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

The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 122 posts

Re: The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

#51

Post by PeterisP »

javert wrote: post #44
lutorm wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not. Look at the publication record of any tenured professor at a non R1 university and you'll typically find that it's dropped to almost nil.

True, I really just meant "at R1 universities." Which isn't fair to all those other tenured professors at non-R1 universities (and I may possibly even be one, someday). Of course, I have heard of R1 tenured professors who claim to spend 50% of their effort procuring funding (though I think 10% is a much more representative estimate).

I've heard believable claims that "here professors don't write research papers, professors write grant proposals" - quite a few of them advance research and get paper authorship by leading a lab and procuring funding for the team that does the actual research and writes the papers.

And I'm not dissing them in any way - getting a grant requires the senior/experienced guys working on it. Getting the funding is a must-have (since without it researchers and students would be dismissed and the research would not exist); but spending your own time researching is a nice-to-have thing that you can do if there's any spare time left after teaching and bureaucracy.

Re: The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

#52

Post by aheilbut »

javert wrote: post #44
lutorm wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not. Look at the publication record of any tenured professor at a non R1 university and you'll typically find that it's dropped to almost nil.

True, I really just meant "at R1 universities." Which isn't fair to all those other tenured professors at non-R1 universities (and I may possibly even be one, someday). Of course, I have heard of R1 tenured professors who claim to spend 50% of their effort procuring funding (though I think 10% is a much more representative estimate).

Also, the research that people are writing grants for and doing is dictated by what is fundable, which is not necessarily exactly what they'd choose to be doing were there no constraints.

Re: The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

#53

Post by Xcelerate »

aheilbut wrote: post #37
Xcelerate wrote: post #20

I am surprised that so many people are relating PhD's to the money you'll make. I hear (very frequently) that "the amount of time you spend doing your PhD will put you far behind the 4 years of having a job" or "if you want to get rich, go into ...", or "management is where all the money is; you need an MBA for that". Uh... I'm doing a PhD because I like scientific research and can't stand the thought of being a proc…

4 years?

For mine (chemical engineering in an American university). I hear it varies quite a bit depending on where you are and what you're doing it in.

Re: The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

#54

Post by hyperbovine »

scarmig wrote: post #21
hyperbovine wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Physical and intellectual freedom are worth more to me than money.

Who's more likely to have physical and intellectual freedom: 1) A recent PhD with $40,000 to his name 2) A Google engineer who graduated from undergrad at the same time and has $400,000 to her name

The answer is 1), but anyways:

1) Most engineers do not work at Google, and 2) I have plenty of friends who do/did, and, guess what?: They still write code all day! Most of which does not do neat things like drive cars, but rather: increases AdWord click-through rates! Or: manages address book contacts. Fun!

I don't care how much free pizza and foosball you offer me, nothing can match the freedom of pursuing my own interests.

Re: The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

#55

Post by jurassic »

Awareness of the opportunity cost and likely outcomes has been hitting me hard lately as I consider dropping out of my top-5 science (not CS) program 2 years in. I've gotten to a comfortable place with python/numpy/matplotlib and am wondering how hard it would be to break into web development as somebody who has only programmed in a scientific setting. Besides Python, I also know enough R and statistics to build linear regression models, do significance testing, make pretty plots with ggplot2, and other things you learn in a first year grad data analysis class.

Those of you in the gallery: Have you or somebody you know successfully made the transition from (non-computer) science into a tech career? In the current economy, what are the chances you'd hire a highly motivated science dropout with programming competence and basic stats knowledge? Would something like Dev Bootcamp be worthwhile for somebody like me?

I hate buzzwords like "data scientist", but I think that might be my best angle. What I'd really like is to apprentice in a Django shop, or possibly wear a little of both hats as a dev and a "data scientist".

Re: The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

#56

Post by csharpminor »

There's certainly a big misconception (in the U.S. and elsewhere)that study and research produces innovations and innovators. However, academia really fosters a type of conservative innovation. You pick your battles, apply for grants that you think you can win (and hope for the best).

For the most part, you don't swing for the fences. You learn how to integrate yourself into a certain type of system, and you hang on until you graduate. You operate in the zone where the marginal return on labor is usually miniscule.

In my opinion, Academia is pretty poor at fostering and developing any type of disruptive innovation. This kind of innovation is generally what makes headlines and gets funding.

Disclaimer: I am by no means the first person to have this thought. Here's a blog post from Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericaswallow/2012/04/19/innovato...

Re: The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

#57

Post by timr »

jurassic wrote: post #55

Awareness of the opportunity cost and likely outcomes has been hitting me hard lately as I consider dropping out of my top-5 science (not CS) program 2 years in. I've gotten to a comfortable place with python/numpy/matplotlib and am wondering how hard it would be to break into web development as somebody who has only programmed in a scientific setting. Besides Python, I also know enough R and statistics to build line…

"Have you or somebody you know successfully made the transition from (non-computer) science into a tech career? In the current economy, what are the chances you'd hire a highly motivated science dropout with programming competence and basic stats knowledge?"

I did it, have worked with others who have done it, and would now hire people who did. The important part is your ability to program. There are tons of PhD students (even in CS), who can't (or won't) write code. There are even more who write horrible, unmaintainable code. You have to be better than those folks.

Also, do not be deceived by "data science": it's mostly a bullshit term, and translates roughly to "programmer who knows basic statistics", rather than "scientist who knows some programming". Nobody wants to hire you if you can't implement your theories in a production context.

The bottom line is that if you're a good coder, nobody cares how you wasted your youth.

Re: The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

#58

Post by dhimes »

confluence wrote: post #48

The problem here is merely a misunderstanding of career statistics. The statistics for success in academia are thoroughly against any one Ph.D. The competition is too high, the rewards are too low, and the competitors are too desperate. This is not a place where you wish to compete - unless you have some kind of overwhelming advantage - aka really, really brilliant - you know who you are. For everyone else - look str…

This is a pretty awesome post that I hope near- and new Ph.D.s think about, especially because at that point in your life, you are probably immersed in a 'macho' culture where thinking about anything but a life in academia is seen as wimping out. Don't pay attention to that. It's nonsense. Pay attention to confluence's post.

Re: The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

#59

Post by Evbn »

PeterisP wrote: post #49

Two points not made here: 1) It's quite common to study for PhD while getting paid for it instead of paying for it - and in that case, it should be treted as a fun and enriching (though not very high paying) job for a couple of years instead of "delaying 4 years". Getting into a huge debt for it is a whole different thing, though. 2) It feels that this problem is partly USA-specific. Sure, other places may have notic…

Opportunity cost. PhD stipends pay less than unskilled labor, after you subtract "tuition"

Re: The Ph.D Bust: America's Awful Market for Young Scientists

#60

Post by [deleted] »

jseliger wrote: post #38
zeteo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been to graduate school and disagree with your comment about expecting a tenure-track job. When you get to know them, PhD students are not poor deluded souls slaving away in the misguided expectation of a plush, secure position at the end. They are rather intelligent, motivated individuals, who choose to work on projects that are more interesting/important than optimal ad placement or crafty financial swaps, and…

I've been to graduate school and disagree with your comment about expecting a tenure-track job. When you get to know them, PhD students are not poor deluded souls slaving away in the misguided expectation of a plush, secure position at the end. I have too (see here: http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2012/05/22/what-you-should-kno... for some comments, mostly job-related), and I think most grad students—at least during th…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN