6 ms·

In Europe a PhD is 3years~ why such a difference?

by Thaxll 13y ago

arjunnarayan 13y ago
European PhD students don't do as much research, or publish as much. They are not competitive with US PhD students for academic jobs in the US. This is not a function of their quality, but a function of how much time they've had. It's also more usual to do a postdoc in Europe for 1-2 years, at which point their publication list and resumé looks about the same as a 5-6 year graduating US PhD student.
- throwaway1979 13y ago
  Talking to european grad students, it appears they have lives during grad school. People talk about it like a job with fixed hours. The average systems PhD student at a top US or Canadian school lives in the lab.
  - arjunnarayan 13y ago
    Yes. This is also a reason why top US PhDs get more done. I suppose I should have been more transparent about this fact.
    - pcrh 13y ago
      I would dispute the "getting more done" claim. One reason whay UK PhDs are shorter is that they typically don't have any classes or rotations. You dive straight into the research.
      - arjunnarayan 13y ago
        That's an empirical claim. So let's try at an empirical test. Show me European PhD students (current, or recently graduated) who have a publication list as impressive as http://web.mit.edu/ralucap/www/#Publications http://web.mit.edu/ralucap/www/#Publications or http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~jduchi/ http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~jduchi/ or http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/parno/parno-cv.pdf http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/parno/parno-cv.pd... (counting only papers 2010 and before) This is a best vs best test (as opposed to an average vs average test which requires more painful empirical effort), so focus on the top European PhD students. If you have methodological issues with a best vs best test because it doesn't not reflect the average PhD experience, let me know as I cannot think of any realistic reasons why it would be a bad test.
        acadien 13y ago
        Stuff like this is why people hate academia. Its research, its not a pissing contest. What are you trying to accomplish here?
        shadowfox 13y ago
        Well. The original question author did ask for "proof" that people get more stuff done during a US phd vs a UK one.
        deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
        mjn 13y ago
        What's interesting is that you point these out as good examples, but in Europe these would typically be seen as evidence of supervisor malfeasance, or at least raise some eyebrows. If a student you're supervising has published this many articles in top journals and conferences in the field, has been in grad school for 4+ years, and has still not graduated, someone is going to wonder: why not? They clearly are both smart and accomplished enough to have graduated. So why haven't they? Are you milking them as low-paid labor instead of letting them graduate? Are you taking up all their time with grant projects unrelated to their dissertation, so they haven't had a chance to finish it? Etc. Questions get asked! The idea is that the top grad student shouldn't be above a certain threshold, because if they are, they should have a Ph.D., not be artificially held back.
        joshvm 13y ago
        Interesting to note that in the UK it is now routine for there to be a four year deadline on PhD students. Where I work, instrumentation people were routinely finishing late because they were enjoying the lifestyle a bit too much. They're trying to streamline the system a lot. We now have to jump through a lot of hoops - 9 month, 12 month, 18 month review panels. It's a pain, but it's obvious they're trying to make sure you don't spend a year in write-up mode. They absolutely want you through the system, because if you don't finish on time, the department gets a funding cut. And actually you make a good point. In the UK, PhD students are fairly well paid. I'm on a CASE program and make around £17k a year tax free (outside London). The nominal wage is £13.5k for outside London (£15.5 inside). We're treated like research staff and not cheap labour.
