Concrete example, as I'm nearing the finishing line:

I'll have done what I wanted to do (so huge peace of mind), I'll get the "Dr" title, I'll have no money with a resonable amount of personal debt, and the chances of getting a lecturing position I want are very poor.

My friend, in the same period, got his PGCE, worked his way up, is now deputy head on £48k pa with all the school holidays to boot.

I don't care about money, and I knew the pitfalls of PhD-dom when I started, I'll be exceptionally proud of my research when I finish. Would I do it again? No. And that hurts. The infrastructure that houses the PhD culture in this country is a disgrace, in my humble opinion. Just as Thomas Harris's Clarice turned away from the values she found to be rotten in the FBI, I feel like turning away from academia for good.

I've spent the last few weeks reading for my viva. I feel that I have improved as a researcher far more than I had fully appreciated when I finally submitted the thesis. I've picked up papers I pidgeon holed half understood 3 years ago and been able to understand every part of them.

cont ..

I don't know wether I'll get my PhD yet, but I'm already bathing in that rosy glow of knowing I am more capable that I was before and I've come along way, alot like I felt after my BSc. I did my PhD because I though being a lecturer would be a rewarding job, having worked as one for a year its a brilliant job. Hard, but more satisfying, interesting and rewarding than I could have imagined.

cont ..

I don't known anyone who's finished a PhD and gone on to do badly. Once you have a phd you have a passport to research. Don't like your feild, do some reading and write in another area target a sector of industry and look for a job.

Tiggs

While I accept the above positives to doing a PhD, I would propose the following rebuttals:

1) "Improving as a researcher". You don't need a PhD to do this. You can do a formal taught course (e.g. an MSc) or work as a research assistant to improve your research skills just as well. Hell, you can even use a library and read books about how to do it.

2)"The PhD as a training for lecturing". I dont think doing a PhD is an effective way to teach lecturers. It is by its definition a research focussed qualification, and teaching and lecturing are very different. IMO, there is very little correlation between being good at research and good at teaching.

In addition I would add:

With due respect, Tiggs, that is rather vague, evades the problems highlighted by previous posters and puts rose-tinted spectacles on the current condition of post-PhD prospects in the UK.

The first couple of points are the same for almost everyone, dramatic improvement as a researcher and as an intellectual full-stop. Passport to research? Definitely not. Target another area, re-read, do something else - why? Over 3 years at the highest level becoming an expert in your field to be rewarded with what, precisely?

cont'd

3)"No one with a PhD ends up badly".

Unlike me?

I think "Ending Up Badly" needs to be defined. Sure, people with PhDs don't tend to be starving, drug addicts, wasting away from malnutrition. However, compared to most other professional pathways that require intensive postgraduate education (medicine, law, teaching, architecture) we suffer from poor pay, fixed contracts, a savage "publish or perish" system and a lack of respect.

And thats IF you become an academic. If you are one of the 50% that leaves academia, you have the debt of studying longer, re-training to do the job you could have probably done straight out of undergrad

The lack of post-PhD prospects is the real killer. I don't know any figures for other professions, but it seems to me (totally subjectively of course!) that law, medicine, dentistry etc. have jobs for their PGs - or at least for more of them compared to academic research.

I was thinking the other day, perhaps it would be better if funding bodies funded less PhD students for longer (3 yrs ain't long enough to fully complete). There are loads of PhDs in my place - and I know there are not that many jobs waiting for us all.

I really think that a serious talk to people about life after would lead to some would-be PhDs choosing more suitable paths for themselves and this would leave more funding for those who really want to 'do' academia.

BTW, I think I would be one of those who chose a different path. I keep fantasising about life as a GP or vet!

I've heard of worse fantasies Jenn!

One can place the argument the other way. Two of my friends are lecturers without PhD's in positions that ostensibly I could apply for if they were vacant. So what is the value of a PhD then? (In social science this is). Clearly, to be placed within academia, one does not need to have cmastered the highest level of expertise which, one would think, such positions demanded as an absolute requirement.

In FUNCTIONAL terms: Is the PhD worth less or just worthless?

Well, I'd say no, for many of the reasons above and on a personal level I've lost a lot of confidence in myself and been very depressed.
There is a move for more 4 year PhDs and less studentships looking into the future.

I have worse fantasies! I should have said, I keep dreaming longingly for life as a doctor or vet.

hmmm... whilst i overall agree, i'd be interested in what you all think of this:
first: my partner who is finishing his economics PhD just got a job, starting soon, as a lecturer, in the UK. this will be paying 37k in the first year with prospects of raises every year (£1k) and promotion to senior lecturer with significant pay raise sometime in the not-too-far future. lucky exception? perhaps. still, apparently it is possible, for some at least, to get good, well paying jobs right after your PhD.

second: in academia there are few "good" jobs and lots of contenders which makes for the high competitiveness. outside of academia there is also competition for the best jobs (there might be more well paying jobs around, but that's not all that counts, is it?). we with our certainly bright, educated minds we would have (would have had if we had chosen that path) a priviledged starting point in that competition and thus good chances of attaining those "good" jobs. instead we chose to enter a field where everyone else is just as smart and educated as we, thus increasing the elements of luck in who gets those sought-after jobs. we have less control, and might have to make do with second best, which could be quite bad. but that was our choice, no?

i'm only one year in but i believe right now i would do it again (my mood can change quickly though...). i want to be among the people i am now, even if it means i'm not the "bright, clever one" anymore but just one among many, thus making my chances of sticking out of the crowd and attaining one of those few good jobs slim.