Why do you want your Ph.D.?

[ANDS!]

hmm, and all this time i thought i needed a tan in order to be waxed poetic about...

all jokes aside, EW. sounds like you're the one who has actually been in school too long if you think that's a nice comment to make on some random message board

Oh please. Unwad your boxers and/or panties. Or continue to take yourself (and this forum) too seriously. Either way will lead to hilarity I am sure. . .

[quicksort]

Oh please. Unwad your boxers and/or panties. Or continue to take yourself (and this forum) too seriously. Either way will lead to hilarity I am sure. . .

l

lol u r so weird??

[quicksort]

Oh please. Unwad your boxers and/or panties. Or continue to take yourself (and this forum) too seriously. Either way will lead to hilarity I am sure. . .

ANDS! hello/??? where are youuu???? i thought u'd be back by now 2 say something new???? please come back

[ANDS!]

Oh dear. . .

[mandarin.orange]

Ah man, I clicked on this thread, ready to wax existential about the question seemingly posed in the title, and answer it as a legit question.

Little did I realize:

[antecedent]

Ah man, I clicked on this thread, ready to wax existential about the question seemingly posed in the title, and answer it as a legit question.

Little did I realize:

BEST. EVER.

Also, yes, the conversation was derailed.

[quicksort]

I'm sorry, guys. Nice image.

Edited August 11, 2012 by quicksort

[wildviolet]

Hmmm... Well, back to the conversation.

I'm going for my PhD because I want to be a professor.

I want to be a professor because I think my personality, values, and beliefs are suited to being a professor (this is different from my dream job, which is to sing or dance professionally, but that's not likely going to happen now).

I love school. I've been a classroom teacher, a waitress, a database administrator, a program coordinator, and a cashier. I've worked in labs, offices, and retail stores. And, I cannot imagine spending the rest of my life doing any of those things (well, yes I'll have an office, but it won't be that kind of office environment, like in The Office).

Anyway, even if for some reason I don't become a professor, I will still value the time I got to spend learning, exploring, and thinking.

[Zorah]

I had nothing better to do so I went back to school.

[juilletmercredi]

I am getting my PhD because I love research and I want to teach and advise undergraduates.

This was not my original reason for getting my PhD. I originally came because I wanted to be a researcher at a federal government entity. That's still in the back of my mind as a secondary option. I wanted to do health-related research at the CDC or the NIH, or a think tank. Then I started working with undergrads and just fell in love. I love advising and working with them individually to help them achieve their goals. I don't exactly love teaching, but I like it enough and I think I'd like it a lot more at a small liberal arts college with smaller classes and my own control over classes. But I still do love research and am passionate about my research goals, so a professor job is really perfect for me.

Personally, I think one should obtain a PhD if one needs it for one's future career goals OR if one is so simply passionate about a particular field of research or scholarship that one is willing to sacrifice 5-10 years of one's life to pursue that field. Other reasons should be secondary at best. In my own opinion, I think that future regret as a primary reason is one of the worst to get a PhD, because the program itself is so grueling and depressing at times that I regret going *into* it. The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that my career aspirations require it and I remind myself that I do love my research and am passionate about it. I would think that if you are doing it primarily just to say that you did it, at some point you'll be like "Why the f did I decide to do this again?" Everyone has those thoughts, but if you don't have passion to hold onto, it feels empty and you can get bitter.

For the students I advise - when I ask them about graduate plans and they say they want a doctoral degree, I ask them why. If they give me any reason that sounds like "I just want to" or "I want to be called Doctor, that sounds cool," I strongly encourage them to work for a few years before getting a doctoral degree.

[Dal PhDer]

So...getting a PhD just so you can say "You can call me, the Doctor", isn't a good idea?

Will I not get a tardis when I graduate?

[wildviolet]

Dal PhDer--you are so cool, of course you will get one.

I had to look up "TARDIS." I really need to watch Dr. Who.

Edited August 13, 2012 by wildviolet

[BrokenRecord]

I am contemplating not getting a PhD for career reasons. This may disqualify me from pursuing a PhD for the right reasons, but reality is reality and we all have to think about the kind of life we want for ourselves outside of graduate school. Currently, I am pursuing a masters in fairly in demand technical field with great job prospects after graduation. I would love to get a PhD as I enjoy doing research and would like to teach, but the idea of loosing three more years worth of work experience (critical if I wish to become certified in my profession) and a good salary is very unsettling in this economy. I am also concerned with the erosion of the tenure-track process and the availability of academic jobs in the next 5 years. What I will end up doing is applying to PhD programs next year anyway as to keep my options open.

