Do I need a degree?

[Shivam3013]

I currently have enough knowledge equivalent to someone with a BsC in EECS, physics, chem, bio and mathematics. I want to self-study even more to the point of PhD level knowledge in those areas. I want to be a biology researcher and work at NSA. For that, is the knowledge enough or should I pursue a double major in bio and EECS even if I already have the knowledge? i am 18 by the way.

 

[johnqwertyful]

I currently have enough knowledge equivalent to someone with a BsC in EECS, physics, chem, bio and mathematics.

I don't believe that for a second.

 

[ModestyKing]

It is quite the claim. Can you substantiate it somehow? Have you taken tests on those subjects, and where were the tests taken? Was this self-study independent, or guided by a teacher/professor?

In any case, it's unlikely you could become a researcher with the claim of 'self-studied knowledge'. The best you could do is start an undergraduate program at a college that offers placement tests for this sort of thing; if you can prove you place in upper level classes from the start, then getting your BsC won't be an entire repeat of what you already know.

 

[deekin]

I think if you send the NSA an email stating essentially what you said in the original post, they'll hire you on the spot. Probably the CIA and FBI also, but it is best to start with just one agency and see how it goes. Best of luck.

 

[johnqwertyful]

I think if you send the NSA an email stating essentially what you said in the original post, they'll hire you on the spot. Probably the CIA and FBI also, but it is best to start with just one agency and see how it goes. Best of luck.

 

[Shivam3013]

I was hoping that you all would answer the question presuming that my claim was true, rather then questioning the circumstances upon which this question is based on. It was self-study (by textbooks) but I have had the help of several professors from MIT. I have taken several tests yielding very good results. So, is it possible in any research organization like NIH to get a job there without a degree?

 

[ModusPwnd]

I was hoping that you all would answer the question presuming that my claim was true, rather then questioning the circumstances upon which this question is based on. It was self-study (by textbooks) but I have had the help of several professors from MIT. I have taken several tests yielding very good results. So, is it possible in any research organization like NIH to get a job there without a degree?

No, not really. You need to do research, collaborate with peers and more. This cannot be replicated by a textbook. Even if you have mastered Griffiths, Kittel, Boas and the like you are not equivalent to a graduate.

I had a teacher in graduate school with no degree. He was a master in a very narrow niche of TEMs and the like. Even though he had no degree he was published and cited. How many publications do you have?

 

[R136a1]

I was hoping that you all would answer the question presuming that my claim was true, rather then questioning the circumstances upon which this question is based on. It was self-study (by textbooks) but I have had the help of several professors from MIT. I have taken several tests yielding very good results. So, is it possible in any research organization like NIH to get a job there without a degree?

If some guy walked up to you and says that he read a few surgery books, but has no degree or other qualifications. Would you let him operate on you? Same answer.

 

[SteamKing]

I think if you send the NSA an email stating essentially what you said in the original post, they'll hire you on the spot. Probably the CIA and FBI also, but it is best to start with just one agency and see how it goes. Best of luck.

The NSA probably knows already.

 

[STEMucator]

The NSA probably knows already.

Haha +1.

Realistically though, just get the sheet of paper if you know all of that already.

 

[Turion]

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=4498828

Are you an undergrad or not? I suppose you just said that so that people don't question you like in this thread?

 

[Shivam3013]

Instead of questioning me and posting negative comments, I would prefer some real advice. Is it possible to get a BsC using tests as opposed to taking the courses? Also, I have had lots of research opportunities with professors.

 

[ModusPwnd]

Instead of questioning me and posting negative comments, I would prefer some real advice. Is it possible to get a BsC using tests as opposed to taking the courses? Also, I have had lots of research opportunities with professors.

No, its not possible. If all an undergrad education entailed was reading textbooks then why would anybody go? If your research opportunities lead to publications and presentations then you can put that on your resume and that might help you get some job.

 

[Shivam3013]

I have had several publications - mainly in biology. The job I want is to be a researcher.

 

[STEMucator]

I have had several publications - mainly in biology. The job I want is to be a researcher.

Now I know you're trolling.

You're 18 and you've published a book? On (Arguably) one of the hardest subjects (Doctors get paid heavy for a reason).

Be serious if you want serious advice, or at least link me to your published work so I can give you a royal apology.

 

[ModusPwnd]

If you have publications then aren't you already a researcher? How are you getting paid? Are you not already in a university setting to be putting out publications? I don't see how an 18 year old is successfully publishing outside a university setting... Smells like bull to me.

 

[lisab]

Take the GREs in physics, biology, and chemistry to demonstrate your knowledge. If you nail them, anyone of them really, then you would have a chance at going forward without a degree.

 

[Shivam3013]

Publications means papers, not books. I did them under professors, but without enrollment. I have taken GREs and done well on them.

 

[oneamp]

I think if you send the NSA an email stating essentially what you said in the original post, they'll hire you on the spot. Probably the CIA and FBI also, but it is best to start with just one agency and see how it goes. Best of luck.

They will probably be fighting over you. Send a resume to each and let them know you'll be going with the highest bidder.

 

[IGU]

No, its not possible. If all an undergrad education entailed was reading textbooks then why would anybody go? If your research opportunities lead to publications and presentations then you can put that on your resume and that might help you get some job.

First, there are many kids who become undergraduates at 15 or younger. Some are very, very good. Some have a BS by 18.

