I know you are just summarizing (thanks) so don't take this as a response to you - but I strongly disagree with a couple of the points the author makes (I don't feel I can reply to the ones that don't apply to me).
>1. Grad school pointlessly delays adulthood.
Maybe it delays adulthood a bit, in some respect, but I certainly wouldn't call it pointless. I've learned a huge amount in the last six months (which is how long I've been a grad student).
>6. Going to grad school is like going into the military.
The justification for this: Applications to the military increase in a bad economy in a disturbingly similar way that applications to graduate school do. For the most part, both alternatives are bad. They limit your future in ways you can’t even imagine, and they are not likely to open the kind of doors you really want. Military is the terrible escape hatch for poor kids, and grad school is the terrible escape hatch for rich kids.
That's a horrible argument. Just because more people go to the army at the same time more people go to grad school doesn't mean the experience is at all similar (for one, I'm pretty sure most soldiers get more sleep than I do). I was going to say that I can't imagine how a master's could limit my future, but that would actually be consistent with the author's claim, so I'll instead say that without justification I don't accept that a master's will limit my future. And the whole rich kids/poor kids thing at the end is just...I mean...I don't know many rich grad students, I'll put it that way.
I think the article oversimplifies things to a degree, so it's also a reflection of the author's viewpoint and in that sense almost comes across as rationalization. But that doesn't mean the points aren't correct - I had a unique job right out of college that gave me a lot of firsthand experience with a top notch phd program and allowed me to witness the grad student lifestyle w/o having to go myself. I was a web developer for the biology department of my college and worked out of a research building, separate from all the other admin staff, which was great because I got to hang out with people my own age, all the grad students (and even some of the younger associate profs) near my office. And seeing them go through the phd program definitely gave me the strong impression that the ones that survived (at least in a mentally stable way) were the ones that loved research and academia, or at least could make themselves love it over long periods of time.
It's not to say you're locked into academia as a career if you get a phd - one of my good friends went on to join a bio startup, there's a lot of those in San Diego - it's just that it's the default path and most of the above bullet points are still true, especially the pyramid scheme part. They're basically slave labor for whichever prof heads up their lab.
It's worth noting that you can and should apply #7 - Most jobs are better than they seem: You can learn from any job - to grad school as well and treat it as a job with a long term contract, one that you need to mine for all kinds of interesting things that you didn't think you'd learn. For example, I bet a lot of people (understandably) go into a top neuroscience or cell biology program thinking they'll learn a lot about biology and research, and they do, but the ones that did really well learned things like how to manage your time well, motivate yourself on an independent schedule, network in a loose non-corporate environment and blow off steam with non-contact sports.
>It's worth noting that you can and should apply #7 - Most jobs are better than they seem: You can learn from any job - to grad school as well and treat it as a job with a long term contract, one that you need to mine for all kinds of interesting things that you didn't think you'd learn. For example, I bet a lot of people (understandably) go into a top neuroscience or cell biology program thinking they'll learn a lot about biology and research, and they do, but the ones that did really well learned things like how to manage your time well, motivate yourself on an independent schedule, network in a loose non-corporate environment and blow off steam with non-contact sports.
Very good point. I'm learning a lot about CS, but I'm also learning my limits in terms of how much work I can do in general, and how to handle being overwhelmed. I'm making excellent contacts. I'm learning to organize myself better (and actually use a calendar). Even without the CS, I will leave grad school better prepared for the workplace than I came in.
I learned useful information about my area of interest as well as myself during grad school. I also supported myself the entire time. That is part of what adults need to do.
I second that. I did a lot a maturing during grad school. It is a job (especially the TA part), and is a lot of work. I think people who say grad school delays adulthood never went themselves, and they think school == for children.
Agreed 100%. TAing a class with 240 students is no joke (no, I'm not the only TA). I am looking forward to my summer internship because I think it's going to be a lot more relaxing than school. I'll have time to buy my own groceries (vs. Safeway delivery), I'll only work five days a week, I will be able to sleep 6-7 hours ever night, etc. Being a grad student is very unlike being an undergrad.
Plus, grad school finally got me to stop playing WoW - I suspect that if I'd gotten a job right out of undergrad I would still be playing.
I know this is likely to be viewed as off-topic or whatever, but... there are some really cute girls in grad school, especially the European ones. And they are past that whole annoying where's-the-party phase. You also get to learn a lot about a topic, from professors who think you have a brain and are worthy of conversation. So, I have to say, there are some wonderful intangible benefits to grad school. If I didn't travel randomly, I would totally enroll in a graduate studies program, merely for the enjoyable social/intellectual aspects. Some of you who are young and have cash-flow-positive startups should seriously consider it.
Not everything has to be computed in dollars/euros. Remember, there is a human aspect to your life that cannot be bought. You can't spend $15m to be 24 again, even if we DO find a way to live forever.
It says a lot more about the author's bias than anything about grad school in general.
In the median case, grad school is probably a waste, certainly most PhD's in the humanities are. But with a PhD in economics you can get a job working for all of those interesting sounding NGOs that advertise in the back of The Economist. An MD or PhD in biochemistry/subset is required to do serious medical research.
An MBA from a top tier business school (the more technical the better, personally I'd rather get an MBA from MIT than Penn) dramatically increases salary compared to people without an MBA. Could you have done better laddering up in the corporate world? Maybe, but it's a lot riskier, and the author forgets that pointlessly delaying adulthood is fun! Perhaps the author has forgotten that.
A professional graduate degree also provides you with a risk-free way of transitioning careers. Did you do an undergrad in business? Do you want to program now? Get a master's degree in software engineering.
And the comparison to joining the military is just insulting.
