Kudos to Duke for collecting and making public data about the time to degree and the rates of completion in their PhD programs. I would be curious to see similar data from other campuses. It’s unclear how many schools collect such data systematically and they certainly don’t make them public very often as the details are usually not very glamorous and can seem pretty discouraging. But it’s important information for people to have as they prepare for their graduate school experiences. It can also help students from other campuses as they try to argue for better/longer support for their training.
Here is a fun page of data at a UC school. Apparently some schools hide their data behind links titled “Prospective Students Click Here” and “Graduate Student Data.” Sneaky!
Always good to know, along with those ever elusive ‘job offers/filled stats’. Someone needs to cost out the lost opportunity costs of pursuing higher degrees (esp. Ph.D’s).
In the biomedical sciences it is v. common for programs to provide information on degree completion times as well as a list of previous graduates and where they are now.
I just assumed that was the norm.
Isn’t subsidizing higher education a bit of a regressive thing to do? It is taking the people most likely to make a lot of money in life then giving them free/low interest cash to get started. If you were against the tax cuts for the rich, then what do you call this? :P
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for it. But this is the ultimate in “trickle down economics” ;)
try to argue for better/longer support for their training
I guess that’s one possible use, but I generally think of longer time to degree as a bad thing.
Jet, Duke is a private university, so I’m not sure what that has to do with trickle-down. But anyway, people in PhD programs are not going on to make a lot of money in life, compared to what they would make if they chose alternate career paths. So I don’t really see this as a “tax cut for the rich” issue.
I think the interesting thing is that the time to complete seems to have doubled in the last 10 years.
I can think of a no of reason why this might be:-
1) Technology and research is evolving so rapidly that doing reearch at the phd level has become more difficult;
2) IT has made the actual job of writing a dissertation easier, thereby making it harder to separate the innovative from the journeyman phd hence the assessment period takes longer;
3) Faculty are increasingly trying to restrict entry to the profession to preserve wages;
4) A higher proportion of phd students in the US are foreingner whom the universities aren’t really competent / able to assess, hence they take longer issuing them with degree;
5) Peoples rate of time discount has fallen over the last 10 years.
I can’t speak for the US but I am in the final few months of my D.Phil in the UK and it will — assuming no disaster in the next 2 or 3 months —- have taken me a little over 3 full time academic years (but chronologically actually just over 4 as I took a full year leave of absence to work).
[This doesn’t translate into US PhD terms as I know they are structued very differently…]
I could certainly have finished many months sooner if it wasn’t for the fact that a larger percentage of time than I’d have liked was spent teaching, or otherwise working, in order to earn money for luxuries like food and a place to live. Several friends of mine are in a similar situation where they’d really rather not work but have to and all of the people in the situation have complained that working interferes with their thesis time.
I wonder if financial burdens are the main reason for longer PhD times.
Matt, the UK PhD certainly seems to be shorter in general than the US version. I’m finishing up an M.A. in Economics right now; with that degree, I could be out the door at LSE with a PhD in econ three years from beginning. In US economics, it seems that 4 years is quite quick, and 5 years is the norm. Given the salaries that an economics degree commands, the opportunity cost of a US degree nearly makes up for the high tuition/no stipend for Americans in a UK program.
Of course the plus side of a US PhD (in the sciences) is all that extra training, the down side all the teaching to pay for it.
The last (1994) NRC ranking of graduate programs (data searchable at phds.org) includes a “median time to degree”. This data, however, is difficult to interpret. Probably it can at best give a relative measure of time-to-degree.
The US average numbers are a little disspiriting. It’d be nice to see numbers broken down by specialty; for instance, as I understand it, it takes theorists in physics less time to complete a PhD than experimentalists.
