|
It is very fashionable these days in the world of arts and entertainment to create prequels. As opposed to sequels that tell readers or viewers what happened next to their favourite characters or plots, prequels go back in time. I now find myself following this trend and writing a prequel to my post for Inside Higher Ed on how to avoid PhD drop-out. One of the comments on that post made me think that one of the best ways to minimize PhD drop-out rates is to select the best candidates in the first place. The next logical question is then: Why go for a PhD in the first place? There are as many reasons as there are people, you might say, but perhaps their motivations can be grouped into some general categories. The disinterested reason most often given is that people start a PhD because of their thirst for knowledge. Simply put, PhD students are those with a high degree of personal motivation that stems from their natural curiosity and love of intellectual pursuits. It is expected that after they obtain their degree they will metamorphose into scholars for whom also the temptation of researching new and exciting subjects is irresistible, or at least preferable to all other choices. But is it really to satisfy the desire for deeper understanding that one enrols on a PhD programme? Are there no other avenues for the interested mind than university-based research programmes? Certainly there are other opportunities to drive research projects outside academia. Sometimes having obtained a PhD provides access to these research opportunities, but I would not claim this to be the absolute rule. Thinktanks and research institutes do hire capable minds with or without the diploma. There are other reasons given for pursuing a PhD, let's call them the more pragmatic reasons. In this sense, the doctoral degree is not just a passport to a world of research and new knowledge, it is also a valuable asset that increases one's chances of earning higher paid in more satisfying jobs. It is an investment, a certificate of one's special abilities that can give them an advantage on the job market. While it is true that PhD holders do get higher salaries, the higher education market is not one of the most rewarding in terms of financial stability. There are few available jobs, there is a lot of tough competition and the salary of a professional is lower here than in the industry. So the PhD is valuable if its possessor is interested in the non-academic job market. However, how many Fortune 100 people hold a doctorate? Not many. On the contrary, there are numerous among these who are drop-outs (even before finishing a undergraduate course). So if you want to be really financially prosperous, then PhDs are not for you. There are other reasons that motivate students to continue their education to PhD level. Harking back to a time when these diplomas were reserved for a minuscule segment of the population, the doctoral degree is a seen as a prestige marker, the recognition of one's exceptional talents and the certificate of belonging to the intellectual elite. The non-material rewards that a PhD is supposed to bring, at least theoretically, are connected to social standing; PhDs can be used as a vehicle for upwards social mobility, and for the fulfilment of personal and family ambitions. The prestige power of the PhD is however on the wane. With mass education, the number of doctorate holders has increased exponentially, so that the elite membership and the high social status that comes with it is weakened. Especially in connection with a decrease in salary size for university professionals, doctorate holders are perhaps now not seen as exceptional but quirky: why choose to specializes narrowly, work so many hours, and for so little pay when one could get a more lucrative employment elsewhere? Lastly, there are those who out of necessity start a PhD. If the job market offers up nothing attractive, or if entry to the job market is prohibited because of one's immigration status, then pursuing the highest academic degree becomes a viable choice for students who under different circumstances would have opted for a life in the industry and not in research. Do other motivations come into play? Why did you choose to pursue a PhD, or perhaps decide against it? Anamaria Dutceac Segesten writes from Lund, Sweden. She is one of the founding members of the editorial collective at University of Venus. For more on PhD careers and post-doc options read: PhD careers clinic: HE live chat Q&A best bits: Life after a PhD This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To get more articles like this direct to your inbox, sign up for free to become a member of the Higher Education Network. |
|
|
