Did it used to be easier to get a PH.D?

  • Thread starter Thread starter epislon58
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ph.d
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the perceived difficulty of obtaining a PhD in theoretical physics in past decades compared to today. Participants explore various factors influencing the duration and competitiveness of PhD programs, including job market conditions, publication expectations, and the evolution of educational resources.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that while it may have taken less time to complete a PhD in the past, the job market was saturated by the late 1960s, making it difficult for graduates to find employment.
  • Others argue that completing a PhD in four years is unlikely if one aims for a competitive postdoc position, as many candidates now take longer and have more publications.
  • There is a viewpoint that productivity and the choice of dissertation topic are critical for finishing a PhD quickly, with some participants noting that few from their cohorts completed in under five years.
  • Some participants mention that the average time for graduate studies in the US is around 7.5 years, with variations based on individual experiences.
  • One participant highlights that the nature of research and publication expectations has changed, impacting the time taken to complete a PhD.
  • Concerns are raised about the job market for physics PhDs, with some noting that many end up in non-academic fields, such as insurance or finance, due to a lack of available positions in academia.
  • There is a distinction made between the time taken to complete a PhD and the ability to secure postdoctoral positions, with some fields reportedly allowing for quicker completion without impacting job prospects.
  • Participants reflect on the evolution of research resources, noting that access to information has changed significantly with the advent of the internet.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the ease of obtaining a PhD in the past versus today, with no clear consensus on whether it is easier or harder now. The discussion reflects multiple competing perspectives regarding the implications of program length, publication requirements, and job market realities.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include varying definitions of what constitutes a "good" PhD experience, differing expectations across fields, and the impact of changing job market conditions over time.

epislon58
Messages
49
Reaction score
1
Back in the 60s, 70s, and 80s was it easier to get a PHD in theoretical physics than it is today?
Thank you
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
No, but it might have taken less time in the 1960's. There was a severe over-production of physics PhDs (and many other areas besides physics) by the late '60s, resulting in many people unable to get jobs, etc.

Prior to that time there was a rapid boom in the college education field, meaning that there was a great need for new assistant professors; but suddenly the shortage of candidates was replaced by a surplus - in great part due to a deceleration in the growth of college education.
 
So would you say that it is still possible to get a PhD in physics in four years?
 
epislon58 said:
So would you say that it is still possible to get a PhD in physics in four years?

Probably not if you want a good postdoc afterwards/a career in physics. You will be competing with people who spent 6-7 years in their phd program, and have the papers to show for it.
 
You would have to be very productive, and also pick a good dissertation topic first time. Out of my cohort I only know two who finished in under five years.
 
Oh, I thought the faster you completed your PhD the better.
 
ParticleGrl said:
Probably not if you want a good postdoc afterwards/a career in physics. You will be competing with people who spent 6-7 years in their phd program, and have the papers to show for it.

Why do you say this? Is this true for experimental particle physics?

I've not noticed any such problem ...
 
In the US, the average time in grad school (masters and PhD work) is about 7.5 years according to the APS statistics I saw a few years ago. I know one person who finished in 4 years. I know many who took 10 or more years. I was average. It's not a race, and finishing in fewer years does not mean you're better, did better research, or are more likely to get a job or postdoc.
 
Why does it take too much time ? I think generally we have 2 years for a master and the next 3 years for a PhD if the candidate wants to continue. There are totally only around 5 years to get both degrees.
I think it was easy to get a PhD in the past until people set up more rules to control the process
 
  • #10
Keep in mind that in the US, people generally enter a Ph.D. program immediately after the bachelor's degree. Even though they don't do a M.S. degree separately, they still spend a couple of years on M.S. level coursework, in addition to the time spent on actual research.

I took 7 years myself (1975-82), in experimental HEP. From what I remember about my fellow grad students, I think 6-7 years was typical at that time, in that field at least.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
UltrafastPED said:
Why do you say this? Is this true for experimental particle physics?

I've not noticed any such problem ...

I say it because it was definitely noticeable while I was in gradschool. Most theorists had at least one first author paper by the end of their fourth or fifth year, but stayed around another two or three years to get two or three more so that they'd be competitive on the job market. No one cared how long it took to complete your phd, they cared about the papers you had published. I know condensed matter experiment people in similar situations.

Experimental particle physics is a weird beast though, as everyone ends up on all the experiment's papers, so I guess people's reputations must be decided via talks and other avenues.

That said, nearly everyone I know who did experimental particle physics at Fermilab ended up taking a job for an insurance company after postdocing. Its a rough market right now, at least in the US.
 
  • #12
Insurance company? With a PHD in physics.
 
  • #13
Particle girl, if you do not mind me asking, which grad school did you attend?
 
  • #14
epislon58 said:
Insurance company? With a PHD in physics.

Its quite common. Other common jobs are finance companies, software companies, etc. There just aren't enough jobs in science for everyone who gets a science phd.
 
  • #15
I think there needs to be a distinction between finishing one's PhD in 4 years, versus being able to seek employment as a postdoc after finishing one's PhD in 4 years (as opposed to finishing one's PhD in > 4 years, however long that may be).

I can't say much about theoretical physics, but in many other fields (including math and statistics), it's quite common for PhD students to complete their studies in 4 or 5 years. In fact, from what I have heard (at least for graduate programs in statistics at a number of different schools), students are only guaranteed funding within a 4 year period and must seek to apply for further funding to continue their PhD.

I am also not aware of statistics PhD students having really any more advantage as far as postdoc or tenure track opportunities are concerned after pursuing their studies past 4-5 years. Things may be different for math PhDs.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
epislon58 said:
Back in the 60s, 70s, and 80s was it easier to get a PHD in theoretical physics than it is today?
Thank you

To an extent I think you'd be comparing apples and oranges.

The questions and problems people were working on were different, as were the tools and resources available.

For example, when I was un undergrad in the mid-90's the internet was only just becoming popular as a resource to the general public. Prior to this, if you needed any information, you had to go looking in the library. I can imagine that just to look up some really basic information that now takes only a minute or two with Google could take hours.

On the other hand, there was a lot less information to sort through.
 
  • #17
Pigeonhole principle => Not all physics phDs work in physics
 
  • #18
I know that physics PhDs don't all work in physics, but I never heard any of them working at an insurance company. How would a PhD in physics be useful at an insurance company?
 
  • #19
epislon58 said:
I know that physics PhDs don't all work in physics, but I never heard any of them working at an insurance company. How would a PhD in physics be useful at an insurance company?

Insurance companies have large collections of data, and accurately modelling that data can be very profitable.
 
  • #20
how much would one make a year doing that?
 

Similar threads

Timeline for Earning a Ph.D in Theoretical Particle Physics
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Programs Need advice about applying to Ph.D. programs
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Admissions Ph.D. admissions criteria as predictors? (Science Advances)
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Programs I am doing a BME PhD, and hope to transfer to medical physics
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Programs Studying Physics Courses at 50 years old
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
10K
Admissions Comments on my Physics grad school list?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Admissions Are engineering PhDs easier to get into?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Admissions Need help preparing for an interview
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Admissions I'm an Accounting / Finance Student, Can I get my Ph.D. in Physics?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Getting Back on Track with Physics Help
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
5K