PhD Questions

College Majors Engineering Majors
1

<p>If anyone is currently a PhD candidate or have graduated with a PhD in engineering, I want to know a few things about the degree.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>How is the lifestyle compared to being an undergrad? Will it be a lot busier, and a ton of time spent in the lab doing research? Less or no free time?</p></li>
<li><p>When do people start research for the M.S thesis, and also research for the dissertation?</p></li>
<li><p>How tough is it to start the research? I know at the end, you are completely independent from your advisor in the research, but how does it start? What do you do actually? Numerical simulations, experiments, etc? How much time is spent per week doing this?</p></li>
<li><p>How long does it take for an average student to finish the PhD program? How tough is it to complete?</p></li>
</ol>

2

<p>Well some of this depends on your field. It differs some from field to field. That said:</p>

<p>1) I love my life as a grad student seeking a PhD. I am definitely busier than as an undergrad. Each class takes individually a lot more effort for me, but I generally like them a lot more than I liked undergrad classes. Luckily, you only take 2 to 3 per semester. You do spend a ton of time in the lab, and while the official assistantship description says 20 hrs/week, that is a joke. You basically spend a a full 40 hour work week in the lab each minus whatever time you are in class, and you sometimes do more than that. It is a lot of work, but as long as you like your field, it can be a lot of fun and absolutely fascinating. The best thing to compare it to is a really interesting job with low pay.</p>

<p>2) You pretty much start research immediately. How much of it goes towards a thesis/dissertation depends a lot on who your advisor is and how familiar you are with the research to begin with. It seems that most people I know spend about a year or so playing catch-up when they first start, just trying to get acquainted with all their lab stuff, their labmates, the subject of their research and juggle around their classes.</p>

<p>3) It isn’t tough, you just have to realize that 99% of research is a string of failed attempts, and that other 1% is where dissertations are made. Failure is how you learn. The faster you come to terms with that, the faster you will start to be a good researcher. Like I said earlier, it seems like the learning curve to really start making an impact in your group is about a year for a lot of people (unless you have undergrad experience with that group). A common sentiment is that MS students stay around long enough to just start being useful, and then they leave, so to be a fully capable researcher who is reasonably independent it usually takes about the length of an MS, so 3 to 4 semesters plus or minus depending on your personal situation.</p>

<p>What you actually do when you start really is something that none of us can answer because it varies so much with field and with individual research groups and projects. We would need a little more info on your intended research group and field to answer that effectively.</p>

<p>4) Seems like 5 years from BS to PhD is about average for most people I know. Some people do it in 4, some in 6 or 7, but roughly 5 seems to be the average. It is tough, but incredibly rewarding is you stick with it an put in the time. If you really are in it for the right reasons, then the rewards for getting your PhD are more than worth the time put in, especially since you are presumably wanting to do research as a career.</p>

3

<p>

</p>

<p>My son just became an engineering PhD candidate at UCLA. He spends more time in Boelter Hall, but only has 2 classes plus his TA job, so it’s less time than when he did his Masters (3 classes at a time) or undergrad (4 classes at a time). He has done a lot of the research during the summer months when he isn’t in class and has more time. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>He did the exam instead of the thesis. It was an all day exam, and he was stressed out beforehand, but he sure was happy when he passed it!</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>My son had a pre-funded research project offered to him at the time he passed his qualifying exam. They aren’t telling him how to do it, just what they want him to research and design experimentation for. The rest is up to him. He had to give an oral presentation to proceed with the project, and take an oral exam to qualify for Candidate. Now he is working on the dissertation project. He had one advisor for his Masters which took 3 quarters. He has a different advisor for the PhD. He had to get approval for the 2 minor subjects that he is taking this year, they had to relate to the dissertation subject. </p>

<p>

They told him it would take 3 to 5 years to get his PhD, he has 2 years under his belt so far.</p>

4

<p>Thanks for the responses. So UCLA Band Mom, your son did not do a M.S thesis? Does this mean he only started his research at the PhD level? As a M.S, he only focused on the 3 courses per quarter and then taking the first part of the qualifying exam?</p>

<p>Also question for both of you, what is the difference in coursework between M.S and PhD? What are these minor fields that is mentioned, and are they required for the PhD? Thanks!</p>

5

<p>There really isn’t such a thing as PhD coursework to be honest. If you get the MS first, you basically have all the courses you need already and you just have to carry out and perform a large-scale independent research project and produce original results in the form of a dissertation and show that you are fit to be called an expert in your field. That is the qualifications for a PhD. If you get into a direct-to-PhD program, you take all the MS courses to get you up to speed with everyone else and to prepare for the qualifying exam and final exam. Really, all the courses are the same “level”, the only distinction is undergraduate versus graduate courses.</p>

6

<p>

</p>

<p>For the MS, he had to take 9 courses in a single engineering field with the minimum allowable gpa, plus pass the 8 hour comprehensive exam with the minimum allowable score.</p>

