5 ms·

The problem with his argument is that a certain set of circumstances (i.e. a world war) allowed him to enter his position without the PhD. I'm fairly confiden

by cup 12y ago

The problem with his argument is that a certain set of circumstances (i.e. a world war) allowed him to enter his position without the PhD. I'm fairly confident in saying the challenge to become a professor at a respectable university in a stem field without a PhD makes it for all intents and purposes impossible. So while the PhD system is deeply flawed, unless he can provide an alternative then theres not much to discuss.

eli_gottlieb 12y ago
>So while the PhD system is deeply flawed, unless he can provide an alternative then there's not much to discuss. Ok, how about a much simpler system of research apprenticeship? An apprentice is paid a low but livable salary, possibly with tuition remission for any necessary coursework, and probably with TA/RA duties as we have now. There are no grades and no qualifying exams. Instead, the apprentice must simply produce three publishable (ie: either published, or judged by their committee to be publishable) research papers within the committee's set time limit. Once they have accomplished this, the apprentice is promoted to be a professional researcher, given a proper professional salary and allowed to submit work as they please without an advisor's co-authorship. This actually captures most of what we believe, deep-down, that PhD's are actually for, but without the bureaucracy and indignity of treating apprentice researchers as "students" who need their school's approval more than they need to do good work.
- chrisseaton 12y ago
  That's exactly what a PhD already is - a research apprenticeship. They already get a low but liveable salary without having to pay tuition. I don't think many PhDs do TA/RA duties - they're too busy researching. PhD students don't have grades or qualifying exams, and three publishable research papers is what most PhD students achieve anyway. The thesis is just these papers written up into one continuous piece and submitted to the people who will become their peers.
  - _delirium 12y ago
    > They already get a low but liveable salary without having to pay tuition. I don't think many PhDs do TA/RA duties Varies a lot by country. In the U.S., most PhD students do TA/RA duties, because that's the main funding mechanism. It's rare for universities to give direct funding for an entire PhD, though some do fund students' first year directly. A smallish number of students also get multi-year fellowships, either from the university or from an external source like the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program. The common case, though, is that each semester they're hired as either a TA or RA. In the best case, the student's advisor has a grant precisely aligned with their thesis topic, and the student is hired as an RA on that grant, in which case they're being paid more or less just to do their PhD. If they're less lucky, they have to work on a grant-funded project that's more tangential to their thesis, and then essentially have a side job. On the professor's side this system is also a pretty big source of stress, because every semester there's a question of where your students are going to be funded from the next semester. Have to bring in enough grants to hire most as RAs (ideally on projects that lead to progress on their theses), rotate some into TA positions if there aren't enough grants to pay everyone as an RA this semester, etc. In a different form RAships are also becoming common here in Denmark, though they weren't traditionally. PhD students are all hired into a 3-year salaried contract, but increasingly those contracts are funded by European Union projects, and a student hired into a PhD position funded from that source will typically have project-related responsibilities in addition to their thesis.
  - eli_gottlieb 12y ago
    Where are you coming from? I've seen two systems for running postgrad degrees, and neither work as you describe. >They already get a low but liveable salary without having to pay tuition. I don't think many PhDs do TA/RA duties - they're too busy researching. In most places I've seen, PhD students are the primary source of TA/RA labor. If we're lucky, we get a base stipend and TA/RA adds to it. >PhD students don't have grades or qualifying exams I've never seen a PhD program with no coursework, no qualifying exams, and no grade requirements for either. Could you show me where such an arcadian academic track exists? >and three publishable research papers is what most PhD students achieve anyway That was my point, yes.
- anouk_anca 12y ago
