Thinking of Getting PhD

Post Reply New Topic

I really like research and teaching. My friends, peers, TAs, and even professors tell me I should get my PhD and be a professor. However, I am frightened that my GPA is holding me back. It is only a 3.30 GPA in computer engineering. Although, I am only a Sophomore and college was a huge transition for me.

My GPA is rising up, and I hope to get it up to a 3.50 GPA by the middle of my Junior year.

I am only involved in a few activities like a computer science organization, and I am getting closer to obtaining a research position.

Are there any people who went into a PhD program here? What is expected in a candidate? Is a 3.65 (like I'm aiming for) a good enough GPA? Will undergrad research experience give me an advantage?

When I was in college my GPA was slightly below 3.3 but I still got into grad school. The graduage school I got into (University of Minnesota) was ranking 24 out of approx 150 grad schools, so it wasn't bad at all.

You have to understand that GPA is only one of the three main factors. The other two factors are GRE and letters of recomendation. You can easilly make up by using those. In my case, my GRE wasn't that high either; the letters of recommendation were my ONLY strong points.

But, regardless, 3.3 is not bad. It would be bad if you were trying to get into Harvard, but you have a good chance of getting into "good" graduate school (as opposed to "great" one).

I encourage you to proceed to get Ph.D. I think it would be pity if you didn't fulfill your talent.

My advice is to think long and hard about getting a PhD. I have got one and I will say that I had to work very hard to get it, while at times it was good fun at other times it was not so fun. But the good days outweighed the bad ones.

The most important thing is to make sure that you have a good positive reason for doing the PhD, never do a PhD becuase it is the least bad thing which you can do at that point in your life.

Yes, research experience will get you an advantage and that GPA is not bad at all (though it does depend what school are you aiming for). So maybe not top3 but my guess is top 30 for sure.

Depends on what your goals are. I finished my Ph.D. but my GPA in graduate school was not as good as my undergrad GPA. Success in undergrad is not a guarantee of success as a graduate student and poor graduate school performance may actually negatively impact your career, so quitting while you're ahead may be a very solid and reasonable course of action.

I don't know that going to graduate school has had any positive impact on my earnings potential, and even if I did earn more than I would with just a bachelor's degree I would have to weigh that against having a later start on earnings, so I wouldn't recommend it if you're hoping to earn more money with a Ph.D.

Do you want to be a teacher? Have you given consideration to being a tutor or taking up some other low stakes teaching position to see what it is like? A Ph.D. is a research degree, but most of the Ph.D. graduates I've talked to have become teachers because that's about the only thing that's paying. The skills you develop while doing research for your thesis may have very little to do with either your graduate school coursework or what you'll actually end up doing after you graduate.

Keep in mind that there's a huge glut in PhDs right now. So many people are getting their PhDs that there aren't nearly enough tenure-track positions for all them. Pretty much that means getting your PhD would be a bad idea unless you went to a pretty good school. It's bad enough that you pretty much have to get your degree from Purdue or somewhere near that caliber just to get on the tenure track here at my extremely mediocre state university.

Do the research. Find which schools are best, and ask them how many/what percentage of their recent grads have been hired at universities. Otherwise, sad to say, you'll probably end up as a poorly-paid adjunct teacher with no benefits or job security.

My time in grad school was wonderful. For once, being bright, weird, and obsessed with peculiar interests was an asset, and academia is full of people with spectrum characteristics. Lecturing is great, where else can you talk for extended periods about your peculiar interests, and that is what is expected of you. Being quirky and strange is ok, and not at all unexpected by your colleagues and students. Graduate level (and academic) research really requires focus and passion about obscure stuff that the typical person just cannot sustain.

Starting to think about all this as a sophomore is a good idea. As for getting into a graduate program: GPA, GRE, and letters of rec. matter. For the latter, letters that reveal that the recommender knows you are vital. That means finding a faculty mentor as an undergrad. The best way to do this is to get involved in research, do an honors research project, etc. Don't just take classes! Most universities give course credit for independent studies or research. Seek out funding for research: funds from your university or outside funding (there are numerous undergraduate research programs out there). Check out the Council on Undergraduate Research (www.cur.org). The better jobs in academia run on grants, and having grant writing and research experience as an undergrad will give you a huge leg up. Go to professional meetings in your field, give presentations, seek out faculty who are at grad schools you have an interest in. GPA and GRE fall way down in importance when the faculty deciding on who to admit to grad programs know you and want you in the program. One thing seriously affected by GPA and GRE are certain university fellowships (which are doled out often based on specific GPA and GREs). In the end, though, graduate programs typically want to admit students they think will succeed. Evidence of intelligence, focus, and grant, and research experience is vital in all of this.

