Why Doing a PhD Is Often A Waste Of Time (The Economist)

[jbunniii]

What if you have a PhD in engineering?

Same. They are called, e.g. "Principal Software Scientist" instead of "Principal Software Engineer," even when doing the exact same job. That's about the extent of the ego-stroking, though. It's an engineering company; there isn't any science/research being done.

 

[jbunniii]

But wouldn't be fun to be called a "scientist", while the others are just "engineers"?

I suppose so, but titles alone don't mean very much. You can call a guy a scientist, but if he's doing engineering work then he's an engineer. I wouldn't want to spend 3-5 years of my life (or even more) just to have a different title. If it's that important, one can always join one of the web companies who still have silly job titles like "GUI czar."

 

[Andy Resnick]

Still annoys me that universities and academics use grad students as cheap labor.

I didn't see this earlier.

This is a common sentiment, but after thinking for a bit, I don't see how grad students are "cheap" labor. A full-time grad student costs me (figuratively; it's all through research grants) about $36k/year direct costs (tuition and salary), and another $10k/year (or so) indirect costs (health insurance, etc). $46k/year could buy me a full-time technician with much more skill and ability than a grad student.

I know of several strategies to shift the costs around (grad student fellowships or tuition costs passed to the department/school are two), but financially, graduate students are expensive.

Where there *is* a legitimate inequality is in regards to the professional training (or lack thereof) that I am to provide the student. Graduate school is not a job, it is an apprenticeship towards a job- and not just academic jobs, but any job requiring advanced training.

 

[Andy Resnick]

No one I know in my PhD program is there because they think it will be a good investment. They are there because they wanted to learn a lot of physics.

Even if I never get a job doing physics when I'm done, for 6 or so years, I was paid (not much, but paid) to delve into a field of physics and learn as much as I possibly could. If that's all I get, then I'm happy with that. I'll figure out what to do from there.

I felt the same way in school.

Nonetheless. it is also true that there is a lot of resentment/disillusionment/dissatisfaction, or even outright anger in regards to career tracks involving a PhD. Not just academic careers, but any technical job requiring the advanced and specialized training a PhD represents.

 

[Jack21222]

I am not comfortable critiquing your life choices. I will simply point out that nowhere in your post do you consider what you will do *after* you earn a PhD. Where do you want to be in 15 years?

Anything except retail sales. I haven't even applied to the grad programs yet (that starts next fall), so I don't even know what grad program I will be in. I don't know if I want to continue in physics, branch out to astronomy, do something related to climate research like atmospheric science, or something more practical like nuclear engineering.

So, very broadly, in 15 years, I want to be doing something interesting with my life. I'm not set on any specifics.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Anything except retail sales. I haven't even applied to the grad programs yet (that starts next fall), so I don't even know what grad program I will be in. I don't know if I want to continue in physics, branch out to astronomy, do something related to climate research like atmospheric science, or something more practical like nuclear engineering.

So, very broadly, in 15 years, I want to be doing something interesting with my life. I'm not set on any specifics.

I apologize- I'm not sure why I wrote '15 years'; I should have written '10 years'.

In my experience, in order to have a career (as opposed to a haphazard sequence of jobs), it's important to have both a short-term plan (3 years out) and a long-term plan (10 years out). It took me about 10 years to get where I am now (Assistant Professor), and I am currently thinking about where I want to be in about 10 years (Department Chair or Center Director). My current short-term plan is to secure a line of research funding.

It sounds like you have a short-term plan already: get into a graduate program in one of the physical sciences. But you should also spend some time thinking about what you want to do once you graduate- I'm not going to try to list all the possibilities available to someone with a PhD in a science- but you should at least start by thinking in broad terms like industrial R&D, academic research, big corporation, small startup, etc.

Once you do this, you have a *career plan*- a plan to do what you want to do. Then, it's simply a question of executing the plan.

And don't be afraid to change either the short-term or long-term plan- a PhD is not a life sentence.

 

[Jack21222]

I apologize- I'm not sure why I wrote '15 years'; I should have written '10 years'.

In my experience, in order to have a career (as opposed to a haphazard sequence of jobs), it's important to have both a short-term plan (3 years out) and a long-term plan (10 years out). It took me about 10 years to get where I am now (Assistant Professor), and I am currently thinking about where I want to be in about 10 years (Department Chair or Center Director). My current short-term plan is to secure a line of research funding.

