The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
1–10 of 85 posts
Re: The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
#2Found it from a post on Overcoming Bias http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/12/how-hopeless-a-phd.htm...
Robin's last line is: "Overall, my estimate of the chances of success went up after reading the article."
Re: The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
#3PhD graduates do at least earn more than those with a bachelor’s degree. A study in the Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management by Bernard Casey shows that British men with a bachelor’s degree earn 14% more than those who could have gone to university but chose not to. The earnings premium for a PhD is 26%. But the premium for a master’s degree, which can be accomplished in as little as one year, is almost as high, at 23%.
I wonder what this number would be like if you cut the number of academic jobs in half. Because that's what I see happening in the future.
I mean, I don't want to say the people on HN are smarter than the rest of the world but we do tend to spot trends earlier only because of the collaborative nature of the site and that people here actually evaluate the world around them. Which means societal trends can become apparent here before the rest of the world realizes they're going on.
So I think it's instructional that we see a "Higher Education is broken" item about every couple of days. In the years to come I suspect we'll see a lot more competition from lower priced options that provide education using online tools and who don't need armies of research fellows and "postdocs". Combine that with Governments making serious budget cuts and I think you'll see the demand for PhD's plummet.
Re: The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
#4Nice read. Speaking as a PhD I am okay with the PhD certificate having no value (you don't deserve extra earnings for having the certificate). It was my intent to learn some valuable things during the degree process, and I did.
Re: The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
#5I've always explained to my friends and family that the only real requirement of one passing a PhD is stubborness (or tenacity if I'm feeling charitable). It's certainly not intelligence that's the determining factor, although there is a minimum threshold you need to be over. You have to be stubborn enough that despite all the crap the Economist article is describing, you still want that certificate.
But there is real value in doing a PhD at a prestigious university: it opens doors. Many many doors. I think of it as a cognitive short cut for others that, magically, you're now someone worth listening to. I actually don't like this, but that's what I've observed on multiple occasions.
Re: The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
#6PhD graduates do at least earn more than those with a bachelor’s degree. A study in the Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management by Bernard Casey shows that British men with a bachelor’s degree earn 14% more than those who could have gone to university but chose not to. The earnings premium for a PhD is 26%. But the premium for a master’s degree, which can be accomplished in as little as one year, is almost…
The armies of research fellows and postdocs are useful if you do actual research, something that you just can't do with "online tools".
Also, my guess is that academic jobs don't influence the earning premiums that much... the pay is quite low, unless you really reach the top
Re: The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
#7On underpay: this varies highly by country. I am a PhD candidate in The Netherlands, and am employed by the university for four years (as most PhD candidates here). This gives around modal income, a 13th month of salary, holiday allowance, and about two months of holidays per year.
This is a bit less than one would earn going into business immediately, but it buys you a lot of freedom. The education/research split is 0.2/0.8 FTE. There are specific goals with respect to the research project, but other than that there is plenty of time to pursue your interests.
Our university tried to implement a scholarship/bursary system, which was not welcomed by potential Dutch PhD candidates. Foreign candidates do not seem to mind as much, since such scholarships are common in other countries. In my opinion, the scholarship system was a bad move, since pursuing a PhD becomes less attractive to the best of students, due to higher wages in the industry. In the end the scholarship system was shot down by the court (they see a PhD as a normal employment), and seems to have vanished for the time being.
Conclusion: you get what you pay for. Higher PhD candidate wages equals less PhDs, but more high-quality PhDs. With lower wages or scholarships universities can have more PhD candidates, but you will probably lose out on talent who'd rather go to the industry, and the PhD population has a miserable life (low income, long working hours).
Re: The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
#8[deleted]
Re: The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
#9The sole purpose of some PhDs is to serve as cheap labour for the research efforts of a professor.
Re: The disposable academic: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
#10Nice read. Speaking as a PhD I am okay with the PhD certificate having no value (you don't deserve extra earnings for having the certificate). It was my intent to learn some valuable things during the degree process, and I did.
Exactly my sentiments. I'm currently in a PhD program, but not because I intend to be in academia. I love the field I'm studying, and I just felt like doing it instead of joining the workforce. I'll probably learn a cool thing or two. Why not?
There are a decent number of ding dongs in PhD programs too. The level of ding dong-ery doesn't seem to change wherever you go.