  - davidgay 13y ago
    As a former Berkeley grad student who managed to do ok (http://barnowl.org/research/ http://barnowl.org/research/) working normal hours (8/9 to 5/6, except around paper deadlines), I would dispute the claims here and in many similar threads that crazy hours are required for performing successful research (in computer science at least).
colincsl 13y ago
In Europe you typically need a masters degree before you start a PhD program. In the US you don't - you can think of it as a 2+3 type program where you spend the first couple of years taking classes (and getting your masters) and the next three doing your thesis.
011011100 13y ago
I always thought part of the reason was that students in the US basically spend 2 years in their undergraduate degree taking general courses. So US graduate students spend the first few years taking graduate courses rather jumping straight into research. There's lag. That's just my own speculation though.
GuiA 13y ago
The European system follows a strictly defined progression, LMD: Licence: 3 years after high school, equivalent to a US BSc. Master: +2 years on top of the previous, equivalent to a US MSc. Doctorate: +3 years on top of the previous, equivalent to a US PhD. Some PhDs can take a bit more time - it's not uncommon for a student to take an extra 6 months or so (or to start a few months after the official school year starts, because of funding issues). However, I've never heard of someone's PhD taking 4 or 5 years or more (although I'm sure it may happen in some edge cases). The reason why Licence is 3 years compared to the US's 4 is that it's very focused: often, students don't pick which classes they take until the end of their curriculum (where you can pick classes for a specialty relevant to your discipline; for example, AI or Graphics for CS). There are a few general ed classes (for example macro economics, English as a second language, etc.), but definitely less than the US. Similarly, you don't get too pick. I've seen US students get a BSc. in Computer Science and having taken theater and anthropology classes in their first year; this does not happen in Europe (and you do notice that in the US, some very focused students do get their BSc. in 3 years). This also means that the average euro student with a licence is typically stronger in her field than the average US student with a BSc.; however, the downside is that you can't change majors halfway or anything. If you do 1.5 years of CS and then realize you want to go do something else, it's pretty much back to square one. The reason why a PhD is shorter is also due to the fact that it is common for the 2nd year of the Master (M2) to be split in two branches- the standard one, and M2R (for Master 2 Research) for students who know they want to go into research. M2Rs typically include a 6 months internship in a lab, where you start working on topics that will be related to your PhD (you can still go work after an M2R and not do a PhD, but it's uncommon). Source: I've been through the French, British, and US university systems :)
- jlees 13y ago
  In the UK, many of my peers finished somewhere after 3 years but before 5. The writing-up phase tended to drag on, I had a couple of friends who ended up working while writing up as their 3-year funding ran out.
- mtdewcmu 13y ago
  A US PhD is considered more substantial and held in higher esteem than a European one.

