5 ms·

Why do you discourage ANYONE? Surely it is great for some people? Why not urge caution? Let people know it isn't for everyone.

barry-cotter 5y ago
Because for most people going into a doctoral programme is a bad idea. If you do not come from money or have a spouse who can support you it's a terrible bet in terms of chances of success. Outside demand for PhDs is low in most fields. Most people who start a PhD don't graduate with one. They drop out. Substantial numbers of people who do get a PhD never even get a tenure track job. Getting a tenure track job often leads to looking for a new job after seven years, with the "rejected" sticker. Many fields are worse than that. They demand postdocs. Some people make the terrible mistake of thinking that adjuncting is a way of staying in the academy. It's not. If you are adjuncting full time you are extremely unlikely to ever get a real academic job, as a lecturer or professor. Get out. Getting a PhD is fine if you are in a field with great outside options, like Economics, CS, Math etc. but it's consumption, not an investment in future earnings. Outside top programmes the likelihood of becoming an academic drops of f rapidly. A PhD is training to become an academic. It can also be necessary to get a job in some fields with huge oversupply of PhDs, like the sciences, but those jobs are badly paid too. If you really, really want to be an acedemic and you can get into a good programme go for it. No one else should go unless they don't need the degree to earn a living or the degree comes with the prospect of radically improving their lives by making immigration possible.
- ackbar03 5y ago
  >Getting a tenure track job often leads to looking for a new job after seven years, with the "rejected" sticker. Could you elaborate on this one? I thought tenure professor is as stable as you can get in terms of a career
  - OnlineGladiator 5y ago
    He's saying if you don't get tenure, not only have you spent years failing to achieve your goal but now you also carry a stigma with you as you try again.
  - dsq 5y ago
    It's tenure track, meaning that after seven years you either get tenure or you leave.
  - sampo 5y ago
    > Could you elaborate on this one? I thought tenure professor is as stable as you can get in terms of a career "Tenure track" doesn't mean tenure, it means on a track towards a possible tenure. People are hired to start their tenure track, and then during the next 6-7 years, they are evaluated, and in the end some of them are promoted to a tenure position. https://academicpositions.com/career-advice/what-is-tenure https://academicpositions.com/career-advice/what-is-tenure
- dagw 5y ago
  Worth noting that most of this is a very US view of PhDs. In Europe most PhD students earn pretty close to what their starting salary fresh out of school would be. Also in Europe the concept that PhD means you want an academic career doesn't seem to be as true. I work with a lot of people who have PhDs and none of them did it because they wanted an academic career. In fact going back to get your PhD after working for a few years is surprisingly common, and in many cases your employer will partially sponsor that.
  - rscho 5y ago
    I agree. This a very US centric view and it's much better in Europe. But Europe is steering towards the US education model. A big loss, IMO.
  - circlefavshape 5y ago
    > In Europe most PhD students earn pretty close to what their starting salary fresh out of school would be. Not in Ireland
  - reallydontask 5y ago
    > In Europe most PhD students earn pretty close to what their starting salary fresh out of school would be. I'd be surprised if this were the case. In the UK, stipend is ~£16k. You do get to keep student benefits, e.g. no council tax and don't pay taxes but even then it's below what a lot (most?) graduates make.
    - lou1306 5y ago
      It is well-known that UK doctoral scholarships (as well as postdocs) are pretty low, especially considering the cost of life there. In the rest of Europe, grandparent's remark mostly holds. In France, for instance, students get bout 1.7kEUR/month [0], and life is cheaper (unless you're in Paris). Maybe you'd get a slightly higher salary in a company, but the difference is not that big. [0]: https://academicpositions.com/career-advice/professor-salaries-in-france https://academicpositions.com/career-advice/professor-salari...
    - 5y ago
- cycomanic 5y ago
