professors are able to write the best letter for you? Sure, you may have a prof from a great school write you a letter, but what can they really say about you from one semester of interaction? If the two profs know you better and can provide a more accurate depiction of your potential, then go for that because those profs can attest to your good performance in class (like the other prof) but also build on that more fully as well.

Thank you, that is certainly a very good point. I do happen to work as a student assistant for one of the professors but haven't taken any of his courses yet—I plan to take one of his courses though. I am not sure whether it is an advantage that I have worked for him but not taken any of his courses, do you happen to have any insights on whether this is regarded acceptable?

@GrayLiterature, that seems like an answer, actually.

I’ll post it later, I thought I was responding it as an answer - mobile isn’t isn’t too friendly sometimes.

Do either of these threads answer your question:  https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/13698/19607 or https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/85215/19607

I have already had a look at these questions but they only answer aspects of my question. @GrayLiterature’s is an answer to my question though. Any advice on the particular situation explained in my previous comment would be welcome.

If you have worked for one of these profs they will most likely be a much better reference than if you just took a course with them.  Letters from professors where you just attended some course are much more generic (I mean, they can't really say much beyond how you did in the course).

Thanks for your helpful comments! Unfortunately, I cannot upvote the comments since I'm new to the Academia Stackexchange.


text:
Would language difficulties be considered a valid excuse for a poor masters performance when applying for a PhD?
I recently completed a masters in a foreign country. I didn't know the language until the summer directly before, and foolishly thought that taking courses in a different language would be an interesting challenge. I was admitted to the course without needing to take any language competency exams. All lectures and learning material were in the foreign language, but we were allowed to write exams in my native language (which I did).
I absolutely bombed the first semester, achieving a mediocre result which is not great, and I felt that it was at least partially due to the language barrie. I managed to do better in my second semester. So I finished with a respectable grade but I don't know if it will be good enough for the competitive PhD programs that I was hoping to apply to next year. It is perhaps worth noting that I maintained excellent grades during my undergraduate years.
My question is; would those PhD programs be willing to view my second semester grades (which include my thesis) as more reflective of my potential than those of the first semester? In other words, are (self-inflicted) language difficulties considered to be mitigating circumstances?

In what part of the world will you be applying to doctoral programs?

I'm hoping to apply to Switzerland, Germany, France and the USA.

Pretty much impossible to predict how others will react. But you have a steep hill to climb. How to you create a prediction of success?

And are you fluent in German or will you be repeating the same issue?

Mathematical graduate programs in Germany (and indeed almost everywhere else) are English-language.

I don't see how this question can be answered unless you specify in the question the language of the PhD program.  The country does not always specify the language.  I don't think it's English in France.

@AnonymousPhysicist It depends where you are and with whom you work. You will find English theses from France nowadays and at an institution with staff who speak good English, you may well undertake a PhD in English. BUT for everyday life, learning French is recommended and may even become essential. However this can be done as part of the degree. (Side note: I came to France as a post-doc, which was essentially in English for me, have since moved to industry. I initially got French classes from the Institute and nowadays get to speak more and more French in everyday life too, including work.)

@ggclip The PhD can be done in English, however most of the paid positions for PhD students in Germany include some TA-duty, for which often enough some fluency in German is required. Not that there aren't positions and of course scholarships that don't, but those will be harder to get.

The good news is that you have a clear positive trajectory, and I'm assuming your undergraduate scores are quite good to get you accepted to the French MS program to begin with. In this case you have a high undergraduate GPA, and poor 1st semester MS GPA, and a good 2nd semester MS GPA.
This is something you should put into your cover letter. Straightforwardly acknowledge your difficulties as succinctly as you can, but phrase your 2nd semester "comeback" as overcoming a difficulty through hard work and perseverance.
A script might be: "I underestimated how difficult it would be to receive instruction in a language I didn't have a fluent grasp of, and my grades suffered in my first semester. However, through diligent effort to improve my French, as well as late nights studying my courses, I was able to gain good marks in my second semester. Therefore, while my GPA is not as high as I would like, I believe what I have learned in time management and self-study during the past year will help me overcome future difficulties that challenge any PhD student."
As to how potential admissions officers would react to such a statement is out of your control. If it were me and I was not in a top top program where I can afford to throw away 99% of the applications, I might keep you in the pile for further review.


text:
How to get women to apply for theses and research projects requiring (rudimentary) programming skills?
I started my own research (sub) group in a STEM field some months ago at an EU university (bachelor/master/PhD system). Every student has to do a bachelor's thesis (6 weeks), research internships (total of 6 weeks), and a master's thesis (6 months). Since I believe that introducing students to actual research early is beneficial, I use these to let students work on part of my own research. This also allows me to care more about their work.
However, almost no female students show interest in doing their research projects in my group. I don't think it's because of me as person, since in the past almost 75% of students I supervised were women, most of them approaching me with the desire to work with me. However, I switched from an experimental research focus to a theoretical one and I require students to have some basic understanding of programming, since it's necessary for the research I'm doing now. I strongly suspect that this is the factor that leads to this problem.
Given the short time of many of those internships I don't see it as an option to teach these skills in that time in addition to the other necessary skills I have to convey. The university has coding courses and even special courses only for women, however, they don't seem to be very popular.
Any good ideas how I could motivate female students to pick up a basic knowledge in programming (either in the university provided courses or "on their own") and not being scared off by this requirement?

It might be interesting to find out how your male students learned programming.

