寄托天下
查看: 1957|回复: 3
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[求学路上] Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time [复制链接]

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
168
寄托币
3242
注册时间
2013-1-23
精华
0
帖子
784
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2013-5-25 09:22:12 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览
本帖最后由 jialang74 于 2013-5-25 09:24 编辑

Doctoral degrees
The disposable academic

Dec 16th 2010 |From the print edition

A PhD may offer no financial benefit over a master's degree. It can even reduce earnings

The interests of universities and tenured academics are misaligned with those of PhD students


ON THE evening before All Saints' Day in 1517, Martin Luther nailed 95 theses to the door of a church in Wittenberg. In those days a thesis was simply a position one wanted to argue. Luther, an Augustinian friar, asserted that Christians could not buy their way to heaven. Today a doctoral thesis is both an idea and an account of a period of original research. Writing one is the aim of the hundreds of thousands of students who embark on a doctorate of philosophy (PhD) every year.

In most countries a PhD is a basic requirement for a career in academia. It is an introduction to the world of independent research—a kind of intellectual masterpiece, created by an apprentice in close collaboration with a supervisor. The requirements to complete one vary enormously between countries, universities and even subjects. Some students will first have to spend two years working on a master's degree or diploma. Some will receive a stipend; others will pay their own way. Some PhDs involve only research, some require classes and examinations and some require the student to teach undergraduates. A thesis can be dozens of pages in mathematics, or many hundreds in history. As a result, newly minted PhDs can be as young as their early 20s or world-weary forty-somethings.

One thing many PhD students have in common is dissatisfaction. Some describe their work as “slave labour”. Seven-day weeks, ten-hour days, low pay and uncertain prospects are widespread. You know you are a graduate student, goes one quip, when your office is better decorated than your home and you have a favourite flavour of instant noodle. “It isn't graduate school itself that is discouraging,” says one student, who confesses to rather enjoying the hunt for free pizza. “What's discouraging is realising the end point has been yanked out of reach.”

Whining PhD students are nothing new, but there seem to be genuine problems with the system that produces research doctorates (the practical “professional doctorates” in fields such as law, business and medicine have a more obvious value). There is an oversupply of PhDs. Although a doctorate is designed as training for a job in academia, the number of PhD positions is unrelated to the number of job openings. Meanwhile, business leaders complain about shortages of high-level skills, suggesting PhDs are not teaching the right things. The fiercest critics compare research doctorates to Ponzi or pyramid schemes.

Rich pickings

For most of history even a first degree at a university was the privilege of a rich few, and many academic staff did not hold doctorates. But as higher education expanded after the second world war, so did the expectation that lecturers would hold advanced degrees. American universities geared up first: by 1970 America was producing just under a third of the world's university students and half of its science and technology PhDs (at that time it had only 6% of the global population). Since then America's annual output of PhDs has doubled, to 64,000.

Other countries are catching up. Between 1998 and 2006 the number of doctorates handed out in all OECD countries grew by 40%, compared with 22% for America. PhD production sped up most dramatically in Mexico, Portugal, Italy and Slovakia. Even Japan, where the number of young people is shrinking, churned out about 46% more PhDs. Part of that growth reflects the expansion of university education outside America. Richard Freeman, a labour economist at Harvard University, says that by 2006 America was enrolling just 12% of the world's students.

But universities have discovered that PhD students are cheap, highly motivated and disposable labour. With more PhD students they can do more research, and in some countries more teaching, with less money. A graduate assistant at Yale might earn $20,000 a year for nine months of teaching. The average pay of full professors in America was $109,000 in 2009—higher than the average for judges and magistrates.

Indeed, the production of PhDs has far outstripped demand for university lecturers. In a recent book, Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus, an academic and a journalist, report that America produced more than 100,000 doctoral degrees between 2005 and 2009. In the same period there were just 16,000 new professorships. Using PhD students to do much of the undergraduate teaching cuts the number of full-time jobs. Even in Canada, where the output of PhD graduates has grown relatively modestly, universities conferred 4,800 doctorate degrees in 2007 but hired just 2,616 new full-time professors. Only a few fast-developing countries, such as Brazil and China, now seem short of PhDs.