  Your advice seems to be strongly biased by your experiences and several of your "facts" are simply wrong in many fields. > Because for most people going into a doctoral programme is a bad idea. If you do not come from money or have a spouse who can support you it's a terrible bet in terms of chances of success. In the hard sciences you get a pretty decent salary (scholarship). I know that in many countries in Europe they are significantly above average. That doesn't mean you should do a PhD for financial reasons (there are definitely better paying jobs out there), but I know of several people who support both kids and a spouse on a PhD salary, so you don't need to rely on someone else. > Outside demand for PhDs is low in most fields. That depends a lot on field. For CS this might be true (although quite a few jobs in ML expect PhDs for example). In chemistry and biology a PhD is almost expected if you want to work in industry. In my area (photonics/telecom) the vast majority of R&D roles are PhDs. Masters or bachelor degrees essentially get you a technician role. >Most people who start a PhD don't graduate with one. They drop out. I would like to see some stats on that. I know that in my experience (having seen more than 100 PhDs graduate) almost everyone graduated (I know of one who didn't, and he ended up with a very good job anyway) > Substantial numbers of people who do get a PhD never even get a tenure track job. Getting a tenure track job often leads to looking for a new job after seven years, with the "rejected" sticker. The first part is certainly true, becoming an academic is one of the less likely outcomes. However, regarding tenure track, the rejection really only happens at the most prestigious institutions in the US. In Europe this is not even a thing. > Many fields are worse than that. They demand postdocs. Some people make the terrible mistake of thinking that adjuncting is a way of staying in the academy. It's not. If you are adjuncting full time you are extremely unlikely to ever get a real academic job, as a lecturer or professor. Get out. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by adjuncting and what it's relation to postdocs is. Yes many fields require postdocs if you want a tenure position. Pay is highly dependent on country, e.g. in Australia you get paid on the same scale as other academics, in the US the pay is sometimes worse than a PhD. > Getting a PhD is fine if you are in a field with great outside options, like Economics, CS, Math etc. but it's consumption, not an investment in future earnings. Outside top programmes the likelihood of becoming an academic drops of f rapidly. A PhD is training to become an academic. It can also be necessary to get a job in some fields with huge oversupply of PhDs, like the sciences, but those jobs are badly paid too. It really depends what your life goals are. If money is your primary motivator, a PhD is not a great investment, do finance, programming or get into sales quickly (a good sales person can outearn all of the others). If you want to do R&D in many fields you require a PhD and pay can still be excellent. I know several people who were offered >150k jobs out of their PhDs. > If you really, really want to be an acedemic and you can get into a good programme go for it. No one else should go unless they don't need the degree to earn a living or the degree comes with the prospect of radically improving their lives by making immigration possible. This advice again highly depends on your motivation. If you want to just earn as much as possible as quickly as possible, yes don't get a PhD. If you are interested to work on hard problems relatively independently, a PhD could be right. One thing to realise is that it does require a high frustration tolerance, because there will be significant setbacks. That said everyone considering a PhD should do their homework on the group they want to join. Unfortunately there are bad supervisors, who consider PhDs like slave workers, or other groups who don't get you the publications that you should get, because the do poor research.
jraph 5y ago
My PhD could have gone better, but I encourage everyone with the right mindset to try, telling them what to be careful about. I have plenty examples of successful PhDs around me. If you think you could be interested in a PhD and don't try, you might as well regret it for your whole life. If you try and it does not go well, you can quit.

