DS is in the first year of a PhD. Fuzzy's advice rings true. DS loved his subject so most things he did were because he was interested, but having a good network and being able to tap into other people's experience did him no harm. What he did included:
- Be active in the subject society, including being part of some voluntary UG student research. (They came within a whisper of being invited to the US to present but just as useful was the fact that helpful academics opened their address books so they got to meet interesting people). The results of one project, which was of more general interest, got printed in the student newspaper.
- Student rep. DS was lucky as his tenure coincided with a major departmental review. Plus there were some tricky issues that other students asked him to raise, which he then had to present in an evidenced and tactful way.
- His department had a good programme of voluntary lectures from visiting profs and/or PhD students. He also got to attend some form of peer review session for post grads, mainly because he asked and he was the only UG to do so. They also had peer support seminars for their third year dissertations and seem to have put a lot of effort into constructive support for each other.
- In his third year he did some voluntary teaching on a SU organised "Quants for quals" course, essentially statistics for humanities people who needed them, and put a lot of effort into lecture preparation etc. Is there anything like support for overseas or access programme students she could volunteer for.
There was very little funding available at Masters level in his subject so he had to fund himself. However because of demand for his subject he was able to do some Research Assistant work in the summer after graduating and there was lots of teaching work available for Masters students if they wanted it. In London there is also quite a lot of scope for private tutoring, either at A level or first year University level.
When applying for a PhD, references and GMAT score seemed very important. DS had had a bit of a dilemma about where he should do his Masters. Stay at the same place, which suggests a lack of mobility, or go elsewhere and be in a position of having to ask for references for a PhD application in your first term. (For this reason in his subject a post Masters gap year is quite common, though again made easier because it is relatively easy to pick up RA work.) It came down to which was the best place for his particular interests, which luckily was where he was. Class of degree, and marks in specific subjects seemed important. He took a taught Masters, and the marks in the January exams became really important for his PhD applications.
PhD applications were based entirely on the strength of each department in his subject area. University rankings came into play a bit, but it was much more about who he wanted to study under and, then once he got an offer, who would give him funding. He got help on this, and on the application process, from academics and post grads he had got to know during his UG days. Oddly his UK offer was more generous than his US one because teaching was paid for on top rather than being part of the contract, though in the US he is able to do RA work instead.
And as others have suggested, exit routes are important. In DS' subject it is normal to take 6 years over a PhD. Who knows whether he can sustain interest for 6 years, but if not he has plenty of other options that build on what he has done so far.
Not all of this will be relevant, but I hope it helps. The best advice would be to start talking to as many academics and posts grads in her field as she can.