Edited August 13, 2012 by BrokenRecord

[prettyuff1]

Because I am to smart to work at the Bachelor Degree level. In the sciences it is really a matter of do you want to do your own research or do you want to do you own work... I go tired of working for $13/hr and struggling to pay bills. I want the better paying jobs that a PhD will bring me and the ability to do what i would like to do. Long term i would like to be a professor and continue in research. I really like it a lot. I can't see myself not advancing to the next level and not taking this opportunity.

[TheFez]

"Because I am to smart to work...."

That's to too funny.

[Bones]

Doctoral degrees -- The disposable academic -- Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time

http://www.economist.com/node/17723223

Edited August 21, 2012 by Bones

[quicksort]

Doctoral degrees -- The disposable academic -- Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time

http://www.economist.com/node/17723223

I don't think it is if you're going to a good program in the hard sciences/engineering.

[BrokenRecord]

I don't think it is if you're going to a good program in the hard sciences/engineering.

I'd go a little further in saying a good program in an applied hard science and not engineering (unless you're in a top program). PhD's in biology, physics and especially chemistry tend to not be as lucrative as those in toxicology, pharmacology and material science. Engineering PhDs loose critical years of industry experience on the whole which may not pay off if an industry career is the goal.

[prettyuff1]

I'd go a little further in saying a good program in an applied hard science and not engineering (unless you're in a top program). PhD's in biology, physics and especially chemistry tend to not be as lucrative as those in toxicology, pharmacology and material science. Engineering PhDs loose critical years of industry experience on the whole which may not pay off if an industry career is the goal.

I agree totally. There isn't too much funding for knowing just because your interested. Everything now in the hard sciences is gearing towards clinical applications/relevance.

[toasterazzi]

I'm currently in a Master's program, and I haven't entirely decided whether I want the Ph.D. just yet. I'm strongly leaning toward yes, but with some serious trepidation. The word dissertation freaks me out lol and research isn't necessarily my favorite thing. That being said, I'm feeling a strong gravitational pull toward becoming a professor. I know I don't necessarily need a Ph.D to teach everywhere, but still...We'll see how I feel at the end of this semester after I get done with this first round of freshman composition.

[michigan girl]

I would definitely like to obtain a PhD in the future. Both my fields (education and social work) highly value practice experience. Most likely, I hope to work a minimum of three years in administration and policy. This experience would fortunately help me become a stronger applicant for PhD programs.

[Dal PhDer]

Quote from article "Although a doctorate is designed as training for a job in academia, the number of PhD positions is unrelated to the number of job openings. Meanwhile, business leaders complain about shortages of high-level skills, suggesting PhDs are not teaching the right things."

This can't be said enough to students: Yes, if you ONLY do dissertation requirements and ONLY set yourself towards a TT position, then you will most likely experience an upward climb for a TT position. HOWEVER, pigeon holing yourself into 1 type of career path isn't appropriate- and, much like other degree based careers (e.g., teachers, nursing), within this economy it is difficult to find a job. One can hope that as the baby boomer generation eases into retirement, a wealth of position will become open. In the mean time, all PhD students should be looking at collecting a wide range of marketable skills that can be applied to a variety of employment situations. They should also be actively browsing potential job openings outside of academia to see what skills/experiences they should be collecting. I truly believe there is a rich employment pool outside of the University for PhD students. The issue may not be that there is no jobs for students but yet there is no university jobs.

So why am I doing my PhD? To open up doors for me outside of a TT position (which I would ideally like). My PhD experience has allowed me to gain valuable skills, experiences and networks that I can apply to a variety of job opportunities after graduation.

[prettyuff1]

Quote from article "Although a doctorate is designed as training for a job in academia, the number of PhD positions is unrelated to the number of job openings. Meanwhile, business leaders complain about shortages of high-level skills, suggesting PhDs are not teaching the right things."

I totally agree. I think a lot of science PhD go in wanting to get as much knowledge as they can about a particular topic without including real world skills. Budget managing, managing your lab/research, the ability to lead and mentor other junior scientist are skills that are sorely lacking from a lot of PhD students. There is also a lack of networkng skills that are taught. My department is trying to change that by making attendance to national meetings mandatory, but that doesnt teach the skill all the way.

I'm getting a PhD to get a job outside academia because these loans wont pay themselves back.. and i have a son to support.

[SymmetryOfImperfection]

I'd go a little further in saying a good program in an applied hard science and not engineering (unless you're in a top program). PhD's in biology, physics and especially chemistry tend to not be as lucrative as those in toxicology, pharmacology and material science. Engineering PhDs loose critical years of industry experience on the whole which may not pay off if an industry career is the goal.

