PhD without scholarship...Is it possible?

Original post by Ghost6

I would only do it to attend a top program though, because PhD degrees are expensive and academics simply don't make that much money.

I guess it depends on a definition of "much money", but starting salary of a full professor is around 5000 US dollars a month, or 60 000 annual. Average salary is around 10 000 dollars a month, or 120 000 annual. In some fields (Economics, Law) they make much more than that, sometimes two-three times more. Our law professor makes 150 000 annual, and this is in a Public university, private schools pay more.If you tenured your job is virtually guaranteed and you can not be fired.

Also given that they only work around 6-8 hours a week (what my professor told me, anyway) I'd say it is not too bad :wink:

Reply 6

*Corinna*

16

Original post by Ghost6

It is possible to work part-time during your PhD. Possibly the best such part-time job is being an RA, as you are paid to your on your dissertation, but TA work is the most common funding source and it is something good to have on your CV. Not all universities/visa categories allow you to work off-campus while completing your studies.

Never pay for graduate studies out of your own pocket. If you are absolutely set on doing a PhD and got an offer from a really, really good university/department, you may want to take out a loan. I would only do it to attend a top program though, because PhD degrees are expensive and academics simply don't make that much money. Also, generally speaking top candidates are able to attract funding; to put it bluntly not being awarded funding often implicitly means you shouldn't be doing a PhD.

This is not true. I am sick and tired of constantly arguing with you about this thing! (and I'm not the only one who does so) You should not be so quick to judge and dishearten people. There are a million things that matter in who gets the funding and ability is NOT the main one. Research proposal is probably the most important one and for this you HAVE to be lucky to happen to propose something that the people in the committee find interesting. Another thing is the FACT that funding is RIDICULOUSLY scarce!! My department at Oxford had to cut it's scholarships from 4 to 2!! Are you implying that the 2 people who, when they applied in 2011, where ranked 3rd and 4th were fine but the people applying in 2012 ranked 3rd and 4th (and because of the cuts received no money) are not "suitable"????

Original post by janjanmmm

I guess it depends on a definition of "much money", but starting salary of a full professor is around 5000 US dollars a month, or 60 000 annual. Average salary is around 10 000 dollars a month, or 120 000 annual. In some fields (Economics, Law) they make much more than that, sometimes two-three times more. Our law professor makes 150 000 annual, and this is in a Public university, private schools pay more.If you tenured your job is virtually guaranteed and you can not be fired.

Also given that they only work around 6-8 hours a week (what my professor told me, anyway) I'd say it is not too bad :wink:

lol doesn't your professor also have to do research, mark essays, supervise students etc etc? My professors work pretty much all day. It is generally accepted that working in academia is ridiculously demanding because you have to balance teaching+supervising+research+conferences etc etc.

Also, the money you are mentioning is in the US, it is completely different in the UK.

Reply 7

Original post by *Corinna*

lol doesn't your professor also have to do research, mark essays, supervise students etc etc? My professors work pretty much all day. It is generally accepted that working in academia is ridiculously demanding because you have to balance teaching+supervising+research+conferences etc etc.

Also, the money you are mentioning is in the US, it is completely different in the UK.

This is what my professor told me, lol, I guess he does not count research?

As for money, - I read article very recently on the subject and it had comparative salaries for professors around the world, the difference between UK and US was very small, actually.
The most underpaid are professors in Russia, with something like 500 dollars a month to begin with.

Here is the statistics:

UK 4,077 (to begin) 5,943 (average) 8,369 (top)
US 4,950 (to begin) 6,054 (average) 7,358 (top)

That methodology is based on the "purchasing power parity index" (PPP), in which salaries reflect what it takes to purchase similar goods and services in different countries

Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/03/22/new-study-analyzes-how-faculty-pay-compares-worldwide#ixzz1w0ijkCyh
Inside Higher Ed

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 8

Ghost6

7

Original post by janjanmmm

I guess it depends on a definition of "much money", but starting salary of a full professor is around 5000 US dollars a month, or 60 000 annual. Average salary is around 10 000 dollars a month, or 120 000 annual. In some fields (Economics, Law) they make much more than that, sometimes two-three times more. Our law professor makes 150 000 annual, and this is in a Public university, private schools pay more.If you tenured your job is virtually guaranteed and you can not be fired.