@PatriciaShanahan most of them were interested in it and learned it through online courses in self-study (most of them are also very interested in related topics like PC hardware, video games, machine learning,...). Some learned it in non-mandatory courses at high school or even went to specialized IT high schools.

What languages are you using?

Does this answer your question? Writing ads to attract female PhD candidates

What are your numbers? Two/year, 12?

You've noticed lack of female students and you blame it on their supposed lack of programming skills. IMHO It's unwise to act on this conjecture, you need to prove it first. Your research might be genuinely incompatible with their future goals just as well.

Teach computation throughout the undergraduate curriculum.  All your students need to know it anyway.  Examples: https://www.compadre.org/PICUP/webdocs/About.cfm
Ensure all students know why your research is worthwhile.  If the cause of your problem is stereotypes, relating the work to students' values is a way to overcome that.
Educate your students about bias.
Inform your students about minority role models.  Don't know any?  Here's one https://research.seas.ucla.edu/carter/.
Develop a reputation for being a good mentor.

There are no magic instantaneous fixes.

This. If it is genuninely the case that you need some programming skills, and the female students arn't making the earlier choices that prepares them, then that is what needs to change. We run a biological computing module that students can take as an alternative to their dissertation - instead of 12 weeks of lab work, they get 8 weeks of programming tuition, followed by a 4 week research project. It is chosen more or less equally be male and female presenting students.

You may simply need to remove the programming requirement. If you believe that’s what the deterrent is then by removing it, and assuming you are correct, you will see more female applicants. Now, simply because you remove it to encourage applicants does not mean you have to hire them if all you’re concerned about is getting their applications. You can directly test your hypothesis by removing it from the application and if someone comes along with experience, you can safely hire them. But, assuming you’re interested in having women in your lab, it might require additional effort on your part to get them introduced to programming. Is it more laborious on your end? Yes. But you can also be up front that if they don’t have that experience, you will expect them to put in more time to learn via YouTube, StackOverflow, etc to get caught up to speed.

I find this idea of applying for theses somewhat unusual. In my experience, they're typically student-generate projects, which would keep interest higher.
With regard to the specifics of this post, there's some argument that women tend to apply less often to jobs they aren't 100% qualified to, compared to men.
If "rudimentary" programming skills are all that are needed, I'd make sure that's what the listing actually says, instead of listing "two years of experience with Python" that would be nice for you as the mentor, and not the student.


text:
PhDs in the UK: should you know supervisor beforehand?
(context: undergrad/integrated masters student in a math-related field, planning on a PhD in a CS-related field)
In Asia (at least in India and Singapore), students are generally expected to personally know (and ideally have worked with) their to-be supervisors before starting their PhD.
So it's common for undergrads to try to contact professors for summer projects -- and professors generally like it, because they get free work done and get a good feel of who may be a good graduate student for them to take later.
In the end of my second year at a UK university, I emailed a couple of professors (in other UK universities) asking for a summer project with some semi-generic topic ideas, but quickly realized this was a major faux-pas since:

I didn't receive a reply, positive or negative, suggesting that it was regarded as spam.
I found that some other professors -- though not the ones I had emailed -- had put notices on their website expressing their dislike of summer internship requests.
I saw a question here that seemed to suggest that such requests are considered spam, although that may only be for generic formats for mass-emailing professors (which is not what I did).

So I realize that I don't really know how "getting into a PhD programme" works in the UK. Are you not expected to know a supervisor beforehand? Or do students generally look for other (perhaps less time-consuming for professors) ways to network with potential supervisors, like emailing them about their work?

Note: I'm not in a UK, but I sometimes receive emails from students asking for a summer internship. For me during the summer, with exams, conferences, project meetings and holidays, is virtually impossible to take any student and I seldom answer.

I wouldn't regard emailing supervisors asking for an internship as a faux pas (except in the cases you mention where they have indicated they do not want such requests, or mass emailing). I know personally of interns who have gained supervision this way, so while some academics may ignore the requests, and you did not have success, it is a legitimate strategy, and I don't think it should be considered rude.

Pro tip: Check with an ECR, postdoc or even PhD student in the group, they might be more accommodating to introduce you to the work. Sometimes they also have a better idea of what is actually going on in the lab at the moment.

It is not necessary to know a professor before applying for a PhD in the UK. I have so far supervised 8 PhD students, only one of whom I knew before they started their PhD.
There are two routes to a PhD in the UK. First is to apply for an advertised position or program. This is how the majority of PhDs are recruited, but it is also usually only open to home students. The second is to find the funding yourself (either through a non-UK government scheme, an NGO or a wealthy benefactor) and to write to the supervisor laying out your experience, your desire to do a PhD (and why with them), and what your source of funding is.
I don't take unpaid interns as I feel it unfairly advantages those that can afford to do an unpaid internship at the expense of those that can't. My university runs several schemes that fund summer internships and my professional society also has a summer studentship fund. Unfortunately, I only have the capacity to take one, or at a push, two summer students a year, and I would normally recruit these from our own undergraduate body. While I try to reply to all requests for internships, I get several a day during some parts of the year, and sometimes they slip through the cracks.

Thanks. Just to be clear, does "home students" refer to "undergrads from the same university", "undergrads from UK universities" or "UK citizens"?

It means UK citizens and for the next year also EU students - those that don't pay overseas fees.

it's worth noting that eligibility requirements for funding are frequently based on residence rather than citizenship, so a UK citizen living abroad might not be eligibble, when a foreign citizen who has been schooled (as in pre 18) in the UK might be.