I don't think this is the case. I'm seeing not too few jobs for analytical and physical chemists working in biotech, polymers and materials. For synthetic organic chemists or biochemists, yes the gravy train left 5 years or so ago with the pharmaceuticals bust, but that's just one aspect of chemistry, and back then they were given 6 figure starting salaries. The biggest aspect of chemistry is analysis, formulations, process improvement and other things that have little to do with organic reactions.

Same with physics. From what I know, plenty either find jobs in semiconductor companies, as optical engineers, or move to finance, with 6 figure salaries.

There's also those who are stuck adjuncting or postdocing, but that might be because they picked something “bad" like theoretical particle physics or biochemistry. I don't know a single unemployed analytical chemist or optical physicist.

I have a hard time imagining that something as narrow and non quantitative as toxicology or pharmacology would have better career prospects than the quantitative physical sciences. This is backed up by the experience of friends who got undergrad degrees in toxicology and pharmaceutical sciences who are now working fast food while reviewing for the MCAT.

Simply hired also shows 7000 jobs for "chemistry phd" and 1000 for "toxicology phd"

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/jobs/list/q-chemistry+phd

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/jobs/list/q-toxicology+phd

And many of the materials science jobs that aren't in metallurgy seem to be asking for chemists:

http://webconnect.sendouts.com/CN_Frame.aspx?ID=AccessStaffing&SiteID=Webconnect&Group=Webconnect&Key=CN&CNTrackID=1006&MTTrackID=1001&CnId=&PostId=1406e119-f081-40cb-b4e4-a6b207d213b4&ApplyNewCan=0

"PhD in Chemical Engineering, Chemistry, Materials Science or related" "Strong knowledge and experience of Materials Science or Chemistry"

[SymmetryOfImperfection]

Quote from article "Although a doctorate is designed as training for a job in academia, the number of PhD positions is unrelated to the number of job openings. Meanwhile, business leaders complain about shortages of high-level skills, suggesting PhDs are not teaching the right things."

This can't be said enough to students: Yes, if you ONLY do dissertation requirements and ONLY set yourself towards a TT position, then you will most likely experience an upward climb for a TT position. HOWEVER, pigeon holing yourself into 1 type of career path isn't appropriate- and, much like other degree based careers (e.g., teachers, nursing), within this economy it is difficult to find a job. One can hope that as the baby boomer generation eases into retirement, a wealth of position will become open. In the mean time, all PhD students should be looking at collecting a wide range of marketable skills that can be applied to a variety of employment situations. They should also be actively browsing potential job openings outside of academia to see what skills/experiences they should be collecting. I truly believe there is a rich employment pool outside of the University for PhD students. The issue may not be that there is no jobs for students but yet there is no university jobs.

So why am I doing my PhD? To open up doors for me outside of a TT position (which I would ideally like). My PhD experience has allowed me to gain valuable skills, experiences and networks that I can apply to a variety of job opportunities after graduation.

Agreed. For those in physics, for example... just doing the bare minimum coursework and going through the motions = unemployment if you picked a crap field. Hell, even if you picked a "good" field like condensed matter or optics, whose to say they'll pick you if you did the bare minimum and cannot distinguish yourself? That's why you get experience on a wide variety of instruments and software, learn how to program, talk to people outside your immediate field and get skills in things you *know for a fact* will be used in industry.

Right now, everything is for applications, and the main point is **DO NOT BE A COMPANY COST CENTER**. Whats a cost center? Anything that requires research that doesn't pay off within 4 months.

Any wonder why the bio and organic chemistry guys got cut in the downturn but the analytical, physical and polymer chemists stayed? Analytical chemistry makes money/saves money on the timescale of days. Physical and polymer chemistry makes money with new product formulations or processing methods in the span of months. Bio and organic talk about "the pipeline" in terms of years. Guess who gets cut.

Ever wonder why the "chemistry sucks" complaints are mostly from bio, medicinal or organic guys, and the analytical/physical/polymer guys don't really speak up?

Ever wonder why the physicists adjuncting or working high school usually did astro or particle (then again, some of them are making scary money in finance)? Why are there very few condensed matter or optical physicists adjuncting? Maybe its because developments in electronics move at the rate of months and finance is scarily fast at milliseconds, while astro and particle... well, it just doesn't change that much day to day, and isn't profitable. So is it any wonder that in times of downturn, the first to get cut are the astro and particle guys who didn't go into finance?