A short course in supply and demand

In research the story is similar. PhD students and contract staff known as “postdocs”, described by one student as “the ugly underbelly of academia”, do much of the research these days. There is a glut of postdocs too. Dr Freeman concluded from pre-2000 data that if American faculty jobs in the life sciences were increasing at 5% a year, just 20% of students would land one. In Canada 80% of postdocs earn $38,600 or less per year before tax—the average salary of a construction worker. The rise of the postdoc has created another obstacle on the way to an academic post. In some areas five years as a postdoc is now a prerequisite for landing a secure full-time job.

These armies of low-paid PhD researchers and postdocs boost universities', and therefore countries', research capacity. Yet that is not always a good thing. Brilliant, well-trained minds can go to waste when fashions change. The post-Sputnik era drove the rapid growth in PhD physicists that came to an abrupt halt as the Vietnam war drained the science budget. Brian Schwartz, a professor of physics at the City University of New York, says that in the 1970s as many as 5,000 physicists had to find jobs in other areas.

In America the rise of PhD teachers' unions reflects the breakdown of an implicit contract between universities and PhD students: crummy pay now for a good academic job later. Student teachers in public universities such as the University of Wisconsin-Madison formed unions as early as the 1960s, but the pace of unionisation has increased recently. Unions are now spreading to private universities; though Yale and Cornell, where university administrators and some faculty argue that PhD students who teach are not workers but apprentices, have resisted union drives. In 2002 New York University was the first private university to recognise a PhD teachers' union, but stopped negotiating with it three years later.

In some countries, such as Britain and America, poor pay and job prospects are reflected in the number of foreign-born PhD students. Dr Freeman estimates that in 1966 only 23% of science and engineering PhDs in America were awarded to students born outside the country. By 2006 that proportion had increased to 48%. Foreign students tend to tolerate poorer working conditions, and the supply of cheap, brilliant, foreign labour also keeps wages down.

Proponents of the PhD argue that it is worthwhile even if it does not lead to permanent academic employment. Not every student embarks on a PhD wanting a university career and many move successfully into private-sector jobs in, for instance, industrial research. That is true; but drop-out rates suggest that many students become dispirited. In America only 57% of doctoral students will have a PhD ten years after their first date of enrolment. In the humanities, where most students pay for their own PhDs, the figure is 49%. Worse still, whereas in other subject areas students tend to jump ship in the early years, in the humanities they cling like limpets before eventually falling off. And these students started out as the academic cream of the nation. Research at one American university found that those who finish are no cleverer than those who do not. Poor supervision, bad job prospects or lack of money cause them to run out of steam.

Even graduates who find work outside universities may not fare all that well. PhD courses are so specialised that university careers offices struggle to assist graduates looking for jobs, and supervisors tend to have little interest in students who are leaving academia. One OECD study shows that five years after receiving their degrees, more than 60% of PhDs in Slovakia and more than 45% in Belgium, the Czech Republic, Germany and Spain were still on temporary contracts. Many were postdocs. About one-third of Austria's PhD graduates take jobs unrelated to their degrees. In Germany 13% of all PhD graduates end up in lowly occupations. In the Netherlands the proportion is 21%.

A very slim premium

PhD graduates do at least earn more than those with a bachelor's degree. A study in the Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management by Bernard Casey shows that British men with a bachelor's degree earn 14% more than those who could have gone to university but chose not to. The earnings premium for a PhD is 26%. But the premium for a master's degree, which can be accomplished in as little as one year, is almost as high, at 23%. In some subjects the premium for a PhD vanishes entirely. PhDs in maths and computing, social sciences and languages earn no more than those with master's degrees. The premium for a PhD is actually smaller than for a master's degree in engineering and technology, architecture and education. Only in medicine, other sciences, and business and financial studies is it high enough to be worthwhile. Over all subjects, a PhD commands only a 3% premium over a master's degree.