Its a bit more complicated that that - applicants have both "settled" and "ordinarily resident" status under UK law. The full critieria can be found in section 2 of this document: http://www.whiterose-mechanisticbiology-dtp.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/studentshipeligibility.pdf

It is relatively difficult to arrange such internships. The applicants usually look for a 4-6 week period which is usually not enough time to get any meaningful output (except for the very strongest students), but still requires quite some preparation and supervision if done well.
Then, often the visa issue is not resolved and the university does not usually handle internship visa arrangements (it is different with PhDs), so the prospective supervisor needs to help.
Third, it seems that a lot of students especially from India seem to require/seek experience abroad which means that you get a lot of such requests, and, even if the topic sounds reasonably well defined and relevant (which means they have read your website and actually refer to your work) it is incredibly difficult to judge CVs from that country (what does "top 1% in [some fancy national ranking]" or "1st prize of [impressive sounding competition]" mean? Is that good? Is it meaningless?). The extra work in having to supervise a weak/mediocre internship candidate can be astonishing.
I have sometimes accepted internships from students I knew from other channels, e.g. colleagues, or who have talked to me at conferences, workshops and summer schools, but I expected them to organize their visa, where required, mostly themselves - but they did not come from India, and that may definitely require a formal host for a visa; that being said, for a very strong student (i.e. where I would know from other routes that they are strong), I probably would be ready to contribute necessary paperwork (e.g. recommendation/hosting letters) where relevant as long as it is not excessive.
The story is very different if the students are already on location and, especially, if they have taken my course, because I can have an idea what they are capable of and they know my topics and style, so an internship can be ramped up much faster.
In short: external students constitute a significant risk to be a time sink, and especially for a short internship this is usually not worth the logistical and scientific effort, unless you know well who you are dealing with.
For PhDs, there are ads during the year and you apply for them. Getting to know your PhD supervisor is possible separately and outside of an internship. The latter could be a good idea, but, because of above reasons, is usually replaced by an interview. Many prospective supervisors, however, encourage getting in contact with them on applying for a PhD under their supervision.

I think another pertinent issue (at least in the UK) is that funding to support PhD students is often restricted to UK/EU nationals. In the present context, this more or less removes the 'try before you buy' incentive for the supervisor.

@avid This is an additional hurdle. However, we do not have this restriction, and the arguments above hold independent of it.

Ian Sudbery mentioned that a secondary route to applying to an advertised position is to find your own funding and then solicit supervisors. I suspect this varies by field, but I would suggest a third viable route, which is that you can contact potential supervisors without having funding. In some cases there may be university specific funding programmes available, or they may have some idea for what grants to apply to. If you do impress them, they may be very willing to help you find funding and to help you apply. Therefore, I wouldn't be put off from soliciting supervisors without having gone through the difficult task of applying for a fellowship alone.
As for how to make the initial contact, I would suggest that you speak to your own lecturers, who may be able to suggest who to contact. The opportunity to "network" with academics in your own department is extremely valuable, and one that you should not miss out on if you are planning to do a PhD. Having the "endorsement" of being referred by a colleague (who would presumably not do so if they thought you were unsuitable as a PhD student) is likely to increase your chances of a positive response. Outside of working for someone as an intern, I believe being referred by a colleague is the next best thing.
I would also suggest you ask if you could attend research seminars in the area you are interested in. If there is a visiting speaker who works in an area you are interested in, it's a good opportunity to ask if they are seeking PhD students.

PhD students actively look for posts which are on offer, by contacting departments/professors, but prior contact is not usual or needed.
Some students manage to get places in the university because they finished their final year and saw the post which they then applied for - may not be in the same department but the professorial contact comes into play "what's this student like"?
Other students see posts are available and apply, which then leads to interview.
Many departments do not have summer work available as the tech staff may be doing maintenance during the holidays. I know that it was very quiet for us during the vacation - just 3 of us doing research and the cleaners...

One route to meeting a supervisor which is reasonably common in the UK inSTEM subjects, but which seems not to have been mentioned in other answers yet is the masters research project. Integrated masters courses are fairly common in both the 4 year undergraduate programme and 1 year MRes + Phd patterns, as are 1 year taught masters courses. The majority of these will include a dissertation project closely supervised by a member of faculty, which can act as an audition, as well as an introduction to that supervisor and their colleagues.
Having said that, outside of a few institutions, staying at the same institution for all three degrees is sometimes frowned upon (e.g. by funding bodies) as failing to broaden your horizons.


text:
Will taking unpaid leave hurt tenure process?
I am in the last year of my tenure clock and will be submitting my tenure package this Fall.  However, I will not be able to teach on campus this Fall partly due to COVID-19 disruption (school closing means I will have to stay home with my children).  If teaching on campus is required (not yet finalized), I would have no choice but to take an unpaid leave.
Will taking an unpaid leave hurt my tenure process?
I did some basic research.  There are nothing specific in faculty handbook, nor can I find anything in the official tenure procedure book.

Another option might be using the provisions of the Coronavirus relief package for parents to specifically buy out your teaching instead of taking a full leave. I know some institutions are allowing this.

Would you be continuing to perform research during this unpaid leave?

The situation is unprecedented, so any answer based on how things normally work would be of dubious relevance.

@Dawn, is there information on how to use Coronavirus relief package for parents?  I couldn't find any information on this.  Is there any precedence?

Check with HR. I am part of a Facebook group for Tenure-track moms and some are using it this fall. Here is general info, although not for universities: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/advisor/2020/05/14/a-working-parents-guide-to-paid-family-leave-in-the-families-first-coronavirus-response-act/amp/

Search “FFCRA” and “university” for many example policies on how to apply for leave. Also try to search for your specific university to see if there is a policy in place for you. But HR should know the details.

