I’m another GenX PhD and in the 1990s they were saying there would soon be a PhD shortage due to Boomer retirement but it still hasn’t happened. And yes even then it was 500 applicants for a TT job at Podunk U. Some friends decided they’d rather teach HS in Fairfax County than college in flyover country, I don’t really blame them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not--nor has it been--a secret. Those entering PhD programs in the humanities should understand that they are training to be a professional student and low paid teacher.

In many fields yes, but in others they can always work for the govt. especially poly sci

Don’t need more than an MA to do so, really.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even our DD who is doing a post grad work year at HYP school in chemistry says the PHD students have warned her off getting one. She doesn’t plan to go into academia if she gets one.

How will the US stay competitive with this type of system? HYP fully funds these types of PhDs!

+1. It is not just humanities PHDs who have trouble finding jobs in academia. Academia is basically run by the elderly now. Both of my parents are PhDs and professors at a university. They are 78 and 76 and have no plans to retire yet. Most of their colleagues are boomers or older. I"m a gen-xer with a PhD and am a SME at a think tank. I've never been interested in being a professor (I've done adjunct work like lots of folks in DC to pad my resume), but it is brutal out there. I think they should have mandatory retirement ages for professors (not just tenured ones, but any full-time faculty).

+1 I worked the big conference in my field in 2000, people 10 years ahead of me were complaining that the great academic retirement they had been promised hadn't happened yet. I was reading the article in the NYTimes today about adjuncts at the New School, which is illustrative of the fact that the academia we planned to join is gone and not coming back. I've read thousands of pages of correspondence between professors from the 50s and 60s seeking faculty candidates and they were all desperate for "any good man you know." at places like Dartmouth. Now a job paying 60k at Middle of Nowhere State U could get 800 applicants.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even our DD who is doing a post grad work year at HYP school in chemistry says the PHD students have warned her off getting one. She doesn’t plan to go into academia if she gets one.

How will the US stay competitive with this type of system? HYP fully funds these types of PhDs!

+1. It is not just humanities PHDs who have trouble finding jobs in academia. Academia is basically run by the elderly now. Both of my parents are PhDs and professors at a university. They are 78 and 76 and have no plans to retire yet. Most of their colleagues are boomers or older. I"m a gen-xer with a PhD and am a SME at a think tank. I've never been interested in being a professor (I've done adjunct work like lots of folks in DC to pad my resume), but it is brutal out there. I think they should have mandatory retirement ages for professors (not just tenured ones, but any full-time faculty).

Oh Girl, speak. I...won't out what I do but I'm de-olding my ...working groups.

I didn't go to a top law school, but if you're confessing to murdering elderly people here, I'd advise you not to!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even our DD who is doing a post grad work year at HYP school in chemistry says the PHD students have warned her off getting one. She doesn’t plan to go into academia if she gets one.

How will the US stay competitive with this type of system? HYP fully funds these types of PhDs!

+1. It is not just humanities PHDs who have trouble finding jobs in academia. Academia is basically run by the elderly now. Both of my parents are PhDs and professors at a university. They are 78 and 76 and have no plans to retire yet. Most of their colleagues are boomers or older. I"m a gen-xer with a PhD and am a SME at a think tank. I've never been interested in being a professor (I've done adjunct work like lots of folks in DC to pad my resume), but it is brutal out there. I think they should have mandatory retirement ages for professors (not just tenured ones, but any full-time faculty).

Oh Girl, speak. I...won't out what I do but I'm de-olding my ...working groups.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Political Science is a "social science" as a fair bit of it is Quant-heavy. And IU is a fairly well-respected program at a major research university with a lot of highly-regarded graduate programs. Regardless, what this guy wrote was told to me in the 90s on my first day of a top PhD program (Chicago). And it's been true throughout. The opportunity costs are legion. At the same time, a number of my colleagues who did a phd in a language-intensive humanities-focused school parachuted out and now are senior partners or managing directors at major consulting groups or funds. I suspect that is less a viable escape path these days. I tell me own undergrads (at a top school) to be really really cautious about pursuing a phd. Even a full ride (typical at most top programs) will mean years of opportunity costs, no 401k contributions, and an aspiration to enter a profession with a false, 40 years outdated representation of that the profession actually is like currently.