Dr Schwartz, the New York physicist, says the skills learned in the course of a PhD can be readily acquired through much shorter courses. Thirty years ago, he says, Wall Street firms realised that some physicists could work out differential equations and recruited them to become “quants”, analysts and traders. Today several short courses offer the advanced maths useful for finance. “A PhD physicist with one course on differential equations is not competitive,” says Dr Schwartz.

Many students say they are pursuing their subject out of love, and that education is an end in itself. Some give little thought to where the qualification might lead. In one study of British PhD graduates, about a third admitted that they were doing their doctorate partly to go on being a student, or put off job hunting. Nearly half of engineering students admitted to this. Scientists can easily get stipends, and therefore drift into doing a PhD. But there are penalties, as well as benefits, to staying at university. Workers with “surplus schooling”—more education than a job requires—are likely to be less satisfied, less productive and more likely to say they are going to leave their jobs.

Academics tend to regard asking whether a PhD is worthwhile as analogous to wondering whether there is too much art or culture in the world. They believe that knowledge spills from universities into society, making it more productive and healthier. That may well be true; but doing a PhD may still be a bad choice for an individual.

The interests of academics and universities on the one hand and PhD students on the other are not well aligned. The more bright students stay at universities, the better it is for academics. Postgraduate students bring in grants and beef up their supervisors' publication records. Academics pick bright undergraduate students and groom them as potential graduate students. It isn't in their interests to turn the smart kids away, at least at the beginning. One female student spoke of being told of glowing opportunities at the outset, but after seven years of hard slog she was fobbed off with a joke about finding a rich husband.

Monica Harris, a professor of psychology at the University of Kentucky, is a rare exception. She believes that too many PhDs are being produced, and has stopped admitting them. But such unilateral academic birth control is rare. One Ivy-League president, asked recently about PhD oversupply, said that if the top universities cut back others will step in to offer them instead.

Noble pursuits

Many of the drawbacks of doing a PhD are well known. Your correspondent was aware of them over a decade ago while she slogged through a largely pointless PhD in theoretical ecology. As Europeans try to harmonise higher education, some institutions are pushing the more structured learning that comes with an American PhD.

The organisations that pay for research have realised that many PhDs find it tough to transfer their skills into the job market. Writing lab reports, giving academic presentations and conducting six-month literature reviews can be surprisingly unhelpful in a world where technical knowledge has to be assimilated quickly and presented simply to a wide audience. Some universities are now offering their PhD students training in soft skills such as communication and teamwork that may be useful in the labour market. In Britain a four-year NewRoutePhD claims to develop just such skills in graduates.

Measurements and incentives might be changed, too. Some university departments and academics regard numbers of PhD graduates as an indicator of success and compete to produce more. For the students, a measure of how quickly those students get a permanent job, and what they earn, would be more useful. Where penalties are levied on academics who allow PhDs to overrun, the number of students who complete rises abruptly, suggesting that students were previously allowed to fester.

Many of those who embark on a PhD are the smartest in their class and will have been the best at everything they have done. They will have amassed awards and prizes. As this year's new crop of graduate students bounce into their research, few will be willing to accept that the system they are entering could be designed for the benefit of others, that even hard work and brilliance may well not be enough to succeed, and that they would be better off doing something else. They might use their research skills to look harder at the lot of the disposable academic. Someone should write a thesis about that.