Taking an unpaid leave of absence would often factor into tenure decisions. I would begin a discussion with you department head today. Express your concerns. COVID-19 is a very unique circumstance. Surely they could find a way for you to teach remotely if you start a discussion right now.
If I was a department chair, I would be finding ways to accommodate my faculty. But I would also want to have that discussion as soon as possible.
What you definitely do not want to do is wait until a month into the semester to inform your department that you are not going to be showing up. (We had a professor do this a few years ago and he was obviously fired).

Many (probably most) department chairs would work to accommodate their faculty's needs, including, if necessary, requesting special consideration from higher administrators. But to do that, they have to know about their faculty's needs. So I agree: Express your concerns.

This would be a local rule and so no advice here is really valid. I assume people will be reasonable, assuming you are in a reasonable place. But It is better to talk to someone with authority at your institution and get a ruling - in writing. The department head, and/or dean, and or head of the tenure committee would all be good to talk to.
Don't make any assumptions. And don't believe it if a random internet person says don't worry be happy.

To the user who raised Low Quality Post flag, what's wrong with this answer? Would you please point it out?

Even if you found something in the handbook, then that was probably written before the COVID-19 crisis, so it would not mean much. I would hope that would not be held against you, and you have good arguments, but not everybody is equally reasonable. So the best guess can be made by you, as you know who make the decision.


text:
How are scientists trained on the *business* side of running a lab?
I've noticed lots of folks in the sciences seem to have well-developed business skills needed to run a lab, like managing a budget, hiring employees, building a team, setting deadlines and managing work, as well as 'soft skills' in leading and managing people. How scientists get trained on those general business skills?
I expect the answer will be that it varies by field, by university, and by supervisor, and potentially by geographical area. But, I'd love to learn more from folks from different disciplines about the formal or informal training scientists in different fields receive in these skills. I'd also welcome any links or recommended resources for academics looking to build on these skills.

Do you mean "management" rather than "business" ? Unless the lab actually has business aspects (like producing and selling products), the aspects you mention do not seem to be business-related.

Many (most?) universities have an office that aids in such things, taking a portion (sometimes large) of any grant to provide management and other services. The "overhead" of a grant provides these services, but also pays for lab space and such things.

There is no formal training, academy is much like an apprenticeship when it comes to these business skills, but one can improve themselves, for example my BS degree had courses on engineering, engineering finance, project management, entrepreneurship etc. Another way is to mimic the way other successful labs work. It is super counter-intuitive in my opinion as your experience is very limited but that is usually how it is. And yes, there are units that -may- help with copyrighting, administrative, finance/budget, HR issues, maybe grant writing -but- labwise you are alone.

@lighthousekeeper to clarify, they are 'business skills' in the sense that they're the same skills one would use in running a business, not that the lab itself is necessarily a business, although I see that some labs do get "start up incubator" funding to develop a product that could be brought to market.

@Buffy Interesting -- but doesn't the university usually just do the controls and accounting stuff for the grant? I was under the impression that it's the PI who actually sets the budget -- at least that's how it's been on the one major grant I ever worked on. So the PI still needs to know how to formulate the budget for the grant, right? Do they ever receive training any explicit training in budgeting?

@shane I still think it's a misnomer because the skills are not specific to business, and most scientists are not involved with business.

The easy answer is "they're not."


text:
Can one submit overlapping grant proposals?
I plan to submit an NSF CAREER proposal this Summer.
From what I have heard, the review process will take several months, and most likely I won't receive a decision until the next year.
In December, I would also like to submit a regular NSF proposal that describes exactly the first 3 (out of 5) years of the research plan in the CAREER proposal.
So I will have two overlapping proposals being reviewed at the same time by the end of this year.
The reason for the overlap is that both of these describe a project that I feel very passionate about.
I will focus on this project in the next 5 years no matter what.
So if the CAREER proposal is not funded,
I would like to have a shot to be supported by a regular grant as soon as possible.
Plus, it seems CAREER is very competitive,
so my chance of getting funded is not much above zero.
My question is:
Will the two overlapping proposals be in conflict with one another?
If not, what is the right way to clarify this situation to the program officer and panel?

NSF told me they spend a lot of their time preventing people from doing that.

Email or call the relevant program manager.  Answering such questions is part of their job.  Plus it's not bad for them to have had some contact with you before seeing your proposal.

From your description, there is too much overlap.
One option is to figure out how to split off pieces of the project that can be done in parallel.  I’ve currently got a CAREER award that focuses on a core theoretical topic, a standard NSF grant (with a collaborator) that focuses on how this theory interacts with non-ideal physics and measurement, and am part of a team on a third (special-program) NSF grant for which my responsibility is using the theory as a framework to guide my collaborators’ hardware development.
The work on each of these grants drives forward my overall research agenda, but is distinct enough from the others that there is no conflict on the grants.
Definitely talk with your program manager as you develop your proposals —they can give you feedback as to whether they agree that your ideas are distinct before you put in the full proposal effort (and having a good relationship with them is always a good idea in any case).


text:
Is it important to maintain a work-life balance as a PhD student?
My apologies in advance for asking such a trivial question. My concerns may not be as urgent or serious as some of the others on here, but I have been worrying about this for some time now.
My life since starting my PhD has can typically be summed up as waking up early, getting to the office about 7AM and working on some part of my research until 5PM before going home to study some more theory. I adore my field - I really think I'm the luckiest person ever for having the opportunity to work on such interesting problems.
However, I often get comments about my work-life balance being unhealthy. People often tell me to get a hobby that isn't related to physics or mathematics. In fact, a friend even brought me evidence that the vast majority of highly successful scientists, including my scientific heroes, have had a creative hobby.
I've honestly tried to maintain a hobby but I keep getting pulled back into my old routine. The progression typically goes like this:

I start a hobby, say drawing.
I draw consistently for a week or two. I even buy a course book for drawing and work through it. I'm making progress, all is great.
By the third week, I'm plagued with thoughts that slowly erode my motivation to draw. Thoughts about how I could be studying complex analysis, or working on that atomic configuration generation code...
By week four I've forgotten that I was trying to draw in the first place and am now back to the old routine.

