My favorite choice is D) asleep. now I realized I should get my PhD now !
Thinking of Doing a PhD? Take this simple test
11–20 of 47 posts
Re: Thinking of Doing a PhD? Take this simple test
#12Here's my two cents (I got my Ph.D. in physics from U. Chicago):
I went to grad school because 1) Chicago physics was famously challenging and I wanted the challenge, 2) Everyone else I knew went to grad school - I didn't know how to look for a job, 3) Chicago was a big city with good live music and nice architecture.
All were wrong - the only acceptable answer I believe is "I love science so much, I want to be a scientist for the rest of my life and nothing is going to stand in my way."
What happened was: 1) The challenge was 100x more than I really wanted. I found out early I didn't want to be a scientist, but decided I would stick it out like a perversely beneficial jail sentence. 2) I'm a very, very, very social person. Oops - big mistake. You don't make enough money to date. The mental challenge of living a lifestyle in complete opposition to my core personality was the most difficult challenge (5 years in a dark basement trying to detect light from single semiconductor nanocrystals). But, I found out I could take loans and moved to the artist neighborhood - punk rock, dating and beer helped. (Wine-women-song? Sex-drugs-rock n' roll?) 3) I met some of the most interesting people I've ever met in my life and that made it all worth while. I did some cool things and in the middle of the financial crisis I was able to make a career change because the Chicago physics Ph.D. superficially let me get my foot in the door. 4) I went to a NATO physics conference in Turkey, met a non-scientist woman and married her. Now I'm a capulcu. 5) Having a Ph.D. is a great conversation topic at parties. 6) I did some really cool science, but was exposed to many carcinogens and high voltage equipment at a young age.
My Dad was a Marine and I feel like I went through a Mental Marine Corps, no disrespect to the real Marines. Boot camp is not fun, but it turns you into a man of a sort. The first 2 course years were like a boot camp.
The financial impact of not entering the job market hits you even for years after you finish your Ph.D. You'll be behind other people your age for awhile.
I should just turn this into a blog post! HTH
Re: Thinking of Doing a PhD? Take this simple test
#13I wish someone would post an article that actually provided a serious, levelheaded view of the ups and downs of a PhD as well as what it's actually like instead of the overly negative articles? I understand that it might not be what it seems, but it's hard to figure out what's for real and what's just somber humor for the uninitiated.
The fact that you view this as an overly negative article indicates that you aren't the phd type.
I didn't opt for a phd but I sometimes wish I did. I answered C to every one of these questions.
Re: Thinking of Doing a PhD? Take this simple test
#14I wish someone would post an article that actually provided a serious, levelheaded view of the ups and downs of a PhD as well as what it's actually like instead of the overly negative articles? I understand that it might not be what it seems, but it's hard to figure out what's for real and what's just somber humor for the uninitiated.
The experience of doing a PhD varies wildly - between countries, between schools, between departments, between professors, and as time passes. Even at the same school, one person reported to me that while he was in his second year his supervisor told him he probably had enough material to pass if he wrote it all up - while another person worked long hours and reported to me that his supervisor had shouted at him for…
In general, the thumb rule I would like to apply for a PhD is the function of the relationship between the graduate student (employee) and the advisor (manager). Most (not all) graduate student experiences turn bitter due to ethical and professional issues with your advisor. If I were to give any advice to a graduate student, I would write this on the top of my list.
Re: Thinking of Doing a PhD? Take this simple test
#15Here's my two cents (I got my Ph.D. in physics from U. Chicago): I went to grad school because 1) Chicago physics was famously challenging and I wanted the challenge, 2) Everyone else I knew went to grad school - I didn't know how to look for a job, 3) Chicago was a big city with good live music and nice architecture. All were wrong - the only acceptable answer I believe is "I love science so much, I want to be a sci…
Every day you're Capuling? :)
I have a real question about this: is there something in your head that prevented you from stopping? Is it just something that has always been a part of you, or did you just make a decision that for once in your life, you were going to stick with something?
Re: Thinking of Doing a PhD? Take this simple test
#16lol
c, c, c, c, b, d, c, b, c, c, c
Re: Thinking of Doing a PhD? Take this simple test
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
The experience of doing a PhD varies wildly - between countries, between schools, between departments, between professors, and as time passes. Even at the same school, one person reported to me that while he was in his second year his supervisor told him he probably had enough material to pass if he wrote it all up - while another person worked long hours and reported to me that his supervisor had shouted at him for…
In general, the thumb rule I would like to apply for a PhD is the function of the relationship between the graduate student (employee) and the advisor (manager). Most (not all) graduate student experiences turn bitter due to ethical and professional issues with your advisor. If I were to give any advice to a graduate student, I would write this on the top of my list.
Most? I think your sample population is suspect.
