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

I'm quitting my PhD

blog.derhagen.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 382 posts

Re: I'm quitting my PhD

#281

Post by sampo »

bumby wrote: post #277
wombatpm wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PhD programs exist to create new faculty members at other institutions. Other people hiring PhDs is a side benefit that has nothing to do with the purpose of the programs.

I disagree. I'm curious what you base this conclusion on? I've heard professors say similar, but it always seemed that it was because they were in an academic bubble. If this is true, then you almost have to concede the model is broken. There will be a glut of PhDs compared to faculty positions. One of the reasons so many PhDs are disgruntled is because of the false expectation that every PhD is on track for a profes…

> If this is true, then you almost have to concede the model is broken.

PhD training prepares people for the academic career and faculty positions. Less than half of PhD graduates actually end up in the academic career. So yes, you could say the system is ...not perfect.

Re: I'm quitting my PhD

#282

Post by chrisseaton »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #148
tombert wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how they do it in the US, but something I like about the British way of doing PhDs (at least University of York) is that they require you to write a 5-6 page proposal for your project. The proposal needs to be at least a little well-researched, with citations and needs to show a minimal level of competence in the subject that you want to study. I think this is a good idea because it really forces you to…

In the US we have a thesis proposal as well. However something I've learned is that no five-page document, no matter how well considered, can ever determine the optimal strategy for how to spend a 4-5 year slice of your research life. The whole point of research is to learn new things: new things sometimes imply changing direction.

In the US doesn’t the thesis proposal come after you’ve already sunk several years? In the UK you do it as part of your application.

Re: I'm quitting my PhD

#283

Post by chrisseaton »

stanford_labrat wrote: post #78
matthewdgreen wrote: post #27

I feel for the student writing this piece and I'm sad that they've developed some bitterness at their advisors and the entire field (which I read in the piece, even if it wasn't the intent.) Everyone needs to understand something important: a PhD is first and foremost an apprenticeship. It is your opportunity to study under someone who has done a specific kind of research, and learn from that person. If that relation…

I’m starting my PhD this fall and the prospect of an advisor mismatch terrifies me (having seen this first hand). Thankfully my program has 2 or 3 faculty who align well based off of my interviews but you never know…

Pick your advisor before you accept the PhD position.

Re: I'm quitting my PhD

#284

Post by sampo »

queuebert wrote: post #208
im3w1l wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are way more PhD's then there are research positions, so we are very far from the deficit you fear.

In my area of academia, we train about 4 mediocre PhDs for every good PhD that can do excellent, independent research. If we had more good researchers, we could create more positions for them. But right now most of our graduates don't want to do research or suck at it and go into industry. Not to mention the pay differential. I also sit on a graduate admissions committee, and it's hard to find good students. We have…

You make 5 people to go through long and demanding training, knowing that 4 out of 5 will have to change careers afterward, as the training wasn't a good fit for them. Just so that you can weed out that 1 out of 5 to hire. Doesn't this sound a bit exploitative to you?

> it's hard to find good students

Maybe because you provide such a bad deal for the majority of your students?

Re: I'm quitting my PhD

#285

Post by holyra »

JanisErdmanis wrote: post #244
holyra wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a harsh reply. I also had the same issue as the author: absent supervisions. I had only two meetings during my phd and they never reviewed my papers (I tried everything to motivate them and I finally gave up). I did everything on my own. It was very hard. I learned the hard way (try and fail... do it again...). I finally finished my phd with great appreciations from the jury. However this ends with a consider…

> I had only two meetings during my phd and they never reviewed my papers This sounds unreal. How did your supervisor managed his subordinates so they wound not spend their time in leisure activities? > However this ends with a considerable cost I can relate to that. Broken aspirations, depleted ambition and energy and lack of interpersonal relationships sometimes make me feel sad.

> This sounds unreal. How did your supervisor managed his subordinates so they wound not spend their time in leisure activities?

Self-pressure? I cannot spend my work time in leisure time, otherwise I ashame. It is pretty even the opposite that I experienced: I felt ashame in my leisure time to not work to get more progress on my phd.

We were only two phd students supervised by the same pair of supervisors. In fact we saw our supervisors a lot. However this was more in a friend way. Every time we switch to work-related discussions they found excuses to leave or just say that they will take some time later to ask our questions / reveiw our drafts (and this never happen).

In the case of the other student, he was more lucky and find an unofficial supervisor that help him a lot. I find some support from another researcher at the end of my phd. And thanks to him I had some review of my manuscript. This gave me some confidence to finish the writing.

