<p>I just started my Ph.D. program in Electrical Engineering (EE) at a tier 4 university and I have noticed that not that many Ph.D. grads in my program get hired as tenure track professors. The Ph.D. EE program in my university is fairly new but only 1 out of 5 of the Ph.D. graduates from the lab I work in has landed a tenure track position. One of the people that have not been successful (as of today) was a NSF fellowship recipient with excellent teaching and research background! I am starting to feel that the Ph.D. in EE is not worth getting at my current university and maybe I should transfer (possibly to a higher rank school). However, I really get along well with my advisor and he helped me develop my research during my masters (which I obtained at the same university). He also has offered to hire me as a graduate assistant for my Ph.D. which will pay for my entire Ph.D. Should I stay solely on convenience and not to sell out my current advisor? Is it really difficult to land a tenure position when you graduate from a tier 4 universities or does it not matter? If I do transfer to a higher rank school, is tier 1 graduates the only true candidates for a tenure positions?</p>
<p>You have a great source of information, ask your adviser. Do not feel that you would be selling out. You don't have to be that blunt, just discuss your concerns about the low number who get tenure track jobs, tell him that is what you want, and does he think you are on track.</p>
<p>I think many people in engineering get industry jobs don't they? How many of the finishing students wanted academic jobs? </p>
<p>By the way, at your level the "tier" of the university matters much less than the tier of the engineering department, and the national reputation of your adviser.</p>
<p>To the OP: </p>
<p>I agree with what afan said. In addition, I think it should be pointed out that many new PhD's from even the top EE programs will not get a tenure-track job. For example, you can turn to p. 15 of the following PDF to note that even many new EE PhD's from MIT ended up going to industry (i.e. Google, Intel, Texas Instruments). Furthermore, although the pdf doesn't tell you, I strongly suspect that even of the ones who did stay in academia, many of them probably got only post-docs, and hence will still not be able to get placed after their post-doc. </p>
<p>Molliebatmit is getting her PhD in biology at Harvard and she has reported in previous posts that only about 20% of the graduates from her program will become profs. Now, whether she means that only 20% will become eventually fully tenured profs, or only 20% will even get a tenure-track position, I don't know (you can ask her). And yes, she was talking about biology, not EE. But still, it just indicates that even at the best PhD programs, many students will not get tenure-track positions.</p>
<p>Granted, I agree that at the top programs, some level of self-selection takes place. I have heard many PhD students at the top programs say that they will only take an academic position if it is at a top school, and if they can't do that, they'll just go to industry. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, it still means that it's not guaranteed to land a tenure-track posiition even from a tier 1 program.</p>
<p>Here's a story from the Humanities track
D's friend just got his PhD and a tenure track position at a very well known midwestern Music Conservatory at an LAC.He's coming from a recognized private midwestern U(not a Conservatory).
The reasons he was hired were hinted at to him as follows:
He has published
He has taught his own class (not TA'ed)
He has demonstrated that he has been "of service" to his graduate school (committee service,etc)
There were some faculty members from his graduate school already teaching at the new institution .
He wasn't "dragging along" a spouse who also needed an academic job.
Granted,this is a humanities position,but can some lessons be learned for all potential PhD's?</p>