What contributes to attrition?

[random_grad]

What are the most common (but also less common yet striking) reasons for leaving the program you've encountered (whether dropping out ABD or before)? How not to become a statistic?

 

 

[rising_star]

Most common: advisor issues; failure of comprehensive exams; personal circumstances change (death in family, need to take care of relatives, disabled child, become gravely ill); change mind about getting a PhD; funding runs out.

 

Some of what I've listed above is unavoidable. I doubt anyone chooses to get MS during their PhD, or have a parent have a stroke and need a caregiver, or have a "special needs" child. You can make sure you don't fail your comprehensive exams, that you write a good dissertation proposal, and you can maximize your chances for not running out of funding by applying for every grant you're eligible for and starting that process in your first year in the program.

 

I'm sure others will add more to this.

[TakeruK]

Other reasons in addition to what rising_star said:

 

Getting a job and no longer needing a PhD.

 

Choosing to move with spouse/partner instead of finishing school.

 

Choosing not to take qualifying/comprehensive exams.

 

Research reaches a dead end and choosing not to start over (e.g. getting completely scooped, turns out the advisor's idea was fundamentally flawed, research facilities destroyed in a fire/earthquake, spacecraft on which your research is based blows up on the launchpad, etc.). In this case, it's often possible to still cobble something together and finish but it won't have the same impact as the original project. But some people would rather do something else non-PhD related than go through another few years to get a PhD that might not get them the job they want.

 

Advisor moves institution and student chooses neither to move with advisor (or not able to) nor to stay.

 

Choosing to go into a different field that require different certifications.

 

Mental or physical health issues changing their priorities in life.

 

In Canada, the Masters and PhD programs are separate (you get the Masters then reapply to PhD programs), so most of the attrition happens here. The Masters is basically a 2 year trial period for both the graduate student and the advisor and sometimes one or the other decides that further grad school is not a good fit.

 

---

 

As rising_star said, some of this is unavoidable, but at the same time, not all of it is bad. If the student is making the choice to leave (and if it's really a choice) then it is probably a good thing for them in the long run. The way you phrase the question ("how not to become a statistic") seems to imply that leaving the PhD program partway is generally a bad thing. However, for all the people I know that left the PhD-track, almost every single one of them was happy to do so and they made the choice for themselves. In all of these cases, I do believe that they are better off now than if they had continued. 

 

I think it's important to not frame a decision to leave the PhD track as a "failure" or "quitting". Even though some people do leave through failing an exam (or courses) and even though some choices to leave really are the same as quitting a job, I think these words have too strong of a negative connotation. And I think the negative connotations prevent people from thinking about what really is the best choice/path for them. I'm not saying people should just leave PhD programs at the first sign of difficulty, but I think it's a disservice to everyone (and especially for the student) if the student feels that they will be viewed negatively if they chose to leave. It's important that schools and programs are supportive and help students make the best decision for the student, even if that means leaving the program.

[TMP]

I agree.  It's very important to think about leaving a PhD program a success because people are choosing to do something that will improve (in their perception) their lives and make them happier, may it be a dream job, a wonderful spouse with children, or whatever.  Life is full of mixed blessings.

 

You will know as you enter in a PhD program what you do have control over what you don't (especially the behavior of the faculty you work with-- you have no control over that) and you will take care of what you can control.

[navyblackmaroon]

My former advisor considered that a rate of attrition was a reflection of a healthy program. Most people I know who dropped the "PhD track" did so because they found better professional opportunities that fit their interests and needs. Ironically, many of those opportunities are still associated with higher education (like being college recruiters).  The one exception I know had to do with 11th hour dissertation defense issues and conflict.

 

Another form of attrition I saw (and eventually experienced) was leaving one PhD program to join another. I think that is rather rare within top programs (top 15 or so). However, it is possible to see people leave less prestigious programs in favor of a top 15 program. Sometimes programs go through a slump (or unfortunate coincidences) in which a group of graduate students leave for "greener pastures." That was the case in my previous institution (a top 25 program that lost four graduate students to top 15 programs within 2 years).

[random_grad]

It s good to hear that attrition mostly happens for positive reasons! I was not fully aware of the ratio of choice to failure (as in getting kicked out of the program). I can certainly imagine that a person may chose to pursue a different path. At the master s level all the attrition I ve seen was due to inability to follow the courseload/handle the stress, which is not really a choice even if it leads to realizing that that path is not for you and leads to something productive eventually.

[TakeruK]

It s good to hear that attrition mostly happens for positive reasons! I was not fully aware of the ratio of choice to failure (as in getting kicked out of the program). I can certainly imagine that a person may chose to pursue a different path. At the master s level all the attrition I ve seen was due to inability to follow the courseload/handle the stress, which is not really a choice even if it leads to realizing that that path is not for you and leads to something productive eventually.

 

It's definitely bad if departments are purposely manipulating attrition rates to get rid of a certain % of students each year, or using them as some kind of weeding-out process. I've heard of departments that do this because they want a lot of first year grad students to TA and then only keep a fraction of them to continue on the rest of the program. 

 

Fortunately, all of my experience with schools was that the faculty set you up for success. They basically do as much as they can to not directly be the cause of attrition, so the result is that most of the attrition is due to positive reasons (actually, looking up the definition of attrition, it is something like "reducing the strength through sustained attacks" so maybe, technically "attrition" would require some force to be actively working against grad students, but anyways...). But I did consider the environment of each program carefully to avoid "toxic departments" that do actually want some fraction of their students to fail.