<p>For the PhD, he had to take the same 9 courses in a single field with a higher gpa (his major field), pass the same 8 hour comprehensive exam with a much higher score, and then take 3 grad level classes in each of 2 other related engineering, science, math, statistics etc subjects (his 2 minors which had to be approved by his advisor as applicable to his research project), plus give a comprehensive oral presentation, plus take an oral exam. After all that he became a “candidate”. He didn’t do any research for the Masters, he took the option that didn’t require it. However, he did work concurrently for one of the professors’s consulting firm, a job he quit when he started in on the PhD research the summer immediately after completing his MS exam. He continued the research when he started working on his 2 minors, in addition to being a lab assistant and TA correcting papers. The seminar presentation showed his research progress for the year. He started on the full experimental research project as soon as his 2 minors were complete. That research will culminate in a written dissertation and oral defense. PhD students work on research year round, that’s why he quit the consulting firm job he had. But he is paid for his work, and has a fellowship that covers all his tuition. 15 quarters is the average length of study for most MS+PhD students, just under 4 years.</p>

7

<p>

</p>

<p>That is not correct. Assuming that by this, you mean for someone who does not have his MS. The average time that it takes for someone to go from having just a BS to having a PhD (whether he gets an MS along the way or not) end up being closer to 5 years. Your son my have done it in 4, which isn’t uncommon, but that is not the average.</p>

<p>It also depends highly on the situation in your research group when you come in, and whether you are doing experimental research or numerical research. With numerical research, you don’t have to spend several years waiting for your wind tunnel to be free, for example.</p>

8

<p>UCLA Band Mom, are the 2 minors required? I assume that means 6 more courses than the M.S student.</p>

<p>And to boneh3ad, what is the most common route for PhD students nowadays? I want to take all the courses first and take the exam to get the M.S first (4-5 quarters). Then take the minors (6 courses) and start on my PhD research (3 years?). Just concerned if I take this route that I won’t have enough time in my PhD research to get out in 5 years.</p>

<p>Also have you heard of cases of a non-commital PhD degree student? What if a student finishes the M.S and decides the PhD is not for him (and then moves onto industry)? Does the advisor get mad? This seems like a “sneaky” way to get funding for the M.S while declaring yourself for the PhD option, although you aren’t completely lying since you are really unsure of continuing onto the PhD.</p>

9

<p>BoelterHall:</p>

<p>The way that “minor” thing works depends on your field and your school. For example, the way it works here in Aerospace is that you have to take a couple classes outside your concentration area. Aero is divided into aerodynamics, materials, and dynamics/controls. For me, I do aerodynamics but for the PhD I have to take a few classes in materials and dynamics/controls so that I am “well-rounded” enough to pass all three portions of the qualifying exam.</p>

<p>The most common route to a PhD is still far and away going through the thesis-based MS first and then getting the PhD. A combination of facts lead to this, but the two major ones are that not a lot of people know that it is possible to go straight to PhD and not a lot of people know that they want a PhD right out of undergrad. Actually, the situation with UCLA Band Mom’s son getting a non-thesis MS and then going on to PhD is the first instance of this path I have ever even heard of.</p>

<p>There are “non-commital” PhD students, as you put it, but if you don’t want to do research right off the bat, it doesn’t lend yourself to doing this route. Getting funding as a grad student typically means you are doing research or being a TA, and research seems to be far and away the more common of the two. It also pays better. The only real way to get funding without doing research your first two years while you do just courses for an MS is by having absolutely stellar grades in your undergrad along with recommendations and test scores so that you can get a no strings attached fellowship, which are few and far between. Most fellowships even have research stipulations attached to them. In other words, you can do this non-commital thing, but if you do it, you will definitely be expected to do at least some research right from the start. It won’t be something where you design and carry out your own research right then (it will most likely just be you helping out the older guys and learning your way around the lab’s procedures).</p>

<p>Of course, if you do the non-commital thing, your advisor very well could get mad, especially since he has included you in his plans for his research and has you budgeted in as a PhD student, which is a much bigger and more lucrative investment for a school. They devote resources for paying for you to go to school without getting a ton of meaningful work out of you while you work on your MS, and when you finish the MS, if you just up and leave, they will a lot of times not be too pleased. It does happen this way probably more often that people would like to admit, but I would imagine that if you wanted to at any point use your advisor as a reference or use his/her connections to get a job, you would have a lot harder time in most cases, so there are some definite drawbacks to this approach.</p>

<p>Last, I wouldn’t concern yourself too much on time. The MS usually takes 3 to 4 semesters (1.5 to 2 years) to complete depending on circumstances, and that is fairly constant. PhD research, however, varies greatly from institution to institution, department to department, and even from advisor to advisor. It may only take a year or two beyond your MS, it may take 4 or more. The average, though, is about 3 years. The thing is, the whole time, while you aren’t getting paid like you would in industry, you are definitely getting paid, so you aren’t really losing money, and you are presumably enjoying the work more than you would a BS job, so it is totally worth it. It may take you 5 or more years to get it in some cases, but if research is the kind of job you want to have some day, then it really is all but required and you will most likely really enjoy it (mostly, of course long nights trying to tweak and experiment or a paper kind of suck, but those aren’t the norm).</p>

