Why exactly does a religion PhD take so long?

[Averroes MD]

I have a vague idea of why this is so, not just for religion PhDs but all PhDs in general. But can anyone clarify exactly why this is?

Thanks!

Edit: To clarify, why does it take 7+ years sometimes?

Edited May 21, 2014 by Averroes MD

[Perique69]

7 plus years is the norm for PhD programs (especially religion) in America.  It's not unusual for some to take 10 or more years.  The most focused and effective can finish in 5 or 6 years, but that's rare.  Why 7 years?  The combination of coursework, language exams, comprehensive exams and dissertation require A LOT of time.  Most don't even begin the dissertation until year 4.  

[AbrasaxEos]

There are a number of different reasons - a basic 5-year plan for US PhD's goes something like this:

 

Years 1-2: Coursework, maybe TAing

Year 3: TAing, Comprehensive Exams

Year 4: TAing, Prospectus, start dissertating

Year 5+: Writing Dissertation, and maybe teaching.

 

So, in the US, you typically teach and takes more courses during your PhD, which is not the case in the UK/elsewhere, where you go bascially to research and write a dissertation. 

 

Additionally, depending on what you are studying, you may have some added time, to extend a completion span to the 7+ years you mention.  These factors could include:

- You need to learn additional languages to work in particular sources that interest you, or are necessary for your dissertation. 

- You need to get good enough at existing languages to pass exams in them.

- You need to do fieldwork or outside research that ends up taking longer than expected, or just requires you to be elsewhere outside of your program for an extended period of time.

- You have a family emergency or other health issue that prevents you from working on your dissertation as much as you need to.

- You have a horrible advisor who endlessly extends your writing with suggestions like "you should learn Portugese so that you can read this excellent book on your topic." 

- You are an undisciplined person, which you cover up to your advisor with claims of needing to do some "additional research" while you mostly sit around reading buzzfeed articles and wikipedia entries on legacy Sega Genesis games all day.

 

So, a lot of things could take up your time, though it tends to mostly be at the dissertation stage, as most schools push you through the other ones quickly, and won't allow you to stagnate at the prospectus stage or something for a while.  Many schools are now instituting a terminus ad quem for dissertations as well, otherwise you get people who keep paying the continuing fees for 13 years under the guise that they are actually going to pick up writing their dissertation some day, though mostly so that they can tell other people that they are 'working on a PhD at ____."

Edited May 21, 2014 by AbrasaxEos

[sacklunch]

It's important to add also that one's personal life usually eats up a lot of free time. Many of us are married, have kids, outside responsibilities -- we are people -- which tend to accumulate responsibility as age increases. This combined with the fact that many folks have professional responsibilities while ABD, means that it may take quite a long time to complete.

[Kuriakos]

- You are an undisciplined person, which you cover up to your advisor with claims of needing to do some "additional research" while you mostly sit around reading buzzfeed articles and wikipedia entries on legacy Sega Genesis games all day.

 

That is suspiciously specific. 

[marXian]

To add to what AbrasaxEos has said, sometimes people come into a program with what they think is a really solid dissertation idea but then that ends up changing. That's not always the case, but it's certainly not rare for people to change their dissertation focus even as late as the prospectus. There are many reasons why that might happen, but it happens. Not that people completely abandon ship on their historical period or subfield or something, just that they have to find a different corner/angle/argument to pursue.

[Averroes MD]

Thanks for the replies. Stupid question but is the TAing required?

[trinitymatthew]

At some schools, though not all, doctoral fellowships include TAships. This is sometimes true, even in the first year (it was for me) and often in the later years. So the free money isn't always free. In addition to being a TA, I was made an adjunct in my fifth year, which was great in terms of money and experience, but A LOT of work the first time (designing and teaching my own new course). It's also the case that teaching or any other job that you might have on the side can feel more pressing or even rewarding, as compared to sitting in front of your computer or alone in the library, which can always wait. So, there's a great lure to do these more immediately rewarding/extroverted tasks. After the fifth year (when the fellowship was done) I also took a more substantial job and moved from the university which also slowed things down. So, it really is a combination of factors. I knew one guy who finished in 3.5 or 4 years, but it was practically unheard of. He was married and his wife was working, so her support freed him from other responsibilities beyond his studies.    

