<p>I had him for a 1-year graduate analysis sequence and he also supervised a research project I did last summer.
He's not a good teacher but mostly a nice guy. He's not shy about expressing his disappointment in student's work when it is substandard, which is kind of disheartening and intimidating sometimes (he definitely wasn't happy when I half-assed my write-up at the end of last summer). Most of his grad students do very well afterwards- his students who graduated over the last ten years have ended up with tenure track jobs at UChicago, UCLA, UW-Madison, UIC among other places.</p>
<p>Point of clarification: Previous post was in response to a query about a prof. at Caltech that was since deleted.</p>
<p>What about going into a PhD program and dropping out with a masters? Since the PhD is funded, I can assume that dropping out won't cost me a dime right?</p>
<p>Yeah, but that is kind of unethical IMO. It is a large investment universities make when they accept you as a PhD student. I've heard it's almost $100k they invest in you, plus just the fact that you took the spot of someone who really did want to do a PhD, I don't know, I just don't think it's a good idea. </p>
<p>Now deciding you want to drop out in the middle of the phd, that I don't have a problem with, people change their minds.</p>
<p>"Yeah, but that is kind of unethical IMO. It is a large investment universities make when they accept you as a PhD student."
Umm...in math unless you're on a NSF/Hertz/NDSEG/DoD etc fellowship they usually pay your stipend in exchange for you teaching classes- a grad student often has to teach a lot more than a tenured professor for less than 1/5 the money. In fact some programs (notably Berkeley, though they claim to be changing this) have a history of enrolling way more Ph.D students than their faculty would be reasonably be able to advise just so all the undergrad math classes get taught. You're SAVING them money by going to grad school.</p>
<p>On the other hand, a stand-alone MS in pure math is almost universally read as "dropped out of Ph.D program" and so if you're a domestic student, doesn't really help you get any jobs you wouldn't be able to get straight out of college-- of course, for foreign students admission to a Ph.D program provides an opportunity to come to the US, improve their English, and compete for high paying American jobs--so quite a few of them DO in fact start Ph.D programs considering dropping out as soon as they get a finance job.</p>
<p>In my experience, industry views MS applicants who left a PhD program no differently than BS applicants. If industry is your ultimate goal, the MS may actually be more of a detriment. A PhD is certainly necessary to break through the glass ceiling in biotechs/pharma but an MS isn't very valuable in industry. Also, you should feel ashamed for considering denying a spot to a more dedicated student for the sake of a title.</p>
<p>Hmm I don't think that is true at all happyentropy about saving the school money. OK, they pay you, but they also waive your tuition. Tuition is generally double the stipend. From the gradschooltalk.pdf document, he says on page #5 that a single graduate student can cost an adviser $50k a year, so I quoted a less amount per year (roughly $20k, so you figure 100k for the whole phd program). It is probably not as much in math since there isn't any equipment or labs, but it certainly isn't a bargain. And don't forget RA-ships, when you aren't doing any teaching which is usually done during the research phase and they are paying you a higher stipend than if you were to teach. Of course not every student gets an RA, but they are available and they certainly aren't free or a benefit to give out.</p>
<p>Some schools, specifically UPENN, give all their PhD's first and fourth year fellowships, meaning they only have to worry about classes and quals their first year and continuing the bulk of their research their fourth year. That has got to cost them a pretty penny to do. </p>
<p>And how many students at non top 10 schools get outside funding? I would say very few. I looked up the NSF grad fellowship list and honorable mention and it is littered with MIT, Harvard, Stanford, etc. So let's talk about schools that an average math phd would go to: he's going to cost the school money to fund, period. Yeah they don't have enough teachers to teach all those calculus sections, but that is the way the system works. The PhD was meant for you to do research and continue in academia, for the most part. So part of that is learning how to teach, unless you're on a fellowship.</p>
<p>But I totally disagree that the school saves money, or the implication that it does not hurt them financially. The bottom line is, you teach UG courses, they give you enough to continue on and eventually get your PhD. They invest in you, you pay them back by teaching a few courses and writing a thesis.</p>
<p>And back to the main point: How is it not unethical to steal someone's spot in terms of PhD admissions when you know you're going to drop out after your masters?! I am struggling financially, I'm commuting 5 hours a day, I had to beg 3 professors to do research projects, just so I have a CHANCE at a phd program. I'm doing all this to get into grad school! I'm literally living dollar to dollar, I have everything budgeted out until December. And then how am I going to pay for grad school apps? I have no idea.</p>
<p>And the fact of the matter is, in the back of my head, I keep working, I keep trying, and I know it won't be enough. It just never seems to be. But I'll keep trying...</p>
<p>You know how messed up it is that some people try their butt off to get into a PhD program, and then they get passed over by someone who intends on dropping out? I would be furious if that happened to me. </p>