Yet, as my friends point out, the evidence really is against me here. A lot of successful scientists do have hobbies outside of their work. It strikes me that the problem might be a bit more deep-seated: it may just be that I've developed a very unhealthy work ethic that'll cause me to crash and burn down the line.
As academics, how important would you consider hobbies as a part of your lifestyle? Would you consider the cultivation of a field completely unrelated to your own to be an essential component to an academic career - or, as my eloquent colleague puts it, being human in general?

Note: A hobby shouldn't be taken forcefully and as though it's a second job!

Second note: If it's getting more stressful to have the hobby than not to, it's really not worth it, however interesting that hobby is.

I'm curious, how long has this situation been the case?

Does this answer your question? Ways to manage something like a 'work-life balance'?

Is there any job where work life balance isn't important?

@Magicsowon: Obviously if OP keeps their 10h work day plus studying in the evening, adding a hobby will make it even more stressful. You probably shouldn’t force yourself to pointlessly pursue a hobby, but if you don’t have any time for hobbies at all it’s only a matter of time until you burn out.

From the looks of it, you spend 70+h/week on your work. This is too much for a healthy life on the long term, hobby or not. Beware of workaholism and burn-outs, they're nastier than they look.

While a lot of people are saying that if you're happier working than not, that's fine. I'm concerned by your reason for stopping hobbies. If you're feeling like you should be working instead of having fun., that's an indicator that you've internalised things too much and fallen into workaholism, if you would rather be doing the work things than the hobby, that's less concerning. As long as you're having fun and not feeling burnt out you're probably fine.

@AzorAhai--hehim : For many jobs, there's very little risk of it invading your personal life. Think assembly line worker who has fixed work hours with no overtime allowed. Due to the nature of the job, he can neither do it home nor study about it at home. One such worker may find other such jobs, thus compromising his personal life, though.

@Mefitico Sure, but those jobs also can pressure you to take OT, or to come in on the weekends, don't take your vacation, etc.

This sounds more like a question for a therapist or a discussion forum. But I wouldn't be too worried unless you often feel stressed, you're chronically tired, you're unhappy, you feel like your life is missing something, you have trouble focusing (on things you want or need to do), you can't find things to talk about with people you want to talk to or you have some other symptom to tell you there's a problem.

Sounds like your current hobby (learning and research) is pretty similar to your work. Nothing wrong with that. If your learning in the evening is not because you feel obliged to but because you want to do that, it's fine.

You might just as well be a statistical anomaly who not only enjoys but thrives in working much longer than an average person. There are people who enjoy and actively pursue all sorts of extremities and so if you truly have no fatigue or burnout from working that many hours, why not ignore what you hear and revel in what you do instead?

Work-what balance? In academia?! ;) (I know, I know.) In my experience, the hobbies come unexpected and are actually fun. Your description does not sound like you had fun drawing.

Of course that's important. How could you doubt that?

one thing that I don't think anyone's ask and is important in your case is: when you say "Thoughts about how I could be studying complex analysis, or working on that atomic configuration generation code..." is this closer to 'I need to get this stuff done, if I get it done tonight it will be a load off my back', or 'I've got a new game/show series/book that I've been looking forward to and can't wait to play/watch/read'

It is very important that work-life balance be available to people who need it.  Most PhD students and most scientists need some form of balance but exact needs vary.
You are not obligated to adopt someone else's idea of balance.  There is no evidence that what works for other people will work for you.
Healthy diet and exercise are strongly correlated with better health and longer lifespan.  There is very likely a causal relationship there.  But I don't think that's what you were asking.

Would you consider the cultivation of a field completely unrelated to your own to be an essential component to an academic career?

No.  Common, normal, and fair, but not necessarily essential.

being human in general?

That's more of a religious question than an academic question.

That's more of a religious question than an academic question.
Spiritual or philosophical, more than religious, really... in any case, fair advice, definitely expresses in the manner of a physicist!

Actually, not particularly religious, spiritual, or philosophical. Just.... human.

-1 for your last answer. Personally I would answer that part with your first part, since it's all one question ...

Yes, maintaining a work-life balance is important. But what the balance entails changes from person to person, and from day to day. The questions below may serve as prompt to facilitate the balancing.
Do you think you have a good grasp on how you are doing in general, emotionally and in terms of your energy level and motivation? Or can't you even tell? How often do you feel exhausted or tired? How often do you feel lonely or down? How is your sleep? Do you mostly enjoy what you do? Do you feel what you do has a purpose?
When it comes to hobbies, I noted that your approach seems rather solitary, cerebral, and goal-oriented: Learn something, using a book, with a specific outcome. Perhaps you might consider something more physical, more social, and more intrinsically enjoyable as counterbalance. For example dancing, team sports, bird watching, hiking, playing music in a band, (urban) gardening etc.

