The Hard Truth

[Eddie45]

Dear prospective students,

I know this will sound harsh, but as I now near the end of my PhD program at a top-20 I look back and realize there are lots of things I wish someone had told me. A couple things come to mind:

1. ***You probably won't get a tenure-track job in academia*** You'll likely think right now that you'll be the exception (didn't we all) but the truth is that attrition rates are 50% (on average) in PhD programs for polisci. I'm at a great department, but even here with the people who finish the degree we can't place everyone at TT jobs. Maybe we have 5 people on the market in a given year...all with shiny CVs and glowing letters from top scholars. Of those, 1 person will get a decent job in an urban area. Maybe 1 more will get a job in the middle of nowhere and hate it. 1 more will bounce from Visiting AP jobs and the rest will leave academia (usually not be choice, but because they can't find academic jobs). And this is from a really good dept. If you're in a less stellar dept, you've got even less of a chance.

2. Related to #1, be careful during your prospective student trips. Grad programs lie about placement all the time. Figure out how many people struck out on the market from these schools, not just the few shining starts who placed well. All departments will tell you they're on the up-swing. They're probably lying. Get the hard data before you commit to a program.

3. Nobody will hold your hand in grad school. Frankly, even your advisor will probably not even care if you finish your degree or not. If you're not a self-starter, stay away. This isn't a good business for people who need external motivation.

4. You cannot finish your PhD in 4-5 years. When you go to admit day, programs will promise you 4-5 years of funding. Ask them what average time to completion is and then stand back and be amazed. If the dept isn't willing to support you for 6-7 years, don't go.

Finally, don't take out any loans for a PhD program. This isn't a MA degree and you likely won't make enough money in the future to support much debt.

Maybe not worth much, but wish someone had told me these things...

Good luck!

[jacib]

As for #4, as someone in a graduate program, I can say you probably won't standback and be amazed because no one in the program will know the answer, or will tell you something like "Our year-to-degree has been going down" or just tell you something that's not true. I don't think it's malicious, I just don't think they're outcome oriented like that (and it's a big confirmation bias thing: a couple of successful are the ones they remember). Also, in my experience, everyone who doesn't graduate from the program does so for "personal" or "medical" reasons completely unrelated to the program. Everyone. At every program.

I agree with not taking out loans. I agree only quant wunderkinds finish in 5 or less years. And your adviser will definitely not hold your hand, but, if you're doing good work, your adviser should be encouraging and pushing your ideas further. But in most situations, you already need to already be doing good work for that to happen.

#1 is on the pessimistic side of accurate. Jobs might be of a different quality than you expect (small university instead of R1), but there are apparently jobs out there for people from top programs. You're lucky enough to see for yourself in political science because there is an initiative called "Honest Grad Numbers" which lets you can look at the data and judge for yourself (thank Neal Beck at NYU). We'll see if people keep it up--Columbia's is already not working, but the others seem to be. On visiting day, seek out older graduate students for sure. They'll likely have their own things going on and will have no interest in schmoozing with you. Make them talk with you anyway.

But I would add it's up to you not only to be a self-starter when it comes to work, but a self-starter when it comes to professionalization. I just heard a second year in my program asking things like, "Is tenure really forever?" "What's the difference between teaching at Stanford and Swarthmore? (an elite research university vs. an elite liberal arts college)" and other things like that but not really understanding the answers. Know what expectations are for the kind of job you want and start working towards them in year two or three. Look at people who already have those positions and what's on their CV. Try to do more than them. Get those publications out. Unless you are the chosen one, think strategically about the future from the start of the program, not when you're suddenly faced with the job market year greater than or equal to 6.

Edited November 28, 2012 by jacib

[ThisGuyRiteHere]

I agree with the above post. Just spoke to one of my profs yesterday and she basically was astounded that I am asking job questions while I am only applying. I feel like you need to know these things before you commit 5-7 years on something.

[GopherGrad]

Both longer posts are good advice. You should have realistic expectations. But I think something of a corrective is in order.

As a 30-something with a decade in a decent professional career under my belt, my response to the "you will not get a tenure track job!" sentiment is:

Meh.

Guess what? By the same logic, you're not going to make partner at Sidley Austin or chief surgical resident at Cedar Sinai or be Daniel Day-Lewis's talent agent or the CEO of Coca-Cola, either. Go to the law school boards, etc., and you'll see traffick in the same sentiments.

There aren't very many jobs at the top. There aren't any top-heavy fields. The market is soft for everyone. These "harsh truths" are about being an adult, not political science. If you value your career and have a legitimate reason to think you have talent, at some point you're going to have to chose between taking the risk and wondering 'what if'. That's not an easy choice, but it's ultimately not one you get to avoid.

[ThisGuyRiteHere]

Both longer posts are good advice. You should have realistic expectations. But I think something of a corrective is in order.

As a 30-something with a decade in a decent professional career under my belt, my response to the "you will not get a tenure track job!" sentiment is:

Meh.

Guess what? By the same logic, you're not going to make partner at Sidley Austin or chief surgical resident at Cedar Sinai or be Daniel Day-Lewis's talent agent or the CEO of Coca-Cola, either. Go to the law school boards, etc., and you'll see traffick in the same sentiments.

There aren't very many jobs at the top. There aren't any top-heavy fields. The market is soft for everyone. These "harsh truths" are about being an adult, not political science. If you value your career and have a legitimate reason to think you have talent, at some point you're going to have to chose between taking the risk and wondering 'what if'. That's not an easy choice, but it's ultimately not one you get to avoid.

Actually this is very good advice. I was going to pull the trigger on law and maybe go to a school 25-50...but that is madness for about 50% of those attending (or any school outside the T14). Granite, I am still "wet behind the ears" but I think that life is all about weighing pros and cons and making the best choice. While law would probably fit me best, It is no way I am risking that for financial hardship. So I will will try and get a PhD, whether I am tenure track or just toil in post docs.

[blackcoffee64]

Hey if it doesn't work go into stripping. Avg. salary for stripping is >100k a year.

[Eddie45]

Might be of interest: http://chronicle.com/article/PhDs-From-Top/136113/?cid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en