  > the apprentice must simply produce three publishable research papers within the committee's set time limit One big issue with the current PhD system is reliance on published articles to determine a student's worth, which transforms academia into a paper-churning factory. In your scenario, having a set time limit combined with the low pay will still make candidates rush to publish papers, perpetuating the current issues. Ideally, I would prefer a system like in the Netherlands, where PhD students are considered employees of the university, and get paid close to median wage, and get contributions to a retirement plan. It's a demanding job, and should be paid as such. I would also like to see the recommended period for finishing a PhD extended to 7-10 years, ideally spent in 2 or more research institutions. Funding might be a concern, and universities might have to reduce the number of accepted students, but it's worth it if it reduces the current pressure to constantly publish. The process of scientific publishing itself needs to be revamped, to encourage publishing of failed hypotheses, or replication of old experiments.
  - dagw 12y ago
    I would also like to see the recommended period for finishing a PhD extended to 7-10 years, ideally spent in 2 or more research institutions. That's basically describes a PhD plus a postdoc today. Which is essentially the minimum requirement for kicking off an academic career. I completely agree that PhD students should be full employees and get paid basically the median wage of a first job in the relevant field.
  - pcrh 12y ago
    >I would also like to see the recommended period for finishing a PhD extended to 7-10 years That is way too long. A PhD should only be long enough as is required for the average competent person to demonstrate their competence in research. Adding extra bells and whistles, more requirements, etc, does not improve their abilities and only prolongs the apprenticeship to the advantage of their supervisors.
    - anouk_anca 12y ago
      A PhD is not so much an apprenticeship though, its goal should be to bring a novel contribution to the state of the art in the field. The current system does not need more requirements, but it does need more time and freedom for PhD students to develop truly novel ideas, and not fall prey to the "publish or perish" mentality that is so pervasive in academic culture. Dependence on supervisors can be sorted out with proper labour contracts.
seanmcdirmid 12y ago
Many famous computer scientists lack PhDs, some of them are professors; this was completely possible in the 70s/80s when a PhD wasn't required (nor were there enough of them). Today it is probably much harder, though I know some really good researchers who only have masters (not even in CS).
- hessenwolf 12y ago
  Expect a sweep of middle-aged professors doing PhDs with their mates supervising and examining.
  - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
    No, why would they bother? Once you are famous/established, no one cares what your credentials are...the PhD only gets the foot in door, and is a useless piece of paper otherwise beyond what you learnt while getting it (disclosure: a PhD whose piece of paper helped him get his foot in the door of a research lab).
    - hessenwolf 12y ago
      It happened at my university (and I did some moonlighting contracting statistical analyses for some). The salary rules changed to motivate them.
    - dagw 12y ago
      Many universities have rules limiting pay and promotion opportunities to people without PhDs.
      - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
        Maybe at the low end, but definitely not at the high end. As long as they can easily get a position at CMU or Stanford, the university isn't going to low ball them on pay.
        12y ago
MaysonL 12y ago
I'm fairly confident in saying the challenge to become a professor at a respectable university in a stem field without a PhD makes it for all intents and purposes impossible. See Edward Fredkin: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Fredkin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Fredkin for a counter example
- cup 12y ago
  Let me clarify: I mean now. As in a student who is currently performing their undergraduate studies. Do they honestly have a hope of an academic career without postgraduate qualifications?
xamuel 12y ago
>to become a professor at a respectable university in a stem field without a PhD This is silly. It's like saying, "to become a programmer at a respectable software company without a computer". Becoming a professor is about doing research. Getting a PhD is about doing research. If you're actually good enough to do the research, the PhD is a formality. Heck, if your research is genuinely groundbreaking, (not just pushing the envelope another predictable inch), surely you can pick and choose which school will fill out the paperwork to give you a degree for it. Certainly, it's by far the least of the STEM job candidate's worries with the current job market. If you are making the common mistake of confusing "professor" for "lecturer", it's already routine for PhD dropouts to lecture low-level undergrad courses, at least it was at my school.

