Go to first unread
Back
to top
Is a PhD worth it
Watch this thread
abc:)
Badges:
22
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
I've been considering doing a PhD for a little while... my area is politics / IR.
The thing is, I do not want a career in academia, I just really enjoy studying, researching, going deep into topics, all of that. Ultimately though, it's not a field I want to be in for the rest of my life.
I'm wondering what the benefits are of a PhD for somebody ultimately looking for a career outside of academia? Does anyone have experience of this who can help please
The thing is, I do not want a career in academia, I just really enjoy studying, researching, going deep into topics, all of that. Ultimately though, it's not a field I want to be in for the rest of my life.
I'm wondering what the benefits are of a PhD for somebody ultimately looking for a career outside of academia? Does anyone have experience of this who can help please
0
reply
Need more help on going postgrad?
macromicro
Badges:
17
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report
#2
I think a PhD is the better choice for almost all graduates, regardless of their career ambitions (within reason). It seems quite probable that a PhD will at some point in the future be commonplace; it's simply the way academia has to evolve in order to keep up with rising intelligence and education levels. I'm sure many in the past thought it a ludicrous idea that undergraduate degrees would be commonplace and further education compulsory, yet here we are. There's no denying the fact that education sharpens the intellect and a PhD develops a foundation of advanced critical analysis, research skills, and rationality that can be used effectively in almost all graduate careers.
Fortunately for you, IR is also one of the few fields in which research skills are heavily preferred (as well as foreign languages). Many of the sought after graduate positions require a masters as a minimum so you will have some realistic exit opportunities outside of academia, which makes your decision now a little easier.
Fortunately for you, IR is also one of the few fields in which research skills are heavily preferred (as well as foreign languages). Many of the sought after graduate positions require a masters as a minimum so you will have some realistic exit opportunities outside of academia, which makes your decision now a little easier.
0
reply
Smack
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report
#3
(Original post by macromicro)
I think a PhD is the better choice for almost all graduates, regardless of their career ambitions (within reason). It seems quite probable that a PhD will at some point in the future be commonplace; it's simply the way academia has to evolve in order to keep up with rising intelligence and education levels. I'm sure many in the past thought it a ludicrous idea that undergraduate degrees would be commonplace and further education compulsory, yet here we are. There's no denying the fact that education sharpens the intellect and a PhD develops a foundation of advanced critical analysis, research skills, and rationality that can be used effectively in almost all graduate careers.
I think a PhD is the better choice for almost all graduates, regardless of their career ambitions (within reason). It seems quite probable that a PhD will at some point in the future be commonplace; it's simply the way academia has to evolve in order to keep up with rising intelligence and education levels. I'm sure many in the past thought it a ludicrous idea that undergraduate degrees would be commonplace and further education compulsory, yet here we are. There's no denying the fact that education sharpens the intellect and a PhD develops a foundation of advanced critical analysis, research skills, and rationality that can be used effectively in almost all graduate careers.
4
reply
Ritu_4_21
Badges:
0
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report
#4
If academia is not your first choice in life, then a Ph.D. can certainly wait. Its certainly not worth the pain, and you can certainly be better read and more financially independent even without a Ph.D.
I am doing a Ph.D. (almost towards the end), and I have serious doubts if I even want an academic career after this. My advise to everyone who is keen to begin is to really think, if it is necessary for your chosen field to pursue a Ph.D. right now, if not than do it only when it is necessary; or when you have enough peace of mind in general (so that loosing some to a Ph.D. won't have drastic overall implications)
If you want to stay in a Uni. Because you are not ready to take a real life plunge, than well Ph.D. won't help you mature either!
I am doing a Ph.D. (almost towards the end), and I have serious doubts if I even want an academic career after this. My advise to everyone who is keen to begin is to really think, if it is necessary for your chosen field to pursue a Ph.D. right now, if not than do it only when it is necessary; or when you have enough peace of mind in general (so that loosing some to a Ph.D. won't have drastic overall implications)
If you want to stay in a Uni. Because you are not ready to take a real life plunge, than well Ph.D. won't help you mature either!
0
reply
macromicro
Badges:
17
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report
#5
(Original post by Smack)
I'm not sure if you can extrapolate from what has happened regarding bachelors degrees to PhDs in the future. It was seen as socially useful and necessary for keeping up with the advancing economy to have more of the populace educated to undergraduate level, but can the same really be said of a PhD?
I'm not sure if you can extrapolate from what has happened regarding bachelors degrees to PhDs in the future. It was seen as socially useful and necessary for keeping up with the advancing economy to have more of the populace educated to undergraduate level, but can the same really be said of a PhD?