Re: I'm quitting my PhD

#286

Post by bumby »

sampo wrote: post #281
bumby wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. I'm curious what you base this conclusion on? I've heard professors say similar, but it always seemed that it was because they were in an academic bubble. If this is true, then you almost have to concede the model is broken. There will be a glut of PhDs compared to faculty positions. One of the reasons so many PhDs are disgruntled is because of the false expectation that every PhD is on track for a profes…

> If this is true, then you almost have to concede the model is broken. PhD training prepares people for the academic career and faculty positions. Less than half of PhD graduates actually end up in the academic career. So yes, you could say the system is ...not perfect.

If that's the case, "predatory" is probably a more apt description.

Imagine if a trade school only had a 50% employment rate for their intended purpose and forced the students to work at a fraction of their market value for the privilege of attending, while profiting off that labor...I don't think imperfect would be the word used.

Re: I'm quitting my PhD

#288

Post by pacetherace »

A lot of the discontent comes from the expectation that a professor in a well ranked university will be an expert in whatever research he/she is currently doing. So any student who prioritizes university/prof ranking over a professor/lab's expertise is going to be taken for a ride.

Re: I'm quitting my PhD

#289

Post by musicale »

dizzant wrote: post #149
matthewdgreen wrote: post #27

I feel for the student writing this piece and I'm sad that they've developed some bitterness at their advisors and the entire field (which I read in the piece, even if it wasn't the intent.) Everyone needs to understand something important: a PhD is first and foremost an apprenticeship. It is your opportunity to study under someone who has done a specific kind of research, and learn from that person. If that relation…

Thanks for this perspective. I am one of these mismatched PhD students. When I entered 6 years ago, no professors in my department had time to advise me. The professor for whom I was a GTA took pity on me after two years of rejection, and now serves as my committee chair despite having little to no expertise in my field. I am coadvised through a different department, but again, my coadvisor has little overlap with my…

One approach that some supervisors take is to encourage their students to submit a paper (or poster, demo, etc.) each term (or a few times a year) to an appropriate conference or journal.

Even if the paper isn't accepted, you get the experience of conducting adequate background research and literature surveys, writing your own work up in a clear and coherent manner, and receiving feedback, some of which may be valuable. You also get used to rejection (and sometimes very harsh and dismissive criticism) as something that happens but isn't the end of the world. Eventually you get published, which in some sense proves the value of your work because it has been peer reviewed and identified as something worth publishing (and has arguably met the often nebulous "novelty" requirement as well.)

Sometimes innovative work just gets rejected for publication because it goes against the status quo, and that's perhaps another good lesson to learn (as well as how to get around such bias if you need to.)

Re: I'm quitting my PhD

#290

Post by ModernMech »

hnaccount_rng wrote: post #204
dizzant wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for this perspective. I am one of these mismatched PhD students. When I entered 6 years ago, no professors in my department had time to advise me. The professor for whom I was a GTA took pity on me after two years of rejection, and now serves as my committee chair despite having little to no expertise in my field. I am coadvised through a different department, but again, my coadvisor has little overlap with my…

You can still quit. And, at least I would recommend you doing it. I have yet to do the jump to industry, but from what I'm hearing so far: There is little to no value assigned to the _paper_. And, at least in my view, this is exactly as it should be. There are two and only two situations [0]: 1) The company requires your specific expertise and won't care about the title as you are the one with the knowledge 2) The co…

> from what I'm hearing so far: There is little to no value assigned to the _paper_

I was given this advice when I was wavering on whether to finish my Ph.D. In fact, a guy who had finished his Ph.D. told me don't bother, nothing changed from before or after he got it.

Then I went to his wedding and he had the DJ refer to him as "Dr." the entire night in front of his entire family, and by God did they care. They were so proud of him for that title and that degree. After seeing that, I immediately went and applied to defend my dissertation.

And here's the other thing -- even if you work in an industry like CS that has more egalitarian views on credentials like a Ph.D., the whole world is not like that. The actual piece of paper opens up several opportunities not available otherwise:

- Some jobs require a Ph.D. All the experience in the world won't qualify you for that kind of role without the piece of paper.

- You can get jobs as an "expert" easily, where the piece of paper reifies your expertise to your clients (think expert witness or consultant). It's difficult to explain "Yes, I'm at the top of my field except I don't have the same credentials as those other people who also claim they are at the top". The credentials are more convincing to a lot of people.

- It's easier to emigrate to various places. Having a Ph.D. could help you qualify for a O1 visa in the US, and other countries have special carve outs in their immigration codes for Ph.D.s. You don't get any special treatment for being ABD, no matter how much you insist it wasn't worth your time.

etc.

So having completed the Ph.D., it was by far the right choice for me.

Post reply on HN