It took me five years (and one month) to complete my PhD in Ocean Sciences. I’m now looking for a postdoc and I’ve noticed that there seems to be a big difference between North American and UK postdoctoral positions. The ability to do my own research seems limited in the UK and it looks like I’d have less academic freedom that I had during my PhD. Is this the norm for UK positions? Is it something to do with the reduced length of time in the PhD program? (I know that my abilities to do research have increased greatly in the last two years of my PhD). The salaries also seem a lot lower, and one postdoc I was shortlisted for in London seemed to assume that I was still in my early to mid 20s and could “put up with” student-style living for a few more years. We turned them down for financial as well as academic reasons, as I would have had less buying power than provided by my PhD stipend. Maybe a system with longer PhDs results in better positions afterwards. Of course, this is based on the very small sample of jobs in my field, so I’d be very interested to hear from others in similar situations.
Re: physics
It is true in general that theorists take longer than experimentalists, but that was not true for my class, where all the experimentalists but one got out before something like five theorists.
Time in degrees is increasing as job possibilities are worsening. It’s not a good combination.
James—Perhaps time in degree is increasing because job possibilities are worsening? A worse market encourages you to try to fatten your cv before you leave grad school; not to mention that it makes an extra year in school look better compared to going on the market.
Trish, it is not at all uncommon in the UK to be on similar or worse wages going from PhD to post-doc I’m afraid.
Matt, exactly. There are perverse incentives to stay on the student rolls even when you’re substantively done (if you don’t have a job) in many cases: keep deferring student loans, easier to access teaching work in your home dept in many cases, etc.
It’s more complicated than that. Many of the theorists who took a long time went directly into management consulting after they got out.
At least in my experience, it was just harder for everyone to finish because they realized it wasn’t really for anything. You spent a lot of time enduring the general negativity of grad school and at the end the best you could hope for was the downward spiral of increasingly irrelevant post-docs. But you are too invested to get out without a Ph.D., so it was hard to be terrifically efficient getting something that would mean less and less to you at the end, and when you finally finished, you left physics anyway.
Rationally, one would expect people to just buckle down, finish as fast as possible, and then get a job doing something else, but that’s not how people reacted. Most of them never expected to do anything but physics when they got in, so there was a strong cognitive dissonance, and it became extremely difficult to resist the feeling of failure and thus spend your time cultivating hobbies not at all related to finishing your Ph.D.
At least in my experience, it was just harder for everyone to finish because they realized it wasn’t really for anything. You spent a lot of time enduring the general negativity of grad school and at the end the best you could hope for was the downward spiral of increasingly irrelevant post-docs. But you are too invested to get out without a Ph.D., so it was hard to be terrifically efficient getting something that would mean less and less to you at the end, and when you finally finished, you left physics anyway.
It’s anthropology in my case, not physics, but otherwise: hoo boy, can I relate to the above. Having given up on the idea of an academic career, I have only a fairly nebulous sense of personal achievement as motivation to finish: “I’ve come too far to give up now” and “Just think how great it’ll feel to be done!” and so forth. And just as James says, the “rational” thing would be to just buckle down and finish the damn thing and get on with life, but when you’re working full-time and you haven’t done any coursework in years and the whole thing seems utterly disconnected from the “real world,” it’s easier said than done.
There is also the fact that PhD and Masters Degree candidates represent cheap skilled labor. The continual expansion of project requirements mid-project leads to certain unpleasant conclusions on the part of students.
“There is also the fact that PhD and Masters Degree candidates represent cheap skilled labor.”
Hmmm. By the time you pay for graduate tuition, stipend, summer health care benefits, and 60% IDC, a graduate student runs about 60K per year, at least in the private school where I work. It would be much cheaper for me to hire a data manager or statistical consultant on an hourly basis, especially if you calculate the additional time it takes me to train graduate students, check their work, and provide professional (or, almost inevitably, personal) counseling. I see funding and training graduate students more as a service to the department and discipline — and, for some of my colleagues, a way to achieve a form of academic immortality — than as a cost-effective way to get research done.
Tim, grad students as cheap labour must depend on the university. At UBC in Vancouver, health care is free for everyone and tuition is free for PhD students so the only cost to the supervisor is the student stipend (only 17K even if the student isn’t TAing). Add on a couple scholarships to this and grad students can be very very cheap labour. I feel lucky that my supervisor didn’t try to take advantage of that!
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review