(Original post by Smack)
It's a massive commitment and I can't see it being advisable to undertake one unless one has ambitions for academia, or a career path that either requires it or prefers it. IR might be an example of such a field (it's not my field, and I trust that you know more about it than me), but I don't think that most of them are.
It's a massive commitment and I can't see it being advisable to undertake one unless one has ambitions for academia, or a career path that either requires it or prefers it. IR might be an example of such a field (it's not my field, and I trust that you know more about it than me), but I don't think that most of them are.
1
reply
Smack
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report
#6
(Original post by macromicro)
Yes, it can; we have already been experiencing a PhD boom in the UK, China and the US. It's the same skills only more advanced, which is in line with the continual advancement of humans (and therefore the economy) on average. Jobs with lower research and analytical skills will be continually transferred to machinery as education and intelligence levels rise. We've always seen this trend - just look at the automation of farming today. Masters now have government loans in the UK and PhDs will too in 2018 if May sticks with Osborne's plans. It's a constant progression that has never ceased - I see no reason why we wouldn't continue to extrapolate into the future.
I think it's a little short-sighted to think only of entry requirements. To determine the value of education we have to look at one's career as a whole, not simply the entry to that career. What's three years of experience relative to, say, a 40-year career? It seems unlikely it will make any significant impact to the effectiveness of one's competency in a job relative to completing a PhD for those three years which directly sharpens all the tools most (and increasingly) valued in employees today, i.e. analysis, research, problem-solving, subject knowledge, etc.
Yes, it can; we have already been experiencing a PhD boom in the UK, China and the US. It's the same skills only more advanced, which is in line with the continual advancement of humans (and therefore the economy) on average. Jobs with lower research and analytical skills will be continually transferred to machinery as education and intelligence levels rise. We've always seen this trend - just look at the automation of farming today. Masters now have government loans in the UK and PhDs will too in 2018 if May sticks with Osborne's plans. It's a constant progression that has never ceased - I see no reason why we wouldn't continue to extrapolate into the future.
I think it's a little short-sighted to think only of entry requirements. To determine the value of education we have to look at one's career as a whole, not simply the entry to that career. What's three years of experience relative to, say, a 40-year career? It seems unlikely it will make any significant impact to the effectiveness of one's competency in a job relative to completing a PhD for those three years which directly sharpens all the tools most (and increasingly) valued in employees today, i.e. analysis, research, problem-solving, subject knowledge, etc.
I'm not suggesting it's a waste to complete a qualification that does not lead to economic benefit, but at the same time I think it's irresponsible to suggest that it is the better choice for "almost all" graduates to complete such a qualification, rather than something that has to be carefully considered. Especially when such qualification is likely to be undertaken immediately or soon after undergraduate education, and hence will delay entry into the workforce until one's mid, or even late, twenties. A lot of people are in education to further their prospects, and would be far better equipped with an equivalent numbers of years of work experience (and would enjoy an equivalent number of years of income) than a PhD to achieve this.
It's also worth pointing out that universities do not have a monopoly on providing the skills you list, and further qualifications may not be the best bang for your buck in terms of demonstrating them. If anything, I am seeing a trend where non-academic routes, such as apprenticeships, are being increasingly taken up by employers as a means of recruiting new talent. I think there is a quite widespread view that the pendulum has swung too far in the way of increasing educational requirements, that this has led to many taking qualifications that function more as a tick in the box than a useful provider of knowledge and skills, and that it is clearly beneficial to (re)open other pathways.
1
reply
Barraco Barner
Badges:
1
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
im_back_kutta
Badges:
0
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report
#8
PhD doesn't always equal academia, like a poster pointed out, we are having education inflation. Where the degree is not worth the piece of paper it is written on. Bachelors degrees have become the norm now, people are shocked if you say you aren't going to university.
I think a higher qualfication is always worth having, it separates you from the 2:1 BSc guy that has become so common. You don't need to go into academia with a PhD, there are many consultancy roles or roles in banks that want a PhD. Plus you can always have academia as a backup, there would be post doc places you can consider.
I completed a first year PhD at a university in economics, before transferring to another PhD in finance (because I could get funding for this new one).
I think a higher qualfication is always worth having, it separates you from the 2:1 BSc guy that has become so common. You don't need to go into academia with a PhD, there are many consultancy roles or roles in banks that want a PhD. Plus you can always have academia as a backup, there would be post doc places you can consider.
