Why go to graduate school

[PhDavid]

In light of a recent thread (http://forum.thegradcafe.com/topic/86719-some-words-of-caution/), I would like to start up a discussion about the purpose and value of graduate education  

It seems to me that we all know, even if somewhat tacitly, that pursuing a graduate degree is a huge risk. We have all read the abysmal employment statistics that people love to wave in our faces, and we have all had to process this information in our own way. The job prospects, or lack thereof, have caused many to give up the dream of pursuing a graduate degree, and yet others do no seem concerned. 

 

 

Perhaps one cause of this problem is a misunderstanding of the purpose of graduate school. One article I often turn to when I am discouraged is "Don't Be Afraid of Going to Graduate School in the Humanities" by Stephen J. Mexal (https://psmag.com/don-t-be-afraid-of-going-to-graduate-school-in-the-humanities-50a9d33880ee#.mf3cre5pp). In this article, Mexal argues that we need to stop viewing graduate school in the same light as professional school. A professional degree is tailored such that it prepares the student for a specific job (e.g. nursing). In contrast however, a graduate degree is not intended to prepare a student for a specific line of work, but instead allows a person to study and contribute to a particular field of inquiry. This fact, Mexal writes, is the reason that so few PhDs end up employed in a relevant field: a PhD was never intended to place its holder into a specific line of work (although it seems to me that the word Doctor-meaning "to teach" in Latin-in Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) connotes teaching) . Mexal notes, however, that PhD students acquire many valuable skills along the way and are well prepared for work in a variety of fields. In fact, Mexal says that most PhD holders surveyed would still pursue the degree even if they knew they would end up employed in an entirely different line of work.  Thus one should pursue a PhD because of a strong interest in a particular field; not with the hope of securing a tenure track position at a university. 

What do you think of this line of reasoning? Assuming it is possible to get a PhD for free, is it worth the time and effort if there are no job prospects for that field? What can be done during the PhD to increase one's marketability for non-academic jobs?

I would love to hear your thoughs. 

[TakeruK]

As I have wrote elsewhere on these forums, I agree that the PhD should not be viewed only as an avenue for a specific line of work, if that specific line of work is a tenure track professor position. Statistically, we create way more PhDs than there are positions. Instead, as you wrote, I view the PhD as training in a set of useful skills that can lead to a multitude of careers which require these skills. Therefore, I think it only makes sense that a student pursues a PhD if they know that the training from this degree will help them achieve their career goals, whatever those may be.

However, I disagree with the sentiment that a PhD "allows a person to study and contribute to a particular field of inquiry". Well, to clarify, I disagree with this view as the "primary" or "main" focus of a PhD! The PhD should do this but the school should also ensure their students are developing transferable skills. In this sense, I do view the PhD as vocational training or like a "professional school". I believe that the University has a ethical responsibility to ensure their graduates are employable and to provide resources to non-academic career paths, to ensure the degree requirements don't interfere with a student's ability to make themselves employable elsewhere etc.

What do you mean by "Get a PhD for free?". I would never spend money or go into debt for a PhD. In my field, we are "fully funded" which means that we do not pay any tuition or fees and we get paid a stipend for our work (not a ton of money but enough to live on). However, this is a big cost to me, because most PhD students in my field can earn a lot more money if they were not PhD students. In terms of this opportunity cost, I think most students lose out on $10,000 to $20,000 per year. For a 5 year degree, this is up to $100,000, but also 5 years of raises, and 5 years of experience. This is a lot of money over a working lifetime, especially since missing something like 2% raise for 5 years adds up to a lot over 30-40 years of working. Of course, after getting a PhD, I should be employable at a much higher level, and when I made the decision, I decided that there was some risk but that it would be worth it. I would be better off financially and with a better chance at career satisfaction if I had a PhD vs. a Masters degree (In Canada, Masters are also fully funded). 

So, I would say that no, it's never worth the time/money getting a PhD if you don't see any job prospects for you (not necessarily just in the field). I think a PhD is such a big financial risk that I would never go into a program without clear career goals and a clear path of how to achieve them after you graduate. 