barry-cotter 5y ago

Because for most people going into a doctoral programme is a bad idea. If you do not come from money or have a spouse who can support you it's a terrible bet in terms of chances of success. Outside demand for PhDs is low in most fields. Most people who start a PhD don't graduate with one. They drop out. Substantial numbers of people who do get a PhD never even get a tenure track job. Getting a tenure track job often leads to looking for a new job after seven years, with the "rejected" sticker. Many fields are worse than that. They demand postdocs. Some people make the terrible mistake of thinking that adjuncting is a way of staying in the academy. It's not. If you are adjuncting full time you are extremely unlikely to ever get a real academic job, as a lecturer or professor. Get out. Getting a PhD is fine if you are in a field with great outside options, like Economics, CS, Math etc. but it's consumption, not an investment in future earnings. Outside top programmes the likelihood of becoming an academic drops of f rapidly. A PhD is training to become an academic. It can also be necessary to get a job in some fields with huge oversupply of PhDs, like the sciences, but those jobs are badly paid too. If you really, really want to be an acedemic and you can get into a good programme go for it. No one else should go unless they don't need the degree to earn a living or the degree comes with the prospect of radically improving their lives by making immigration possible.

ackbar03 5y ago
>Getting a tenure track job often leads to looking for a new job after seven years, with the "rejected" sticker. Could you elaborate on this one? I thought tenure professor is as stable as you can get in terms of a career
- OnlineGladiator 5y ago
  He's saying if you don't get tenure, not only have you spent years failing to achieve your goal but now you also carry a stigma with you as you try again.
- dsq 5y ago
  It's tenure track, meaning that after seven years you either get tenure or you leave.
- sampo 5y ago
  > Could you elaborate on this one? I thought tenure professor is as stable as you can get in terms of a career "Tenure track" doesn't mean tenure, it means on a track towards a possible tenure. People are hired to start their tenure track, and then during the next 6-7 years, they are evaluated, and in the end some of them are promoted to a tenure position. https://academicpositions.com/career-advice/what-is-tenure https://academicpositions.com/career-advice/what-is-tenure
dagw 5y ago
Worth noting that most of this is a very US view of PhDs. In Europe most PhD students earn pretty close to what their starting salary fresh out of school would be. Also in Europe the concept that PhD means you want an academic career doesn't seem to be as true. I work with a lot of people who have PhDs and none of them did it because they wanted an academic career. In fact going back to get your PhD after working for a few years is surprisingly common, and in many cases your employer will partially sponsor that.
- rscho 5y ago
  I agree. This a very US centric view and it's much better in Europe. But Europe is steering towards the US education model. A big loss, IMO.
- circlefavshape 5y ago
  > In Europe most PhD students earn pretty close to what their starting salary fresh out of school would be. Not in Ireland
- reallydontask 5y ago
  > In Europe most PhD students earn pretty close to what their starting salary fresh out of school would be. I'd be surprised if this were the case. In the UK, stipend is ~£16k. You do get to keep student benefits, e.g. no council tax and don't pay taxes but even then it's below what a lot (most?) graduates make.
  - lou1306 5y ago
    It is well-known that UK doctoral scholarships (as well as postdocs) are pretty low, especially considering the cost of life there. In the rest of Europe, grandparent's remark mostly holds. In France, for instance, students get bout 1.7kEUR/month [0], and life is cheaper (unless you're in Paris). Maybe you'd get a slightly higher salary in a company, but the difference is not that big. [0]: https://academicpositions.com/career-advice/professor-salaries-in-france https://academicpositions.com/career-advice/professor-salari...
  - 5y ago
cycomanic 5y ago
Your advice seems to be strongly biased by your experiences and several of your "facts" are simply wrong in many fields. > Because for most people going into a doctoral programme is a bad idea. If you do not come from money or have a spouse who can support you it's a terrible bet in terms of chances of success. In the hard sciences you get a pretty decent salary (scholarship). I know that in many countries in Europe they are significantly above average. That doesn't mean you should do a PhD for financial reasons (there are definitely better paying jobs out there), but I know of several people who support both kids and a spouse on a PhD salary, so you don't need to rely on someone else. > Outside demand for PhDs is low in most fields. That depends a lot on field. For CS this might be true (although quite a few jobs in ML expect PhDs for example). In chemistry and biology a PhD is almost expected if you want to work in industry. In my area (photonics/telecom) the vast majority of R&D roles are PhDs. Masters or bachelor degrees essentially get you a technician role. >Most people who start a PhD don't graduate with one. They drop out. I would like to see some stats on that. I know that in my experience (having seen more than 100 PhDs graduate) almost everyone graduated (I know of one who didn't, and he ended up with a very good job anyway) > Substantial numbers of people who do get a PhD never even get a tenure track job. Getting a tenure track job often leads to looking for a new job after seven years, with the "rejected" sticker. The first part is certainly true, becoming an academic is one of the less likely outcomes. However, regarding tenure track, the rejection really only happens at the most prestigious institutions in the US. In Europe this is not even a thing. > Many fields are worse than that. They demand postdocs. Some people make the terrible mistake of thinking that adjuncting is a way of staying in the academy. It's not. If you are adjuncting full time you are extremely unlikely to ever get a real academic job, as a lecturer or professor. Get out. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by adjuncting and what it's relation to postdocs is. Yes many fields require postdocs if you want a tenure position. Pay is highly dependent on country, e.g. in Australia you get paid on the same scale as other academics, in the US the pay is sometimes worse than a PhD. > Getting a PhD is fine if you are in a field with great outside options, like Economics, CS, Math etc. but it's consumption, not an investment in future earnings. Outside top programmes the likelihood of becoming an academic drops of f rapidly. A PhD is training to become an academic. It can also be necessary to get a job in some fields with huge oversupply of PhDs, like the sciences, but those jobs are badly paid too. It really depends what your life goals are. If money is your primary motivator, a PhD is not a great investment, do finance, programming or get into sales quickly (a good sales person can outearn all of the others). If you want to do R&D in many fields you require a PhD and pay can still be excellent. I know several people who were offered >150k jobs out of their PhDs. > If you really, really want to be an acedemic and you can get into a good programme go for it. No one else should go unless they don't need the degree to earn a living or the degree comes with the prospect of radically improving their lives by making immigration possible. This advice again highly depends on your motivation. If you want to just earn as much as possible as quickly as possible, yes don't get a PhD. If you are interested to work on hard problems relatively independently, a PhD could be right. One thing to realise is that it does require a high frustration tolerance, because there will be significant setbacks. That said everyone considering a PhD should do their homework on the group they want to join. Unfortunately there are bad supervisors, who consider PhDs like slave workers, or other groups who don't get you the publications that you should get, because the do poor research.

jraph 5y ago

My PhD could have gone better, but I encourage everyone with the right mindset to try, telling them what to be careful about. I have plenty examples of successful PhDs around me. If you think you could be interested in a PhD and don't try, you might as well regret it for your whole life. If you try and it does not go well, you can quit.