I completed a first year PhD at a university in economics, before transferring to another PhD in finance (because I could get funding for this new one).
0
reply
im_back_kutta
Badges:
0
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report
#9
(Original post by Barraco Barner)
No. Only get phd if you want a job in research or academia.
No. Only get phd if you want a job in research or academia.
1
reply
macromicro
Badges:
17
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report
#10
(Original post by Smack)
I think what is key is: how many of these newly qualified PhDs get to utilise their PhDs? Academia can produce more PhDs (in fact one might even be cynical and suggest that academia benefits from increasing numbers of PhD students as it means more people to perform research at a lower cost), students can enrol on and complete PhDs because they love their subject, because they want to try for careers in academia, but none of that creates more PhD requiring jobs in the economy.
I think what is key is: how many of these newly qualified PhDs get to utilise their PhDs? Academia can produce more PhDs (in fact one might even be cynical and suggest that academia benefits from increasing numbers of PhD students as it means more people to perform research at a lower cost), students can enrol on and complete PhDs because they love their subject, because they want to try for careers in academia, but none of that creates more PhD requiring jobs in the economy.
(Original post by Smack)
I'm not suggesting it's a waste to complete a qualification that does not lead to economic benefit, but at the same time I think it's irresponsible to suggest that it is the better choice for "almost all" graduates to complete such a qualification, rather than something that has to be carefully considered. Especially when such qualification is likely to be undertaken immediately or soon after undergraduate education, and hence will delay entry into the workforce until one's mid, or even late, twenties. A lot of people are in education to further their prospects, and would be far better equipped with an equivalent numbers of years of work experience (and would enjoy an equivalent number of years of income) than a PhD to achieve this.
I'm not suggesting it's a waste to complete a qualification that does not lead to economic benefit, but at the same time I think it's irresponsible to suggest that it is the better choice for "almost all" graduates to complete such a qualification, rather than something that has to be carefully considered. Especially when such qualification is likely to be undertaken immediately or soon after undergraduate education, and hence will delay entry into the workforce until one's mid, or even late, twenties. A lot of people are in education to further their prospects, and would be far better equipped with an equivalent numbers of years of work experience (and would enjoy an equivalent number of years of income) than a PhD to achieve this.
(Original post by Smack)
IIt's also worth pointing out that universities do not have a monopoly on providing the skills you list, and further qualifications may not be the best bang for your buck in terms of demonstrating them. If anything, I am seeing a trend where non-academic routes, such as apprenticeships, are being increasingly taken up by employers as a means of recruiting new talent. I think there is a quite widespread view that the pendulum has swung too far in the way of increasing educational requirements, that this has led to many taking qualifications that function more as a tick in the box than a useful provider of knowledge and skills, and that it is clearly beneficial to (re)open other pathways.
IIt's also worth pointing out that universities do not have a monopoly on providing the skills you list, and further qualifications may not be the best bang for your buck in terms of demonstrating them. If anything, I am seeing a trend where non-academic routes, such as apprenticeships, are being increasingly taken up by employers as a means of recruiting new talent. I think there is a quite widespread view that the pendulum has swung too far in the way of increasing educational requirements, that this has led to many taking qualifications that function more as a tick in the box than a useful provider of knowledge and skills, and that it is clearly beneficial to (re)open other pathways.
0
reply
Reality Check
Badges:
22
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report
#11
(Original post by Smack)
I think what is key is: how many of these newly qualified PhDs get to utilise their PhDs? Academia can produce more PhDs (in fact one might even be cynical and suggest that academia benefits from increasing numbers of PhD students as it means more people to perform research at a lower cost), students can enrol on and complete PhDs because they love their subject, because they want to try for careers in academia, but none of that creates more PhD requiring jobs in the economy.
I'm not suggesting it's a waste to complete a qualification that does not lead to economic benefit, but at the same time I think it's irresponsible to suggest that it is the better choice for "almost all" graduates to complete such a qualification, rather than something that has to be carefully considered. Especially when such qualification is likely to be undertaken immediately or soon after undergraduate education, and hence will delay entry into the workforce until one's mid, or even late, twenties. A lot of people are in education to further their prospects, and would be far better equipped with an equivalent numbers of years of work experience (and would enjoy an equivalent number of years of income) than a PhD to achieve this.
It's also worth pointing out that universities do not have a monopoly on providing the skills you list, and further qualifications may not be the best bang for your buck in terms of demonstrating them. If anything, I am seeing a trend where non-academic routes, such as apprenticeships, are being increasingly taken up by employers as a means of recruiting new talent. I think there is a quite widespread view that the pendulum has swung too far in the way of increasing educational requirements, that this has led to many taking qualifications that function more as a tick in the box than a useful provider of knowledge and skills, and that it is clearly beneficial to (re)open other pathways.