To increase your marketability for non-academic jobs? This really depends on what you want to do outside of the academy! My advice is to keep your options open and pay attention to career center events on your campus. My school regularly hosts seminars where they invite recruiters from various sectors to come and talk about what it's like to work in their field. You don't get to hear very much outside of academia, so attending these events taught me a lot about what the options out there really were. As you learn about these other options, you should develop the skills that allow you to pursue these options. Also, a lot of the time, it's not necessarily learning new skills but how to "translate" your academic skills into the jargon that your desired career path uses, so that you can "speak their language". 

I was pretty vague in the above paragraph since I wanted it to be applicable to a wide range of career paths. Currently, I am also interested in data analyst/data science type positions. I am learning how to describe the computational aspects of my research into the methods that companies like Amazon or Facebook would use to describe their work. I am learning some additional skills to round out the computational stuff I just picked up as part of research so that I would have a stronger foundation. I am also learning about the process of hiring in these fields, e.g. how to prepare for that type of interview etc.

I'm currently in my last year of my PhD and I'm applying to jobs. At this point, I've only applied to academic ones (postdocs) because the postdoc job cycle happens a lot earlier. Non-academic jobs have much shorter turn around times and I may be applying to those later this year, depending on how the postdoc cycle goes.

[NoirFemme]

I don't have this issue because I was never the "star" student, and it took me a long time to get to grad school (it wasn't even a goal when I returned to finish my undergrad). I also have a richly rewarding career outside of the academy, so a TT job is not my #1 goal for obtaining a PhD. If anything, the extensive breaks between schooling, the multiple fields I've dabbled in, and the way I view a doctorate (as a means for expanding my creative reach) is why I am going to grad school. I suppose being first-gen, low-income has been a good thing--I still don't associate a PhD with just being a professor because my first experience with someone with a doctorate was Indiana Jones LOL.

Edited January 22, 2017 by NoirFemme

[The Shade King]

3 hours ago, NoirFemme said:

I don't have this issue because I was never the "star" student, and it took me a long time to get to grad school (it wasn't even a goal when I returned to finish my undergrad). I also have a richly rewarding career outside of the academy, so a TT job is not my #1 goal for obtaining a PhD. If anything, the extensive breaks between schooling, the multiple fields I've dabbled in, and the way I view a doctorate (as a means for expanding my creative reach) is why I am going to grad school. I suppose being first-gen, low-income has been a good thing--I still don't associate a PhD with just being a professor because my first experience with someone with a doctorate was Indiana Jones LOL.

I love your response. On one hand I feel this way in terms of PhD a tenure track is not the be all end all but on the other hand I want to be a professor not for the ivy tower but to extend my reach to empowering students. I am actually interested in the administration  part just as much as the teaching part so my path should be interesting. Also some of my favorite professors I have learned have very unique paths to the academy and they were not as linear as we think. Everyone has a story and I think people has to keep that in mind. I 

[Armchair_Phil]

23 hours ago, The Shade King said:

I love your response. On one hand I feel this way in terms of PhD a tenure track is not the be all end all but on the other hand I want to be a professor not for the ivy tower but to extend my reach to empowering students. I am actually interested in the administration  part just as much as the teaching part so my path should be interesting. Also some of my favorite professors I have learned have very unique paths to the academy and they were not as linear as we think. Everyone has a story and I think people has to keep that in mind. I 

 

I was also interested in administration but when all is said and done I don't think it would be a good fit, I need creative control over my work which a teaching or private sector position can offer an admin post really cant give me what I want.  To me, creative control is the whole point of tenure. Although a TT position would be ideal we have to stop looking at it as the end all be all. Getting a Ph.D. will open doors we just need to be aware of the skills we are honing and be clear of what exactly we want out of our work.  

[heyDW]

I'm pursuing a PhD because I want to know more. I like reading, writing, discussing, having my mind broken down and built back up. I don't think I've romanticized it much...it's true it will be difficult, and it's true I may struggle to find a job afterwards...but I'm unhappy with the world and this is the avenue that would best utilize my skills and allow me to make an impact.