It sounds like you have a short-term plan already: get into a graduate program in one of the physical sciences. But you should also spend some time thinking about what you want to do once you graduate- I'm not going to try to list all the possibilities available to someone with a PhD in a science- but you should at least start by thinking in broad terms like industrial R&D, academic research, big corporation, small startup, etc.

Once you do this, you have a *career plan*- a plan to do what you want to do. Then, it's simply a question of executing the plan.

And don't be afraid to change either the short-term or long-term plan- a PhD is not a life sentence.

I think I'll have a better idea of what I want to do when I graduate when I get closer to graduating. My problem is I can picture myself enjoying any number of careers. The trick is, it's difficult to know if I actually *will* enjoy that career until I'm in it for a while.

A good friend of mine ran into this problem. She got her bachelor's degree in secondary education. She *thought* she'd love being a teacher... until she actually became a teacher. She lasted two years, and now she's working a job that requires only a high school diploma, making as much as she did as when she was in college.

Anyway, I feel I still have time to come up with a career.

 

[Sankaku]

...the mental capacity to juggle dozens of ideas at once peaks around 25.

Not to be hostile at all, but do you have a reference for that? I would be interested to read it.

(I don't disagree with the rest of your argument.)

 

[Lievo]

do you have a reference for that? I would be interested to read it.

http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/~bradd/gabrieli_2004_nrn1323.pdf

 

[Caramon]

The solution is for all University's to hire more professors and have more classes with smaller class sizes!

 

[Andy Resnick]

Not to be hostile at all, but do you have a reference for that? I would be interested to read it.

(I don't disagree with the rest of your argument.)

http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/~bradd/gabrieli_2004_nrn1323.pdf

I don't see how that article applies. Specifically, on the first page:
"In longitudinal comparisons, age-related changes from age 20 to 60 tend to be small or non-existent,with speed of processing showing the largest change,whereas changes after the age of 60 have a slope that is roughly equivalent to that found in cross-sectional data[5–7]."

In addition, the resented data in Fig.1 *start* at age 25, while the data on Fig.2 has barely anything pre-30 y.o.

 

[Lievo]

I don't see how that article applies.

I just wanted to provide the scientific evidences regarding this question to the ones interested. In brief: working memory show little or no decline with aging, at least when one controls for processing speed.

I will let anyone decide whether this supports D H view, as my explanations would likely be in vain. :zzz:

 

[fasterthanjoao]

This is a common sentiment, but after thinking for a bit, I don't see how grad students are "cheap" labor. A full-time grad student costs me (figuratively; it's all through research grants) about $36k/year direct costs (tuition and salary), and another $10k/year (or so) indirect costs (health insurance, etc). $46k/year could buy me a full-time technician with much more skill and ability than a grad student.

This is indeed a common sentiment, and it is also an interesting one. I remember when I first started my PhD I went to a faculty talk by one of the department heads - a welcoming type event for new students. He described what life was like during his PhD, but one of the things I always remember him saying was that he, and his colleagues, are extremely grateful to have us all on board. We (PhD students) are the work-horses of the university, and are the ones that will be there when our supervisors have an idea.

The lesson worth taking from my anecdote is that being a PhD student is a privileged position. To be able to work very closely with fine minds is a great thing - I am grateful to the system for introducing me to all of the wonderful people I have met. When you think of it this way, a PhD becomes really quite a remarkable prospect, rather than thinking of it as a very poorly paid research position. You're getting paid with an introduction to the field - an opportunity to work with, and be guided by, one of the world experts in your field. For the majority of the time, you'll be researching - you don't have to worry about filling in the forms, or necessarily doing all of the teaching. You get paid to sit and think - and also have the backdrop of a university to provide a wonderful setting in which to do it.

All of that, and PhDs are also very flexible times. In no other position will you get to really fully dictate your work schedule, or decide where you are flying for conferences that year.

A final remark - I know when I started my PhD I knew almost nothing about the subject in which I was going to be researching. I was also extremely raw - I got good grades, and a good first degree, but I found out pretty quickly that I was lacking quite a lot of skills that I hadn't really realized. I also know that my PhD work took me *a lot* longer to do than it would have were my supervisor doing it himself.