From the print edition: Christmas Specials

the original
http://www.economist.com/node/17723223

0 0

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
168
寄托币
3242
注册时间
2013-1-23
精华
0
帖子
784
沙发
发表于 2013-5-25 09:37:36 |只看该作者
读博士为什么是浪费时间

译者 古雷

《 青年参考 》( 2013年04月24日   36 版)



博士生拿着低薪从事“奴隶劳动”

    1517年万圣节前夜,马丁·路德将95条论纲钉在了维滕贝格一个教堂的门上。在那个年代,一条论纲只是作者想要主张的一种观点。路德是信奉奥古斯丁教义的修士,他认为基督教徒不能用金钱铺筑通往天国的道路。

    时至今日,博士论文不仅是阐述某种观点,还是对原创研究过程的记述。每年都有成千上万的学生为获得博士学位而撰写论文。

    在多数国家,博士学位是进入学术界的门槛,是进入独立研究领域的敲门砖——它就像某种知识杰作,由学徒与指导者通力协作完成。

    获得学位的要求,不同国家、大学甚至不同专业,要求各不一样。有些地方要求学生先花上两年时间拿到硕士学位或文凭。这些学生中有些人会得到一定补贴,另外一些则是完全自费。

    要获取某些博士学位只需要研究,有一些则是要求修完学分后参加考试,或给大学生授课。一篇数学学术论文可以是几十页,历史类学术论文则可能多达数百页。因此,新科博士有些还是20来岁的小伙子,有些是已经厌世的40来岁中年人。

    许多博士生有一个共同点:对现状不满。一些人称自己的工作是“奴隶劳动”。每周7天,每天10小时干活,工资低,前途渺茫,这种情况十分普遍。

    有笑话称,当你办公室的装修比家还豪华,还有喜欢的方便面牌子时,你知道自己是一名研究生了。“问题不是研究生院让人泄气。”一位坦承喜欢学院提供的免费披萨的学生说,“真正让人泄气的,是终点遥不可及。”

    纵观历史,大多数时候,到大学读学位是少数富人的特权,甚至很多执教人员都没有博士学位。二战后,高等教育扩张,讲师也被要求要有较高学历。美国大学堪称这方面的领头羊。

    到1970年,美国大学学生占全球的1/3,却颁发了全球一半的自然科学和工业技术的博士学位,当时美国人口仅占世界人口的6%。此后,美国每年博士出产量不断翻番,一直到每年6.4万人。

    其他国家也在追赶。从1998年到2006年,经合组织国家颁发的博士学位数量增加40%,同期美国增加22%。博士培养在墨西哥、葡萄牙、意大利和斯洛伐克尤为显著。甚至在年轻人口不断缩减的日本,也增加了46%。

    这些增长反映了美国以外大学教育的迅猛扩张。哈佛大学劳动经济学家理查德·弗里曼说,到2006年,美国高等学校招收的新生,只占世界的12%。

    博士在读生是积极性很高的、可供任意支配的廉价劳动力,招收更多博士生有助于学校开展更多研究项目。在一些国家,这些博士生可以用来扩展教育,而成本较低。一位耶鲁大学研究生助教9个月的教职收入为两万美元,而2009年全美在职教授的年均薪酬为10.9万美元。

    博士和博士后均供过于求

    博士生牢骚满腹不是什么新鲜事。不过,研究型博士的培养体系本身,似乎确实存在问题。而实用型“专业博士”,比如法学博士、商学博士以及医学博士,含金量要高很多。

    博士供过于求。博士学位授予量与研究职位数量严重脱节。与此同时,很多企业领导抱怨招不到高级技术人员,这表明博士教学与现实不对口。最激烈的批评者甚至将研究型博士学位的培养体系,比作庞氏骗局或是传销。

    实际上,博士“年产量”大大高出大学对讲师的需求。学者和记者安德鲁·哈克与克劳迪亚·德雷弗斯的著作称,美国在2005到2009年间一共培养出10万多名博士。与此同时,教授之职仅新增1.6万个。

    让在读博士生去教本科生的做法,导致全职教师职位减少。甚至在加拿大这种博士毕业生增长不多的国家,2007年授予4800人博士学位,同时却只新增2616人作为全职教授。在一些快速发展的国家,像巴西和中国,现在博士生似乎很短缺。

