By Professor Doom
I’ve written of
the Ph.D. glut a
few times, and things really were different when I applied to grad
school:
I was rejected from the majority of
graduate schools I applied to. It wasn’t that I was all that weak an applicant,
but the recent collapse of the USSR (at the risk of giving things away) meant
the US was being flooded with high quality, famous (in their field)
mathematicians, and this was going to continue for years…there weren’t going to
be many jobs for new Ph.D.s anytime soon, and so grad schools did the right
thing and cut back enrollments.
Year in, year out, for well over a decade
now, higher ed has been churning out people with advanced degrees, degrees only
higher ed would hire, in numbers higher ed knows far outstrip the number of
positions it will fulfill. It’s been a well-known problem, and the obvious
solution, not accept so many grad
students, will not be considered because it cuts into those delicious
student loan checks.
Instead of doing the right thing, higher
ed has pretended the obvious solution doesn’t exist, and gone to a different
solution: find another place to put scholars besides academia. Trouble is,
you’ve got many scholars in academia trying to figure out how to do this, and
their total lack of knowledge of “the real world,” i.e., anything outside
academia, makes them woefully incapable of discovering how to do it
successfully .
Of course, they could just ask scholars
who’ve left academia successfully, but this is a fairly rare method of
learning:
The author I’ve quoted from above tries to
place Ph.D. Historians, as difficult a Ph.D. as any, into jobs outside of
academia, with some success.
The bottom line:
Pursuing a doctoral degree has tremendous costs, even when the degree is
"fully funded." Doctoral students fall behind their peers with B.A.s
and M.A.s in many significant ways, and not just financially. Because doctoral
training is, by and large, not suited for most nonacademic careers, Ph.D.s who
leave the academy must often learn radically new skills for jobs that do not —
and never will — require a doctorate. Some of those new skills are antithetical
to doctoral training.
A Ph.D. is an extremely specialized
degree, at least for most fields, often culminating in a paper on an extremely
specific topic (eg, “mating habits of the New Zealand spiked
centipede”)…generally not a topic of any great use to the “real world.” Now,
there’s nothing wrong with that, as the Ph.D. is supposed to be a pure
research, pure knowledge, degree.
Thing is, pursuing such a degree can
easily consume 4 years, 8 years, even a decade of a human’s life, in addition
to the time spent getting a bachelor’s and quite possibly a master’s degree
first. It…really was intended for someone who expected to spend a lifetime in
academia.
These years spent are well spent if
staying in academia, but are generally wasted years, economically speaking, for
those going out “into the real world.” As the vast bulk of those doing this are
only entering the real world because there is no place for them in academia, we
once again come to the conclusion higher ed is hurting these people, draining
away their most productive years of life in exchange for grad school tuition, a
much higher tuition than undergraduate school.
In
hindsight, I presented an overly rosy picture of postacademic life because I
didn’t want to discourage and depress young Ph.D.s who were already under stress.
I didn’t want to admit that many highly intelligent people outside the academy
do not revere the doctoral degree, and that the job search would be much more
difficult than they were being told.
I’ve sought “real world” jobs in the past,
and was told time and again I was “overqualified.” I again point out how evil
our higher education system is in producing more Ph.D.s than it knows it can
employ, not just wasting years of people’s lives in “education,” but additional
years as they overcome their excess qualifications.
On the financial front,
Ph.D.s start their nonacademic careers significantly behind their peers, and
the losses stretch out over a lifetime, affecting pensions and retirements,
mortgage payments, and the ability to pay for a child’s education.
While the above is true, it’s also worth
pointing out that many academics end up forgoing having children…they can’t
afford it, and are too old once they have a Ph.D. Again I point the finger at
higher ed for doing so much harm to society by literally taking our smartest
people out of the gene pool, even as I acknowledge how much hurting people like
this helps the Poo-Bahs running our schools acquire nice tracts of lakefront
property.
One of the surveys
explicitly declined to survey recent graduates — an omission which I cannot
help but feel was calculated.
Well, of course they don’t want to talk to the graduates, because the
graduates would give them a chorus of “I wish I didn’t waste so many years of
my life in your school.” They already know that answer, you see, and don’t
care: they need a solution to the Ph.D. problem which will still allow the
purchase of nice pieces of lakefront property, not the obvious solution of not accepting so many Ph.D. students in the
first place.
Two
comments merit a counter-comment on my part:
You cannot anticipate even being invited for
an interview for a tenure track academic position these days or even invited
back to lecture at your alma matter…The post-doc fellowship can drag on for 5
or 8 years and some people are stuck there forever.
Having served on hiring committees, I saw even meagre permanent
positions receive hundreds of applicants with Ph.D.s desperate for
anything…unless you have a real advantage (the proper skin color or self-identified
genitalia helps), you’re not getting called in for an interview in most cases.
The “post-doc fellowship” is the real world equivalent of an internship, except
at the end of the internship you’ll likely be cut loose and replaced by someone
younger and maybe more talented, instead of the real world where interns are
getting actual job experience that will help them get hired.
An "overproduction of PhDs"? I think by now we all
understand the issue isn't "too many" persons with degrees, but too few
jobs. The work formerly bundled into a professorial job has been unbundled into
teaching-only adjunct, part-time and contract positions.
While there is some truth to the above, I still believe there’s an
overproduction, in many fields at least. Year in, year out, we produce more
Ph.D.s than there are job opportunities in the institutions creating those
Ph.D.s, and the adjunctification of the professorship position can only answer
for a few of those jobs.
Some professions, like economists and MD's, 'match' doctorates in to positions. Some colleges that make a point of offering 'job-ready' BA's keep an eye on actual demand and change or reconfigure programs accordingly. One might hope other professions/colleges would look into this.
ReplyDeleteThey would, but when every grad student means an extra $100k in your pocket, and there's no penalty if the grad student gets nothing, then there's no reason to...written agreements with accreditation about acting with integrity by damned. Of course.
ReplyDelete