Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Abolish the PhD (2016)

blog.devicerandom.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 197 posts

Re: Abolish the PhD (2016)

#71

Post by chrisseaton »

fruffy wrote: post #53
Fomite wrote: post #6

"Problem is, “graduate students” are not students. They are workers." Graduate students are both . My students benefit heavily from me not necessarily treating them to the same standards as I would treat a full time research employee. And while they are the primary workhorses of research, there are large swathes of their graduate student careers where they are not particularly (or often negatively) productive. I will…

As a current CS PhD in the US I find this sentiment aggravating. I am not a mere "student", I am a full-time employee. I do not take classes and I am not interested in taking classes. I would either like to teach or work on my research in a collaborative environment with other like-minded peers. Many PhDs are in their late 20s/early 30s, coming from all swaths of life. They are not children. However, in the American…

> I am not a mere "student", I am a full-time employee.

Isn't 'student' the preferable option here? I was proud to be a student when I was doing my PhD. (I said 'doctoral student' when I wanted to be more clear.) Why do you want to work for someone else, on their hours, answerable to them, doing their research and teaching their classes, instead of working on your own research?

I can't understand why you'd want to be an employee?!

Re: Abolish the PhD (2016)

#72

Post by urthor »

dsr3 wrote: post #16
rjzzleep wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends where. Both the article and the responses throw everything in the same basket, as if it all universities are the same and all education systems are the same. The bologna accords sure tried to make all higher-ed work in the same fashion and it has been a disaster. There is no doubt that in the US in a lot of universities graduate students are a cheap workforce that reinforces corporate interests through res…

"There is no doubt that in the US in a lot of universities graduate students are a cheap workforce that reinforces corporate interests through research that is funded by them to sway public opinion in certain directions." Citation is needed for this subject. Large amount of research in University is funded by NSF or the Federal Government. While industrial interest also contribute significantly to research fund, it i…

Industrial research contributes significantly?

It was my understanding the vast majority of research funding in the US was either from the NSF, DARPA or similar, or the University. Corporations are a single digit percentage, no?

Re: Abolish the PhD (2016)

#73

Post by urthor »

_8j50 wrote: post #63
chrisseaton wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing a masters in between is usually I'd say a big waste of time and very inadvisable. If you're strong enough to start your PhD then just start it. And to literally answer your question - you don't need any kind of prior degree at all to start a PhD. I was recently investigating getting a gifted engineer onto a PhD programme without an undergraduate, and it was possible.

I can't believe I didn't know this, I thought yoy had to have masters before phd.

Only in Germany and a group of similarly minded countries.

The Anglo-Saxon tradition is one of disorganised irreverence.

Re: Abolish the PhD (2016)

#74

Post by urthor »

wodenokoto wrote: post #24

My understanding is that US system places Ph.D. and masters degree in the same course. In Europe and Asia you take a bachelor, then a masters degree. Both as university students. A masters opens the door to apply for a Ph.D. In Denmark, for example, a Ph.D. is commonly a job position, with a limited contract. Union governed, pay, pension. You apply for a position when one is announced, just like many other jobs. Lite…

In the US and other Anglo Saxon countries it's a free for all after Bachelors.

Whatever the faculty wants happens.

Re: Abolish the PhD (2016)

#75

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

_8j50 wrote: post #63
chrisseaton wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing a masters in between is usually I'd say a big waste of time and very inadvisable. If you're strong enough to start your PhD then just start it. And to literally answer your question - you don't need any kind of prior degree at all to start a PhD. I was recently investigating getting a gifted engineer onto a PhD programme without an undergraduate, and it was possible.

I can't believe I didn't know this, I thought yoy had to have masters before phd.

The thing is, if you don't have top grades or an exceptional background, most universities will expect you to have a Master's, instead. But if you do have top grades, or an exceptional background, then you can probably go straight into a PhD from high school, or anyway many universities will accept you.

It matters a lot whom you have impressed with your skills, your knowledge and your dedication, it goes without saying, and by how much. Like in chrisseaton's comment above, they were investigating about a "gifted engineer" and I'm guessing they would have written a strong letter of recommendation for that candidate.

So it may not be possible for everybody in practice, but in theory, it's possible.