Re: Thinking of Doing a PhD? Take this simple test
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
In general, the thumb rule I would like to apply for a PhD is the function of the relationship between the graduate student (employee) and the advisor (manager). Most (not all) graduate student experiences turn bitter due to ethical and professional issues with your advisor. If I were to give any advice to a graduate student, I would write this on the top of my list.
Most? I think your sample population is suspect.
Yes, most. It follows from the same employee-manager philosophy. I don't have empirical data to prove it though. Feel free to disagree.
Re: Thinking of Doing a PhD? Take this simple test
#19[deleted]
Re: Thinking of Doing a PhD? Take this simple test
#20Part I
I will give an answer focused on STEM field Ph.D. programs in the US.
Pros:
Professor Career. A Ph.D. is nearly essential for a career as a professor. If you want such a career, then about have to get a Ph.D.
Learning. A Ph.D., both in your coursework and your independent study, can let you learn much more about your field. Some of what you learn might be quite powerful and valuable later in your career, especially if you want to be an entrepreneur and found a business where some powerful, valuable 'secret sauce' technology will be a big advantage for the business.
Jobs. Some employers will pay extra for a Ph.D. Jobs in US national security, working for the Federal Government directly or work in the 'military-industrial' complex are common examples.
Cons:
(A) With a Ph.D., working for someone without a Ph.D. can be awkward. Why? Because most organizations still want to have a hierarchy much like a Ford plant 100 years ago where the supervisor knew more and the subordinate was there mostly just to add muscle to the thoughts of the supervisor. Then a subordinate who knows more can be a threat to the career of the supervisor. Related phenomena include 'goal subordination' in organizational behavior and the Peter Principle.
(B) After the success of Google, some Silicon Valley venture partners concluded that for company founders they wanted graduate school dropouts. After the success of Facebook, they concluded they wanted college dropouts. After the success of Tumblr, they concluded that they wanted founders who never went to college, and we have to suspect that really they wanted high school dropouts. They are also big on recent immigrants who, necessarily, don't have a Ph.D. degree from a US research university.
Getting a Ph.D. Below I give some advice on getting a Ph.D. in 12 parts.
Qualifications: I hold a Ph.D. in Engineering from a world famous US research university where my research was on some applied math. I've been a college professor teaching applied math and computing, and I've worked in applied math and computing for problems in business and US national security. I've published peer-reviewed original research in applied math and computer science. Currently I'm a founder of a startup where the crucial, core 'secret sauce' is some applied math I created.
(1) Research. In any of the better US research universities, very likely the main issue for getting a Ph.D. is your research. In simple terms, do some good research and find that your path is pleasant. Struggle with research and find your life not so good down to much worse.
So below I will give some ideas that can help you do sufficiently good research.
(2) Criteria. The main criteria for research is work that is "new, correct, and significant". Below I will give some ideas that can help you achieve each of these three criteria.
(3) Engineering. In the STEM fields, I'd concentrate on engineering. Of course the 'M' in STEM is for mathematics, so there I'd concentrate on some version of applied mathematics, e.g., 'mathematical sciences', hopefully in a school of engineering where your research can be some mathematics for a practical problem. For just why should concentrate on engineering, see below.
(4) Mathematize. For how to do good research in the STEM fields, my recommendation is to 'be wise, mathematize'. That is, quite broadly the most respected research, especially in the STEM fields, is to find mathematical solutions. Advantages of mathematization:
(A) If you present your mathematical solution as theorems and proofs, then it can be fairly easy for you to check that your work is correct and quite difficult for anyone else to argue that your work is not "correct".
(B) In fields of engineering, nearly everyone struggles with math. So, if you have a good math background, then you can have one heck of an advantage.
(C) Applied math is one astoundingly powerful way to get good solutions to practical problems. So, (I) start with a practical problem. (II) Find what mathematical assumptions are reasonable for that problem and make a faithful conversion of the real problem into a mathematical problem. (III) Using the assumptions, find a solid, powerful mathematical solution to the mathematical problem. (IV) Convert the mathematical solution to a real solution, e.g., via software. (V) Write a paper on the work (and/or start a business to deliver the results). So, in moving logically from the real problem to the real solution (as a paper and/or business), you have taken a detour through some mathematics; this detour can be a big advantage over slogging through just intuitive or empirical techniques.
(5) Achieving the Three Criteria. There is an advantage in being in engineering: You are likely permitted to start with a practical problem. If you start with a recent practical problem, then nearly any solution you find can be called "new" if only because your problem was new. Or, if you are working on a problem in large server farms, how the heck did von Neumann, Kolmogorov, Maxwell, or Newton have already solved it? If the practical problem is important and you make some solid, visible progress on it, then your work can be called "significant". If your solution is mostly mathematics, with theorems and proofs, then it's 'correct' essentially only from passing checks on the theorems and proofs.
It can help your solution be regarded as 'significant' if in some sense it is provably the best possible, that is, 'optimal'. So, maybe your solution is the least cost, least time, least mean square error, least type II error, etc.