    研究领域存在同样情况。现如今,博士生以及作为合同雇员的“博士后”(有人称之为“学院的丑陋软肋”),承担大多数研究工作。博士后现在也是供过于求。

    弗里曼对2000年之前的数据研究显示,在美国生命科学领域,如果教职工作的需求每年增长5%,那这些学生(博士和博士后)里,仅有20%的人能找到工作。在加拿大,80%的博士后每年挣3.86万美元甚至更少,相当于当地建筑工人的平均薪资。

    博士后数量的增加,客观上成了博士生们通往学术职位的另一个障碍。在某些领域,有5年博士后的资历,是获得一份全职工作的前提。

    低薪博士研究人员和博士后大军,提升了大学及国家科研能力。但这并非总是好事。世易时移,受过良好训练的杰出人才或许变得无用。

    在有些国家,比如美国和英国,糟糕的薪酬和职业前景,反映在博士留学生的数量上。据弗里曼估计,在1966年,仅有23%的自然科学以及工程类博士文凭颁给留学生。到2006年,比例增至48%。相比国内学生,留学生更愿意忍受更差的工作条件。同时,这些优秀的外国廉价劳动力,使得薪酬成本大为降低。

    博士生找工作缺乏竞争力

    相比拥有硕士学位,拥有博士学位未必带来更大经济利益,甚至收入反而更少。

    支持博士教育的人说,即使不能获得一份稳定的学术研究工作,读博士也值得。并非每个博士生都想进大学工作,许多毕业后都去了私营部门。

    这确是事实,但博士生退学率居高不下,表明很多博士在读学生没有信心。在美国,仅有57%博士学位的学生最终拿到学位。在人文学科(大多数属自费读博),比例为49%。更糟糕的是,其他领域的博士生,在攻读博士的头一年,很多人倾向于换专业。

    但人文学科博士生却不一样,他们最开始坚守领域,但最终很多人不得不放弃。这些放弃了的人,却反而成了那些国家的学术精英。美国大学的一个研究报告表明,那些完成了博士学位的人,并不比中途弃学的人聪明多少。缺乏指导、职业前景黯淡及经济拮据,都是他们最终放弃的原因。

    那些在大学外找到工作的博士毕业生,也并非表现优异。一方面是因为博士课程本身专业性太强,大学就业指导工作人员不得不费力帮助学生找工作;而另一方面导师往往对离开学院的博士生缺乏兴趣。

    经合组织的一项研究表明,博士们在获得学位后的5年,很多人都从事临时工作,这一比例在斯洛伐克超过60%,在比利时、捷克共和国、德国和西班牙超过45%。他们中很多人是博士后。约1/3的奥地利博士从事着与其学位无关的工作。在德国,13%的博士毕业生最后从事着卑微的工作。在荷兰,这一比例是21%。

    博士毕业生们确实领着比本科生更高的薪酬。《高等教育政策及管理》杂志刊登的伯纳德·凯西所做的一项研究表明,在英国,学士的收入比那些可以去上大学而未去上的人,收入高出14%。而博士的这一比例为26%。但硕士学位的回报却同样很高,有23%。有些硕士文凭仅靠一年时间就能取得。

    在某些领域,博士学位的优势荡然无存。在数学、计算机、社会科学以及语言学领域,博士挣的钱和硕士几乎一样。在工程、工业技术、建筑和教育领域,博士的收入甚至低于硕士。仅在医药、其他科学领域、商学和金融学领域,博士获得的回报才能说可以与付出相称。将各个行业平均起来,博士仅比硕士收入高出3%。

    施瓦茨博士是一名物理学家。他说,许多博士课程都可用时间更短的课程取代。他说,30年前,华尔街公司发现,有些物理学家能解出很难的微分方程,于是聘请他们来做“理学专家”、分析师和交易人。但今天一些更短的课程就已提供金融业所需的高等数学。施瓦茨说:“一个会解微分方程的物理博士生,已没有竞争力。”

    前途无量还是“钓个金龟婿”?

