Do people who do PhDs realize that they aren’t worth the time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baffles the mind that someone thinks a terminal degree in any field won't pay more than stopping along the way. A phD in Psychology is not going to have a bachelors in computer science or vice versa and a phD in psychology always makes more money than a bachelors in Psychology.

You can’t be serious. Getting a master’s or PhD in computer science isn’t going to earn someone anything more than a bachelor’s in that field would.

Most Masters programs in engineering/CS are funded (TA/RA/in-state tuition/waiver, etc.) and takes an extra year. Good deal in the grand scheme of things. Once you get into PhD, it is funded and you are not in it for the money (although CS PhDs get paid good money to teach). A programmer (often the job you get after a BS) is a low-end job, akin to a plumber. After 10 years you are still a plumber, albeit a senior one and when crap like the current downturn or a more serious one hits, you may be out of a job. With a PhD in a CS domain, you are teaching and researching a CS domain., much higher level job with a very low risk of job loss after tenure. Sure, the CS person with only a bachelor's degree can make more money in the short to medium term.. until they get laid off after 45-50 years. Good luck after that. The PhD can continue their research teaching well into their 80s if they choose to, live in a safe college town, lead a low-stress life, travel the world and generally have a much higher QOL that one with just a BS.

Is this correct? I assumed so, but a friend’s son has applied for an electrical engineering masters and will not be funded. Deciding between UCLA and UW.

Your friend's son should be applying for PhD programs, not MS programs. The PhD programs are funded, but if you only want an MS or MsE, you can leave with that degree, which will be completely funded.

Yes, that's why I was questioning the PP, I know the dropping out of PhD route is funded, and don't know why he didn't pursue that. He specifically applied to masters programs. He has done research for the past year, completed undergrad in '22. Perfect grades and scores. Also don't know why he didn't at least apply to jobs, has some notion the work he wants requires a masters at minimum, but being office broken might be the bigger hurdle.

[Anonymous]

My parents told me I should’ve either stopped at high school or gone to a 2 year trade school. They see postsecondary education that “uses your noggin” as completely pointless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Is this correct? I assumed so, but a friend’s son has applied for an electrical engineering masters and will not be funded. Deciding between UCLA and UW.

If he only applied for a masters, it's usually not funded unless he can secure a TA-ship or RA-ship. That's not uncommon.

However, if he were accepted into a funded PhD program that awards a masters along the way, yes that's a way to get a "free" masters. Source: my son who is a 3r year PhD candidate and earned a masters in MechEng at no cost to him during his first two years. The tuition cost for that masters would have been ~$150,000, but was all covered by the universtity. On top of that he's paid about $50K/year for his PhD stipend. A lot of people forget to include the value of that free tuition.

[Anonymous]

^^ PP correction- tuition for those two years ~ $120,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, that's why I was questioning the PP, I know the dropping out of PhD route is funded, and don't know why he didn't pursue that. He specifically applied to masters programs. He has done research for the past year, completed undergrad in '22. Perfect grades and scores. Also don't know why he didn't at least apply to jobs, has some notion the work he wants requires a masters at minimum, but being office broken might be the bigger hurdle.

He would have needed to have substantive research as an undergrad prior [b]to applying for a PhD to be accepted into a funded program straight out of undergrad. Meaning he would've needed to have that under his belt by the end of his junior year. He'd be competing with others who've already been published. While there are some exceptions, this is true for most STEM PhDs.

From your description, it sounds like he started research over this past year. While that would prepare him for a future PhD application, he may not have had enough meaningful research as an undergrad to apply. Top grades and scores will not get you into a PhD program. Those are nice but meaningful research and recommendations from professors that can attest to your research skills are essential to get an offer in STEM fields. It might be that your friend's son is working on that part now---he probably knew all this when he applied and was wise to pursue the masters instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

A PhD is required in my field of research, OP.
You cannot be a Principal Investigator at NIH or any academic institution without one.

Surely you support medical research? The people who study cancer pathways, diabetes and heart disease, Alzheimer’s, etc?

My husband has an MD and a PhD. He uses both for his work.

Research is a labor of love. The goal is not wealth.

Think about that next time you go to the doctor, and benefit from modern medicine and treatments. Think about the combined millions of hours from millions of PhD holders around the world whose efforts have led to bring you actual physical relief.

Similarly, how about the physical science and device engineering PhDs that came up with all the components of the iPhone? Don’t get me wrong, Apple engineers, some with but many without PhDs put together and marketed the product, but all the base science was developed by academic labs (funded by the federal govt).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My reasons were pure. The search of knowledge for its own sake. How is that a waste of time?