<p>Of course, the most difficult part is deciding if a PhD really is right for you. If you are honestly considering doing that but aren’t sure, I would just do the thesis-based MS, which will often get funded before too long anyway once you get on with a professor, and then decide based on that experience whether you want to continue. You will probably know by halfway through your MS if continuing beyond that is still an interest. Doing the thesis-based MS is a really good test to see if you want to do the PhD, and if you decide you don’t want to do a PhD, you still have that research experience and probably publications that you can use to still get some research jobs if you want them.</p>

10

<p>

</p>

<p>The minor requirement depends on what you are getting the PhD in. Some engineering fields only require 1 minor, and 3 additional ad-hoc classes in any other subject related to the research project. I was giving you what was required by my son’s advisor (earthquake engineering). This is the same advisor that told him he could expect to finish in 15 months. The average time to finish most likely varies in the different sub-fields of engineering. My son is doing a project where he doesn’t have to compete with other grad students for lab time or equipment.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Here’s the trick on how to get a fellowship at UCLA: Apply early! Before the end of November. And include GRE scores in the application. You will get word back on your application some time in late March. </p>

<p>My son originally applied for Master’s only. He got a full fellowship plus living stipend. Halfway through his 3 quarters of Master’s classes, the department head asked him if he would consider staying on for a PhD. He thought about it for at least 3 months before saying “yes”, but even then it was contingent on his GPA and qualifying exam score. All this time I was nagging him to make up his mind :rolleyes: because I was afraid that he was taking so long to make up his mind that he wouldn’t be considered for any further fellowship money. And I was worried that he would have to submit a second application for the PhD since his original application was only for a Masters. But no matter, the dept head automatically extended his fellowship once he finally said yes, he didn’t have to submit a second application, and I didn’t have to nag him any further. At the time he started the PhD summer research, his advisor was switched to another professor who was more linked to the funding source.</p>

11

<p>I have a question. It’s a bit off topic but oh well. How do you copy a quote from someone elses comment and make it appear in the shaded box? :)</p>

12

<p>Use BBCode. That means you just copy their text, and put “quote=name” in front and “/quote” after it, and each of those is in instead of “”. I had to use “” since using the actual would have quoted that text, haha. You can also leave out the “=name” part and it just won’t show a quoted by name.</p>

13

<p>

</p>

<p>I actually don’t know of anyone getting a minor with their PhD at my school. I have to take 15 classes just for my initial MS, and most professors aren’t too keen on people taking even more.</p>

<p>Also, not sure if it’s true in your son’s department, but for the people I know that applied to UCLA, they only accepted all students as MS and had PhD heavily contingent upon their grades in their MS classes. People I knew that got into a number of top-10 programs were turned down for funding by UCLA (and admission straight into the PhD program), so some of what your son experienced might be due to their quirks.</p>

14

<p>thanks! 10 char</p>

15

<p>

</p>

<p>haha! now there’s only one thing left to do…take over the world!!</p>

16

<p>@saraleigh117:</p>

<p>And of course use the actual person’s name instead of just the word “name”.</p>

<p>@RacinReaver:</p>

<p>I think by minor she just meant taking a few classes outside of his concentration area since qualifying exams cover EVERYTHING within your field most of the time, not just your area of expertise.</p>

17

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m guessing that the original poster BoelterHall is interested in Mechanical or Aerospace, here are the graduate admission stats and MS/PhD requirements for that field.</p>

<p>Acceptance rate into the program is 45%
[Program</a> Profile Report - Mechanical Engineering](<a href=“Program Profile Report - Mechanical Engineering”>Program Profile Report - Mechanical Engineering)</p>

<p>More info about the minor field requirement
[2009-2010</a> Program Requirements - Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering (Mechanical Eng)](<a href=“http://www.gdnet.ucla.edu/gasaa/pgmrq/mane2.asp]2009-2010”>Mechanical Engineering | UCLA Graduate Programs)</p>

<p>

</p>

18

<p>bone, yeah I realized that as soon as I did it. thanks</p>

19

<p>Ahh, I see UCLABandMom. Their definition of a minor is a bit different than the schools I’ve been familiar with. What they have seems more along the lines of depth/breadth sequences of undergrad. I had similar rules with taking classes, though it was mostly defined as “Take these classes plus three from column A, three from column B, and two of your choice.”</p>

20

<p>Yeah, minor is kind of an odd choice of word for what that policy is actually doing. It seems to me that it makes it too easy to associate it with a minor in the sense of what it is for an undergrad.</p>