<p>For those of you parents thinking ahead to graduate school for your children, a New York Times article </p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/03/education/03education.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/03/education/03education.html</a> </p>
<p>talks about how long it takes to get a Ph.D. degree.</p>
<p>Thanks for posting this! How true! I hope something can be done about this. I can add that in natural sciences, the more "prestigeous" the lab/PhD advisor, the longer it takes to complete research for the coveted degree, because such profs are usually too busy with travel, invited lectures, etc. to advise.</p>
<p>That is a long time to work on a Ph.D! I guess I was lucky that I only took 5 years (with a relatively "non-prestigious" advisor ;) , although he is well known and well connected in his field ). I was almost 26 when I finished my Ph.D. work, and I felt like I had been in school for a very long time!!</p>
<p>NIH has partnered with several universities in order to accelerate biomedical PhD degrees:
[quote]
• The D.Phil. (the Oxonian abbreviation for the Doctor of Philosophy) can be obtained in 3-5 years. Rather than having to complete a list of required general courses, students immediately begin research.
[/quote]
[quote]
The student will be expected to spend approximately two years at Cambridge and two years at the NIH. The time spent at each institution will usually be done in blocks of a few months that add up to the guideline of two years.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My husband got his PhD. in 5 years, but it was of the staple three published papers variety. Biophysics, the professor was and still is very well known in the field, but his lab was always pretty small.</p>
<p>One mistake many college undergrads make is the manner in which they choose a graduate program. Too many merely repeat what they had done in selecting their undergrad college-apply the the most prestigious universities offering a PhD in their area of interest.</p>
<p>WRONG!!!!!</p>
<p>For a PhD track student the choice of dissertation advisor is critical. It does not matter if that advisor is on the faculty of Princeton or Kansas State. The top researchers in any field are the ones know well throught the academic world, who command the best research facilities and obtain the best research grants. And among the top researchers there will be those who are better at facilitating the work and completion of their PhD candidates' dissertation work.</p>
<p>The real key to PhD program admissions is to find the professors you desire to mentor you. To do this you need to determine what particular area(s) of study interests you. It must be as precise as possible. Next you need to go to peer review journals, professional societies, etc to find academics who are at the top of their field. Lastly one must research the prospective departments and individuals. A good place to start is the department annual report. It is sometimes available on line or can be requested by calling the department. It typically has extensive information about each faculty member, grant recipients and published research.</p>
<p>Then do a unique thing. Talk to the professor about your graduate program plans. We have telephone numbers and offices! I did this as an undergrad the summer before my senior year. Though it was serendipidous, I actually met with my future PhD advisor at Cornell. Not only did I determine that I felt confident that I could work well with him but he also personally assisted in getting me both the research grant and RA assignment needed for me to attend.</p>
<p>I agree with Originalog about the advisor and department, not the prestige of the school, being the most important factor in chossing a graduate program. I was limited geographically for grad school, since I was married and my husband could not move. I started at any Ivy League school but soon found that none of the labs there were actually working in the specific area of my field in which I had developed an interest. I learned that another school in the same city, which was not as prestigious and which I had not been aware of previously, was strong in the exact area in which I hoped to do my work. I ended up transferring to that school and getting my degree from there.</p>
<p>It took me four and quarter years to earn a Ph.D. in Immunology. That was slightly fast. Most in our department took about five years. </p>
<p>My observation for grad students in the sciences was that a major time driver was the technology you were using and/or the natural history of the disease you were studying. The poor x-ray crystalographers always took 6 to 8 years. And nobody wanted to study prions, which back then were called "slow viruses," because they were in fact so slow growing that it would take decades to generate enough data for a dissertation.</p>
<p>Another factor that kept students in school sometimes years longer than they planned was that their major professors would sometimes play games in refusing to sign the thesis and kept demanding one more line of experimentation to complete the study, and then one more after that, etc. This was because of the prof's desire to keep a fully-trained and experienced senior grad student (essentially a post-doc) in the lab cranking out data and helping write grants instead of starting over with a new grad student (essentially an undergrad) who didn't know anything.</p>
<p>I believe that math/science Ph.D. programs take less time than Ph.D.s in the humanities and social sciences. If I remember correctly, the average length of a History Ph.D. is about 7 years, more or less in line with what Princeton reports.</p>
<p>For the humanities and social sciences, some teaching is important for career development. It is not just a case of graduate students providing cheap labor at research universities. Those that cannot show that they have had teaching experience are at a distinct disadvantage on the job market.