In Europe a PhD is 3years~ why such a difference?

by Thaxll 13y ago

In Europe a PhD is 3years~ why such a difference?

European PhD students don't do as much research, or publish as much. They are not competitive with US PhD students for academic jobs in the US. This is not a function of their quality, but a function of how much time they've had. It's also more usual to do a postdoc in Europe for 1-2 years, at which point their publication list and resumé looks about the same as a 5-6 year graduating US PhD student.

throwaway1979 13y ago
Talking to european grad students, it appears they have lives during grad school. People talk about it like a job with fixed hours. The average systems PhD student at a top US or Canadian school lives in the lab.
- arjunnarayan 13y ago
  Yes. This is also a reason why top US PhDs get more done. I suppose I should have been more transparent about this fact.
  - pcrh 13y ago
    I would dispute the "getting more done" claim. One reason whay UK PhDs are shorter is that they typically don't have any classes or rotations. You dive straight into the research.
    - arjunnarayan 13y ago
      That's an empirical claim. So let's try at an empirical test. Show me European PhD students (current, or recently graduated) who have a publication list as impressive as http://web.mit.edu/ralucap/www/#Publications http://web.mit.edu/ralucap/www/#Publications or http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~jduchi/ http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~jduchi/ or http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/parno/parno-cv.pdf http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/parno/parno-cv.pd... (counting only papers 2010 and before) This is a best vs best test (as opposed to an average vs average test which requires more painful empirical effort), so focus on the top European PhD students. If you have methodological issues with a best vs best test because it doesn't not reflect the average PhD experience, let me know as I cannot think of any realistic reasons why it would be a bad test.
      - acadien 13y ago
        Stuff like this is why people hate academia. Its research, its not a pissing contest. What are you trying to accomplish here?
        shadowfox 13y ago
        Well. The original question author did ask for "proof" that people get more stuff done during a US phd vs a UK one.
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
      - mjn 13y ago
        What's interesting is that you point these out as good examples, but in Europe these would typically be seen as evidence of supervisor malfeasance, or at least raise some eyebrows. If a student you're supervising has published this many articles in top journals and conferences in the field, has been in grad school for 4+ years, and has still not graduated, someone is going to wonder: why not? They clearly are both smart and accomplished enough to have graduated. So why haven't they? Are you milking them as low-paid labor instead of letting them graduate? Are you taking up all their time with grant projects unrelated to their dissertation, so they haven't had a chance to finish it? Etc. Questions get asked! The idea is that the top grad student shouldn't be above a certain threshold, because if they are, they should have a Ph.D., not be artificially held back.
        joshvm 13y ago
        Interesting to note that in the UK it is now routine for there to be a four year deadline on PhD students. Where I work, instrumentation people were routinely finishing late because they were enjoying the lifestyle a bit too much. They're trying to streamline the system a lot. We now have to jump through a lot of hoops - 9 month, 12 month, 18 month review panels. It's a pain, but it's obvious they're trying to make sure you don't spend a year in write-up mode. They absolutely want you through the system, because if you don't finish on time, the department gets a funding cut. And actually you make a good point. In the UK, PhD students are fairly well paid. I'm on a CASE program and make around £17k a year tax free (outside London). The nominal wage is £13.5k for outside London (£15.5 inside). We're treated like research staff and not cheap labour.
- davidgay 13y ago
  As a former Berkeley grad student who managed to do ok (http://barnowl.org/research/ http://barnowl.org/research/) working normal hours (8/9 to 5/6, except around paper deadlines), I would dispute the claims here and in many similar threads that crazy hours are required for performing successful research (in computer science at least).

colincsl 13y ago

In Europe you typically need a masters degree before you start a PhD program. In the US you don't - you can think of it as a 2+3 type program where you spend the first couple of years taking classes (and getting your masters) and the next three doing your thesis.

011011100 13y ago

I always thought part of the reason was that students in the US basically spend 2 years in their undergraduate degree taking general courses. So US graduate students spend the first few years taking graduate courses rather jumping straight into research. There's lag. That's just my own speculation though.

GuiA 13y ago

The European system follows a strictly defined progression, LMD: Licence: 3 years after high school, equivalent to a US BSc. Master: +2 years on top of the previous, equivalent to a US MSc. Doctorate: +3 years on top of the previous, equivalent to a US PhD. Some PhDs can take a bit more time - it's not uncommon for a student to take an extra 6 months or so (or to start a few months after the official school year starts, because of funding issues). However, I've never heard of someone's PhD taking 4 or 5 years or more (although I'm sure it may happen in some edge cases). The reason why Licence is 3 years compared to the US's 4 is that it's very focused: often, students don't pick which classes they take until the end of their curriculum (where you can pick classes for a specialty relevant to your discipline; for example, AI or Graphics for CS). There are a few general ed classes (for example macro economics, English as a second language, etc.), but definitely less than the US. Similarly, you don't get too pick. I've seen US students get a BSc. in Computer Science and having taken theater and anthropology classes in their first year; this does not happen in Europe (and you do notice that in the US, some very focused students do get their BSc. in 3 years). This also means that the average euro student with a licence is typically stronger in her field than the average US student with a BSc.; however, the downside is that you can't change majors halfway or anything. If you do 1.5 years of CS and then realize you want to go do something else, it's pretty much back to square one. The reason why a PhD is shorter is also due to the fact that it is common for the 2nd year of the Master (M2) to be split in two branches- the standard one, and M2R (for Master 2 Research) for students who know they want to go into research. M2Rs typically include a 6 months internship in a lab, where you start working on topics that will be related to your PhD (you can still go work after an M2R and not do a PhD, but it's uncommon). Source: I've been through the French, British, and US university systems :)

jlees 13y ago
In the UK, many of my peers finished somewhere after 3 years but before 5. The writing-up phase tended to drag on, I had a couple of friends who ended up working while writing up as their 3-year funding ran out.
mtdewcmu 13y ago
A US PhD is considered more substantial and held in higher esteem than a European one.