3 ms·
In general, though, I think most grad programs should take more than their replacement rate. There should be a (sizeable) outflow to non-academic jobs in a heal
by ptero 10y ago
In general, though, I think most grad programs should take more than their replacement rate. There should be a (sizeable) outflow to non-academic jobs in a healthy system.
This also requires not having an institutional "tenure or failure" mentality, which is, sadly, not uncommon in many science grad schools.
- pmiller2 10y agoYes, there should be a sizable outflow to non-academic jobs, but that implies that the demand is there, and that the jobs hey sufficiently well to make up for the opportunity cost of not earning for eight years or more. These conditions do not really exist for a lot of fields. How many jobs outside academia are there where a PhD in medieval history is an advantage?
- disgruntledphd2 10y agoIt's those transferrable skills, yo. In general, a liberal arts PhD will be able to work independently with little supervision, plan a course of work and make headway without much feedback. In general, they can also communicate effectively through text. I totally get that people don't want to leave their speciality, but the PhD will normally give students a bunch of skills that are hard (but not impossible) to get elsewhere. I have a psychology PhD, and now work at a tech company (I always loved stats, and discovered coding during the PhD due to laziness, so may not be a typical case).