Importance of PhD Grades?

[NotMyParty]

I'm sure this question has been asked before. Nonetheless, I still feel that I do not have a comprehensive sense of the answer. As a first-year student in a top-10 sociology program, I also feel that this question is the 'elephant in the room' among my cohort. We're all so driven and eager to succeed and please our professors. It's clear that obsessing over tests/points/assignments/evaluations is part of the understood expectations here. But do grades really matter? Our program has an outward culture of pretending that grades aren't important. When asked directly, several professors have poo-pooed the notion that we should be grade motivated. I am inclined to agree. I didn't come to this PhD program to strive for a perfect GPA. I came to learn how to be an academic. I don't think the two are necessarily aligned. Except that I have also overheard conversations among professors where students grades were explicitly mentioned as a basis of comparison. 

 

I know that PhD grades, in and of themselves, are of no importance on the academic job market. I know that publications and reference letters from my committee will reign supreme. But what do I have to worry about in the meantime? To what extent is the distance between an A and a B now going to affect my strength as a job candidate in the future? Is it something I only have to worry about if I plan on applying to certain fellowships? (if so, which ones?) Does the emphasis on grades vary between faculty members? 

 

I ask this because (like most students in top PhD departments) I was grade-obsessed as an undergraduate. But looking back, I realize that the kind of striving I did for my near-perfect GPA was in many ways a hinderance to the learning process. I don't think its an overreach to say that this kind of obsessive evaluation-focused performance is a hallmark of our generation. In undergrad, I read for what I knew would be on the test, not for what I found most interesting. I memorized. I spent more time on assignments that were worth more points, rather than the ones I found most intellectually stimulating. I wrote safe essays instead of taking intellectual risks. I regret this approach, and I do not wish to repeat it. I think it would be a disservice to myself and to my eventual contributions to the discipline.

 

If PhD programs are all about learning to do original research, I would like to give myself permission to learn what is most interesting. To me this means letting go of focusing on being a "good student," and learning how to be a good academic. I think that it's inevitable that my grades will slip in the process. Sometimes, I'll be busy with a research subject and will turn my stats homework in late. Etc. I'm fine with this, as long as it doesn't hurt me in the eyes of my professors, or my career in the long-run. 

What do you think?

 

-

[immediately motivating this comment is the fact that I recently received my fall semester grades.

Two of the classes I took were topical seminars of similar structure & workload. I worked very hard in both. Seminar #1 was maybe one of the best classes I've ever taken. I excelled in the class to the point that the professor was encouraging me to incorporate my interests in the topic into my dissertation, and offered to be on my committee. There was no way that I didn't ace the class, except that he apparently did not like my final paper. It was a risk-taking paper, but I thought it was one of the best papers I've ever written, etc. I do understand that standards of evaluation are different in grad school. Nonetheless, after doing so well in the class I was surprised to receive a "B" as a final grade. Seminar #2 was perhaps one of the worst classes I've ever taken. I still worked hard, did all the assignments, but I definitely half-assed the final paper. I'm also pretty sure that I was at the bottom of the class in terms of performance during the term. I received an "A" as a final grade. Clearly, the professor had to have given all A's.

 

I'm not one to believe in objectivity, but these two grades really should have been reversed. Oh well, I suppose It all comes out in the wash! I don't think I'll be asking either professor to be on my committee, but I am perplexed by the contradictory feedback I've gotten grade-wise. And I'm not sure what lesson to learn from this experience. ]

[TakeruK]

The faculty and students in my program have also talked about how grades are not important. I've talked to many senior PhD students at multiple schools that are applying to post-doc positions. Only one of them had to submit their transcript to one job competition -- no one will even see your other grades.

 

However, grades are important in the early stages -- e.g. applying for competitive fellowships. Also, as a first year grad student, we might not have much research background, so the only thing they can really compare all of us is using GPAs. Over time, as we grow into senior grad students, people will stop talking about our courses and more about our research. I think you have the right approach towards balance coursework and research and I'm trying to do the same too!

 

It's definitely easier said than done -- I thought that after 2 years of grad school before this PhD would make it much easier to focus on research more and care about grades less. But my MSc program was very course-light (4 courses in 2 years) while this program (and all US programs) are very course-heavy (9 courses this year), so I occasionally find myself slipping into my undergrad mindset again and spending too much time on homework/courses. But I think we will all learn to switch mindsets, hopefully sooner rather than later!