I also think academia can use more queer/impoverished/neurodivergent/non-men than it currently has, and I'm all of the above. I want to make academia more accessible and I want to be a thorn in the foot of any abusive crapbag seeking tenure. hehe.

[XYZ1234]

been thinking about whether its worth going for a PhD. I applied this year and I have masters. My field is in environmental sciences and with the current political climate not sure if there is going to be enough grant funding to support this type of research. Perhaps I should change careers.... Also I have found that from looking at lots of jobs ads employers actually prefer or require a PhD if you want a research position at level of analyzing data and above. A master's will qualify you for a tech job if you have the right skills.

Edited January 27, 2017 by BSB825

[aberrant]

On 1/22/2017 at 2:51 PM, TakeruK said:

So, I would say that no, it's never worth the time/money getting a PhD if you don't see any job prospects for you (not necessarily just in the field). I think a PhD is such a big financial risk that I would never go into a program without clear career goals and a clear path of how to achieve them after you graduate. 

That is my perspective.

[cloud420strife]

Ya getting a phd in most situations is a waste of time. Better off with getting some certifications or taking a short masters program if you need new job skills. Alot of the working world doesnt care about most degrees. Even most masters are a waste of time. Some companies are starting to not even care about having a bachelors. You can get a ton of real skills within 4-5 years worth of time verses a phd to where you learn very little. Most of a phd is just studying the crap out of 1 topic non stop. The amount of money, time, sanity you have to give up for it, just not worth it unless your diehard about being a professor or wanna be like a psychologist or something that needs a phd.

[farflung]

On 1/22/2017 at 2:51 PM, TakeruK said:

In terms of this opportunity cost, I think most students lose out on $10,000 to $20,000 per year. For a 5 year degree, this is up to $100,000, but also 5 years of raises, and 5 years of experience. This is a lot of money over a working lifetime, especially since missing something like 2% raise for 5 years adds up to a lot over 30-40 years of working. Of course, after getting a PhD, I should be employable at a much higher level, and when I made the decision, I decided that there was some risk but that it would be worth it. I would be better off financially and with a better chance at career satisfaction if I had a PhD vs. a Masters degree (In Canada, Masters are also fully funded). 

Yes yes yes. Factoring in this opportunity cost is so important as anyone considers the financial pros and cons of graduate school. It's not just whether you can get through your PhD without debt-- which should be a minimum expectation for PhD programs -- it's weighing whether you're prepared to delay things like promotions, applied work experience, and contributions to any kind of retirement fund for 7-8 years (average time to degree in my field). These opportunity costs are something I am only just now realizing in the later years of my PhD program. Like, crap, other people my age have retirement accounts? Savings for their children's college? This may not seem like a big deal in your 20s, but in your 30s and 40s, these things really do affect quality of life. 

[ThousandsHardships]

I began a PhD program four years ago in a STEM field and graduated three years later with two master's degrees instead. This year, I will be beginning my PhD journey anew in a humanities field. My mindset about my PhD has completely changed during this process of self-discovery.

Four years ago, I applied to PhD programs because I loved being in the university setting, and I loved to teach. I thought that a PhD would be the ultimately gateway toward teaching at a four-year university. I treated research and my PhD as something that I simply had to put up with in order to reach my long-term goals. This made me miserable. I saw no end to what I was doing, thought of lab work beyond the bare minimum as a waste of time, was constantly stressed at my lack of progress, and was very worried about wasting my time in school possibly without getting the degree I wanted or the job I coveted.

This time around, though, I've realized something. When you love your field and the research makes you feel alive (even if it does sometimes lead to tears of frustration or distress), then it is not a waste of time. Why? Because when you think about it, what are you looking for in a job? Money? Something you love? A PhD program gives you all that, if you choose the right field, and if this is what you want. I for one want to go into academia. As a PhD student, I get to satisfy my curiosity, I get to express my insights in writing, I get to interact with intelligent scholars, I get to teach to my heart's content, I get to take advantage of campus resources, and I get to get involved in student affairs. And I will be paid for doing so. This is everything I've ever wanted in a job. If it is only for five years, then I will have the best five years of my life. Why would the best five years of my life be a waste of time? If I can't find a job in academia, I will at least have had these five years, and that is better than nothing. If I need another job, I can find another then. A PhD student isn't just a researcher; s/he is also a teacher and a student leader, if s/he chooses to be. An individual trained as a teacher and student leader will not be limited to a single path.