I think what is key is: how many of these newly qualified PhDs get to utilise their PhDs? Academia can produce more PhDs (in fact one might even be cynical and suggest that academia benefits from increasing numbers of PhD students as it means more people to perform research at a lower cost), students can enrol on and complete PhDs because they love their subject, because they want to try for careers in academia, but none of that creates more PhD requiring jobs in the economy.
I'm not suggesting it's a waste to complete a qualification that does not lead to economic benefit, but at the same time I think it's irresponsible to suggest that it is the better choice for "almost all" graduates to complete such a qualification, rather than something that has to be carefully considered. Especially when such qualification is likely to be undertaken immediately or soon after undergraduate education, and hence will delay entry into the workforce until one's mid, or even late, twenties. A lot of people are in education to further their prospects, and would be far better equipped with an equivalent numbers of years of work experience (and would enjoy an equivalent number of years of income) than a PhD to achieve this.
It's also worth pointing out that universities do not have a monopoly on providing the skills you list, and further qualifications may not be the best bang for your buck in terms of demonstrating them. If anything, I am seeing a trend where non-academic routes, such as apprenticeships, are being increasingly taken up by employers as a means of recruiting new talent. I think there is a quite widespread view that the pendulum has swung too far in the way of increasing educational requirements, that this has led to many taking qualifications that function more as a tick in the box than a useful provider of knowledge and skills, and that it is clearly beneficial to (re)open other pathways.
Horses for courses.
2
reply
macromicro
Badges:
17
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report
#12
(Original post by Reality Check)
I entirely agree with this. I've seen a large number of people who were doing well in their undergrad and not sure of their next move be 'encouraged' into applying for a Ph.D only to get to their first year report and think 'what the hell am I doing?'. A Ph.D. is not necessary in a lot of fields, and I would suggest often doesn't help where practical experience could be more use than more bits of paper to collect.
I entirely agree with this. I've seen a large number of people who were doing well in their undergrad and not sure of their next move be 'encouraged' into applying for a Ph.D only to get to their first year report and think 'what the hell am I doing?'. A Ph.D. is not necessary in a lot of fields, and I would suggest often doesn't help where practical experience could be more use than more bits of paper to collect.
0
reply
Reality Check
Badges:
22
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report
#13
(Original post by macromicro)
Again, you have only considered entry requirements and haven't acknowledged that jobs are becoming increasingly less practical and more theoretical. The more practical a job is, the more prone to automation it is; the more theoretical a job is, the higher the intelligence and education it requires. This is a constant trend. Clearly education is not "bits of paper", an argument often used in lieu of any position of substance. We can reduce anything to absurdity and make it sound pointless: money is also just bits of paper; humans are just bits of atoms.
Again, you have only considered entry requirements and haven't acknowledged that jobs are becoming increasingly less practical and more theoretical. The more practical a job is, the more prone to automation it is; the more theoretical a job is, the higher the intelligence and education it requires. This is a constant trend. Clearly education is not "bits of paper", an argument often used in lieu of any position of substance. We can reduce anything to absurdity and make it sound pointless: money is also just bits of paper; humans are just bits of atoms.
Your point about automation is rather weak. For instance, accountancy, very much a 'theoretical' job which most people would consider needs 'higher intelligence and education' is one the most likely to be automated. Your nice dichotomy belies the truth.
Ph.Ds aren't for everyone, and in my opinion it would be frankly farcical for everyone with a 'theoretical' job to need one. Quite unnecessary. It's also quite unnecessary to be so quick of the mark in declaring an argument no 'position of substance' before you've heard or understood the argument - you should know that as a Ph.D. student!
0
reply
macromicro
Badges:
17
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
Report
#14
(Original post by Reality Check.)
PhD's were designed for Academia.
PhD's were designed for Academia.
0
reply
Reality Check
Badges:
22
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report
#15
(Original post by macromicro)
So were Bachelor's. Education and intelligence evolves.
So were Bachelor's. Education and intelligence evolves.
0
reply
macromicro
Badges:
17
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#16
Report
#16
(Original post by Reality Check)
Au contraire, the education system in this country very much consists of 'collecting bits of paper' for too many students. We all know what 'collecting bits of paper' means - it means being on a treadmill of qualifications without stopping to think whether these qualifications are personally worthwhile.
