EPTno thanks
Don't become a scientist - Page 12
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
KOFgokuon
United States14893 Posts
no thanks | ||
|
hejakev
Sweden518 Posts
On May 16 2010 08:34 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: What about a PhD in English? Don't go over a BA in English unless you plan on teaching it | ||
|
HnR)Pride
Canada297 Posts
Anyways, a lot of truths have been said in this thread. My advice: If you want to do your PhD, do it. It's not going to hurt you and will give you a lot of opportunities in private industry as a consultant or product professional. If you are still delusional... errr pure enough to think you want to be a research scientist then go for it, but don't expect to be appropriately compensated. The most successful people in science positions are people with a personality who can take their industry and science knowledge, combine it with their personable demeanor and either manage biotech product lines or sell them. No one wants to be a bench chemist forever, it's stagnating, have a career path laid out and clear deadlines for your progression within a company or within your own start-up. Never, ever, hold it over people's heads that you have a degree in a scientific discipline and always talk plainly with people until you can gauge how much of the industry knowledge they have. The people saying it's not what you know but who you know do not know science. It is largely what you know, far greater than traditional disciplines. What you know will dictate who hires you or what profs will oversee you and where you will succeed the best. Rebooting your career from a microbiologist to a biochemist isn't reasonably possible after a year or two of grad school. Who you know comes into play when you decide you've paid your dues and want to move on to private industry. This is why grad students get taken to seminars and conventions in their last year by professors who like them. That's when you get to know people and decide where to go, if you've gone that route. | ||
|
BEEF SUPREME
Canada4 Posts
On May 20 2010 06:49 KOFgokuon wrote: military scientist = developing bioweapons no thanks At least you would be making a real difference. | ||
|
KOFgokuon
United States14893 Posts
On May 16 2010 11:59 Servolisk wrote: Seems like a load of standard events being over dramatized. I don't think he has any significant passion for his work and is a typical whiner. He even made a tenured faculty position sound undesirable :p He basically sounds like he is not getting any grants funded. Compared to most things, I find the academic track he described to be very meritocratic, in the long run. Ph.D. students and post-doc's are usually underpaid, but if successful have the opportunity to independently run their own research, and become a tenured professor-one of the best jobs possible. No successful post-doc really views it as a bad job, that I have seen  Speaking from a Bio perspective, I feel like the track is very competitive but full of opportunity to people who are dedicated. Maybe it is different in Chemical Engineering than Biology, but for Bio they won't care what university it is, they will only care about publication quality. Although in Bio you won't get a faculty position as a Ph.D. graduate without a post-doc anyway. your chances of getting high quality publications is higher at bigger name universities. You'll have more well known faculty members, in general better facilities, equipment, smarter collaborators, it all builds up | ||
|
DrSmoke
United States175 Posts
| ||
|
rackdude
United States882 Posts
Yes, and when did I say it wasn't? *Hint! I didn't! I just said it wasn't computer science!* | ||
|
hejakev
Sweden518 Posts
| ||
|
Biochemist
United States1008 Posts
| ||
|
Shizuru~
Malaysia1676 Posts
On May 20 2010 02:17 Physician wrote: "Don't Become a Scientist!" by Jonathan I. Katz He should have titled it "Don't try to make it as university/college professor". His conclusion too is atrocious advice. The more scientist a nation trains, the better it does economically - for everyone, always. The guy, to put it bluntly, has written up a piece of idiocy. I believe he needs to review what a "scientist" really means. Having said that I know this guy is not idiot but that he has no qualms playing the fool. His writings in general have no intention to instruct but to create reaction and controversy. uhm.... what do you base that statement of yours on? | ||
|
wanderer
United States641 Posts
On May 21 2010 07:22 Shizuru~ wrote: uhm.... what do you base that statement of yours on? That's kind of trivial, actually... are you serious? (not that i agree with what that guy was saying...) | ||
|
Biochemist
United States1008 Posts
On May 21 2010 07:22 Shizuru~ wrote: uhm.... what do you base that statement of yours on? I would be surprised if there isn't a strong correlation there, since the number of scientists a country produces is correlated with the breadth of higher education in general. I wouldn't go as far as implying that it's the actual scientists that are helping the country out though, more like the bankers, businessmen, lawyers, politicians, etc. | ||
|
guitarizt
United States1492 Posts
| ||
|
TunaFishyMe
Canada150 Posts
Personally I feel that the author of the article is 100% correct. He's a bit harsh but thats reality. The real world is horrible. One another thing that is important. A Bachelor degree is useless. Why? Because everyone and their mother's have one too. Does this mean you HAVE to do a masters? No, It means you need to differentiate yourself. You get your bachelor so on paper, you have the minimum but outside of school you get involved, work for ppl, start your own business. Do something impressive to differentiate yourself and that is how you can get a job. For me, I'm doing a non-research oriented master's at UT. I want to move more into business so I'm doing a masters of management. We'll see how that goes. I just gave you guys 4 years of solid info. Consider yourself lucky! lol | ||
|
rackdude
United States882 Posts
| ||
|
TunaFishyMe
Canada150 Posts
