5 ms·

I started to work instead of doing a PhD and I think it was a good decision. The sad part is having less time and progressing more slowly with research (outside

I started to work instead of doing a PhD and I think it was a good decision. The sad part is having less time and progressing more slowly with research (outside of one's job, whatever it may be) but maybe it's better than not having a job and also progressing slowly doing a PhD full time. As an aside, if you have a clear research interest already (which many PhD naturally take a long time to find) then I don't think it matters that much anymore whether you have the actual qualification. In Mathematics it could be easier to go the direct path to research than in Biology, though. Two papers can these days even be converted to a PhD with minimal additional work.

helpPeople 7y ago
I study on my own and present it on my website, no paywall or subscription. I do what I want, rather than what a professor tells me. I've been featured on some top websites. My point is, you don't need academia necessarily. And after meeting PhD grads, I'm not sure I believe in the positive association with intelligence and accomplishments.
dr_dshiv 7y ago
Really true. We need more examples of people completing PhDs in 1-2 years because they've already done the research and written most of the thesis. It's totally possible.
- ISL 7y ago
  That misses the learning process in a PhD program. A PhD is not just the thesis work, it is also the education and mentorship that is generally necessary to become an expert in both a broad field and a specialty.
  - pergadad 7y ago
    Why shouldn't it be easy(ier) to get the PhD when you've already worked and published for 10 years in the field?
    - diffeomorphism 7y ago
      That seems like a completely different question. Suppose somebody does a brilliant Master's thesis and afterwards quickly writes two more good papers. He/She could get a PhD immediately at that point as far as research is concerned, but would benefit from waiting a bit longer and also getting mentorship etc. . A person who worked and published for 10 years for all purposes already was doing PhD work for 10 years and thus can more or less staple some works together to get PhD whenever they want to.
      - mygo 7y ago
        People can go their whole lifetime without making novel contributions to a field. If an arbitrary time limit is required to have a PhD, I feel like it probably discounts the implications of what kind of individual one needs to be to make novel contributions at a young age in less time.
- jasonhong 7y ago
  Part of the reason it typically takes 5-6 years to complete a PhD (in computer science at least) is because it takes a long time to learn the methods, the skills, and the large body of past work, as well as just becoming a member of the research community (via attending workshops and conferences, publishing paper, and reviewing). It's possible to complete a PhD in 2-3 years, but this also typically leaves no room for exploration or any kinds of errors. At CMU, the only examples I know of were people who were on leave from the military and had a hard stop after 3 years to return.
  - dr_dshiv 7y ago
    Also CMU alum. Why anyone would WANT to rush a PhD, I don't know. I had to finish faster than my peers because I started a business half way through -- and I was either going to complete in 6 months or never. So I finished up in a hurry. I am a tenure track professor & CEO -- which works so long as you don't care about anything at all. But that's separate. My point is, and I'm four beers in, is that my head of data science is so good, he has been mentored by me for years (fwiw), and he has published a lot -- I feel he is the perfect candidate for completing a PhD asap. I think he needs two years for acculturation. In that paradigm, smart folk in industry could publish papers and then take 2 years to get a doctorate --- and I think the world would be better for it.
- treis 7y ago
  But where will labs find cheap labor?
bonniemuffin 7y ago
I'm glad you called out biology as a counterexample. In my grad school/postdoc experience, publishing a meaningful paper in the wet lab biosciences often requires tens of thousands of dollars in consumable materials, as well as $100k+ of lab hardware. Casual garage researchers have very little opportunity to contribute to the field in meaningful ways.
- xenocyon 7y ago
  I would say math is the exception, rather than biology. In most fields - even ones that don't require physical experiments - research is aided quite a bit by infrastructure, interaction, and environment.
- ISL 7y ago
  The most important ingredient in research is time. Don't count out garage research. There is no substitute for professionalism in research, no matter the venue. Hard work, best practices, collaboration, and expertise are all essential. I am presently in a time of change in my own research career, and a garage laboratory underwritten by an industrial job is beginning to look quite tempting. There are a lot of advantages, but the onus is heavily on the researcher to choose research directions that are compatible with that environment. Barbara McClintock did her most-famous work in a shed with a small adjoining cornfield. I'm happy to wager that there are major discoveries left in biology to be made with similar equipment. The key is being able to eat, sleep, support loved ones, be healthy, and be able to get some research done.
  - mygo 7y ago
    I would love to learn more about how you go about running your own lab! How can I follow?
    - ISL 7y ago
      At the moment, I work at the University of Washington's CENPA but my departure from academia is likely. Whether I leave academia or not, the best way to follow my scientific work is through my publications: https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=vi-A5dkAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=vi-A5dkAAAAJ...

