Is Doing a PhD Beneficial?
8 comments
I'm a CS professor and chair at a primarily undergraduate college. I've advised several students over the years who have gone on to be admitted to PhD programs at top-20 schools.
Here's what I would tell one of my students: If you're wondering whether you should do a PhD, the answer is no. At least not right away. Slouching into grad school without a strong commitment and a plan is a bad idea.
The most challenging parts of grad school aren't the academics. It's the long process, low pay, getting older, and uncertain outcomes that wear people down. If you aren't sure (yet) that you really want to do a graduate degree, you should try something else for a few years, then think about returning to grad school if you still have a desire to do research.
I worked for a few years between finishing my first degree and entering a PhD program. Those years were helpful in shedding the "undergraduate student" mentality and thinking of myself as a professional. Industry can also expose you to new problems and research areas that you never encountered in your undergrad program.
In terms of careers, you don't need a PhD for industry, outside of a small percentage of research positions. Academia is a different game and a PhD is required, but there are many different types of institutions that are looking for different things from their faculty. Teaching and advising students is the largest part of my job. We have publishing requirements for tenure, but the research culture isn't as grinding as it would be at a top-tier R1 department.
Here's what I would tell one of my students: If you're wondering whether you should do a PhD, the answer is no. At least not right away. Slouching into grad school without a strong commitment and a plan is a bad idea.
The most challenging parts of grad school aren't the academics. It's the long process, low pay, getting older, and uncertain outcomes that wear people down. If you aren't sure (yet) that you really want to do a graduate degree, you should try something else for a few years, then think about returning to grad school if you still have a desire to do research.
I worked for a few years between finishing my first degree and entering a PhD program. Those years were helpful in shedding the "undergraduate student" mentality and thinking of myself as a professional. Industry can also expose you to new problems and research areas that you never encountered in your undergrad program.
In terms of careers, you don't need a PhD for industry, outside of a small percentage of research positions. Academia is a different game and a PhD is required, but there are many different types of institutions that are looking for different things from their faculty. Teaching and advising students is the largest part of my job. We have publishing requirements for tenure, but the research culture isn't as grinding as it would be at a top-tier R1 department.
I got a PhD in a related field at an American university, and can give my 2c:
- It sounds like you're conflating getting a PhD with working in academia. There are _many_ jobs in the industry that prefer PhDs, especially in AI/learning. The PhD can be a credibility boot if you're looking at entering a field with many PhDs in industry.
- Many of the applications will ask for a personal statement as well as a research statement. My advice is to go ahead and write these statements and maybe things will become clearer. If you're still unsure, go ahead and submit the applications.
- If you're going to get a PhD, it is better to do it now rather than after a few years working (it's hard to go back to a small paycheck)
- Many schools offer a masters along the way to the PhD, and from what I've seen getting a masters helps a lot with industry work
- If your goal is to maximize lifetime earnings, work experience is more valuable than the extra 3-5 years of school (but the masters is probably still worth it)
Don't feel like you have to figure it all out before you graduate. I was unsure all the way until I secured funding for my research. At that point I decided to pursue the PhD because it was interesting and a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. It's happened to be good for my career too, but I think it was worthwhile in itself.
- It sounds like you're conflating getting a PhD with working in academia. There are _many_ jobs in the industry that prefer PhDs, especially in AI/learning. The PhD can be a credibility boot if you're looking at entering a field with many PhDs in industry.
- Many of the applications will ask for a personal statement as well as a research statement. My advice is to go ahead and write these statements and maybe things will become clearer. If you're still unsure, go ahead and submit the applications.
- If you're going to get a PhD, it is better to do it now rather than after a few years working (it's hard to go back to a small paycheck)
- Many schools offer a masters along the way to the PhD, and from what I've seen getting a masters helps a lot with industry work
- If your goal is to maximize lifetime earnings, work experience is more valuable than the extra 3-5 years of school (but the masters is probably still worth it)
Don't feel like you have to figure it all out before you graduate. I was unsure all the way until I secured funding for my research. At that point I decided to pursue the PhD because it was interesting and a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. It's happened to be good for my career too, but I think it was worthwhile in itself.
It really depends. Many people are seriously turned off by the internal political dynamics of academia. You might end up working with a PI who has bad relations with some other PI and their conflict ends up making your work impossible, for example. Insane levels of political infighting are the norm, and it's not too surprising, as far more PhDs are minted every year than new Professor slots can accomodate, so, expect a lot of nepotism.