Au contraire, the education system in this country very much consists of 'collecting bits of paper' for too many students. We all know what 'collecting bits of paper' means - it means being on a treadmill of qualifications without stopping to think whether these qualifications are personally worthwhile.
(Original post by Reality Check)
Your point about automation is rather weak. For instance, accountancy, very much a 'theoretical' job which most people would consider needs 'higher intelligence and education' is one the most likely to be automated. Your nice dichotomy belies the truth.
Your point about automation is rather weak. For instance, accountancy, very much a 'theoretical' job which most people would consider needs 'higher intelligence and education' is one the most likely to be automated. Your nice dichotomy belies the truth.
(Original post by Reality Check)
Ph.Ds aren't for everyone, and in my opinion it would be frankly farcical for everyone with a 'theoretical' job to need one. Quite unnecessary. It's also quite unnecessary to be so quick of the mark in declaring an argument no 'position of substance' before you've heard or understood the argument - you should know that as a Ph.D. student!
Ph.Ds aren't for everyone, and in my opinion it would be frankly farcical for everyone with a 'theoretical' job to need one. Quite unnecessary. It's also quite unnecessary to be so quick of the mark in declaring an argument no 'position of substance' before you've heard or understood the argument - you should know that as a Ph.D. student!
0
reply
macromicro
Badges:
17
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#17
Report
#17
(Original post by im_back_kutta)
PhD doesn't always equal academia, like a poster pointed out, we are having education inflation. Where the degree is not worth the piece of paper it is written on. Bachelors degrees have become the norm now, people are shocked if you say you aren't going to university.
I think a higher qualfication is always worth having, it separates you from the 2:1 BSc guy that has become so common. You don't need to go into academia with a PhD, there are many consultancy roles or roles in banks that want a PhD. Plus you can always have academia as a backup, there would be post doc places you can consider.
I completed a first year PhD at a university in economics, before transferring to another PhD in finance (because I could get funding for this new one).
PhD doesn't always equal academia, like a poster pointed out, we are having education inflation. Where the degree is not worth the piece of paper it is written on. Bachelors degrees have become the norm now, people are shocked if you say you aren't going to university.
I think a higher qualfication is always worth having, it separates you from the 2:1 BSc guy that has become so common. You don't need to go into academia with a PhD, there are many consultancy roles or roles in banks that want a PhD. Plus you can always have academia as a backup, there would be post doc places you can consider.
I completed a first year PhD at a university in economics, before transferring to another PhD in finance (because I could get funding for this new one).
0
reply
Reality Check
Badges:
22
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#18
Report
#18
(Original post by macromicro)
Nothing more than cynical unfounded speculation. The majority of students understand the importance of education today and want a degree to that end. More to the point, whether they are doing it to get hold of the certificate as a pre-requisite is beside the point; what is important is that they must achieve that certificate and thus develop their intelligence necessarily.
No, "accountancy" is incredibly broad. The areas susceptible to automation are those focused on administration and input, i.e. not graduate roles.
You didn't give the argument - so I was no quicker off the mark than you were slow to deliver. I can only analyse what you write, surprisingly enough. Again, you haven't given an argument, you have only given an opposite opinion. Saying it is "farcical" with no reasons for justification is as good as offering nothing at all.
Nothing more than cynical unfounded speculation. The majority of students understand the importance of education today and want a degree to that end. More to the point, whether they are doing it to get hold of the certificate as a pre-requisite is beside the point; what is important is that they must achieve that certificate and thus develop their intelligence necessarily.
No, "accountancy" is incredibly broad. The areas susceptible to automation are those focused on administration and input, i.e. not graduate roles.
You didn't give the argument - so I was no quicker off the mark than you were slow to deliver. I can only analyse what you write, surprisingly enough. Again, you haven't given an argument, you have only given an opposite opinion. Saying it is "farcical" with no reasons for justification is as good as offering nothing at all.
1
reply
Trevish
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#19
macromicro
Badges:
17
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#20
Report
#20
(Original post by Reality Check)
Most of your posts seem obsessed with equating intelligence with Ph.Ds, and that everyone must do a Ph.D if their capable of so doing. Most of these posts seem to end with you taking someone else's post apart line by line and repeating your argument only for them not to post any further. Presumably because they see little point in so doing.
Most of your posts seem obsessed with equating intelligence with Ph.Ds, and that everyone must do a Ph.D if their capable of so doing. Most of these posts seem to end with you taking someone else's post apart line by line and repeating your argument only for them not to post any further. Presumably because they see little point in so doing.
Still no rebuttal.
0
reply
X
Quick Reply
