Yes. In the US a PhD (in my understanding) combines both taught and research elements. In the UK, the masters is the taught component, and the PhD is largely or wholly research. Generally the entire process seems to end up shorter than the US, a year for masters and officially 3 but usually more like 4 for the PhD.
as mentioned above, admission to a UK PhD seems much easier than the US, but the catch is that it doesn’t often come with funding attached. And funding may sometimes be from the same university but be a separate decision to the admissions one. And admissions …depends. In some cases, as mentioned above strong contact with a potential supervisor (not mentor) is a strong recommendation. In others, just knowing what you want to do and why it would work for that department’s research interests/if you identified a potential supervisor may be enough. In my case, one of the examiners on my master’s dissertation noted that it showed I was suitable for a PhD, which I was told meant I’d almost certainly get a PhD offer from the same department if I’d applied (I didn’t). So lots of ways to do this in the UK, especially if you can be assured of funding.
As an aside while a masters is taught in the UK, most (not all) of them have required dissertation components. I had to provide a research proposal for my masters dissertation as part of my application. Not all of them do this obviously, but note that it may be required.
oh and something I nearly forgot - as a second aside, not all masters are taught, some universities offer MRes options. These will have some taught components, but the bulk of the degree is research.
Not sure I agree with this, @tdy123. First, there is value in the years spent on the PhD, regardless of specific career outcome. Second, many PhD’s I know are not going into academia due to the adjunctification of teaching.
I am not sure I would judge any program based on how many grads get tenure track. Fewer do these days, period. That does not make those years wasted. There are other career options and the learning, community, and skill development for the PhD are worth a lot.
Finding the right mentor goes a long way to ensuring that value.
I agree. Especially since we are talking about following a passion and developing skills without incurring debt. The right place with the right people is the most important thing. One of her Italian mentors is urging her to add Chicago, and is facilitating intros to people at two schools on her list, and another is doing an intro at a third school. Hopefully she just clicks with someone and it happens organically.
My son’s girlfriend just got her history masters degree from the University of Reading. She was first in her class and had the outstanding masters thesis. She was admitted in January to the PhD program, but sadly learned in April that there would be no funding.
Sure thing! That’s why I tried to make explicit that my comment was directed towards a student that “is pursuing a PhD in the hopes of a tenured academic career.”
In several fields that I am aware of, the chance of getting a tenure track position correlate extremely well with program ranking and placement history.
In economics, a field where PhD students still have pretty good academic job prospects (and even better industry prospects) doing reasonably well (defined here as top 50% of your cohort) in any one of the top 20 or so programs lands a grad a pretty good chance of a tenure track appointment somewhere. Want a tenure track appointment at a top 10 ranked University? Being in the top 50% of your cohort at the top 2 ranked programs (MIT and Harvard) gives you a good shot, outside the top 2 you need to pretty much be the “star” of your cohort.
In Philosophy - a field with one of the worst academic job prospects - only the #1 program has anything close to a decent placement chance for any tenure track placement at any school of whatever rank.
So, if the goal is tenure track academia, placement matters. If the goal is personal fulfillment, industry or government, then tenure track placement is largely irrelevant.
I should clarify that students I know are not going into academia because the adjunctification of academia has made tenure track jobs so scarce. They are applying but not getting the jobs, so they find other options. Not a choice, a reality, after 12 years of study. For many, a tenure track job just isn’t possible, or they may have to start at an obscure place and move around a lot.
Do you think that makes pursuing a PhD a less-than-wise choice for many/most people? (I do!) 4-7 years is a lot of time (+ opportunity costs, etc.) to spend when the job waiting at the end of it is an adjunct position with a lower effective hourly wage than a 16 year old without even a HS diploma makes slinging burgers at a fast food joint.
One shouldn’t get a PhD in expectation of a faculty job. One should get one because one wants the experience.
If a professor has N students over the course of her career, and only 1 is needed to replace her, what happens to the other N-1? Any PhD aspirant should be able to ask themselves this question.