
Should you go to graduate school in a recession? - peter123
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2009/03/should-you-go-to-graduate-school-in-a-recession.html
======
alabut
Link to the original article being summarized and discussed in this blog post:

[http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/02/03/dont-try-to-
dodge-t...](http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/02/03/dont-try-to-dodge-the-
recession-with-grad-school/#more-2071)

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._

~~~
endtime
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.

~~~
alabut
No offense taken and upvoted.

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.

~~~
endtime
>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.

------
numair
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.

------
rms
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.

~~~
Silentio
"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.

~~~
endtime
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.

~~~
Silentio
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.

------
mikeryan
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.

------
nategraves
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.

------
GavinB
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.

~~~
DannoHung
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.

------
RK
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.

~~~
captainobvious
Weird, surely you noticed the TAs during undergrad? Did you think they were
grading papers for fun? =P

~~~
RK
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.

~~~
chris11
Yeah, I'm in an undergraduate engineering program and I've always assumed that
funding wouldn't be a problem.

I was under the impression that schools didn't want to accept someone who was
going to drop out because of finances.

So basically if they thought you would not be able to pay, you wouldn't get
in.

That said, I knew that funding would probably include things TAing, and that
RA's were usually one of the better sources.

NSF said that from 93-96, only half of newly minted engineering phds graduated
with debt, so the percent is a little higher than I thought.

NSF 96 debt info: <http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/issuebrf/sib98318.htm>

------
jwb119
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...

------
amichail
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.

------
akikuchi
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.

------
mhb
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=501428>