    许多学生说,他们开始某一领域的研究,纯粹出于热爱,研究本身就是目的。他们中很少人去想获得相关文凭后,将来出路在哪里。

    在英国,一项针对博士毕业生的研究显示,1/3承认之所以读博只是因为他们想继续做学生,或是想推迟去寻求工作。约有一半工程领域的博士生承认了这一点。科研人员能轻易获得补贴,因此他们就随大流地读起了博士。

    但选择继续待在学校有利也有弊。那些受到的教育远多于工作所需——即“受教育过剩”的人,会更容易对工作感到不满意,产出也更低,而且更容易跳槽。

    学院派人士认为,怀疑读博士学位是否值得,跟这个世界是否有太多艺术和文化一样多余。他们认为,知识学问从大学渗透到社会各个层面,让这个社会更多产、更健康。这或许没错,但对个人来说,读博仍是一个坏选择。

    学院和大学与博士生的利益并不一致。待在大学里的学生越聪明,对学院就越好。研究生能带来更多财政拨款,能丰富其导师的学术研究论文发表记录。学者们精心挑选优秀的本科生,训练他们成为将来的研究生。把这些聪明孩子送出校门,对导师毫无益处,至少开始时是这样。

    一位女学生,曾被导师殷切寄语,说她前途无量。该生此后开始漫长的7年学术研究之路,最后导师建议她去钓个金龟婿好了。

    读博士的种种弊端早已尽人皆知。我在10年前攻读一个基本上毫无意义的理论生态学博士时,对此就一清二楚了。当时欧洲试图统一高等教育,一些大学推动带有美国博士学位的结构化学习。

    为研究提供资金的机构意识到,很多博士发现在劳动力市场中,技能难以得到发挥。撰写实验报告、介绍学术观点及查阅文献等技能,在现今这个技术知识迅速被吸收消化,并被迅速传播给广大受众的现实社会里,显得毫无用处。

    一些大学目前也在为博士生培训“软技能”,比如沟通能力、团队合作能力等,这些在求职市场里或许会派上用场。在英国,一个为期4年的“新通道博士”项目声称,为博士生提供此类技能培训。

    评估标准和激励动力可能也有必要改变。一些大学院系将每年产出博士的数量,作为成功标准,因而竞相培养更多博士生。对学生而言,更实际的衡量标准是他们多久能找到一份固定工作,收入会是多少。

    许多博士生是班上最聪明的,在各方面表现突出。他们在人生旅途上会获得无数赞誉和奖赏。每年新一批研究生踏上学术研究之路时,很少有人愿意选择去相信,他们进入的这个体系,是为他人的好处而设计的,刻苦和优秀都不足以保证成功,他们最好做点别的什么事。

    他们或许可以利用研究技能,更深入审视这种可有可无的博士教育。我觉得该有人就此写一个论文。

    □英国《经济学人》杂志

原文
http://qnck.cyol.com/html/2013-0 ... k_20130424_1-36.htm

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
81
寄托币
1220
注册时间
2012-12-2
精华
0
帖子
485
板凳
发表于 2013-5-25 10:39:48 |只看该作者
读博士其实是一种职业选择,想做研究和想去大学做老师的人读博士很合适,如果想读完博士找工作,那读博士就真的是浪费生命和时间了。

使用道具 举报

Rank: 5Rank: 5

声望
47
寄托币
1712
注册时间
2013-3-12
精华
0
帖子
271
地板
发表于 2013-5-25 15:20:34 |只看该作者
最近一直在读不读博间纠结,哎苦命的文科生。。

使用道具 举报

RE: Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time [修改]

问答
Offer
投票
面经
最新
精华
转发
转发该帖子
Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1586783-1-1.html
复制链接
发送
回顶部