Edited February 14, 2017 by ThousandsHardships

[eternallyephemeral]

I went into my PhD knowing, and telling everyone in my program, that I was going into industry when I finish. It helps that in my area, 50% of people go into industry. And the opportunity cost is lower, because we get internships which helps with the promotions (you start at a higher level), the actual opportunity cost in salary (because we often make a lot more than just our stipend), and the saving/retirement/life goals that often escape people in grad school. On top of this, people who go into industry from my program frequently start their own companies or private practices, something extremely difficult to do without a PhD in my field.

As well, I'm employed at a company that I would be very happy to continue working for when I'm done, that hires only PhDs from my field. Most people are likely not in this spot, but this exists and it suggests that my PhD is not at all a waste of time, because I need the degree and I know exactly what I'm doing afterwards.

On top of these career-related concerns, the PhD should be changing the kind of work you do, not just the salary and the title. If you're doing the same work as a bachelors or masters, then obviously it's not adding anything. But I would argue that you aren't complementing the PhD with the necessary soft skills and networking/resume creating ability if that is the case. Of course, economics and labour markets can get in the way of this, but you have to get as close as you can with the resources you have available.

For me, a PhD is an investment in myself, my career, and my overall development as a thinker and a producer of knowledge. I don't mean this in an ivory tower way or a classist way. It is about completing my personal goals, and currently the opportunity cost is nothing, as I am getting a degree while working multiple jobs on the side that add up to a full-time salary out of undergrad. To say it is a waste is to ignore the opportunities provided with a PhD program, as long as you choose a good one and you are able to finish it.

[SciFiMelanoma]

I think here is a possible answer why NOT go to grad school

The Death of a Scientist: The (self-)annihilation of modern scientific community

[juilletmercredi]

Well, let me begin by saying: I don't think pursuing a graduate degree is a huge risk. Employment data shows that people with graduate degrees have lower unemployment rates and overall higher average salaries than people without them. Parsing it farther, the unemployment rate for doctoral degree holders is very low - somewhere around 2%.

Pursuing a graduate degree is a risk IF you consider your only viable career option to be academia, as a tenure-track professor in your field. If you think more expansively, it's actually not that risky an endeavor.

However, I have to say that I heartily disagree with Mexal. Sure sure, a PhD allows a person to more deeply study a field and contribute to a particular field of inquiry. And that's all fine and good, if one were independently wealthy and did not need to feed themselves or their families with work. For everyone else, graduate school should be seen as a means to an end - and one shouldn't pursue the degree unless they intend to do something with it that requires or strongly recommends it. (Or, alternatively, if they go in with eyes wide open that their PhD program is just a 7-year diversion and they are fine with the idea of doing something that doesn't require it later.)

I have to say that I have a lot of disdain for current professors (as Mexal is) trying to extend/preserve their way of life by repurposing graduate school away from preparation for a tenure-track position in academia to being just about strong interest in a field. Most professors certainly don't act as if preparing their students for a TT position isn't the goal. It's also disingenuous: most professors know that most students who enter PhD programs do so intending to be tenure-track professors in the field. More insidiously, though, is that in my eyes that repurposing is a selfish and frankly exploitative move by these professors: they need PhD students to teach their freshman service classes so that they can spend time on their scholarship and teaching the upper-level 12-student seminars.

I'm fine with PhDs being seen not only as a vehicle for TT jobs if and only if there are other positions that ask for a PhD in certain fields, or would strongly benefit from one. I work in an industry that hires a lot of PhDs in the computer, mathematical, and engineering sciences and quite a few in the social and behavioral sciences. But if someone came to me tomorrow and said they wanted to be a UX researcher, should they go get a PhD? I'm not sure I'd say yes. I'd tell them to start with a master's in HCI and see where they could get from there.