Yes, it’s this, for some of us. I have a social sciences PhD because I wanted to study more and understand better how things work in my topic of study. I did not go into it as a career plan. I agree that if my purpose were to make as much money in my 20s as possible, this was not the way. I have worked outside academia in positions that didn’t require a phd, but having it usually helped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s impossible to get into funded PhD programs as an American undergrad.

Wrong. It is easier to get into a funded PhD program as an American undergrad. The professors who fund these students sometimes have federal grants what will only pay for American citizens. It is harder to be an international student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, that's why I was questioning the PP, I know the dropping out of PhD route is funded, and don't know why he didn't pursue that. He specifically applied to masters programs. He has done research for the past year, completed undergrad in '22. Perfect grades and scores. Also don't know why he didn't at least apply to jobs, has some notion the work he wants requires a masters at minimum, but being office broken might be the bigger hurdle.

He would have needed to have substantive research as an undergrad prior [b]to applying for a PhD to be accepted into a funded program straight out of undergrad. Meaning he would've needed to have that under his belt by the end of his junior year. He'd be competing with others who've already been published. While there are some exceptions, this is true for most STEM PhDs.

From your description, it sounds like he started research over this past year. While that would prepare him for a future PhD application, he may not have had enough meaningful research as an undergrad to apply. Top grades and scores will not get you into a PhD program. Those are nice but meaningful research and recommendations from professors that can attest to your research skills are essential to get an offer in STEM fields. It might be that your friend's son is working on that part now---he probably knew all this when he applied and was wise to pursue the masters instead.

He knew he didn’t want a phd and he knew he didn’t want to take a job. But I think he should have at least applied to phd programs knowing he could get a no cost masters that way. On the other hand another friend’s kid turned down funding at Hopkins and paid for a masters at Stanford which worked out fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s impossible to get into funded PhD programs as an American undergrad.

Tell that to all the American undergrads about to graduate and start funded PhD programs in the fall? Anyone can disprove this by looking at the graduate students listed online for any major university's departments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t realize it. My hippy-era socialist PhD parents raised me not to think about money. I don’t think they even understood the concept of opportunity cost, or if they did, would have been ideologically against the entire premise.

I regret my phd now. I wish I’d trained as a nurse or teacher. I’ve become pretty cynical about the quality and influence of most psychological and social science research, which is my training.

Are you a clinical psychologist?

BTW I feel really bad for you. Boomers really sold their kids a lie with the whole “follow your passion” and “money doesn’t matter” BS. 99% of kids would be better off working in their twenties than in a PhD program. And for something like clinical psychology, you make even less money than entry-level software engineers (probably similar to a mid-career teacher or nurse) and have to slave away for all of your 20s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s impossible to get into funded PhD programs as an American undergrad.

This is absolutely false. Laughably so.

No it isn’t. They fill them with international students from developing countries who think making $30k/year for 6 years is the cat’s pajamas. Meanwhile, tons of American undergrads applying to STEM PhDs get shut out every year.

"They" don't fill them. It's a mix. Tons do get shut out, but that is the nature of competitive programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dunno I started my assistant professor job at 27 making $210k and now make 300k, tenured and almost impossible to fire, and i work about 10 hours per week. But you do you OP

Yeah and for every "you" there are hundreds of PhDs who did not get any kind of professor job. You must have been on hiring committees, and surely you know how bad it really is.

Plus it sounds like your PhD was in STEM and if you'd taken the same BS / MS into industry you'd be making even more. But you did you.

Isn't that the case with every domain? If you study English, you end up as a copywriter/proposal writer and live at the bottom of the totem pole. if you keep studying and get a PhD in English, you may not get a teaching job but that writing was on the wall the day you signed up to study English in undergrad, wasn't it?

With other domains (e.g. CS), it's a QOL decision. Grind it out in until 30, you are set for life (lower pay, yes, but not a code-monkey), job security, strong retirement benefits, respect in society, etc. At 40, you could be making $1M at google (very, very few get there) or be a full prof. at a university advising the google department leads on the future of technology making $500K. If you get lucky with a couple of patents, you could become a multi-millionaire too..

You can't say totem pole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My nephew with a PhD is a cancer researcher.

So that was a bad move?

Depraved DCUM would say yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t realize it. My hippy-era socialist PhD parents raised me not to think about money. I don’t think they even understood the concept of opportunity cost, or if they did, would have been ideologically against the entire premise.

I regret my phd now. I wish I’d trained as a nurse or teacher. I’ve become pretty cynical about the quality and influence of most psychological and social science research, which is my training.

Are you a clinical psychologist?

BTW I feel really bad for you. Boomers really sold their kids a lie with the whole “follow your passion” and “money doesn’t matter” BS. 99% of kids would be better off working in their twenties than in a PhD program. And for something like clinical psychology, you make even less money than entry-level software engineers (probably similar to a mid-career teacher or nurse) and have to slave away for all of your 20s.

You can't say slave away.