You can also find yourself working as an underpaid lab tech on some project for your PI's startup company or something like that as well - many PhDs just follow the director's instructions with no 'original research' to speak of. Literally the work could be done by an undergrad part-time lab tech paid minimum wage, which is about the deal the PhD gets.
On the other hand... if your field is very new-tech-heavy, sometimes the hands-on experience gained working with cutting-edge technology in a well-run research laboratory is invaluable.
You can also find yourself working as an underpaid lab tech on some project for your PI's startup company or something like that as well - many PhDs just follow the director's instructions with no 'original research' to speak of. Literally the work could be done by an undergrad part-time lab tech paid minimum wage, which is about the deal the PhD gets.
On the other hand... if your field is very new-tech-heavy, sometimes the hands-on experience gained working with cutting-edge technology in a well-run research laboratory is invaluable.
> useful to the career
Only if it's a career in academia. Or maybe some very-heavy-into-R&D-academia-adjacent jobs.
The best thing for me were actually classes. We really got deep into what science is, and maybe even more importantly what science is not. There were several courses on origins, development and philosophy of science which I think were among the most interesting and informative courses I have ever taken. The methods and approaches to problems I learned there helped me greatly elsewhere - in my job in particular.
That said paper/grant grind is awful and internal politics in my uni were much much worse than in any job. I abhorred both.
But I got into PhD studies for free (with a small stipend to be exact), so my take does not account for monetary side of the issue.
Only if it's a career in academia. Or maybe some very-heavy-into-R&D-academia-adjacent jobs.
The best thing for me were actually classes. We really got deep into what science is, and maybe even more importantly what science is not. There were several courses on origins, development and philosophy of science which I think were among the most interesting and informative courses I have ever taken. The methods and approaches to problems I learned there helped me greatly elsewhere - in my job in particular.
That said paper/grant grind is awful and internal politics in my uni were much much worse than in any job. I abhorred both.
But I got into PhD studies for free (with a small stipend to be exact), so my take does not account for monetary side of the issue.
Your PhD is how you learn to produce original research. If you’ve produced original research you’ll defend your thesis if you haven’t you’ll have to try again.
If your original research has commercial potential it will get you in the door immediately. If not it will still be highly regarded and open the door to higher level positions.
If you're highly entrepreneurial, use your PhD to research your startup, then use your thesis to fundraise. Here's an idea, research removing the GIL from Ruby, research anything to do with AI or computer vision.
If your original research has commercial potential it will get you in the door immediately. If not it will still be highly regarded and open the door to higher level positions.
If you're highly entrepreneurial, use your PhD to research your startup, then use your thesis to fundraise. Here's an idea, research removing the GIL from Ruby, research anything to do with AI or computer vision.
PhD studies vary a lot depending on (1) the type of CS you're doing and (2) the part of the world you're in. Depending on these factors, a PhD can mean completely different things.
(1). Theory CS is very different from more applied topics. If you're planning to do theory, in my opinion, the main criterion should be whether you enjoy (and are good at) deep CS theory, something much closer to discrete mathematics than software. Can you enjoy it, for a long time, even if there is no practical application in sight? In this case you will indeed optimize for paper publication (although as you get more and more theoretical, the quality of your papers will matter more than quantity, and people will publish less generally, with fewer authors per paper, so you may even get judged by people who actually read your papers). Also, transitions to industry are generally easy, but your PhD will often be less valuable than the 4-7 years you spent on it. On the plus side, I feel that theory research depends more on your own abilities and a bit less on external factors (well connected advisor, strong research group, access to resources, luck getting the right coauthors).
If you have a specific branch of CS in mind, it's a good idea to check the match between that field and the school you apply to. All rankings are bad but http://csrankings.org/ can actually give you a decent first idea of what people in your school do.
(2). PhD studies mean very different things in different parts of the world. For example, in Europe, there are often few or no course, no exams (research only), tuition is generally negligible, and stipend vary hugely ($0.5k to $2.3k/mo net). In North America, tuition can be a big issue, you often take classes, and at top schools exams will be very much a fearsome filter. An American PhD's value varies accordingly.
The best thing would be to talk to some students in the programme before enrolling, to get a better idea.
