We don't need no education

March 28, 2006 11:59 PM

I'm probably going to drop out of a Ph.D. program – should I still take my qualifying exams? Any chance this might let me ultimately get a Ph.D. while feeling like I left academia? If I do ultimately drop out, would taking exams have just been a big waste of time?

Here’s the scene. I finished my required coursework. The next step was to take a qualifying exam. After that, I then would write a dissertation.

But instead of taking exams, I took a year off. I wanted to get experience before narrowing down dissertation ideas. During that year, I realized that studying environmentalism is not nearly as rewarding as actually making environmental stuff happen. Turns out I'm much more entrepreneurial, political, and social network-building than scholarly.

I don’t need the degree for my job goals (environmental nonprofit work and/or writing) -- it wouldn't hurt, but it doesn't help as much as work experience does. The isolation, lack of structure, and sense of pointlessness have really gotten to me. And I'm starting to worry about my financial future (buying a house, starting a family) and don't want to spend 2-3 more years just breaking even.

So, I’m probably going to drop out. I have one or two job offers, at least one of which I could defer long enough to take qualifying exams. The question is, should I bother doing that?

I’m leaning toward doing it because I imagine, in the not-too-distant future, I could end up doing a project that might fulfill the dissertation requirement (either research as part of my job, or further out, an independent book project). Maybe with orals behind me, I could get my degree while basically doing something else. I’d also welcome the chance to pull together what I’ve learned -- the learning does appeal to me somewhat for its own sake, somewhat -- and I'd like to leave things at a good stopping point.

But I recognize that this may just be a last-ditch effort to keep going even though my heart's not in it. I can't tell if I'm essentially tricking myself into continuing, delaying the inevitable, or just leaving my options open. (I'm not sure it matters.)

The major reason not to: Exams are designed to prepare people to do a dissertation. So taking them, if I don't end up going on, could be a big waste of time and energy. (I don’t fully comprehend how much.) I'm pretty burned out. And given my burnout, and all the other exciting possibilities out there, I wouldn't persevere through life-or-death stress levels -- I would only succeed if I managed to de-escalate the situation somehow.

Advice? Experiences? Suggestions? Am I underestimating the devotion and complaisance needed to get through exams? Do you think I might actually be able to do a dissertation while feeling part of the working world (in terms of money and daily schedule)? Or are oral exams the last major hump before you really are a free agent with only one research project between you and a degree?

posted by ruff to Work & Money (21 answers total)

Much of it depends on how your program is structured.

For example, in some places, you have to complete your dissertation within a certain period of time after you enter (or take your qual). So, it may not be possible to just take the exam, and then at some indefinite time in the future do the dissertation.

In my experience, studying for such an exam is a lot of hard work. Don't do it unless you're really motivated to pass. The experience of studying and taking my qual was not all that rewarding. Except, it gave me a chance to see how all the different stuff I had learned fit together. On the whole, it took something like two or three months of studying 6 hours a day to get ready.

Generally the idea is that passing those exams signals your readiness to conduct research. In my experience, life as a grad student gets MUCH better after you're done with the coursework and the exams. I didn't realize just how rewarding doing research can be when I was first starting out as a grad student. So, I would say that if you’re not going to do research, then taking the qual is kind of a waste. The only possible benefit I can think of to taking a qualifying exam is that some places will let you get a candidate's degree (C. Phil.) once you pass, which is considered higher than a master's.

My advice is that unless you think there is good chance that in the near future you'll want to write a dissertation, skip the qual.
posted by epimorph at 1:15 AM on March 29, 2006

I should add that most of my experiences were with math, so the applicability of this to your situation may be limited.
posted by epimorph at 1:22 AM on March 29, 2006

a project that might fulfill the dissertation requirement (either research as part of my job, or further out, an independent book project).

I'm not sure what you mean here, but I have heard of very few (i.e. no) programs where the dissertation requirement is fulfilled by anything other than writing (and, usually, defending) a dissertation. You definitely want to sound this out with your advisor if you plan on trying it. People do write their dissertation after they get a job (although it doesn't seem easy, and I've known people who took several extra years to get even to a defense draft doing things that way, let alone to the submitted version; and these are with academic jobs). This wouldn't be possible at all without being ABD.

Also, if you ever decide you want to return, it would be a lot easier to return ABD than to return to quals.
posted by advil at 3:33 AM on March 29, 2006

A PhD is only a good investment if you're after the academic freedom and lifestyle. Monetarily, you are better off with work experience, and it sounds like you are, and will continue to be, more fulfilled by doing, rather than studying. Your performance in the exams wouldn't be as good with the burnout and without the motivation, so why bother? There would be hardly any reward, and you'd feel like crap after them.

I imagine you are talking about a PhD by publication. Don't know how they work, though. I think you write a scholarly book and ask for it to be examined.

In non US countries, PhDs rarely involve any exams, and are often over a lot quicker. If you were to resume later, it could be in another country.