On May 22 2010 01:24 rackdude wrote: Anyone know if this applies to math? especially math. Pure math is so abstract that no one really gives a crap about. Sure! There are 0.5% jobs out there that pay a shit load for people who understand the stuff developing intense logic stuff but for most graduates, its so hard to find a job where you can apply your skills. If industry hasn't been able to apply it, I would stay away from a master/PHd, unless you really want to do research and continue on with academia. A bachelor in math can help you find a job but like I said, no degree out there will garuntee you a job. People told me EE is and its not. I'm top 10 in my class and I did internship so its not like I didnt perform well either. In fact, #1 in our class doesnt have a job either. People who do are those you had family hook-ups or got really lucky. | ||
|
rackdude
United States882 Posts
On May 22 2010 01:58 TunaFishyMe wrote: especially math. Pure math is so abstract that no one really gives a crap about. Sure! Sorry but I lost you right there. The first thing I was taught in pure math is each problem's potential applications if solved. It seems like you aren't really part of the field. That's ok, but I'm looking for someone who knows the field. You sound like you're EE and that's all fine and dandy. Sorry if I come off as mean . | ||
|
cz
United States3249 Posts
On May 22 2010 02:06 rackdude wrote: Sorry but I lost you right there. The first thing I was taught in pure math is each problem's potential applications if solved. It seems like you aren't really part of the field. That's ok, but I'm looking for someone who knows the field. You sound like you're EE and that's all fine and dandy. Sorry if I come off as mean .The point is no business is going to pay you $60k+/year right out of university, whether as a PhD or not, to try and solve abstract problems that have long term implications. That doesn't make the business money. The only thing that would hire for that would be academia, and then you are in the exact same boat as what the OP is all about: too many PhDs, not enough decent paying positions (unless you count $30-40k/year after your PhD as "decent"). If your education does not give you the skills to immediately impact and increase the profit for a company, why would the private sector hire you? And if they don't, you are stuck with the govt/academia, which is already packed full of PhD's competing over $30k/year jobs (immediately) and the rare tenure track position 5-10 years after. The bottom line is, don't go into science (or math) or anything else trying to A) make a good living and B) do pure research as they are mutually incompatible for most and the first extremely difficult anyways. | ||
|
rackdude
United States882 Posts
On May 22 2010 02:20 cz wrote: The point is no business is going to pay you $60k+/year right out of university, whether as a PhD or not, to try and solve abstract problems that have long term implications. That doesn't make the business money. The only thing that would hire for that would be academia, and then you are in the exact same boat as what the OP is all about: too many PhDs, not enough decent paying positions (unless you count $30-40k/year after your PhD as "decent"). If your education does not give you the skills to immediately impact and increase the profit for a company, why would the private sector hire you? And if they don't, you are stuck with the govt/academia, which is already packed full of PhD's competing over $30k/year jobs (immediately) and the rare tenure track position 5-10 years after. The bottom line is, don't go into science (or math) or anything else trying to A) make a good living and B) do pure research as they are mutually incompatible for most and the first extremely difficult anyways. This thread is about academia. He says there are too many PhDs. People say that's true about many sciences. However, you cannot blanket statement it to EVERY single field. So, I'm wondering about math. | ||
|
goldrush
Canada709 Posts
On May 22 2010 00:59 TunaFishyMe wrote: I just graduated from EE at Queen's U in Canada. I was thinking about doing a masters in EE to improve my credentials and help me get a better job. Let me clear something up. Doing a master's or a PHd is not going to help you get further ahead if you don't go back into the same field. I worked at AMD and spoke with 5-6 engineers who have a masters in EE from supervisor level to director level. ALL of them told me their master's didnt help get them to where they wanted to be. Why? Because they did their master's in something unrelated to their line of work now. In the real world, no one cares if you have a master's or not. Or a PHd for that matter. They aren't going to treat you any different. What's important is that you are compentent and know what you are doing. If your Master's and PHd relates to what you do in industry, they will help quite a bit. But most (at least 90%) change their line of work eventually, making their degrees useless. Point? Don't do a master's because you think it'll improve your future JUST because you have a master's. That is so naive and a waste of 2 years. Most of academia doesn't even apply to industry so unless you want to continue doing research for the rest of your life, I wouldn't go into it. Especially not PHd. Personally I feel that the author of the article is 100% correct. He's a bit harsh but thats reality. The real world is horrible. One another thing that is important. A Bachelor degree is useless. Why? Because everyone and their mother's have one too. Does this mean you HAVE to do a masters? No, It means you need to differentiate yourself. You get your bachelor so on paper, you have the minimum but outside of school you get involved, work for ppl, start your own business. Do something impressive to differentiate yourself and that is how you can get a job. For me, I'm doing a non-research oriented master's at UT. I want to move more into business so I'm doing a masters of management. We'll see how that goes. I just gave you guys 4 years of solid info. Consider yourself lucky! lol Education gets you a foot in the door and then you have to prove that you belong there. But having that foot in the door is important, it doesn't matter if you can do the job if the people aren't going to give you a shot. | ||
| ||
