I've been pondering this issue today (as if I have nothing better to do!).

About 2 years ago, Warwick University changed its academic hierarchy to the US model i.e., a Lecturer is now an Assistant Professor, a Senior Lecturer or Reader is now an Associate Professor, and a Professor remains a Full/Chaired Professor. This system is followed by many countries.

What does everyone think of this? Would you prefer to be Assistant Professor Joe Bloggs, rather than Dr Joe Bloggs the Lecturer?

Is the title 'Lecturer' a little modest for someone who has spent 7-10 years in higher education, and is predominantly a 'researcher' not a teacher?

Being a lecturer isn't as lonely as being a PhD student, and you'll gain a lot more respect. The work is quite varied i.e., research, lecturing, dealing with tutees, and admin work, so you'll come in contact with other human beings a lot more. But I think it is up to the individual how much they want to be alone in a department. The stress of producing research is still at the forefront, but a new lecture is only expected to knock out 2 articles/publications a year...so that's not too bad.

For a very good account (and enough to put most people off) of the jobs/stresses a lecturer faces, see:
http://www.kevinboone.com/university.html

Hehe...nice avatars!

======= Date Modified 20 Nov 2008 16:02:48 =======
Thanks for the info. Vincent.

I'll certainly have a look at that report (and probably write something directly on the blog). Unfortunately, I can't read it right now as I have a looming deadline.

Have you sought opinions from the National Postgraduate Committee (http://www.npc.org.uk/)? They are quite active about PG issues.

Mucho congratulations Zelda! 8-)

There has been a spate of submissions on this forum recently!

Given the economic climate, our options may be very limited anyway. Try getting a job in the City at the moment.

I'm definitely in a tizz over what to do too.

Most likely I'll try to get an academic job or a researcher position somewhere.

I've been asked by friend to help them run a company (nothing glamorous), but I'd like to work in an area that will put my PhD knowledge to good use.

======= Date Modified 20 Nov 2008 15:47:30 =======
My decision to pursue a PhD rested on the fact that I was uneasy about pursuing a corporate career. I may go into corporate work once I finish my PhD, but my doctorate will give me more flexible career options.

The 'Dr' title is an attractive bonus, but no one should pursue a PhD purely for the 'Dr' title. Frankly, doing a medical degree would be easier!

EDIT: I don't believe many people pursue a PhD because they recognise a problem that needs solving (or someone elses problem), but rather they are generally interested in carving out an academic career for themselves and embark on a PhD because it is a necessary element of such a career.

Hi Vincent,

Your link doesn't work, so I can't comment.

As for the paragraph you mention, I would disagree with this statement insofar as it reflects on how PhD programmes operate in this country.

Out of interest, what impact will this review have on future policy? I ask because I wonder if gauging doctoral researchers' opinions from blog replies/forums isn't necessarily going to reflect the full picture of the problems facing researchers.

Will researchers be offered a more formalised avenue to input their views at some point?

This is impossible to answer! They are such different choices you must base your decision on your own preference.

Beware that many more jobs may be lost in the financial services sector over the next few years, so your actuary job may not be permanent.

Given your situation it is probably best to comply in written form all the negative incidents and outcomes that have occured throughout your studies (hopefully, you kept a diary/notes of dates and email archives). Then seek help from someone outside your department e.g., a student welfare officer or student union rep. If they feel you have been unfairly treated, then it may be fruitful to see a lawyer who specialises in higher education litigation.

What type of pay is offered with the average postdoc? Does it equate to (or eventually equate to) a lecturer salary? i.e., 28-34k.

I'm glad I'm in a discipline that grants one's first academic job as a 'lecturer' rather than a postdoc 'research fellow' or what not.

It seems somewhat arbitrary that some disciplines have this additional layer of postdoc work before one can achieve a full-time and permanent post.

Possibly this is why science disciplines tend to plough through their PhDs much quicker than soc.sciences/arts/law/business as they know there is another 1/2 years of postdoc underdog status to go through.

Kiwi, I've not done my viva yet, but after reading these stories (and I sympathise with all you guys) there seems to be a general trait that the candidate did not collaborate with their supervisor in the choice of their examiners and/or there was a general failing in the department involved (may it be the supervisor leaving, or general incompetence in the department).

I'd cover one's back in two respects:

First, make sure you are fully involved in the choice of your examiners. You have this right in most universities. If you don't like an examiner suggested by your supervisor, then veto that choice. Don't choose a very young examiner, they'll be interested in impressing the other examiner to your detriment, and don't choose an examiner that has not been used by your department before.

Second, and linked to the above, make sure you choose examiners whose work you have not criticised in your thesis. If you must choose an examiner whose work you have criticised, then make your you have a cast iron argument for doing so. Also ensure that examiner has the type of personality to take criticism on the chin and engage in constructive argument, rather than attempting to fail you. If the criticism isn't key to your thesis, then just remove it or significantly soften it.

Also read the work of your examiners so you know their interests and how they approach argument etc....even if this is not related to your own work.

It's impossible to say because you don't mention your subject area.

If most of your research will be via internet databases then it's very possible to work away from university, but if you need to be in a lab well that's a different story.

You will miss out on becoming a more integral part of the university; however, I know lots of PhD students who live on campus or near their respective university and will never attend anything.

Some academic staff live further away from their places of work (cf. to Manc. to Notts) and they manage fine.

Social science is not my thing...so I can't contribute much here, but only to say to get in touch with your university's ethics committee or research division (or whoever oversees research when real participants are used). They will probably be able to give you the university policy on renumeration/incentives and where to recruit from.