<p>No offense happyentropy, but I think you come from a different perspective than an average math student. I mean, you went to a great school, did well in grad courses, etc. When it was time for you to apply to grad school, you got into all the big ones. However, I just don't see it as me doing them a favor, when I'm so WILLING TO DO THEM THIS FAVOR, and none of them would let me. So it can't be that, they want to invest in someone they think is able to finish their phd program.</p>
<p>I would like to add to my previous post:</p>
<p>I am not at all implying you did not work for what you achieved, I'm sure you worked extremely hard. However, I'm just trying to get the point across that there are other math students who did not do as well as you and really do not view it as the schools doing you a favor. I can tell you when I got all those rejection letters in March and April, it really hurt. If I had gotten into as many high caliber programs as you did, I might view it the same way as you. However, my point of view is someone on the outside looking in, trying to get in. </p>
<p>That it all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I disagree. The school I go to isn't that great and if I get a MS at say MIT, I'll look a lot better to employers even if the MS effectively carries the cachet of a BS. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. I just want to hedge my bets, that's all. I mean, I don't want to enter a program that has a 50% failure rate and have nothing to fall back on just in case I can't hack it; In this case I can rewarded even for failure, which seems like a good deal. It's not that I'm would plan to drop out with a masters from the get-go. There are only two situations that I would do that: 1) a better opportunity comes up. 2) I'm not make satisfactory progress. Both are justified IMO.</p>
<p>Coffeebreak, you disagree that I had that experience? I was involved in hiring several individuals and these were the experiences I had.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Hmm I don't think that is true at all happyentropy about saving the school money. OK, they pay you, but they also waive your tuition.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Tuition isn't waived, it's given as tax-free income that bypasses you and goes directly to the school. Your advisor has to pay your tuition, which can range anywhere from $10k-$35k a year in addition to your stipend. In my case, I get around a $25k stipend on top of the $30k tuition grant. So, even before lab fees, I cost $55k a year to maintain. That's one of the reason why any graduate fellowships you apply to will give an amount of tuition they're willing to cover in addition to the stipend you receive. If you watch, you'll probably notice there's a lot more PhD defenses towards the end of the spring and summer; that's because if they finish by then their advisor won't have to pay any tuition for the upcoming year.</p>
<p>I think if you go into a PhD program with the intent of trying, but somewhere along the way you get a job offer, you decide this is not what you wanted, then yeah that's totally justified in terms of getting a terminal masters.</p>
<p>The only way that I would consider it entirely unethical is that if you went it knowing that you were going to drop out.</p>
<p>"Hmm I don't think that is true at all happyentropy about saving the school money. OK, they pay you, but they also waive your tuition. Tuition is generally double the stipend."
Grad students at, say, Berkeley teach two classes each semester for a $21 k/year stipend. These classes have to be taught somehow. Where else is Berkeley gonna find a competent teacher who will work that much for only $21k a year? If it was so easy why would programs like that let dead-end grad students to stay around for 8+ years as TA's? </p>
<p>"From the gradschooltalk.pdf document, he says on page #5 that a single graduate student can cost an adviser $50k a year, so I quoted a less amount per year (roughly $20k, so you figure 100k for the whole phd program). It is probably not as much in math since there isn't any equipment or labs, but it certainly isn't a bargain."</p>
<p>Indeed, it is much less in math- most students in math are supported either by outside fellowships or teaching assistantships, NOT your advisor's grants. In most programs most students don't even have an adviser until AFTER you have your master's- if your goal is to jump ship with a masters you would probably do it BEFORE you even find an adviser. In fact, at many programs many people are forced to leave the program <em>because</em> they can't find any faculty member to work with them- although the department is happy to keep them around as TA's. Prof. Christ at Berkeley said that until a few years ago the department based its incoming class on the number of courses that need to be taught, knowingly admitting many more grad students than would be able to find advisers. From the perspective of a bottom-half grad student at Berkeley, the department's decision to <em>admit</em> her/him seems a lot more unethical than his decision to drop out (had the applicant been rejected by Berkeley, they could have gone to a lower ranked but still excellent program (say UPenn?) where finding an advisor would have been easier and he wouldn't be wasting his time for years teaching classes without finding anyone to guide him in research. </p>
<p>"And don't forget RA-ships, when you aren't doing any teaching which is usually done during the research phase and they are paying you a higher stipend than if you were to teach. Of course not every student gets an RA, but they are available and they certainly aren't free or a benefit to give out."
