<p>I've thought that on average it usually takes 5 years for students to get a PhD with a Masters along the way, if he/she starts working on a PhD straight off a bachelors degree and doesn't leave to a different university after the MS degree. How about for students who come to a new university to work on a PhD degree with a Masters degree from a different university? Is it 3 more years (because you had that 2 year of coursework) or is it still 5 more years? I want some kind of average answer...and also I'm an engineering student just in case the answer is very different for a different field...</p>
<p>from what I understanding it depends on the school and PhD program you are entering and how many credits, from your masters degree, they will allow to count toward your specified PhD program.</p>
<p>So, it’s doubtful you will be able to get 1 specific answer or even an average.</p>
<p>It’s best to contact the school of interest, with your transcripts and ask them.</p>
<p>Not to mention, the “end” of your PhD would be after successfully defending or submitting your dissertation - it all comes down to your research output and quality. If you happen to be the luckiest scientist alive and all your experiments work out perfectly and your data is groundbreaking, you can get out within ~2-3 years. More realistically? Anywhere up to 5 years after you finish your masters (maybe more!)</p>
<p>Many schools won’t accept a MS degree from a different program, so you’ll be required to retake a number of classes. Sometimes you can work out partial credit, but it all depends. Also, in my experience, 5 years is on the fast side. I think the average at my school is something like 5.7 years to finish your degree.</p>
<p>It really depends on the program, but it’s unlikely that it will take 3 years from an MS. Even most people who hold an MS take 4-5 years to finish within the sciences. Most programs will give you some advanced credit, but not all, and most likely you’ll still be required to take at least 30 credits of coursework.</p>
<p>Plus remember that PhD programs are variable and it really depends on how long it takes for you to do everything. Classes are usually pretty straightforward, but some people have to take comps twice, or take longer to study for them, take 6 months off after they are over, get married, have children, etc.</p>
<p>Most programs have statistics of how long and what % of PhD’s accepted actually finishes. I been looking at the MS–>PhD since I’ll have an MS when I start. Most places will NOT give you a full two years, but I have yet to see anywhere not giving you a decent amount of credit for your work. My understanding talking to faculty is expect the typical 5-6 years to be 4-5. Plus you have research expierence with an MS so you can be “up and running” quicker than your cohorts. </p>
<p>One thing faculty have told me is make sure you indicate you DO NOT expect to finish within 2-3 years. Why would someone invest tons of money, time, energy, effort getting you into their lab, up to speed, pulling a committee together etc if you expect to leave ‘quickly’ in PhD terms. Even if you somehow pull it off, don’t show that card up front, I’m not saying to lie… just indicate you are willing if need be to spend 4-5 years there.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t say most. A lot of programs don’t keep those statistics because either the professors are oblivious or they don’t want to know. My program knew average time to degree (7 years - yikes) but not attrition rates.</p>
<p>Engineering tends to be on the lower side for Ph.D’s – around 5 years – and is somewhat irrespective of whether you come in with a masters because when you graduate is based on your advisor’s opinion, which is not necessarily correlated with how much work you have done. That said, there are many more people who take longer than 5 years than there are that take less.</p>
<p>My experience contradicts a few opinons on here. I did my masters at one institution and knew I would have it in hand when applying to PhD programs. Some said they would honor it entirely, some would honor individual courses, others would not honor it at all. Time to complete can vary based on whether or not you have a masters or not, simply because the rules may place milestones differently - someone starting at the masters level at my institution can take the quals and start research on their thesis easily a year ahead of those who do the same amount of work but (as I did) spread it across two schools.</p>
<p>The total time to completion can also vary tremendously by discipline and lab group. I know that the humanities are notoriously slow to award the degree, while engineering is usually the fastest. My first engineering advisor here thought that (already having my masters) 3 years was possible but difficult, my second and current advisor has had students do it in 3 years before - both are experienced and highly regarded, they just have different needs and desires. FWIW, I will take at least 5 years, largely due to health issues (which also spurred the advisor change), but I have seen no desire here to keep people longer than 5-6 years, shorter when possible - the desire to put more researchers in other institutions seems to outweigh the need for skilled RA’s and TA’s.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This reminds me that you can further distinguish between theoretical/computational and experimental Ph.D’s. The former two tend to graduate more quickly (a year or so), all else equal because an experimental Ph.D often involves setting up and qualifying equipment/processes. I have heard of theoretical guys getting out in 3-4 without a masters, but I do not know an experimentalist who has gotten out before 4.5</p>
<p>
While I do agree in general, in my case the situation is reversed. My first advisor was 100% a theoreticist, but still expected a faster graduation time than experimentalists at the other schools where I was admitted. Conversely, my current advisor (the one who graduates PhD’s faster) is an experimentalist! </p>
<p>I should note that all of the 3 year graduates or prospects mentioned by said advisor have been older students with some experience in industry, who had a significant drive to graduate and move on, myself included. I forgot to mention this earlier, and it is a substantial caveat. As a married man with kids and a career on hold I have more incentive to finish up quickly than I suspect most graduate students do.</p>
<p>I’ll agree with the theoretical/computational people graduating faster. Out of the first half of my class that’s finished, all of the modelling people are done, and only one experimentalist has (and there’s about 5-6 of us experimentalists left).</p>