End of brain dump! (Aussie PhD student, final year).
posted by cogat at 4:16 AM on March 29, 2006

I have lots of thoughts on this but here's a question first. Will finishing your qualifying exams allow you to get a terminal master's degree? Or do you already have a master's? If the exams get you that degree, it could be worth the slight pain and could give you some greater authority and legitimization than merely a bachelor's.
posted by fionab at 4:20 AM on March 29, 2006

Oh, you are thinking of doing a part-time dissertation whilst in the working world. Normally this gives you 1.5x the time to do it, but at the same time as a job the pressure is high. It's hard enough doing a PhD full-time, IMHO.

My suggestion for the part-time route is this: publish papers, without being enrolled at a university. When you have enough papers to make into a dissertation Sign up for a part-time degree, hand in the diss (after advice from your supervisor), and get it examined.
posted by cogat at 4:21 AM on March 29, 2006

I would take the exams and then take the job, but even there see if you can set aside time as a formal part of your job to pursue research that can lead to a dissertation.

The trick is to think about the future. Right now, the practical side of working is appealing, and it's obvious how that could be true. But you also say you want to have a family. This implies some ambition to provide more than the minimum - which means (in many things related to the environment) something like project management, nonprofit organization management or research institute management.

You'll be able to do either at a low to intermediate level with your current training, but sooner or later you're going to suddenly find that you're competing for all the jobs you want against people with all of your experience AND a PhD.

So in 10 years there's a high likelihood you're going to be scrambling around trying to figure out a way to make the work you've done "count" against a PhD at that time. It makes sense in such a context to suck it up, work your ass off and do both the job AND the PhD - and not limit yourself in later years.
posted by mikel at 4:42 AM on March 29, 2006

A PhD is only a good investment if you're after the academic freedom and lifestyle. Monetarily, you are better off with work experience

This is not the case in, for example, biological research, where to be promoted to a position of authority and still do research (as opposed to QA or other more businessy type things) one must have a Ph.D. There is a fairly low ceiling at virtually all companies for people without one.
posted by rxrfrx at 4:53 AM on March 29, 2006

Speaking as a current PhD student (halfway through dissertation), I'd say forget the exams. If you're already feeling disillusioned, studying for them will be absolute torture - you can always come back to the PhD at a later stage if you feel like you need it for employment reasons. (And do it somewhere where the process if quicker.) Also, it has been my experience that the reason for the exams is not to prepare you for your dissertation, but to prepare you to teach - and if you're not into the academia thing, then why bother? Yes, it totally sucks to just throw away all of the work you've already done - but employers will take what you have done into consideration. Of my friends that have abandoned a PhD, none of them have been penalized in their fields for doing so.

You need a HUGE support system to actually FINISH a PhD - your dissertation may take years after the exams, if you're having doubts now, I'd be a little worried about completing it. (I am also speaking as a person who purposely did her PhD in another country so I wouldn't have to take the exams - which I believe are a big waste of time - so you may want to read this with a grain of salt.)
posted by meerkatty at 5:09 AM on March 29, 2006

Ultimately, this will depend on your particular program.

For my program, if you left after completing and passing exams, you could receive a terminal Masters (and if you left before, you received nothing).

The other part that will depend on your program is the specific clause the discusses the time period after passing the exams. In my program, as long as you were in the program and conducting research, you were financially supported and allowed to continue. I had a friend at a big name school who believe it or not floated around for 10 years and was never asked to leave (there were no time limits). At other schools, there is a certain time period and if you do not finish, its over. So if there is not a time limit, you could potentially return several years later and finish.

All of the above info should be spelled out in either your course catalog or in the graduate school webpage.

Is it worth the timie to just take the tests/difficulty? Again depends on your school (and you). For me, the courses and exams were easy believe it or not. I did not invest much time and passed. The part that killed me was the research - never found it interesting and it became more and more pointless as time went on.

Best of luck. Sounds like it will be more rewarding for you once you leave academia.
posted by Wolfster at 5:38 AM on March 29, 2006

I'd say take the exams. It opens up the possibility of a dissertation down the road and life is all about the possibilities, no. I would also disagree about the worth of a D in the nonprofit sector. Whereas experience is the most important in choosing leaders, a PhD could really separate you from the crowd if you get ambitious in a couple of years.
posted by jmgorman at 6:05 AM on March 29, 2006

Ugh. I say cut and run. Watching various friends get PhD's (computer science, molecular bio, american culture) has convinced me that it's an absolutely dismal and unrewarding process unless your heart is completely in it. Yours isn't.
posted by selfmedicating at 6:42 AM on March 29, 2006

I can't speak for environmental science, but the first time I studied for my physics qualifier, I studied full time for an entire summer. I failed. The second time, I studied on the weekends in the spring and full time all summer. I passed. Barely. The qualifying exam is by far the hardest part of the physics PhD. If you're not motivated enough to put that kind of effort into preparing for it, you won't pass.
posted by dirigibleman at 6:53 AM on March 29, 2006

I don’t need the degree for my job goals (environmental nonprofit work and/or writing)

This is what my job entails, and I just earned my Ph.D. last year. In fact, having the Ph.D. got me the job. The good thing about having the degree is that if/when I decide to pursue a different part of the field, I already have the hard work done.