Also given that they only work around 6-8 hours a week (what my professor told me, anyway) I'd say it is not too bad :wink:

Yes, tenured professors do make six figures, but this only comes after 5 years of graduate school, a couple of additional years in post-docs and some time as an assistant professor first. A brilliant academic will usually not be a full professor before he is 40 at least. Also, only a handful superstars at the very top private universities make $200,000+. Many people in their late twenties make this much in the financial industry with only a B.S. and some clever or lucky career moves.

Also, most PhD graduates, even from the top programs, end up teaching at much lower institutions than the ones they graduated from. Professors do work less, and usually on things they prefer, compared to other white-collar professionals, but it is fair to say that they make considerably less. On the other hand they have, to my knowledge, considerably more free time and longer vacations, including sabbaticals.

Reply 9

Ghost6

7

Original post by *Corinna*

This is not true. I am sick and tired of constantly arguing with you about this thing! (and I'm not the only one who does so) You should not be so quick to judge and dishearten people. There are a million things that matter in who gets the funding and ability is NOT the main one. Research proposal is probably the most important one and for this you HAVE to be lucky to happen to propose something that the people in the committee find interesting. Another thing is the FACT that funding is RIDICULOUSLY scarce!! My department at Oxford had to cut it's scholarships from 4 to 2!! Are you implying that the 2 people who, when they applied in 2011, where ranked 3rd and 4th were fine but the people applying in 2012 ranked 3rd and 4th (and because of the cuts received no money) are not "suitable"????

Look, "good enough" will always be relative to your competition. The very best candidates, no matter which criteria are used, will get the funding and the others won't. My advice for the latter is very simple: forget the PhD. The academic job market is saturated and it is unreasonable to take out a £100,000+ loan for a piece of paper which may turn out to be worthless if you cannot land an academic job.

Reply 10

*Corinna*

16

Original post by Ghost6

Look, "good enough" will always be relative to your competition. The very best candidates, no matter which criteria are used, will get the funding and the others won't. My advice for the latter is very simple: forget the PhD. The academic job market is saturated and it is unreasonable to take out a £100,000+ loan for a piece of paper which may turn out to be worthless if you cannot land an academic job.

there is a BIG difference between saying that you believe it is not worth paying for a PhD simply because it is very expensive and does not even guarantee an academic position and saying that if you don't get funding you are not worthy of doing a PhD (in terms of abilities). The reason I disagree with you and you always infuriate me and I wish I had more negs to give you is because you claim that not getting funding means you should not be doing a PhD, that you aren't good enough for it. This is what I disagree with. There are many exceptional candidates who, given the opportunity, would potentially shine and I simply do not accept that funding always goes to the best candidate because what defines the best candidate anyway?? In theory it should be mental and academic abilities, but in practice it could be anything from familiarity with the department to being lucky with your research proposal and sometimes even being lucky enough to come from a country that happens to have a specific scholarship for its graduates.
Now, if someone should be doing a PhD without funding this is up to them to judge. I personally would not do it, simply because I would not be able to afford it, but if someone is aware of the difficulties of going into an academic career and is financially able to pursue a PhD then I think they should. And OK, maybe a PhD from Wolverhampton is not particularly prestigious, but there are many perfectly decent universities between that and Oxford that are conducting valuable research and should not be dismissed just because they don't have the brand name. After all, what matters for a PhD is the supervisor.

Reply 11

Ancathdubh

OP

2

Original post by Ghost6

It is possible to work part-time during your PhD. Possibly the best such part-time job is being an RA, as you are paid to your on your dissertation, but TA work is the most common funding source and it is something good to have on your CV. Not all universities/visa categories allow you to work off-campus while completing your studies.