Language acquisition, fieldwork and teaching contribute to lengthening time to degree for graduate students in the humanities and social sciences.</p>
<p>In some cases, students don't wrap up the Ph.D. until they have a job offer. In other words, profs are sometimes doing the student a favor by ALLOWING him/her to stick around the department. This is more often true in humanties.</p>
<p>Not only can it take many years to complete a doctoral degree, but at least in the sciences additional postdoc research and training is very common. That is a lot of years with little or no income. Of course, later on salaries are likely to be substantially bigger than without the advanced degree. Then there are progressive taxes. With high tax rates on that extra income, it makes it very difficult to recover from years of little or no income. Our society does not make it easy to go on to an advanced degree. You need to do it for love, not money.</p>
<p>Originaloog couldn't be more correct. Besides finding the key person you want to have as an advisor, consider a few other things:<br>
1. Does your potential advisor have tenure? If not, be very cautious. More than a few graduate students have had their graduate work delayed for years because their advisor didn't receive tenure and left the school.
2. Does your potential advisor have funding -- particularly funding that might allow you to avoid being a TA for entry level classes for two years? A RA is a lot more helpful.
3. Is your potential advisor in great battles with others in the department? Is the department a battleground? Remember, when the dinosaurs tromp around, the little guys get trampled.
4. How has this department and your potential advisor done with other graduate students? How long on average does it take? What's the employment scenario for those graduates? </p>
<p>Too many potential graduate students fail to understand the political nature of graduate work, and I've seen far too many really brilliant people fail to finish while more politically astute but less amazing graduate students get their degrees.</p>
<p>It took me 4.5 years to complete M.S. and PhD degrees in Biology. I had a 10 months old baby when I started and another one when finished. There is nothing wrong with teaching requirements for humanities students a typical work day of a science student is at least 10-12 hours, while some students literally live in their labs.</p>
<p>In the humanities 7 or 8 years is pretty typical, and students can get funding for that period.
I disagree that the school you select is of lesser importance than the particular faculty member, at least in the humanities. To land a job in the competitive market for PhDs in English, Music History, etc., you are much benefited by going to a "top" school -- and those schools often have the best financial packages. Generally when you enter a program, you don't really know who you will end up working with. Sometimes the most famous scholars are terrible mentors -- never read your stuff on time, etc. (My dissertation director, way back when, took 11 months to read my final draft...he was a prominent professor, indeed, ironically now on the faculty of the school in the article that touts its quick turn-around!).</p>
<p>This is kind of old, but it gives you some idea how stressful grad school can be.
<a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D00E5DB1F30F93AA15752C1A96E958260&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=print%5B/url%5D">http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D00E5DB1F30F93AA15752C1A96E958260&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=print</a></p>
<p>BB.</p>
<p>My D is a senior Physics major, starting her thesis research with one of her professors. A couple of years ago, she told me she was told, the average Physics Ph.d took eight years! Wowsers! </p>
<p>Right now, her plan is to work for a year or two while she decides whether or not to pursue graduate school. She's not yet sure she's willing to go that long haul, but she thinks it's important to position herself to have that option.</p>
<p>My Cousin (who is now a university professor), took 7+ years to earn her Ph.d in Speech Pathology and Audiology. She was constantly frustrated about the amount of time it was taking to finish her research because, her world renown adviser was "always out of the country". From this thread, that sounds like a maddeningly common phenomenon.</p>
<p>Right on arabrab! But let me add . . . even if your advisor has tenure, it doesn't mean he or she will stay at your school. It happened to me! I was too far along to go with him (he took his younger students with him to the new place). Very much slowed me down.</p>
<p>In History (my field) several years ago a study was conducted and came up with average time to degree being 12 years! I think that's not completely accurate (I think it's shorter at the "better" places where students pretty much do history full time) but in my cohort at an ivy, the fastest to finish was 7 years and most of us were in the 8-9 year range. And many did not get jobs (1990s horrifyingly bad job market!)</p>
<p>At D's PhD program in Musicology:
New Professor this year brought student with him
Dropout rate in the first years has been about 50% (they take 2 in a year)
Lots of movement of professors..some retiring to emeritus status,new blood coming in.This is all over not just her insitution.Its a time of change from the "boomer" professor generation.
So many different reasons people take time to finish the PhD.Romantic enanglements are a common reason...people move to another city to be with a loved one.Women give birth.
Shes been led to believe 6 years is common,maybe more. Her institution funds six years and they can apply for more funding after. Her dept requires TA'ing after the first year, but as far as they know, teaching/classroom experience is essential insecuring a humanities job.</p>
<p>S has just started a Ph.D program in the social sciences. From his conversations with undergraduate profs in the field, it seems very important that you try to go to a "top" program in this field, if you are looking for a career in academia, as S is. Advice from undergrad profs led him to turn down one program he thought he "might" have liked more for the one he has just started. Reason? Current program is "Top 5."
He is fully funded for five years, with teaching responsibility for years 3 & 4. Year 5 is supposed to be the dissertation year.</p>
<p>In my experience in grad study in the biomedical sciences, it's probably better career-wise to have earned your Ph.D. from a state or second-tier school in the lab of a well-known and well-connected professor who ran an active and well-funded program that published a lot rather than in a few-or-no publications lab in a prestigious name university. </p>
<p>Ideal would be to have both of course, but if forced to choose, a strong publication record will trump a glittering Name university when it comes to landing that key post-doc or first job.</p>