That said, I echo what others are saying. If your program offers a terminal Masters when you take your exams I would go for it, because it will help you out in the long run. Otherwise, if you're just feeling abused by your Ph.D. program and not enjoying it, get out. Find something you love.
posted by nekton at 8:10 AM on March 29, 2006

Just to reiterate what another math guy said -- if you wait too long after taking the qual, you may be required to take it again. It should be an easy thing to determine about your program.
posted by Aknaton at 8:27 AM on March 29, 2006

Can you talk to your advisor about this situation, or are they part of the problem?
posted by mrmojoflying at 9:16 AM on March 29, 2006

I will assume that you know what your program's requirements are and that the various alternatives you've listed are all viable.

With that understanding. You mentioned that you can generate all or part of the dissertation as a byproduct of the work you are looking to take. You also mentioned that your primary interest is to get out into the field and away from academia. But why can't you do the fieldwork as a gradutate student? In this way you get to be proactive and feel like you are making a difference in the real world, while you earn your PhD.

This solution doesn't immediately address your financial concerns but it puts you in a better position later on. PhD's are inherently advantageous. They confer greater authority, flexibility and higher employment ceilings.

If you can indeed kill two birds with one stone, I would think that setting out to do so purposefully (and not just hoping that some work will miraculously fill the requirements of a dissertation) would be the way to go.
posted by oddman at 9:18 AM on March 29, 2006

2nd year mid-comprehensives Canadian environmental studies PhD student writing here.

This is such a personal call-but it does sound like you're already in your way out the door, so to speak.

One thought: having a PhD in your back-pocket doesn't mean that you're stuck in Academia forever. I know a number of professors who returned to the ivory tower only after working as consultants after completing their edu-ma-cation. If academia doesn't suit, there's no one stopping you from working for an NGO or becoming an intellectual entrepreneur.

Another thought: Though you don't need you PhD for the kind of work that gets you going, could it be a way to differentiate yourself down the road? Completing a PhD is full of transferable skills (including sticking with tasks where the payoffs are well off in the future) that employers like.

Final thought: If academic work is too dull and doesn't give you the kind of experiences you crave, why not volunteer for an organization while still in school? Just 'cause you're not getting paid for it, doesn't mean it won't count as experience in the future.

Personally speaking, I'm finding comprehensives an exercise in hoop-jumping, but I know that I'll have free reign in what I study for my dissertation work. The excitement of that project is what keeps me going right now.
posted by gavia at 9:25 AM on March 29, 2006

Talk to an advisor, but customarily even with an MA/MS--even after passing quals/comps--you will have to meet a new program's credit/residency requirements. You might be able to transfer credits in, but you likely will have to start almost from scratch. If you switch fields, this is definitely the case.

Sounds like you don't really feel motivated enough to see the entire program through to completion (maybe another 5 years), so get your Masters and get out.

I did it and returned to an entirely different doctoral field after a 6 year hiatus. I love my new program (I'm in my 3rd year and about to take quals/comps) but I can't imaging going through all this pain if I didn't really know down in my gut that I wanted to see this program through.
posted by onetreehill at 9:26 AM on March 29, 2006

Response by poster: Thanks for all the thoughts, everyone. Just have a sec (will return to the thread in a bit) but at the moment, wanted to at least add the info that I do have a terminal masters already.
posted by ruff at 12:07 PM on March 29, 2006

OK, some of the comments about non-US programs seem a little irrelevant, if you're a student where your profile says you live (i.e. in the US), so I'll keep my comments related to US programs.

First, since you already have a terminal/transitional MS/MA degree, there doesn't seem to be much use in taking the test for that purpose, assuming again that the terminal degree is in the same field. If not, it still may be worthwhile to take the second MS degree.

Exams are tough, as are classes, but it's also true that the most important thing a PhD student does is his/her dissertation. So don't overestimate the value of being ABD--it's all about the "D", and very little about the "AB" components.

As for submitting a project you've completed under different auspices, that also may not be possible--lots of US universities have explicit dual-use policies that prevent students from submitting work completed in other contexts for their dissertations. Check to see if yours does. If it does, you may still be able to utilize research you do for an employer, but you'll need to confer with a committee as the work progresses, and not just hand them a final product at the end.

I'd say that you should take the exams if you (1) can get something concrete out of the experience, or (2) think there is any chance at all that you'll want to return to finish the PhD in the next 5 years. Otherwise, work on getting some good recommendations from your professors and try something else for a while.

[Oh, and it's also not true that programs outside of the US don't require exams; most do, in fact.]
posted by yellowcandy at 12:32 PM on March 29, 2006