As for the job market in academia: this varies tremendously from field to field. Do some research in your field to see how PhDs are faring, in getting faculty positions or non-academic jobs. Most academic fields have professional organizations that keep track of job placement information. The ability to get an academic will vary too from program to program. A distinguished program and well known faculty advisor with many connections will give you a huge boost in getting an academic job (as he or she probably knows people in the department where you are applying). This is not to say there are not plenty of PhDs out there without academic jobs. But many of them are not very good candidates. They have uninspiring letters of rec (suggesting they did not stand out in their programs), or come from obscure programs, or don't seem particularly passionate about their work. Our last faculty search resulted in about 70 applicants, and only about 5 of those were really appropriate.

If you don't get into the best program, that is also ok. I have had several former students get into decent, but not top programs. But they busted their asses in the masters program and were able to get into top programs for their PhDs.

Academic jobs can have drawbacks: there are wacked out colleagues who can make your life miserable, peculiar politics, uninspired students, so-so pay given the level of education, and the pressure of the tenure process, research grant seeking, or, in the instability of non-tenure track positions. On the other hand, most jobs are unstable, full of annoying senior colleagues, bosses etc. The difference is that in academia you are pursuing you passions, as opposed to shuffling papers for some soulless corporation.

Ok: end of lecture

So of all the 70 applicants, 5 of which were qualified, how many were hired? Right off the bat this doesn't sound like good odds, and not the way to place one's bets.

My exposure to the grant writing process has led me to believe that you can follow the money, or you can follow the physics, but not both. I have become cynical and disdainful about this because things like batteries, gaseous hydrogen, biofuels, solar and fuel cells get funding and people working on them get positions but I can't. I feel that I have no place in academia because I want to pursue things that work at least as well and certainly no worse than the various busy, burdensome, low-yield things that others are working on.

I shouldn't complain too much though, because funding and institutional support often come with strings that involve not owning the intellectual property (patents) that are created, so maybe I've gotten the better end of the deal after all.

One hired. Probably half of the applicants already had a job, and I would guess a majority
of the rest eventually found a position, even if a post-doc or temporary position (which can
give you a better chance for a regular position in the future). Actually not bad odds at all
considering what I have heard from people hiring professionals for government and private
sector jobs (hundreds of applications for one job). Again, the chance of getting a position
with a PhD varies significantly from field to field.

i heard about 100+ applications for a postdoc last month. that is a shame considering what a lousy job is a postodoc.
phd is very incompatible with family lifestyle, imagine getting two such jobs at the same place.

grannel where did you hear that you don't own the patents at the uni? one does not own them completely but has to share with the univ who sponsors the patent. at my place, being a prof is great, almost all the profs have their own startups that were the result of the gov sponsored research, they hire their former students and use the results. nsf is very relaxed about what you actually do with the money when you get it, the problem is only to get it.
it is true that spicy topics are relevant to get in, also funding agencies prefer big name collaborations, I guess they see it as a safe bet.

Maybe this is not true in all cases, I don't know. I'm really just venting, so maybe I'm making a lot of bad assumptions but this is how I feel about it. I know that it is customary for employers to have you sign away rights to any patents you have a hand in creating when you work for a regular salary. I also know of students who don't own any share in the ownership of patents regarding some of the things they worked on, so I feel privileged that my current arrangement allows me to have partial ownership of things I'm creating.

As most patents don't result in enough royalties to pay for the fees typical for completion of the patent process, people who work for a regular salary may be getting the better end of the deal even if they sign away their rights to their employers. However, no university is paying my salary, so I'm just going to go ahead with my arrangement, come what may.

I looked at the phd requirements.. and that verbal examination of your dissertation.. F that. I can hardly do a class presentation so I can't imagine what would happen when trying to verbally defend something that would determine if I wasted 3 to 4 years doing. Bleh.