The overproduction of PhDs

Too many docs, not enough jobs.

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2012_07_06/caredit.a1200075

 

I think the private school programs get this a lot more than the public school programs.

Emphasis should be on “student success and on preparing doctoral graduates for 21st century careers” rather than on maximizing students’ usefulness to professors and their grant-supported research.

 

I think Capella University produces the highest number of Ph.D's per year verses other academic institutions. I am wondering if the future Doctorate holders soon to be like J.D holders.

 

As long as people don't think that a college degree is sufficient to get a job, they are ok. Actual talent and experience are always a minimum qualification in the real world.

 

overproduction of PhDs

I tell my students, don't think about getting a PhD unless there's nothing else in life you want to do. Getting a PhD sucks. Finding an academic job sucks. Getting tenure sucks.

And unless you get into a highly competitive program don't bother because you'll never find a job (this rule does not apply to minorities, except Asians).

 

U.C. Berkeley is still #1, but Capella is not far behind.

 

This comment smells bad.

 

Funded doctorates are still a good deal

Every so often I'll read an article that complains that new PhDs from the best schools can't find work. Usually, it's in the humanities, but I guess the same trend exists in the sciences. It's not really sad, though, that a student got a free ride into his/her late 20s or so. The complaint that they can't find work, usually means they can't find the exact work they wanted like a professorship at a nice school. It's probably the first time they didn't succeed and it's a tough pill to swallow, but it's not tragic or unfair. There's still plenty of work and their degree certainly won't hold them back. They're very bright, after all, and can likely get certified in whatever they want. The truth is that if you're really the best of the best you can write an important book or do some other spectacular thing that will send you to the top. If you got a free ride and got a PhD in exchange for research or teaching survey courses you still did pretty good and are among the very fortunate. Feeling cheated in this case is like getting free guitar lessons and bitching that you didn't get a record deal...go play at the local bar and get a day job like the everyone else!

 

I love this statement. :haha: Good one.

 

Besides sounding racist, this is extremely bad advice. I suspect the poster is not a Ph.D.

There is plenty of room for Ph.D.s to practice outside of academia. In fact, most academic disciplines could use people who bridge the gap between academics and practice. And having a good theoretical foundation in one's field can really improve one's professional practice.

 

That makes sense. It would be a sad thing if a PhD had to choose be academia and nothing to be useful. If that were true it would basically mean that their subject was worthless off campus. If a PhD of anything happens to have common sense and a decent personality too he/she can be the MVP in any number of settings and organizations.

 

At one time, I hoped that DL might eventually create advanced educational opportunities for people who want to pursue their academic interests while holding down a day-job, without necessarily having to hang all of their hopes on landing a tenure-track position in academia. But the evolution of DL hasn't really worked out that way.

There's some truth to that. It's probably more true in the humanities and in the social-sciences than it is in the natural sciences.

 

I am Asian.....What's going on here? opworm:

 

bad advice?

a. I have a PhD. I was a tenured full professor at a medium sized state university for over 2o years.

b. For almost all fields, a PhD would not advance one's career, indeed I believe it would "over-qualify" one for most positions. In certain scientific or engineering careers certainly it would be an asset.

I do know PhDs who work outside of academia - - at the DMV for example.

c. The truth is not racist by definition. To be Black, Native American, or Latino is an asset in getting an academic job. Only a fool thinks otherwise. Being Asian is not an advantage; too many successful Asians.

 

A statement of fact about race is not racist. People that are offended by truth should not engage in discussion.

 

I did not say "racist" I said "racial" there is a difference. Please refrain from making racial statements, even if they are well intended. You are entitled to your opinion, but a public board such as this is not the place to voice such opinions. We already have someone who was offended by your statement and I hope you will use better discretion in the future.

You can consider this a warning.

 

Are you stating that no issue with racial elements can be discussed on this board? That's just pathetic. Now, I'm offended.

 

I'm not sure what "fact" you're referring to but perhaps you'd like to verify it with a few citations.

 

I'll try to be a little more clear. I believe that your statements about race were intended to be factual and nothing more; you were not intending to be racist. However, I want you to realize that people do not enjoy hearing their race being labeled, even if the labels are factual (I'm not saying they are or are not factual). In any case, it is offensive. When discussing the race of another, please be more careful.

I hope you will drop the subject now and let us move on.