"grad school is probably a waste, certainly most PhD's in the humanities are."
This rests on the assumption that learning is only valuable insofar as it helps the learner attain greater financial reward. You may define knowledge as a commodity which has value defined by national monetary systems, but those who pursue PhDs in the humanities wager the knowledge they gain in their pursuit of the degree has value in relation to their context greater than the value reflected in its commodification.
Meh. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that a humanities PhD might not have practical value, but it has value to some people because they like it and come out of it more worldly. I mean, sure, okay, but there is a qualitatively different type of advantage that comes with a technical PhD.
I don't disagree with you on any particular point. I was only stating that to dismiss a PhD in the humanities "as a waste" says a lot more about the position from which one makes that dismissal than about the humanities PhD itself.
Its not risk or cost free. Graduate school has a severe opportunity cost. If you can make $60K/year and grad school tuition is $20k a year, you have a $60k opportunity cost and a 20k out of pocket cost.
My biggest counter to this is the reason I went to grad school (MBA - done on an evening program)
After a layoff is a great time to reassess what you are doing in your career. My wife is an associate attorney, many of whom are getting laid off right now. If she got laid off she's not sure she'd go back in to law. I was an engineer who wasn't sure I wanted to write code for the rest of my life so I got an MBA.
Grad school is a great way to get a "second" chance at what you want to do, particularly if you've spent a couple of years working and found that the reality of your career doesn't match the vision you had in college.
In fact, regardless of being laid off, I'd recommend taking a couple of years off between undergrad and grad school working before starting a graduate program.
I can see the merit to the argument that one shouldn't pursue grad school, but just as a counter balance, I thought I'd list some advantages:
1. You can often earn a higher starting salary when finished (assuming of course that the recession has passed by the time you're finished)
2. Access to educational loans and grants
3. Access to school resources (e.g. library, equipment, other students, mentors, etc.). Just last week I downloaded about $50,000 of market research through my school's subscription to eMarketer, Gartner, Factiva, etc.
4. Access to student pricing on software and hardware (e.g. MSDNAA, Adobe, Apple discounts)
5. Access to student camps competitions
6. Better access to internships
Now, am I doing grad school? Nope. It didn't really seem to make any sense for what I wanted to do for a career. But, I do see some merit.
Why is the bashing of the military in this conversation accepted without a second thought? The armed forces have had a rough time of it the last few years, but many servicepeople find the military incredibly rewarding. There's a reason why those retired guys wear military caps that they earned when they were 25.
American engagement in recent conflicts has been enormously unpopular. There is a sense that the Armed Forces no longer serve to protect and defend America, her peoples and her ideals, but the political and economic aspirations of a very few.
If trust in the government and its goals can be restored, then a belief that the Armed Forces are an honorable and worthwhile avenue of service will also be restored.
Like all of the previous discussions about school/no school, it really depends on the person or the field. Some people need the structure of a university environment to learn and some jobs require a specific degree. Other people and other jobs just don't.
As far as the recessions goes, in the sciences and engineering, I would be slightly concerned about funding for students, even once you get admitted. Even before the current recession I knew too many grad students who had to TA or switch groups, etc. due to funding problems. Not something I would have imagined before I spent time in grad school.
I meant students having to revert to TAing after losing research funding. Generally only the first year grad students would TA classes and then join a research group and get paid as a research assistant.
I, along with most of the others I knew in science/engineering grad school, didn't really think that funding would ever be an issue, but I saw far to many cases in which it was.
I agree with the author that many people go into graduate school for the wrong reasons. However, it doesn't follow that all graduate school is bad.
The key here is the distinction between practical and impractical knowledge. The author seems to operate under the assumption that only practical knowledge is good. In her experience, she has been able to gain practical knowledge at least as efficiently outside of the graduate educational system. I agree with her point here, but I don't think you can discount the value of impractical knowledge - which I would define as knowledge that does not have any immediate real world application.
The value in impractical knowledge is twofold: 1) it can (and often is) able to called on later and 2) it can serve as an introduction to other practical knowledge. For instance, even the lawyer that the author has argued has wasted his/her education by transferring to a different career field may immeasurably benefit from some theoretical aspect of his graduate experience. More likely, an experience in graduate school may introduce a person to a subject area or conceptual idea that has a practical application they would never have been exposed to outside of that environment.
Some may argue that both of the above benefits can also be obtained through real world work experience, which leads to the question of knowledge for its own sake. I personally am a believer in learning for learnings sake, although I'm not sure I can articulate that argument in a comment length...
I suspect that 99+% of people who pursue a PhD will end up disappointed and bitter.
Your chances of success are probably better with startups.
Also, keep in mind that the vast majority of research done in CS is about improved implementation -- not new applications. The main exception here is HCI + MIT Media Lab, which are more open to new apps.
Of course, if you do get accepted into a top 4 university in the US, then you might want to think about it. That's an impressive accomplishment, especially for international students.
It is interesting to think of this post in relation to the one regarding scalable vs. non-scalable careers. Professional schools are prerequisites for many of the most obvious, lucrative non-scalable careers. But if you consider the possibility that you will change careers even if you make it through graduate school (because you get tired of being a dentist, for example), then your decision to pursue a non-scalable career looks much riskier.
http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/02/03/dont-try-to-dodge-t...
And the overall bullet points:
1. Grad school pointlessly delays adulthood.
2. PhD programs are pyramid schemes
3. Business school is not going to help 90% of the people who go.
4. Law school is a factory for depressives.
5. The medical school model assumes that health care spending is not a mess.
6. Going to grad school is like going into the military.
7. Most jobs are better than they seem: You can learn from any job.