[xypathos]

If you're capable of coming up with your own funding, you could maybe get your DGS to let you not TA.

 

Though really this depends on the school. Some offer say 4 years of stipend across the board, guaranteed (Yale, I believe does this). Some only offer say 2 years of stipend (Harvard's CSR for example) but then offer 2 years of teaching fellowships, in which case you're still given the stipend amount (generally) but on the condition that you do the teaching fellowship. While say Vandy requires you to serve as a Research Assistant your first year, then to TA in years 2 and 3 in order to collect the stipend.

[mdiv2014]

this is an interesting question

 

I have never heard of a Middle Eastern student with full funding from their government taking 7 years to do a PhD after they already have a Masters. Never. In any field.

PhDs in Petroleum Engineering for instance didnt take 7 years.....

Mind you none of these foreign students that I know of have been to TT US schools and none have been in religion per se (one I remember was at Uni of New Mexico and I cant remember if it was 'Islamic Studies' or an PhD/EdD with specialization in teaching Islam....) but they were in top schools for their field Uni Houston/Tulsa/Oklahama.Wyoming/West Virginia for Petroleum Engineering for instance

Therefore I would say you 'can' opt out of TAing doing only course work and dissertation, but you probably get NO discount in tuition. 

As a side note, Kings College has a part-time EdD for working professionals that is 7 years tops - and that time-line is in an accredited part-time EdD program.

Edited May 22, 2014 by mdiv2014

[sacklunch]

This is another reason that seeking a PhD in our field (from a North American school) is often a bad idea if you want to have any sort of normal life. If you are married and have kids your family must be willing to move around the country/world for job prospects, oftentimes with poor wages. Whenever my friends in doctoral programs in the sciences complain about 'how long it takes' to finish their degrees I seriously cannot help but laugh. In the hard sciences, and even many in the social sciences, it is not terribly common for students to pursue a master's degree before beginning the PhD. Hell, even many philosophy PhD students do not even have an M* before beginning. Many of us studying some aspect of ancient history have 3-5 years of M* BEFORE beginning the PhD. Hilariously some classicists, too, can transition right into a PhD program. For text and/or ancient related fields in religion the time is usually: 4-5 undergrad, 3-5 M*, 5-7 PhD = 12-17 years. Oh and almost all of us have 5x the debt than the average PhD in the sciences. In short, we are idiots. 

[Kuriakos]

In short, we are idiots. 

 

+1

[marXian]

I think going onto the job market with zero teaching experience would be....not a good idea. The job market is already difficult enough. Why would a school consider someone who didn't at least have some TA experience over someone who TA'd some courses and maybe even taught their own course one term as an advanced student? I think the standard funding package at a lot of schools is two years fellowship (i.e. no teaching) and three years TA. Many universities also have teaching centers with programs to help grad students develop good pedagogy as TAs as well as develop their own courses and syllabi. Those are all things that will up your chances of getting a job.

 

My experience has been that TAing doesn't add a whole lot of work because, at least in my program, it counts as units toward my full time status. So this year, my first as a TA in my program, I've taken one fewer course in the two quarters that I've TA'd. It might be a different experience for someone who has never taught before. In my first MA program (English), "TAing" meant I had to actually teach two sections of freshman composition per semester on top of taking three courses. Compared to that, attending lectures given by the prof and holding three discussion sections once a week is a breeze.

 

mdiv2014, some universities (Northwestern, for example) don't allow students with MAs to transfer any units toward their PhD no matter what the program. At NU, it's a Graduate School policy. I imagine that other universities may have similar rules. Now, even if they still have to do the same amount of coursework as everyone else, people coming in with an MA probably have a slightly clearer idea of what their dissertation is going to be, have less reading to do around their topic, etc. Still, it's entirely possible that someone with an MA or two could still take seven years. You just can't anticipate what sorts of roadblocks you'll encounter.

Edited May 23, 2014 by marXian