by cup 12y ago

eli_gottlieb 12y ago

>So while the PhD system is deeply flawed, unless he can provide an alternative then there's not much to discuss. Ok, how about a much simpler system of research apprenticeship? An apprentice is paid a low but livable salary, possibly with tuition remission for any necessary coursework, and probably with TA/RA duties as we have now. There are no grades and no qualifying exams. Instead, the apprentice must simply produce three publishable (ie: either published, or judged by their committee to be publishable) research papers within the committee's set time limit. Once they have accomplished this, the apprentice is promoted to be a professional researcher, given a proper professional salary and allowed to submit work as they please without an advisor's co-authorship. This actually captures most of what we believe, deep-down, that PhD's are actually for, but without the bureaucracy and indignity of treating apprentice researchers as "students" who need their school's approval more than they need to do good work.

chrisseaton 12y ago
That's exactly what a PhD already is - a research apprenticeship. They already get a low but liveable salary without having to pay tuition. I don't think many PhDs do TA/RA duties - they're too busy researching. PhD students don't have grades or qualifying exams, and three publishable research papers is what most PhD students achieve anyway. The thesis is just these papers written up into one continuous piece and submitted to the people who will become their peers.
- _delirium 12y ago
  > They already get a low but liveable salary without having to pay tuition. I don't think many PhDs do TA/RA duties Varies a lot by country. In the U.S., most PhD students do TA/RA duties, because that's the main funding mechanism. It's rare for universities to give direct funding for an entire PhD, though some do fund students' first year directly. A smallish number of students also get multi-year fellowships, either from the university or from an external source like the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program. The common case, though, is that each semester they're hired as either a TA or RA. In the best case, the student's advisor has a grant precisely aligned with their thesis topic, and the student is hired as an RA on that grant, in which case they're being paid more or less just to do their PhD. If they're less lucky, they have to work on a grant-funded project that's more tangential to their thesis, and then essentially have a side job. On the professor's side this system is also a pretty big source of stress, because every semester there's a question of where your students are going to be funded from the next semester. Have to bring in enough grants to hire most as RAs (ideally on projects that lead to progress on their theses), rotate some into TA positions if there aren't enough grants to pay everyone as an RA this semester, etc. In a different form RAships are also becoming common here in Denmark, though they weren't traditionally. PhD students are all hired into a 3-year salaried contract, but increasingly those contracts are funded by European Union projects, and a student hired into a PhD position funded from that source will typically have project-related responsibilities in addition to their thesis.
- eli_gottlieb 12y ago
  Where are you coming from? I've seen two systems for running postgrad degrees, and neither work as you describe. >They already get a low but liveable salary without having to pay tuition. I don't think many PhDs do TA/RA duties - they're too busy researching. In most places I've seen, PhD students are the primary source of TA/RA labor. If we're lucky, we get a base stipend and TA/RA adds to it. >PhD students don't have grades or qualifying exams I've never seen a PhD program with no coursework, no qualifying exams, and no grade requirements for either. Could you show me where such an arcadian academic track exists? >and three publishable research papers is what most PhD students achieve anyway That was my point, yes.
anouk_anca 12y ago
> the apprentice must simply produce three publishable research papers within the committee's set time limit One big issue with the current PhD system is reliance on published articles to determine a student's worth, which transforms academia into a paper-churning factory. In your scenario, having a set time limit combined with the low pay will still make candidates rush to publish papers, perpetuating the current issues. Ideally, I would prefer a system like in the Netherlands, where PhD students are considered employees of the university, and get paid close to median wage, and get contributions to a retirement plan. It's a demanding job, and should be paid as such. I would also like to see the recommended period for finishing a PhD extended to 7-10 years, ideally spent in 2 or more research institutions. Funding might be a concern, and universities might have to reduce the number of accepted students, but it's worth it if it reduces the current pressure to constantly publish. The process of scientific publishing itself needs to be revamped, to encourage publishing of failed hypotheses, or replication of old experiments.
- dagw 12y ago
  I would also like to see the recommended period for finishing a PhD extended to 7-10 years, ideally spent in 2 or more research institutions. That's basically describes a PhD plus a postdoc today. Which is essentially the minimum requirement for kicking off an academic career. I completely agree that PhD students should be full employees and get paid basically the median wage of a first job in the relevant field.
- pcrh 12y ago
  >I would also like to see the recommended period for finishing a PhD extended to 7-10 years That is way too long. A PhD should only be long enough as is required for the average competent person to demonstrate their competence in research. Adding extra bells and whistles, more requirements, etc, does not improve their abilities and only prolongs the apprenticeship to the advantage of their supervisors.
  - anouk_anca 12y ago
    A PhD is not so much an apprenticeship though, its goal should be to bring a novel contribution to the state of the art in the field. The current system does not need more requirements, but it does need more time and freedom for PhD students to develop truly novel ideas, and not fall prey to the "publish or perish" mentality that is so pervasive in academic culture. Dependence on supervisors can be sorted out with proper labour contracts.

seanmcdirmid 12y ago

Many famous computer scientists lack PhDs, some of them are professors; this was completely possible in the 70s/80s when a PhD wasn't required (nor were there enough of them). Today it is probably much harder, though I know some really good researchers who only have masters (not even in CS).

hessenwolf 12y ago
Expect a sweep of middle-aged professors doing PhDs with their mates supervising and examining.
- seanmcdirmid 12y ago
  No, why would they bother? Once you are famous/established, no one cares what your credentials are...the PhD only gets the foot in door, and is a useless piece of paper otherwise beyond what you learnt while getting it (disclosure: a PhD whose piece of paper helped him get his foot in the door of a research lab).
  - hessenwolf 12y ago
    It happened at my university (and I did some moonlighting contracting statistical analyses for some). The salary rules changed to motivate them.
  - dagw 12y ago
    Many universities have rules limiting pay and promotion opportunities to people without PhDs.
    - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
      Maybe at the low end, but definitely not at the high end. As long as they can easily get a position at CMU or Stanford, the university isn't going to low ball them on pay.
      - 12y ago

MaysonL 12y ago

I'm fairly confident in saying the challenge to become a professor at a respectable university in a stem field without a PhD makes it for all intents and purposes impossible. See Edward Fredkin: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Fredkin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Fredkin for a counter example

cup 12y ago
Let me clarify: I mean now. As in a student who is currently performing their undergraduate studies. Do they honestly have a hope of an academic career without postgraduate qualifications?

xamuel 12y ago

>to become a professor at a respectable university in a stem field without a PhD This is silly. It's like saying, "to become a programmer at a respectable software company without a computer". Becoming a professor is about doing research. Getting a PhD is about doing research. If you're actually good enough to do the research, the PhD is a formality. Heck, if your research is genuinely groundbreaking, (not just pushing the envelope another predictable inch), surely you can pick and choose which school will fill out the paperwork to give you a degree for it. Certainly, it's by far the least of the STEM job candidate's worries with the current job market. If you are making the common mistake of confusing "professor" for "lecturer", it's already routine for PhD dropouts to lecture low-level undergrad courses, at least it was at my school.