+1 for your last paragraph. But note that there is no obligation for social activities either, even though they will be important for most people (being part of the 8 essential aspects of well-being, as in "relationships" and "giving back").

If you're happy and well-adjusted by your own yardstick, I think you're doing fine.
The only dark cloud I see is that your life and work as a grad student will change after graduation. For example, if you follow an academic career path, you will have to face that in the future it is likely your students who will be doing the really fun work! While many professors keep a foot in the lab or what have you, a professor's main job typically isn't doing bench work (or the theoretical/computational equivalent). Their job is primarily to keep the ideas & money flowing, and support students' learning and careers (and of course teach courses now & then!).
If you really have no interests beyond your research work, you may find that transition from foot-soldier to admin difficult. Difficulties may also arise when you face inevitable rockiness in the career side of things (a difficult project getting stalled, a dry spell in grant funding, etc.), a larger outside-of-work social support system or hobby may help keep you on an even keel.
But ultimately what is "normal" or "healthy" depends on whether it's healthy for you. For example, if things are going great now, why bother to change? But just recognize that if in the future things no longer feel healthy, it's okay to pick up a hobby at that time with no regrets.

In mathematics that complete transition to administration is much less common. You can easily keep spending most of your research time actually doing research.

@Arno good point, i believe the same is true in the humanities.

While it may be true that more senior people stay more hands on in reasearch in experimental subjects, for all academics, an increase in seniority mean an increase in time spent teaching and doing admin for the department. The typical academic contract is famously 40% reserach (either doing it or supervising it), 40% teaching and 20% service/administration)

The flip side of this comment is that there is unlikely to be another time in your career when you'll be as free to concentrate on your research as your are now, and there might be some value in taking advantage of that.

One other thing to watch out is burnout. Doing long hours is often not sustainable. Also, sometimes the benefit of a break or vacation is felt after taking it.

There is no obligation for you to have a hobby. If you don't want to draw, then don't draw. If you want to study complex analysis in every spare hour you have, then by all means do so. You are an adult and free to do as you will with your time.
Yes, work life balance is very important to many PhD students. They have a tendency to mismanage their own time and overemphasize the volume rather than quality of their work. Volume of course is easy to measure, you can "work" 14 hour days and feel secure that you are doing everything you ought to for the sake of your own success. Whereas judging the impact of the work is much harder and comes with experience, so it is tempting to overlook the importance of that one hour that was worth 1400.
However, clinging to volume like a safety blanket is not harmless. People get tired as they become fatigued and their productivity can drop dramatically (especially in knowledge work like a PhD). There is a risk of becoming bored with your project and incurring substantial delays as a result. It can be bad for mental health and depress people. Having too much work can interfere with basic personal upkeep like paying bills, staying on top of paperwork, housekeeping, and so on which then lead to more distractions from research. This is why people talk about the importance of having work life balance as a PhD student.
From what you said in your post, you are clearly happy with spending all your time working, and don't enjoy hobbies. In this regard, you are different from other people and it is not important to you. Congrats and don't feel you have to be someone else just because. Generally, I'd like to think that if an adult does not want a hobby, other adults can respect and understand that. But some people are stubborn, so if the attempted interventions bother you, there is always the simple option of lying to them about a boring hobby that will make them feel like they've done their good deed for the day and leave you alone. Of course, don't be surprised if people who do care about their hobbies then don't have as much in common with you. And you might change your mind one day, about how much work with no play you are willing to tolerate...

I was talking to one of my best friends about the prospect of getting a PhD. His response was something like this:

The best thing about being in a PhD program is getting to really dive into a single area, and focus and just that, for a few years. You'll probably never have that opportunity again in your life.

Okay, so some scientists have other hobbies and interests, that's great. Were they pursuing them intensely during their PhD program? That might be a different kettle of fish, and in need of more specific data.
I would recommend: Follow the routine that works for you and feels natural. Some people never find even that, so you should count yourself as fortunate. Yes, proper nutrition and exercise is a must, you need to find some way to work that in. If you're hyper-focused on one topic (for now), people should respect that.
Be skeptical of, and don't try to hold yourself to, some anecdotal "famous scientist" behavior; those stories likely get passed around because they are novel and unusual. In many cases they may have other resources (money, family, connections) that make it easier to maintain academic and outside interests than normal. In other cases the stories may be inflated "tall tales" told to build up the brand and mythologize the person in question.

Your work-life balance is, well, yours and nobody else's. It isn't measured in hours per day, or how many hobbies you have, or how many parties you go to. It also is likely to change over the course of your life, as your life situation changes.
As a grad student, I loved my work. The experiments that I did required long runs on equipment at an industry lab partner. The available time was weekday nights, and all weekend. But I didn't work all weekend long - almost every weekend I took a day off, drove up to a well-known climbing place, met up with friends and spent the entire day climbing. Being outdoors for a day, focused on the hear-and-now of climbing and being with friends, was a good work-life balance.
Now, years later, I still love what I do at work. However, with a wife and kids I make sure that I spend plenty of time with them on evenings and weekends, and take all of my vacation (now about 7 weeks/year all told). I don't climb anymore (my strength-to-weight ratio is not as favorable!), but still am happy to head out backpacking and whatnot (the plan to spend 6 weeks driving to the Arctic ocean this summer with my son was, sadly, a victim of Covid). I think my work-life balance is just fine.
If you are happy and productive, don't worry about what other people think. But, be bluntly honest with yourself - if you feel a need to get away from your research for a while then do it.