[chateaulafitte]

It s good to hear that attrition mostly happens for positive reasons! I was not fully aware of the ratio of choice to failure (as in getting kicked out of the program).

 

In healthy programs, not many people will get kicked out - presumably if you're accepted, it's because your dossier suggests you can make it.

 

That being said, not getting kicked out does not mean that leaving your PhD program "happens for a positive reason". If you leave to take care of a sick relative, because of health issues, etc., it can still be experienced as a failure. I've seen many people drop out, and safe for the ones who did it after the end of their first year (to get into other programs), those who dropped out did it because they had no other choice.

 

The definition of "attrition" is indeed interesting:

 

 

: a reduction in the number of employees or participants that occurs when people leave because they resign, retire, etc., and are not replaced

: the act or process of weakening and gradually defeating an enemy through constant attacks and continued pressure over a long period of time

 

Who's the enemy here?

[random_grad]

For me attrition has first and formost military connotations and denotes something austere, with throwning troops marching on despite losses and wounds. Hence my initially negative perception of the term. (Then again I m esl so I probably have it all wrong due to my foreign cultural references).

Have you seen students regretting having kids as in kids lead a person to drop out? (although I would imagine that nobody would ever show such feelings but rather construct a happy narrative around it).

[random_grad]

I ve heard of dpts purpusefully manipulating attriion rates. That is indeed very unfortunate.

Cases I ve seen, however, were with students being admitted from small universities - presumably they were the top of their class etc - but for whom the transition was too much to handle. Perhaps the dpt should have created extra safeguards for catching cases like this; but there s always a person who simply does not seek help or, well, for whom it was never meant to be. Im talking about terminal MAs within the Canadian system.

The reason I m worried is that I expect my load to double at the new institution, and the MA load was already bad enough XD I guess it s a bit of the imposter syndrome creeping out. I should trust the adcom.

Edited May 20, 2015 by random_grad

[TakeruK]

Cases I ve seen, however, were with students being admitted from small universities - presumably they were the top of their class etc - but for whom the transition was too much to handle. Perhaps the dpt should have created extra safeguards for catching cases like this; but there s always a person who simply does not seek help or, well, for whom it was never meant to be. Im talking about terminal MAs within the Canadian system.

 

Do you mean cases where people drop out of terminal MA programs in Canada (i.e. did not receive their MA) or do you mean cases where people get their terminal MA and then do not pursue a PhD.

 

If it's the latter, then I think this is perfectly fine and normal. I think the Canadian terminal MA/MSc program as a pre-req for a PhD is an excellent way to structure graduate school. Many people I know realise that grad school/academia is not what they want after 1 year into their MA/MSc program, so then they spend their second year finishing up and looking for work. Those who want to continue will spend their second year either fulfilling requirements to be advanced to PhD standing (skipping the MA/MSc defense; but this is not recommended since you won't get a Masters), or applying to PhD programs (whether it's at their current school or elsewhere).

 

In Canada, a Masters degree is often quite useful at improving your chances of employment. Attrition** rates in Canada and the US are about the same, but from my experience, all of the "attrition" in Canada seem to happen right after the terminal MA/MSc, but in the US, this can happen anywhere (and the person leaving do not necessarily leave with a useful degree). The terminal MA/MSc creates a natural stopping point that forces everyone to reconsider and re-evaluate. 

 

**I also think of attrition in the military context which has negative connotations, but I guess the other definition given makes more sense why we use this word

[rising_star]

I can't say that I personally know of anyone who had kids and then that led them to drop out. In fact, many of my grad student peers chose to have children while in graduate school because of the flexibility grad school allowed to share childcare responsibilities, for example. That said, having kids can definitely make it more difficult in terms of time management.

[TakeruK]

I can't say that I personally know of anyone who had kids and then that led them to drop out. In fact, many of my grad student peers chose to have children while in graduate school because of the flexibility grad school allowed to share childcare responsibilities, for example. That said, having kids can definitely make it more difficult in terms of time management.

 

I know some people where it went the other way. They chose to drop out because they decided that they wanted to spend their time with their family instead of pursuing academia as a career. They made this decision because they felt this would make them more happy than staying in academia. Of course, I realise that since I'm not actually them, I don't know for sure that this was 100% their choice and not some other pressure (from their spouse? from society? from academia?) that made them choose to leave. But in the absence of other information, I take them at their word. The people I'm thinking of include both men and women.

 

Also, I recognize that academia does apply pressure in some cases where it will appear that a student "chooses" to leave but it's not really their choice. For example, most Canadian grad schools allow parents to take up to a year off for leave for their child's first year (same as any other job in Canada), but the department, supervisor and the publish/perish mentality of academia can often make taking a year off not practical for your career. This could lead to students making the "choice" to leave academia but they do so because there is no viable alternative. 

 

So, I do agree that even if the student made a "choice" and is happier leaving the program than staying in it, this doesn't mean that everything is okay or ideal. For some situations, perhaps we could fix the system so that the choice to leave isn't the "lesser of two evils" and actually allow the student to choose between two happy outcomes.

[random_grad]

I was talking about people not finishing their MA. Otherwise I agree that the Canadian system has its benefits because it allows you to test the waters. That totally how I used it.