Re: Abolish the PhD (2016)

#76

Post by bunbunbun »

chrisseaton wrote: post #71
fruffy wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a current CS PhD in the US I find this sentiment aggravating. I am not a mere "student", I am a full-time employee. I do not take classes and I am not interested in taking classes. I would either like to teach or work on my research in a collaborative environment with other like-minded peers. Many PhDs are in their late 20s/early 30s, coming from all swaths of life. They are not children. However, in the American…

> I am not a mere "student", I am a full-time employee. Isn't 'student' the preferable option here? I was proud to be a student when I was doing my PhD. (I said 'doctoral student' when I wanted to be more clear.) Why do you want to work for someone else, on their hours, answerable to them, doing their research and teaching their classes, instead of working on your own research? I can't understand why you'd want to be…

I can say from experience that employees get some protections that students don’t. Particularly when it comes to:

- working hours (often paid for 20 but working close to 40)

- paid time off (I have worked through a lot of ‘vacations’ and ‘holidays’)

- health insurance (for my whole family, not just me)

- behavioral requirements for managers (I have stories)

- retirement funding

- credit for work products (imagine being told your name isn’t on a pub because you were in training)

Re: Abolish the PhD (2016)

#77

Post by chrisseaton »

bunbunbun wrote: post #76
chrisseaton wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am not a mere "student", I am a full-time employee. Isn't 'student' the preferable option here? I was proud to be a student when I was doing my PhD. (I said 'doctoral student' when I wanted to be more clear.) Why do you want to work for someone else, on their hours, answerable to them, doing their research and teaching their classes, instead of working on your own research? I can't understand why you'd want to be…

I can say from experience that employees get some protections that students don’t. Particularly when it comes to: - working hours (often paid for 20 but working close to 40) - paid time off (I have worked through a lot of ‘vacations’ and ‘holidays’) - health insurance (for my whole family, not just me) - behavioral requirements for managers (I have stories) - retirement funding - credit for work products (imagine bei…

But you're opting into them having more control over you. If you're an employee they can set your hours. They can't as a student. You're opting into a HR-managed vacation system instead of managing your own time.

Health insurance, behaviours, retirement, etc I guess so.

Re: Abolish the PhD (2016)

#79

Post by jltsiren »

MontyCarloHall wrote: post #69
jltsiren wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computational fields are not software engineering. In order to be productive, you need expertise in the field you are studying, as well as in at least two of CS, software engineering, statistics, and mathematics. Undergraduate degrees are too short to teach all that, which is why people must continue learning basic skills during PhD (and postdoc).

>you need expertise in the field you are studying, as well as in at least two of CS, software engineering, statistics, and mathematics There are some very talented undergraduates with expertise in several of the above. They generally end up being the most successful PhD students, since they are immediately productive from the get-go. (Or, they work as a junior quant at Jane Street.) >people must continue learning bas…

> No postdocs should still be learning basic skills. The (ostensible) purpose of a postdoc is a final step to prepare very talented PhDs for a faculty position. People who are faculty material should have mastered all relevant skills during their PhD.

That attitude is very bureaucratic.

Computational research is always interdisciplinary. Administrators organize universities into departments according to the needs of undergraduate curricula, but those administrative boundaries have little to do with the skills needed in research. The skills you learn during PhD are probably enough for your PhD research, but then you may need new skills when you start a new project as a postdoc. And again when you start a new project as a junior faculty member.

Postdoc is also the career stage where many people switch fields. For example, a background in X or even computational X is often insufficient for some research topics in computational X. You need to hire people who got their PhDs in CS, mathematics, or statistics, and then those people must learn X before they can contribute. And once they start contributing, they may have to learn software engineering to turn the methods they have developed into useful tools.

Re: Abolish the PhD (2016)

#80

Post by epups »

suyjuris wrote: post #67
Topolomancer wrote: post #33

There are some very good points in the article. As someone whose adviser proved troublesome when it came to graduating and letter writing (a horrible practice as well!), I second most of the points made. At the same time, there's also reason for cautious optimism. In the German system, for instance, PhD students are paid (mind you, it's an academic salary, which is not a lot but a first year PhD student with a full t…

> In the German system, for instance, PhD students are paid (mind you, it's an academic salary, which is not a lot but a first year PhD student with a full time contract already makes more money than the median German salaried worker) Just to put numbers on this: PhD students earn roughly 4300€ per month (before taxes and insurance), resulting in something like 2600€ take-home pay. This is for a “full-time” position…

For most other fields, the salary for PhDs is 65% or 50% of these numbers. Considerably lower than median salary then.
Post reply on HN