Keep an eye on your mental health. Spending so much time on your own keeps you inside your own head. A friend of mine developed paranoia at one point by simply ignoring everything around him. Just check in with yourself every so often to see if your thinking is still straight. Remember the movie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Beautiful_Mind_(film) ?  Don't be scared by this warning but if others start to wonder about odd facets of your behaviour then it is worth stopping and considering if they could be right.
As for a hobby, the best one I have ever found when working intensively is going for a walk. You can carry on thinking but you are getting oxygen, exercising, and allowing your body to recover. I have a dog now so she reminds me when it is time to walk. However you can equally set a timer on your phone to go off at regular intervals - say every half hour for a round-the block walk, or once every hour for a two-block walk. On the way drop in at a local cafe and get to know the staff. Chat about inconsequential things briefly but then get to work while drinking your tea/coffee.
Human contact is important because research can be very lonely. However there is no need to go overboard and join a club.
P.S. Short-term bouts of intense working are fine but three solid years while doing a PhD is too much for brain and body without changing the scenery at least a little.

+1 for walks! Exercise, relaxation, and optionally no-pressure thinking time in one.

Work-life balance is a useful concept as an approximation of what works for the average person. But it’s a concept that’s mostly relevant for people for whom “work” is a concept that’s very distinct from the rest of “life”. And it sounds like you may be one of those very lucky people who enjoy their “work” so much that it becomes essentially the same as a hobby - something you are so passionate about that at times you like doing it more than anything else.
Well, I think I know the feeling, because I’m also such a person. While I do have quite a lot of hobbies, sometimes long periods go by when I enjoy my work so much I only “work” from moment I wake up until I go to sleep, and I start feeling guilty about neglecting my “hobbies”. At the same time, I realize how lucky I am to be paid to do what I love. Over time I’ve come to realize that for me, there simply is no boundary between “work” and “hobbies”; to me they are pretty much the same thing, at least for a large part (math research) of what’s considered “work”.
So I think your friends are basically wrong. Hobbies are good not because they will make you a more successful academic, but because they make you a more interesting person and can develop you in directions that are orthogonal to your academic work. In a sense they let you exercise different parts of your brain and expand your horizons in ways that work won’t. But that has little to do with an academic career. I think there are some mathematicians who are extremely successful precisely because they don’t care about anything other than math and spend their entire lives just thinking about their research. So you could very well succeed with such an approach if it suits your personality and interests.
At the end of the day, you need to decide what you’re optimizing for. If you’re optimizing purely for career success, your current approach may well be optimal. If you’re optimizing for overall happiness, you’d probably want to think about investing time in things other than work, like friends, a romantic life, and yes, maybe also some fun hobbies (which incidentally can help with the friends and romantic life part).

While it can be liberating to have no boundary between work and life if you don't need one, it can also cause great suffering if you need one. Unfortunately, there is an ideological narrative that leads many knowledge/creative workers in particular to delude themselves into a "passion" that is nothing more than internalized exploitation. Who needs a decent wage and sound working conditions when you can just follow your dreams.

@henning yes, people delude themselves in all sorts of ways. For some it’s as you describe, while others delude themselves into thinking they need to have some kind of cookie cutter life with a dog, hobbies, the perfect work-life balance, etc. Yet others are deluded into thinking money is the most important thing and that if you aren’t paid a lot you’re a victim of “internalized exploitation”. So perhaps we should acknowledge that different people need/want/are made happy by different things. I spoke of my own experience, others will speak of theirs and OP can decide what works for them.

(And as I said I actually have many hobbies myself, which I find extremely rewarding.)

sure, different people have different needs. Your answer might work for OP, who apparently enjoys his work and seems to believe he needs to pick up a hobby because that's what people do. Regarding money, however, if you have a family and work as adjunct on serial fixed-term contracts, this need is not a delusion, and passion doesn't pay the bills.

@henning agreed, some people are genuinely exploited. I see where you’re coming from. OP should beware of the ideological narrative you mentioned, as well as its reverse. The healthiest is to think for yourself and not blindly buy into anyone else’s ideology.

When you do a Ph.D, I think one of the main challenges is that you always try to figure out some solutions for your methodological/theoretical questions you try to answer.
Sometimes, when you are really stuck for many days on a problem (a proof for example), you may lose your perspective since you are inside the problem. You may miss little trivial details that may help you to make a proof. At that point, having a hobby is helpful. After spending some time on your hobby and coming back to your work would probably give you a fresh perspective. So you could be even more productive for your research with a hobby.

The concept of having a "life" varies by individual. Ultimately, you must decide how you define "life", rather than trying to copy what other people think "life" should involve. If you enjoy your work so much that you gladly find it to be almost coterminous with your "life", that is a great and enviable place to be, and you should ignore other people's admonishments about "work-life balance" (having said that, you should, of course, still ensure that you have enough sleep and exercise, and eat a healthy diet).
Few people are so fortunate, and even fewer manage to sustain this happy state for very long (after PhD, most scholars have to confront the tedious administrative realities of finding an academic job and, if they get one, discharging all the irritating bureaucratic demands). The notion of "work-life balance" as a conflict between two different sides has arisen as a coping mechanism for the majority of people who do not find their work sufficiently fulfilling to be the sole constituent of a good "life".

There are certainly benefits to having a good work/life balance. Having downtime from work can help avoid "burning out" later on. Social interaction is good for mental health. Physical activity is good for physical (and mental) health.
However, having a hobby which you basically treat like another kind of work isn't necessarily going to be beneficial. And from your post, that sounds like what you have been going for. You should be looking for ways to switch off, not just change channel! Try to avoid the idea that your hobby needs to be productive, and look for activities that involve spending time with other people and/or outdoors. What do your friends do with their time off?
I think the Simpsons had the right idea.