(1). Theory CS is very different from more applied topics. If you're planning to do theory, in my opinion, the main criterion should be whether you enjoy (and are good at) deep CS theory, something much closer to discrete mathematics than software. Can you enjoy it, for a long time, even if there is no practical application in sight? In this case you will indeed optimize for paper publication (although as you get more and more theoretical, the quality of your papers will matter more than quantity, and people will publish less generally, with fewer authors per paper, so you may even get judged by people who actually read your papers). Also, transitions to industry are generally easy, but your PhD will often be less valuable than the 4-7 years you spent on it. On the plus side, I feel that theory research depends more on your own abilities and a bit less on external factors (well connected advisor, strong research group, access to resources, luck getting the right coauthors).
If you have a specific branch of CS in mind, it's a good idea to check the match between that field and the school you apply to. All rankings are bad but http://csrankings.org/ can actually give you a decent first idea of what people in your school do.
(2). PhD studies mean very different things in different parts of the world. For example, in Europe, there are often few or no course, no exams (research only), tuition is generally negligible, and stipend vary hugely ($0.5k to $2.3k/mo net). In North America, tuition can be a big issue, you often take classes, and at top schools exams will be very much a fearsome filter. An American PhD's value varies accordingly.
The best thing would be to talk to some students in the programme before enrolling, to get a better idea.
It depends.
I can tell you that (1) you don't really need it for an industry career and (2) you surely need it if going into academia.
On the downsides, a PhD means a number of your best years spent with a lowish salary and without a clear career path forward. It can be frustrating to spend time on some open problem without being sure you can solve it properly. Depending on the exact place where you do your PhD, you may need to play some number games to graduate, like having a certain number of publications in certain venues.
On the plus sides, a PhD can be incredibly interesting, if you enjoy the research of your advisor. It will also develop a number of other skills, such as networking, critical thinking, reading, possibly programming, patience, which could be useful later on. After the PhD, you will have some degree of freedom to pursue your own interests in an academic position and the pay will not be bad, although nowhere near what you would get in industry. You will be in a good position to start a company, though, if your research has immediate practical applications. In certain fields (AI, vision, systems/cloud) it will be easy to get a well paying industry job afterwards.
It used to be (pre-Covid) that you would travel to conferences in various places (in Computer Science, at least), which was a nice benefit. If you do a PhD, make sure you choose a lively venue, with other peers that you can discuss interesting topics with.
I can tell you that (1) you don't really need it for an industry career and (2) you surely need it if going into academia.
On the downsides, a PhD means a number of your best years spent with a lowish salary and without a clear career path forward. It can be frustrating to spend time on some open problem without being sure you can solve it properly. Depending on the exact place where you do your PhD, you may need to play some number games to graduate, like having a certain number of publications in certain venues.
On the plus sides, a PhD can be incredibly interesting, if you enjoy the research of your advisor. It will also develop a number of other skills, such as networking, critical thinking, reading, possibly programming, patience, which could be useful later on. After the PhD, you will have some degree of freedom to pursue your own interests in an academic position and the pay will not be bad, although nowhere near what you would get in industry. You will be in a good position to start a company, though, if your research has immediate practical applications. In certain fields (AI, vision, systems/cloud) it will be easy to get a well paying industry job afterwards.
It used to be (pre-Covid) that you would travel to conferences in various places (in Computer Science, at least), which was a nice benefit. If you do a PhD, make sure you choose a lively venue, with other peers that you can discuss interesting topics with.
If you do a PhD, please don’t show up in web development trying to learn React. Secretly we all think you are a waste of an education. If you do it, do it. Don’t come bouncing around for a paycheck afterward and bother us, and certainly don’t try to impress us with your wasted effort.
Just my 2 bitcoin, I’ve seen too many of you waste your time and then demand respect from web devs. Do you, but don’t bother us, and if we let you win, stfu and don’t bring up your wasted effort.
Just my 2 bitcoin, I’ve seen too many of you waste your time and then demand respect from web devs. Do you, but don’t bother us, and if we let you win, stfu and don’t bring up your wasted effort.
I'm interested in theories and I often read books and articles about them. However, I'm not sure if I am capable of producing quality research as I have no experience doing that. Also, from others comment on HN, it seems that research today is publish a lot -> optimize for H index -> get tenure and write grant proposals, which may not be something I would enjoy/capable of doing... I consider doing a grad study purely for the pursuit of knowledge, so I wonder if it would be better to just get a developer job instead of doing a grad study...