helpPeople 7y ago

I study on my own and present it on my website, no paywall or subscription. I do what I want, rather than what a professor tells me. I've been featured on some top websites. My point is, you don't need academia necessarily. And after meeting PhD grads, I'm not sure I believe in the positive association with intelligence and accomplishments.

dr_dshiv 7y ago

Really true. We need more examples of people completing PhDs in 1-2 years because they've already done the research and written most of the thesis. It's totally possible.

ISL 7y ago
That misses the learning process in a PhD program. A PhD is not just the thesis work, it is also the education and mentorship that is generally necessary to become an expert in both a broad field and a specialty.
- pergadad 7y ago
  Why shouldn't it be easy(ier) to get the PhD when you've already worked and published for 10 years in the field?
  - diffeomorphism 7y ago
    That seems like a completely different question. Suppose somebody does a brilliant Master's thesis and afterwards quickly writes two more good papers. He/She could get a PhD immediately at that point as far as research is concerned, but would benefit from waiting a bit longer and also getting mentorship etc. . A person who worked and published for 10 years for all purposes already was doing PhD work for 10 years and thus can more or less staple some works together to get PhD whenever they want to.
    - mygo 7y ago
      People can go their whole lifetime without making novel contributions to a field. If an arbitrary time limit is required to have a PhD, I feel like it probably discounts the implications of what kind of individual one needs to be to make novel contributions at a young age in less time.
jasonhong 7y ago
Part of the reason it typically takes 5-6 years to complete a PhD (in computer science at least) is because it takes a long time to learn the methods, the skills, and the large body of past work, as well as just becoming a member of the research community (via attending workshops and conferences, publishing paper, and reviewing). It's possible to complete a PhD in 2-3 years, but this also typically leaves no room for exploration or any kinds of errors. At CMU, the only examples I know of were people who were on leave from the military and had a hard stop after 3 years to return.
- dr_dshiv 7y ago
  Also CMU alum. Why anyone would WANT to rush a PhD, I don't know. I had to finish faster than my peers because I started a business half way through -- and I was either going to complete in 6 months or never. So I finished up in a hurry. I am a tenure track professor & CEO -- which works so long as you don't care about anything at all. But that's separate. My point is, and I'm four beers in, is that my head of data science is so good, he has been mentored by me for years (fwiw), and he has published a lot -- I feel he is the perfect candidate for completing a PhD asap. I think he needs two years for acculturation. In that paradigm, smart folk in industry could publish papers and then take 2 years to get a doctorate --- and I think the world would be better for it.
treis 7y ago
But where will labs find cheap labor?

bonniemuffin 7y ago

I'm glad you called out biology as a counterexample. In my grad school/postdoc experience, publishing a meaningful paper in the wet lab biosciences often requires tens of thousands of dollars in consumable materials, as well as $100k+ of lab hardware. Casual garage researchers have very little opportunity to contribute to the field in meaningful ways.

xenocyon 7y ago
I would say math is the exception, rather than biology. In most fields - even ones that don't require physical experiments - research is aided quite a bit by infrastructure, interaction, and environment.
ISL 7y ago
The most important ingredient in research is time. Don't count out garage research. There is no substitute for professionalism in research, no matter the venue. Hard work, best practices, collaboration, and expertise are all essential. I am presently in a time of change in my own research career, and a garage laboratory underwritten by an industrial job is beginning to look quite tempting. There are a lot of advantages, but the onus is heavily on the researcher to choose research directions that are compatible with that environment. Barbara McClintock did her most-famous work in a shed with a small adjoining cornfield. I'm happy to wager that there are major discoveries left in biology to be made with similar equipment. The key is being able to eat, sleep, support loved ones, be healthy, and be able to get some research done.
- mygo 7y ago
  I would love to learn more about how you go about running your own lab! How can I follow?
  - ISL 7y ago
    At the moment, I work at the University of Washington's CENPA but my departure from academia is likely. Whether I leave academia or not, the best way to follow my scientific work is through my publications: https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=vi-A5dkAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=vi-A5dkAAAAJ...