Erin: You like hanging out too?
Lisa: Well, it beats doing stuff.

What's a work life balance?
On a more serious note: Typically filling life with work longterm is not a healthy choice. Having said that, taking the following quote from your post:

My life since starting my PhD has can typically be summed up as waking up early, getting to the office about 7AM and working on some part of my research until 5PM before going home to study some more theory. I adore my field - I really think I'm the luckiest person ever for having the opportunity to work on such interesting problems.

You are stating that you are happy working continuously on the topic and that is quite normal when you enjoy a topic, even more so in academia. - Having said that, success in academia is not necessarily tied to long hours. Some successful people worked regular hours too.
I think as long as you work on it because you want to, it will be fine. - If you work long hours because you feel any kind of pressure to do so, it is NOT fine and will be damaging.
I'd also ask if you feel happy to do something else and drop to "normal hours" if you found something more interesting. If yes, you should be fine.
And just on a personal note: Those who have dealt with IT know the feeling of having something to work on/resolve and suddenly it is the middle of the night as time flies by - this happens.
One more comment: There are also good answers in other contributions, such as the "change of tack" from research PhD to permanent academic post. Having said that, nearly pure research posts exist - often one temporary contract after another from funding proposals. Stressful, but 100% research.
Edit:
Hobbies? Well, I did spend some time on photography during my academic years but also stopped for several months? A year? In between.
As others have said, there is no need for hobbies - you might not have found yours yet. So what?
Maybe you could also do something along your research subject? Rendering graphics? Raytracing? - Code mathematical software? Try, see if it sticks or not. - If it doesn't, it is fine.

At the very least, I think it is important to pick up some sort of physical activity as a "hobby". It will help keep you in good physical and mental health in the long run.
Also, from personal experience, it should not interfere with your technical thoughts. During my phd (quantum computing), many good ideas on how to solve the technical problems I was facing came about while I was working out.
For everything apart from physical activity, there are no real guidelines, just do what feels ok for you.

However, I often get comments about my work-life balance being unhealthy.

Come to work in my country, Japan, and you won't be getting such comments.
Jokes aside, I share the view that if you enjoy your work and are passionate about it, you don't need to balance your work, in the first place. The only valid reason to pursue an academic career is when you are so passionate about doing research that it is a kind of hobby for you. Academic jobs are very demanding in terms of effort and qualifications and are not well paid, so if you just want to make money, build a career in a more financially rewarding field - IT, industry, banking, real estate, or anything of the kind. And still, I'd recommend choosing a job you are passionate about, not just the highest paying job you can get.
Since you say you think you're "the luckiest person ever for having the opportunity to work on such interesting problems," it doesn't seem that you have any real problem. If you enjoy your work, just keep enjoying it, and if anyone tells you that your work-life balance is unhealthy, respond that what is unhealthy is to have a job that needs to be balanced. And you can refer to the fact that the life expectancy for Japan, where people tend to work longer hours than in the USA or Germany, is higher than the life expectancies for those two countries. And you can ask your advice-givers whether they would advise a famous painter such as Salvador Dali or Pablo Picasso to get a hobby, too. Painting is their hobby.  And your hobby is research. Research is to a large part about creativity - just like painting is.
Furthermore, research work is really multifaceted. To be a good researcher, you have to be a good manager, a good writer, a good negotiator, a good orator, and so on. The tasks you have to do greatly vary in their nature. You make measurements, do calculations, write research articles, arrange collaborations, travel to conferences, give talks, discuss research findings with your colleagues, write persuasive grant proposals, come up with hypotheses to explain things, etc., so you frequently change your activity. And a change is as good as a rest. Why would you need a separate hobby then?
The very reason why people need a hobby separate from their work is that they are so bored at work that they need to spice up their lives and fulfill the urge to fulfill their creative potential. But if your job already brings you everything you need in terms of self-realization, you don't need a separate hobby. Your job already brings you everything. And that's how things should be.
I humbly hope that my answer will help you and other users look at the problem from a somewhat different perspective as compared to other answers.

I agree with the gist of this answer, but while people in Japan may live longer, they report less life-satisfaction than Germans. Reference

@henning--reinstateMonica : Life satisfaction is a weird parameter to use to compare countries, for it's absolutely normal to have a list of things you are not satisfied with and working on. I believe that one should have own emotions balanced, and i think that excessive joy on a permanent basis is something rather abnormal. And couldn't German life satisfaction be influenced by regular beer consumption? :)

it may seem so, but there's a whole discipline dealing with "happiness research". Here's a widely cited international comparative study. Anyway, I'm certainly not against a nice cold beer, but in winter time a hot sake does warm the heart as well.

Without reading a lot in depth, I suspect comparing happiness across countries quickly becomes an esoteric pseudoscience rather than rigorous research. - The OECD better life index will have you believe that people in the UK are happier than in France... http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/topics/life-satisfaction/ - Yet just about everything seems worse in the UK than in France if we are looking at the global societal/political context that impacts life. Add to that, that in some countries it is accepted to complain, while in others you just keep quiet and accept it.

You're fine.  Key is to be aware that you're doing what you want---and to be aware that as time passes, what you want will change.  A new-ish PhD student often wants to eat all the candy in the store.  Complex analysis, yum!  If the candy gives you indigestion, pay attention.  But as long as it's all delicious, gobble away.