Mike Van Winkle asks: to Ph.D. or not to Ph.D.
(This question seems especially apropos after James of OTB pointed to this post at Crooked Timber.)
First off, partially in response to the Crooked Timber post, I find that I quite enjoy the academic life, although it is true that the financial remuneration isn’t what other professions might provide (of course, I do live in a low cost of living state). Still, I love teaching and writing, and clearly have an abiding and deep interest in politics. University campuses tend to be fairly pleasant places to be, and the schedule one has (even at an institution with a heavy teaching load) is quite flexible and beats your typical traditional work day.
Of course, I don’t know how assistant professors in say, SoCal manage to afford to live (the basic answer, I suppose, is have a two-income family---otherwise, I am guessing you end up living like a grad student). And Chris Bertram's description of the time it takes to get an academic job in the UK is close to that in the US, i.e., a 4 year degree followed by 4-6 (maybe more) of grad school, with likely a year or more at a temporary position before a tenure track job is acquired (if one is lucky enough to get one). So, it does require quite a commitment, and the entire process bears a certain resemblance to rolling dice.
In regards to Mike’s question (whether or not one ought to pursue a Ph.D.), I would answer as following:
If you want to teach at the university level: yes.
If you like books, study, teaching, and talking: yes.
If you are passionate about a particular subject: yes.
If you want to spend a lot of time on specific issues that excite you, but that you may be one of a handful who find them exciting: yes.
If you want to get rich: no.
If you have to live in a certain part of the country: no.
If you have to live in a certain kind of town (i.e., big city or whatever): no.
If you aren’t a self-starter: no.
If you require a great deal of structure in your life to excel at your work: no.
Also, some advice for those who might be considering graduate study:
1. Only go if you really want the degree. There is a high rate of attrition in grad school and only those who truly want it will finish.
2. Take a GRE review course before you take the test: TAships are normally affected by empirical measures such as GPA and GRE scores. Every point can count.
3. Remember: there are a lot less jobs out there than there are applicants. A lot of people who are worthy of an academic employment may never get one (I can think of several whom I personally know right off the top of my head).
4. Once in school, go to conferences: take those seminar papers and present them. And don’t be picky—go to local, regional and national conferences. Indeed, the local and regional conferences are typically cheaper to attend, and easier to get your proposal accepted.
5. Contact journals in your field and volunteer to get put on their list of book reviewers—it is easy way to get published and you get free books.
6. Pursue publications whilst in grad school.
7. Seek out teaching experience while you study.
8. Keep your mind and eye open to non-academic alternatives, should a tenure-track position not materialize once you graduate.
Posted by Steven Taylor at November 26, 2024 10:03 PM | TrackBackI'm going to disagree with you in a couple of areas:
2. Take a GRE review course before you take the test: TAships are normally affected by empirical measures such as GPA and GRE scores. Every point can count.
I didn't take a GRE prep course. My "prep" consisted of taking two "sample" tests on a CD in the back of a GRE prep book. I didn't even read the book. I made over 1900. 796 - Verbal, 740-something - analytic and 530-something - math. (this was before the essay portion of the test, in 2024). But I'm atypical. I told another guy to do the same and he bombed on his first attempt.
3. Remember: there are a lot less jobs out there than there are applicants. A lot of people who are worthy of an academic employment may never get one (I can think of several whom I personally know right off the top of my head).
This is true in more traditional fields like poli sci or history, but not so true in the field I'm studying - mass comm. There are far more jobs than there are qualified PhDs.
Otherwise, your advise is spot on. I'm particularly attracted to the finite nature of the semester. After 16 weeks, everything ends and you start over with something new. You always have the chance to fine tune your courses and retry them. This is quite different from the daily grind of the "real" world, where it never ends and doesn't really change unless you change jobs. The only analogous situation I can think of would be a sport, where the season ends at some point and you rest up for the next season.
Posted by: bryan at November 26, 2024 10:42 PMBut what about someone who doesn't want to teach and dreads dealing with university buracracy, yet is deeply interested in ideas and wants to write about them?
Posted by: Sean Hackbarth at November 26, 2024 11:00 PMI wonder, Steven, if multiple MS degrees would be better. I'm talking at least in terms of the general sciences: Chemistry and Biology. Not all of us are lab monkeys, I suppose.
It sure does seem better than putting all one's eggs in his basket. Getting a PhD in something that'd be totally out of demand that you'd have to move from one place to another just to find an employer seems like an awfully big hassle. I suppose that is the reason behind the "if you have to" statements you have in there.
Academic scientists tend to be starving artists too.
Posted by: OF Jay at November 27, 2024 03:11 AMOF Jay,
I suppose it would depend one's field. In the social sciences multiple masters aren't all that useful. Also it would depend on whether one wants to teach or do something else.
Posted by: Steven at November 27, 2024 08:55 AM