“Without my PhD I wouldn't have been able to get an extremely well-paid position in a very well-known management consulting firm. I also had an offer for a lecturership in Limerick” – are you suggesting therefore that PhD’s are generally worthwhile and lead to the kinds of positions you describe or are you merely telling people you don’t know that you have a lovely, shiny new job that pays you bundles of cash to feel important when you type on here? Hmmmm? Your writing is as confused as it is confusing.

If you are about to launch into a personal attack on someone, isn’t it simple courtesy to read what they’ve said before responding? Or don’t they teach that in management consultancy? “Stop crying like a girl and get a life” – ah, the aggressive, emotional contribution that belies the intelligence of a PhD candidate/graduate. But as you later say, “only the toughest survive, not necessarily the most intelligent”. So, the most important thing about conducting, say, sociological research or other research that contributes to the fund of knowledge available in human societies is to be, er, “tough”. That offers tremendous hope to the marines amongst us, I’m sure.

Recently back from a much-earned break in Corfu. Ready to attack and finish the write-up by Christmas (he said, tongue-in-cheek).

Unlike some I have read the full thread, and contributed to it.
I was as amused as I was astounded by o.stoll’s comments, and as there are a number of people on here just starting out and asking questions that relate to the thread title, I thought it worth adding to my previous comments.

I thought the opening-line contribution of “Didn’t read the entire thread” revealed more about the poster than anything else, which is saying something.

Interesting replies eh Jennifr?

A few no's and a few hell yeah's!

It seems that those who have something (like a job) sorted WELL before completing their research and findings are the happiest - to wit, in 5 years (imo) the PhD pathway will be as useful as a chocolate fireguard for the vast majority, and the quality, the relative brilliance of the contribution made through their thesis will be almost totally redundant. What will be important -- and quite right too, of course!! -- is doing 8 million teaching hours for the "c.v." and publishing something (damn it, ANYTHING (it doesn't really matter)) in some (rancid/obscure) journal before knowing what the hell one is really on about.

Abandon ship, abandon ship!!

I can only speak for myself, sometimes the royal 'we' will get used; and I may as well as I'm going out soon so no typing today!

It's not about being disillusioned or not being clued up. I'm 31, for example, and like nearly everyone 'we' know the score and we know the pitfalls from the very start. I did it for all sorts of reasons and couldn't have asked for a better 3 years (so highly positive).

But that's only part of the story. The question remains of why a doctorate continues to be so poorly valued for a great many people, irrespective of their experience during the PhD. That is a much bigger institutional/structural question and, it appears to me, universities couldn't give a toss about it. I can be highly positive and satisfied as a "Dr" but also seriously question the utility and worth of the award I will be given, and the implications of this.

cont'd

The scenario only seems set to worsen so far as I can tell, particularly for those subjects that do not lend themselves to 'industry' or any other sphere outside of academia.

'Someone' said to me - regarding PhD's in the social sciences - that British universities operate much like how a mouse is asked to run on their wheel inside their cage. Hmmm.

@ BadHairCut:
We are clearly in agreement on this issue. My 'worthless' comment was obviously tongue-in-cheek and I wouldn't dare to devalue my, your or anyone's efforts on this pathway.

I am interested in what people's thoughts are on the matter as it's a discussion that isn't often had, it seems. The award of a PhD (I can imiagine) is exhilerating and extremely fulfilling, with the 'expert' tag a satisfying feeling. And that really is worth attaining. I wonder, though, if the functional utility of the award is represented in any other way for the majority of holders. If not, surely a pre-PhD handbook of some sort should be compulsory to alert potential candidates to the scenario they will face upon completion.

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?

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?

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.

..........

But just like the physical sciences the problems still have to be worked through, tested, accepted or revised and so on. It's hard work hitting the level that established scholars are at (even if disagreeing with what they are saying!!), and I'm struck by the number of people who don't finish on time - that's not a criticism, just a measure of how hard writing a PhD in 3 years actually is, hence the urging to start the writing process as early as one can in order to perceive more clearly the enormity of the task ahead.

Hi MsCrow
Well I suppose it's how clear on things people are approaching the start of their PhD. I had my research area, theoretical approach and empirical avenue all pretty much nailed down, so I just cracked on with arguments for what I was proposing and (largely) against those that had been put forward already. The writing was too simplistic and not balanced enough, for example.

As people say there are many who don't write anything/much and there has to be a period of learning and 'grinding away' as it were.

..........

Wowzers, I'm not right often so get in !!

Good luck with it imo.

Hi SK -

I'm social sciences, near the end. You must write something! You won't advance at the required rate unless you start to detail your arguments in a scholarly way, and the sooner the better as whatever you write at first will invariably be cack (no offense). Don't confuse the urgency to get writing with the idiotic pressure to publish 'something' (i.e. any old carp), but you won't know what 'level' you're really at until you attack it!

I wrote 50,000 words in my first year, theoretical arguments and justifications - twas a lot of tosh (and I binned it) but I could see why and I very soon after hit 'PhD level' writing quite easily.

My advice is get writing, tis time for your originality to shine, and stay positive when some high-level scholarly criticism (i.e from your supervisor(s)) comes your way! What fun! Good luck

Yes good luck Addict et al.

Am coming to the end of my Sociology PhD (thankfully). Despite enjoying my research and writing immensely, the discipline (imo) has never been more fragmented, especially theoretically, and there appears so far as I can tell to be a lot more emphasis placed on submitting something that fits the red-tape structure of "a PhD" than submitting something committed to the exploration of knowledge and the research-inspired discovery of explanations about changes in society / human behaviour.

Choose everything you write about wisely, there's absolutely zilch guranteed at the end of it (as we know), but following the "in" crowd (something I haven't done) will get you more success and opportunities in this sphere methinks.

Hope you feel like a "proper" PhD-er soon though!!

(Social Movement Theory is a prime example of that fragmentation by the way, ghastly.)