Again, department-wide RA-ships in math are almost always competitive and granted after you pass quals. If your goal is to jump ship with an MS you would have done it already. On the other hand if you're supported by an NSF fellowship? Well, the US government wasted $30,000-$90,000- considering where else it wastes money, this is very hard for me to feel bad about.</p>
<p>Apart from all this- outside of a few top programs, a vast minority of grad students publish anything or do any notable research after receiving their Ph.D. Most will not become professors at research universities, and will never use what they learned in grad school in any way. The only thing they contribute to the school. Ph.D programs aren't really training you, they're paying you to do a job, for a small opportunity to possibly later get another job which requires a Ph.D in math. If you drop out, they will admit someone else to take your place. </p>
<p>"And back to the main point: How is it not unethical to steal someone's spot in terms of PhD admissions when you know you're going to drop out after your masters?! I am struggling financially, I'm commuting 5 hours a day, I had to beg 3 professors to do research projects, just so I have a CHANCE at a phd program. I'm doing all this to get into grad school! I'm literally living dollar to dollar, I have everything budgeted out until December. And then how am I going to pay for grad school apps? I have no idea."</p>
<p>If I intend to drop out of grad school after teaching 2 classes/semester for two years in exchange for $23k/year and health insurance, I may indeed be screwing someone over <em>this year</em>. After I drop out, the department will have a vacancy and admit an extra person, and so I will be <em>helping</em> someone get into grad school in two years as much as I am preventing someone from getting into grad school now...</p>
<p>You should research that path more carefully. I asked my prof this exact question and he stated it would be extremely dishonest to go into a funded program knowing you were gonna drop out. They make an investment in training you to do a research project. To ask them to start from scratch essentially after dropping out and to do it for selfish reasons will burn a lot of bridges and may sour some cultivated relationships.</p>
<p>entropy, from pretty much everything I've heard Berkeley is one of the biggest offenders in hiring grad students just to teach classes, though I imagine it's even worse in fields such as math than my own materials engineering.</p>
<p>Also, departments let dead-end students stay on because many of them continue to publish. I know a number of people that had to convince their advisors they were ready to graduate and move on, since the professor just wanted the to stay on and continue publishing quality papers. To start with a new student they'd have to drop two years worth of money while they get through their masters degree, and even then it takes a bit of time to get up to speed with the lab and all the institutional knowledge they need to gain. I'm sure many professors would keep students on for 8+ years if that person was being an effective member of the lab.</p>
<p>And, again, you're likely not being paid just $23k a year to teach, the department is also covering your tuition. For internationals and non-CA residents, that can be pretty substantial.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Coffeebreak, you disagree that I had that experience? I was involved in hiring several individuals and these were the experiences I had.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with your idea that a MS is tantamount to a BS. However, using that same logic, if a MS at UCLA is the same as a BS at UCLA and a MS at MIT is the same as a BS at MIT, taken with the additional fact that MIT is more prestigious than UCLA( come on, we all know that a BS from MIT is better than a BS from UCLA when it comes to math), its clear that a MS from MIT carries more clout than a BS from UCLA. Think of it as trading your BS for a BS from a better school.</p>
<p>"entropy, from pretty much everything I've heard Berkeley is one of the biggest offenders in hiring grad students just to teach classes, though I imagine it's even worse in fields such as math than my own materials engineering"
In math the same phenomenon happens at Michigan, UCLA...pretty much all the top programs at state schools with huge undergraduate student bodies.</p>
<p>"Also, departments let dead-end students stay on because many of them continue to publish."
This depends on the field...in math most Ph.D graduates finish with out publications, don't publish anything after their doctorate, and most Ph.D theses don't contain anything publishable nor are they ever cited. Outside of top programs, the vast majority of Ph.D graduates go on to jobs at teaching colleges where little or no research is required so teaching is both their principal contribution to their graduate department, and by far the most important (for their future career) skill they gain in graduate school. (I imagine it's much the same in humanities fields).</p>
<p>"And, again, you're likely not being paid just $23k a year to teach, the department is also covering your tuition. For internationals and non-CA residents, that can be pretty substantial."
Yeah, I sort of neglected the fact that in many cases the money comes and goes out of different pockets (I imagine this varies by school though). Nevertheless, for the University as a whole I imagine grad students are the cheapest way to get classes taught.</p>
<p>Adjuncts are usually much cheaper than grad students.</p>
<p>Allowing grad students to act as teaching assistants is a crucial part of preparing them for university employment. And most students at "top" programs, if they can secure academic employment at all, will secure positions at colleges and universities where teaching is at least one third of their job.</p>
<p>Hey Happy, I feel terrible that you're going to Chicago, from the surrounding area to the winters, Chicago is a miserable place to be, I spent four years there as an undergrad, and now at Courant working towards an MS, and want to go to caltech for a PhD in Poli Sci, any tips there, my tips, don't walk around after 12AM if you can. Try to buy a car if you live off campus, so you can avoid cold winter walks to class or wherever. Go eat at Harold's Chicken, and go out to the rest of the city to keep your sanity, and spend a lot of time at Henry Crown field house to play sports. But I feel bad for anyone who goes to Chicago, I have not met anyone or spoken to anyone at Chicago who liked spending time at Chicago, not to mention the academic burden.</p>