Never pay for graduate studies out of your own pocket. If you are absolutely set on doing a PhD and got an offer from a really, really good university/department, you may want to take out a loan. I would only do it to attend a top program though, because PhD degrees are expensive and academics simply don't make that much money. Also, generally speaking top candidates are able to attract funding; to put it bluntly not being awarded funding often implicitly means you shouldn't be doing a PhD.

Thanks all for your comments... :smile:

Btw I want to clarify few things about my question. I am EU citizen so i have no restriction to work in UK.
I am a PhD student (funded) in the USA, but I am academically not satisfied, so I have now an offer from a UK University, which I love, but which gives me no money :frown:

I can partially agree with you (Ghost). This is what I have noticed. There is a big difference if we are talking about USA or UK.
In USA it is the norm I would say to get funds from the school for a PhD, in the UK it is the opposite. I am a PhD student in the USA and I am funded, I would not do a PhD here without funding (for many reasons...) and would not advice anyone to do one. I never met any PhD student in the USA who was not financially supported by their school, therefore I agree with you (if we talk about USA).
For UK it's a different story. TAship and GAship and such are widely available in the USA, they are very less common in the UK. As a graduate student in the USA I have always had one. While I did not find any TAship advertised in the school I want to go in UK.
The school I want to attend in UK is SOAS (for those who were wondering about how prestigious is the school...), and so far I do not know about funding but current students told me that chances to get one are close to zero (I think they only give one for each department or something).
Corinna, thank you for your comments... :smile:

Reply 12

oxford doesnt even have to pay teachers that much. the min requirement to teach at oxxford is you have a dphi from oxford or a pphd from cambridge. hell with diversity because hey lets face it its just a buzz-word. i am a theory guy always chasing the wind. my head must be in the clouds for pushing the idea of diversity.

Original post by *Corinna*

lol doesn't your professor also have to do research, mark essays, supervise students etc etc? My professors work pretty much all day. It is generally accepted that working in academia is ridiculously demanding because you have to balance teaching+supervising+research+conferences etc etc.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 13

cant agree more on this. econ101, incentives. business school phds (uk) may be worth paying for it.

gennerally speaking, dont do a phd unless you get a full studentship (fees waived and the basic living cost is provided by the university) or your family can suport you 100% finanncially. no debt upon graduationn. before you can borrrow more money at a higherrate to buy a house, you haveee to return the mooooney you brrowed to fund your phd and it can be as much as £100k.

wouldnt say "never pay for graduate studies out of your own pocket." masters degrees in business offer a quick returrn on investment.

Original post by Ghost6

Never pay for graduate studies out of your own pocket. If you are absolutely set on doing a PhD and got an offer from a really, really good university/department, you may want to take out a loan. I would only do it to attend a top program though, because PhD degrees are expensive and academics simply don't make that much money. Also, generally speaking top candidates are able to attract funding; to put it bluntly not being awarded funding often implicitly means you shouldn't be doing a PhD.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 14

this is like saying that the financial market is innefficient and try to explain that by saying that managers who did well were simply lucky. here is the thing, the market is a lot more efficient than you think it is, but its not as efficient as you want it to be. why are there scholarships for students from those countries and why are there scholarships for some projects but not for others? this world isnnt as crazy or irrational as you think it is or you want it to be.

Original post by *Corinna*

there is a BIG difference between saying that you believe it is not worth paying for a PhD simply because it is very expensive and does not even guarantee an academic position and saying that if you don't get funding you are not worthy of doing a PhD (in terms of abilities). The reason I disagree with you and you always infuriate me and I wish I had more negs to give you is because you claim that not getting funding means you should not be doing a PhD, that you aren't good enough for it. This is what I disagree with. There are many exceptional candidates who, given the opportunity, would potentially shine and I simply do not accept that funding always goes to the best candidate because what defines the best candidate anyway?? In theory it should be mental and academic abilities, but in practice it could be anything from familiarity with the department to being lucky with your research proposal and sometimes even being lucky enough to come from a country that happens to have a specific scholarship for its graduates.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 15

