<p>Many people tell me that whatever I do, I shouldn't get a PhD, because earning one is grueling and miserable, and the jobs for PhDs suck.</p>
<p>However, the people who say this are almost always conservatives.</p>
<p>Is earning a PhD actually a miserable process? Or do conservatives say this just because they're biased against academia?</p>
<p>it depends on what field you are /or want to be in. some require a PhD as entry level requirement, others not. and yes, it's grueling, but worth it if you need it!</p>
<p>Well, of course it's grueling and miserable.</p>
<p>But whether or not that means you shouldn't do it depends on you.</p>
<p>huh? What does this have to do with people's politics?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Many people tell me that whatever I do, I shouldn't get a PhD, because earning one is grueling and miserable
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, I think a better question to ask is what else is out there? Let's face it. A lot of jobs out there are also grueling and miserable. I've certainly had a few of those. </p>
<p>I think the most appealing part of the PhD process, once you're in the research phase (hence, past coursework and General Exams), is that you have tremendous flexibility with your time. For example, if you feel like taking a block of time off to do something else other than your research, you can do it. For example, I was just talking to a guy who is getting his PhD in EECS at MIT, and he basically said that he really didn't do anything at all on his research during last February, as he spent the whole month basically shopping for and then playing with an HDTV (which is not part of his research). In fact, if he had instead wanted to take the whole month to go travelling in Europe or wherever, he could have done it, and most likely nobody would have even noticed. Now, granted, he does have to maintain satisfactory progress in his project. But that means that if he wants to work like a dog for a whole month, and then follow it up with a month of doing nothing, he can do it. </p>
<p>Contrast that with most jobs in which you will often times be called upon to work extremely hard even when you don't really want to, and where you are just basically chained to your desk. </p>
<p>
[quote]
and the jobs for PhDs suck.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't know about that either. I think this has much more to do with the people who are getting PhD's - a lot of them just don't seem to know how to market themselves. Like I've always said, in the absolute worst case scenario, you can always just become a high school teacher, which is not a bad job (i.e. can get tenure in 2-4 years which makes you effectively unfireable, you get the whole summer off, etc.).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is earning a PhD actually a miserable process? Or do conservatives say this just because they're biased against academia?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You seem to be implying one definition of the word conservative - which is "political conservative", since political conservatives are thought to be biased against academia. Those types, while less likely go into academia than political liberals [due to a selection bias], may still be open to the PhD process. </p>
<p>There is another definition of the word, however, which is compatible with an anti-academia bias. That definition is related to the tradition of upholding family and social values. This definition may have more of an anti-academia bias, because those who go into academia often must abandon familial obligations to seek the pursuit of knowledge. And the pursuit of knowledge is naturally liberal and open-minded. </p>
<p>==</p>
<p>Also, sakky, your post made my day. Totally. :D</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think the most appealing part of the PhD process, once you're in the research phase (hence, past coursework and General Exams), is that you have tremendous flexibility with your time.
[/quote]
I was told that it was a great choice for me to plan my wedding while in graduate school -- if I need to go meet with a vendor in the middle of the day, I can do it without telling anyone or asking anyone's permission.</p>
<p>There are different constraints placed on student time in different disciplines. In some fields, it's possible for students to do quite a bit of work from home. In the lab sciences, this is obviously somewhat more difficult, and students don't have much of a choice but to spend long hours in the lab. It is considered normal for students in my program to work about 9-10 hours a day during the week, all day Saturday, and a few hours on Sunday. It's no picnic, but there are certainly worse jobs that one could conceivably have.</p>
<p>What on earth would lead you to believe that Political Conservatives are against getting PhD's? That's totally unfounded. Although many Academics are not politically conservative, a bunch of PhD's who work else where are.</p>
<p>Are high school teachers in that much demand, sakky? As in, can all PhDs be assured of a position in high school? It's conceivable that some may not meet the job due to factors such as poor social skills.</p>
<p>I know that I wouldn't be qualified for high school teaching because of issues with my maturity (as well as Asperger's Syndrome). I'm also very cynical about the public education system and would not want to invest effort in a system that I don't believe in (I'm strongly for increased emphasis on self-education/homeschooling, and I have many reasons for this, on which I will not elaborate here).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Are high school teachers in that much demand, sakky? As in, can all PhDs be assured of a position in high school?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course not ALL PhD's can be assured of a position in high school. It doesn't need to be that extreme. After all, plenty of Phd's will indeed find academic jobs. Or go to industry. Keep in mind that, for whatever reason, a lot of new PhD's will refuse to take a HS teaching job, thinking it's somehow beneath them. So all you need to do is have enough high school teaching jobs for the remainder of people. </p>
<p>
[quote]
It's conceivable that some may not meet the job due to factors such as poor social skills.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, first off, just thinking back to ** my ** high school, there were certain teachers I can immediately think of that weren't exactly the most social of people either. Far from it, in fact. Yet they evidently still got a teaching job anyway. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I know that I wouldn't be qualified for high school teaching because of issues with my maturity (as well as Asperger's Syndrome).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You want to talk about maturity? Well, I'll put it to you this way. Just recently, there was * yet another * case of a high school teacher getting caught sleeping with her students. A few weeks ago, a school principal was caught dealing crystal meth out of his office. So *even these * people can evidently get hired into the school system, and you can't? Let's face it. Getting hired to be an educator ain't exactly the highest bar to clear in the world if even these people manage to get in. </p>
<p>Heck, again, I just think back to my high school. While there were some good teachers there, there were plenty more that were themselves poorly educated (i.e. didnt' even have a degree in the subject they were teaching), and furthermore, weren't highly motivated, didn't have good teaching skills, didn't have much of anything at all. I therefore have to imagine that anybody with a PhD can at least do better than they did. Let's be honest. There are a LOT of mediocre teachers out there. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm also very cynical about the public education system and would not want to invest effort in a system that I don't believe in (I'm strongly for increased emphasis on self-education/homeschooling, and I have many reasons for this, on which I will not elaborate here).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, that's completely different then. There's a big difference between "can't" and "don't want to". </p>
<p>But let me put it to you this way. Most people in the world have jobs that they don't really like and don't really want to do. Let's face it. If everybody did what they wanted to do, there would be no garbagemen, no janitors, no fast food workers, no Walmart shelf-stockers, none of these kinds of jobs. This doesn't just apply to blue-collar jobs - plenty of white-collar office jobs are, frankly, pretty meaningless. I've worked in the real world, and I have seen numerous jobs for which nobody could be said to have ever really dreamed of having when they were a kid. For example, no kid grows up dreaming of becoming a middle-management bureaucrat. Sometimes you gotta do take jobs you don't really like and don't really believe in, just to pay the bills. That's life. Not everybody gets to have a job that they really believe in. Frankly, I've never had one.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Are high school teachers in that much demand, sakky? As in, can all PhDs be assured of a position in high school?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>"Job opportunities for teachers over the next 10 years will vary from good to excellent, depending on the locality, grade level, and subject taught. Most job openings will result from the need to replace the large number of teachers who are expected to retire over the 2004-14 period. Also, many beginning teachers decide to leave teaching after a year or two?especially those employed in poor, urban schools?creating additional job openings for teachers. Shortages of qualified teachers will likely continue, resulting in competition among some localities, with schools luring teachers from other States and districts with bonuses and higher pay." --Bureau of Labor Statistics</p>
<p>Plus, look at education majors. It shouldn't be hard for a PhD to uncompete them...</p>