But you don't need a PhD to do this.

Duh. No one is saying you do. PP’s point with simply that they figured out to get out since their PhD the path was even worse, but PP added that that particular exit path might not be as viable now.

Anonymous wrote:Even our DD who is doing a post grad work year at HYP school in chemistry says the PHD students have warned her off getting one. She doesn’t plan to go into academia if she gets one.

How will the US stay competitive with this type of system? HYP fully funds these types of PhDs!

The pharmaceutical industry needs medicinal chemists badly. It's a great career with great benefits, lifestyle and salary. Yes, I'm a PhD working in the industry. Come play with me Johnnie.

Anonymous wrote:Political Science is a "social science" as a fair bit of it is Quant-heavy. And IU is a fairly well-respected program at a major research university with a lot of highly-regarded graduate programs. Regardless, what this guy wrote was told to me in the 90s on my first day of a top PhD program (Chicago). And it's been true throughout. The opportunity costs are legion. At the same time, a number of my colleagues who did a phd in a language-intensive humanities-focused school parachuted out and now are senior partners or managing directors at major consulting groups or funds. I suspect that is less a viable escape path these days. I tell me own undergrads (at a top school) to be really really cautious about pursuing a phd. Even a full ride (typical at most top programs) will mean years of opportunity costs, no 401k contributions, and an aspiration to enter a profession with a false, 40 years outdated representation of that the profession actually is like currently.

But you don't need a PhD to do this.

I did a Ph.D. in a humanities field at UofC. They didn't even need all of us to teach, but R1 professors need students to supervise. It's a total racket.

Political Science is a "social science" as a fair bit of it is Quant-heavy. And IU is a fairly well-respected program at a major research university with a lot of highly-regarded graduate programs. Regardless, what this guy wrote was told to me in the 90s on my first day of a top PhD program (Chicago). And it's been true throughout. The opportunity costs are legion. At the same time, a number of my colleagues who did a phd in a language-intensive humanities-focused school parachuted out and now are senior partners or managing directors at major consulting groups or funds. I suspect that is less a viable escape path these days. I tell me own undergrads (at a top school) to be really really cautious about pursuing a phd. Even a full ride (typical at most top programs) will mean years of opportunity costs, no 401k contributions, and an aspiration to enter a profession with a false, 40 years outdated representation of that the profession actually is like currently.

Anonymous wrote:A PhD in Chemistry seems way more marketable. Can't they work at some kids of science type company

Not all chemistry is commercially relevant

A PhD in Chemistry seems way more marketable. Can't they work at some kids of science type company

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not--nor has it been--a secret. Those entering PhD programs in the humanities should understand that they are training to be a professional student and low paid teacher.

In many fields yes, but in others they can always work for the govt. especially poly sci

+1 Hopefully they’re getting strong quant skills, are researching a policy-relevant field and are moving to DC afterwards. Otherwise, be prepared to move from one tiny, poorly-resourced LAC in a rural area to another and another…

Anonymous wrote:This is not--nor has it been--a secret. Those entering PhD programs in the humanities should understand that they are training to be a professional student and low paid teacher.

In many fields yes, but in others they can always work for the govt. especially poly sci

Anonymous wrote:Even our DD who is doing a post grad work year at HYP school in chemistry says the PHD students have warned her off getting one. She doesn’t plan to go into academia if she gets one.

How will the US stay competitive with this type of system? HYP fully funds these types of PhDs!

+1. It is not just humanities PHDs who have trouble finding jobs in academia. Academia is basically run by the elderly now. Both of my parents are PhDs and professors at a university. They are 78 and 76 and have no plans to retire yet. Most of their colleagues are boomers or older. I"m a gen-xer with a PhD and am a SME at a think tank. I've never been interested in being a professor (I've done adjunct work like lots of folks in DC to pad my resume), but it is brutal out there. I think they should have mandatory retirement ages for professors (not just tenured ones, but any full-time faculty).