Original post by rippedbanana

cant agree more on this. econ101, incentives. business school phds (uk) may be worth paying for it.

generally speaking, dont do a phd unless you get a full studentship (fees waived and the basic living cost is provided by the university) or yoour family can supppport you 100% finanncially. no debt upon graduation. before you can borrow more money at a higher rate to buy a house, you have to return the money you borrowed to fund your phd and it can be as much as £100k.

wouldnt say "never pay for graduate studies out of your own pocket." masters degrees in business offer a quick return on investment.

I don't know what you mean by "Econ 101", but I graduated in Economics Magna Cum Laude, so I think I know a thing or two about Economics :smile:

It always amazes me that people area readily spill out 500 000 or a million to buy a house, but are getting terrified at the thought of borrowing 200 000 to fund education. Your house will rot and fall apart, it will lose value due to depreciation even if market does not go down (as we all know it did). I personally know people here in the US who lost 300 000 - 400 000 in equity on the houses they bought. I am not aware of any living being who lost his PhD.

Education is something that will stay with you for the rest of your life. Student loans are restricted in terms of period (in the US they expire after 25 years, in the UK after 30) and how much they can charge you per month (in the US they can not charge you more than 15% of the sum above 20 000 dollars a year, similar precess in UK). So it really is nothing more than the tax you are paying, and monthly payments are not gonna change whether you borrow 10 000 or a million. But you will have an amazing honor of doing what you love for living, of enjoying your work, and of not being stressed and shoved around like a dog by the bosses, as those finance students mentioned above are.

The way I look at it - to hell with the house, I will live in a shack if I have to, but I will do what I love and what I feel passionate about. And, amazing thing, if you do that - the money and the houses will come!

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 16

Original post by janjanmmm

The way I look at it - to hell with the house, I will live in a shack if I have to, but I will do what I love and what I feel passionate about. And, amazing thing, if you do that - the money and the houses will come!

you cant get laid if you live in a shack. i am not buying the "if you build it they will come" thing. i am a glenn ross kinda guy. not a fan of glenn ross movie though.

surrely people that innvest that much money in edducation know exactly how they make return on it. even mbas at ivvy schools arennt worth that much these days. who doesnt have a mba or something like that?

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 17

anoldbaby

Original post by Ancathdubh

Thanks all for your comments... :smile:

Btw I want to clarify few things about my question. I am EU citizen so i have no restriction to work in UK.
I am a PhD student (funded) in the USA, but I am academically not satisfied, so I have now an offer from a UK University, which I love, but which gives me no money :frown:

I can partially agree with you (Ghost). This is what I have noticed. There is a big difference if we are talking about USA or UK.
In USA it is the norm I would say to get funds from the school for a PhD, in the UK it is the opposite. I am a PhD student in the USA and I am funded, I would not do a PhD here without funding (for many reasons...) and would not advice anyone to do one. I never met any PhD student in the USA who was not financially supported by their school, therefore I agree with you (if we talk about USA).
For UK it's a different story. TAship and GAship and such are widely available in the USA, they are very less common in the UK. As a graduate student in the USA I have always had one. While I did not find any TAship advertised in the school I want to go in UK.
The school I want to attend in UK is SOAS (for those who were wondering about how prestigious is the school...), and so far I do not know about funding but current students told me that chances to get one are close to zero (I think they only give one for each department or something).
Corinna, thank you for your comments... :smile:

I am not sure what do you mean by academically not satisfied? If this is something about not getting along with your supervisor then maybe you can find someone else instead of coming to the uk?

I am not sure how viable is this... but you can exist with a MPhil after a year in theory if you don't get funding and maybe use that to support your application for dphil with funding some where else.... but that's only if you really really really want.... its hard to say without knowing whats happening but I would stay where I am if I were you...

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 18