Second, what beyond class learning do you think is necessary as part of an undergraduate education? Maybe a few labs in science? Certainly nothing in math. If a student learns as well or better from a textbook then what else does college have to offer beyond an official credential? Sure, some do some research, but it is neither required nor all that usual. Sure learning to cooperate with your peers is a good thing, but tell that to Perelman.

Please support your assertions with something more than incredulity and denial.

 

[yungman]

I currently have enough knowledge equivalent to someone with a BsC in EECS, physics, chem, bio and mathematics. I want to self-study even more to the point of PhD level knowledge in those areas. I want to be a biology researcher and work at NSA. For that, is the knowledge enough or should I pursue a double major in bio and EECS even if I already have the knowledge? i am 18 by the way.

You really think people will take your word? I think you best bet is to apply for a graduate school. Not all grad school need to have a BS degree. I did talk to a very good school call Santa Clara University about their post grad program as I don't have a degree in EE. They allow me to go directly to the grad program without a degree. If you can get good grades, then all else is forgiven, you'll be graduate at 22.

I believe Sheldon Cooper do exist, but not that often!

 

[Shivam3013]

Finally, some advice which is not asking me for my credentials. In biology and chemistry, I can see why class-research would be necessary but for math and EECS (considering I have completed projects from MIT OCW and edx etc), it is absurd. People will take my word because I have standardized exams to prove it. I was just wondering if I can get a BsC by simply passing the tests. Thanks!

 

[ModusPwnd]

First, there are many kids who become undergraduates at 15 or younger. Some are very, very good. Some have a BS by 18.

So what's your point? The original poster has no degree.

Second, what beyond class learning do you think is necessary as part of an undergraduate education? Maybe a few labs in science? Certainly nothing in math. If a student learns as well or better from a textbook then what else does college have to offer beyond an official credential? Sure, some do some research, but it is neither required nor all that usual. Sure learning to cooperate with your peers is a good thing, but tell that to Perelman.

Please support your assertions with something more than incredulity and denial.

What you describe here is the C's get degrees attitude that leaves many frustrated with their education. Research is a vital component of science education and it is certainly the norm. The original poster does have this, so that is good for his resume.


Finally, my assertion is not my assertion. Its the way it is. You cannot test your way into a BS degree. Getting a high score on the GRE will not get you a degree.

 

[HallsofIvy]

Now I know you're trolling.

You're 18 and you've published a book? On (Arguably) one of the hardest subjects (Doctors get paid heavy for a reason).

Be serious if you want serious advice, or at least link me to your published work so I can give you a royal apology.

He didn't say he had "published a book". He said he had "several publications". That could mean he was co-author on journal articles.

Shivram3013, talk to the professors you have worked with! They are your best resource.

 

[Shivam3013]

Thanks. I don't know anyone who by publications in science means an actual 300 page book. I have talked to the profs and they say to go with my intuition. I thought some helpful guidance here would be useful by it's just mostly full of discouragement.

 

[ModusPwnd]

Thats what guidance is good for, telling you things you don't want to hear. Dont expect good advice to simply just reinforce what you already believe.

 

[Shivam3013]

Guidance questioning my intelligence by people with a superiority complex is not very helpful.

 

[jasonRF]

Finally, some advice which is not asking me for my credentials. In biology and chemistry, I can see why class-research would be necessary but for math and EECS (considering I have completed projects from MIT OCW and edx etc), it is absurd. People will take my word because I have standardized exams to prove it. I was just wondering if I can get a BsC by simply passing the tests. Thanks!

What standardized EECS test are you referring to? I am not aware of such a thing, but there are a LOT of things I am ignorant of!

jason

EDIT: I agree with halls of ivy - talk to the profs you have published with. They actually know you and your situation. We don't.

 

[yungman]

Get a degree ( post grad), nobody will trust you no matter what you say. You'll end up spending more time in your life trying to convince people than to just get the PHD.

Nobody will take you serious unless you have your own invention. Then without a job, how are you going to have the environment to invent something to convince people? Without a degree, who is going to hire you into an environment to do anything serious? You see the chicken and egg problem?

I was one that had been an EE and manager of EE for 30 years WITHOUT an EE degree, but it's not going to be as easy today. Also, I am in EE, not in Biochem research. I can imagine that would be harder. It'll take too long for you to start low and move up the career ladder. Get the PHD. If you are really as good as you claimed, you can get through in less than 4 years and you barely can legally buy alcohol when you celebrate your graduation.

Another thing that might be very important. People do look at your tittle, when you publish your paper, people do look at whether there is a PHD behind your name. Some company do hire for you tittle because it will look good in the portfolio to pitch for funding.

 

[IGU]

I currently have enough knowledge equivalent to someone with a BsC in EECS, physics, chem, bio and mathematics. I want to self-study even more to the point of PhD level knowledge in those areas. I want to be a biology researcher and work at NSA. For that, is the knowledge enough or should I pursue a double major in bio and EECS even if I already have the knowledge? i am 18 by the way.

Most research positions require credentials (like a PhD). The best way to get such requirements waived is to personally impress somebody. It would typically have to be somebody at the level of a research director of a lab, as in the case of your failure they are responsible for not following the rules.

As to self-study to a PhD level of knowledge, that's not too hard in math if you are disciplined and very capable. But in things where there is typically some experimental component it's more difficult. If you stick to areas requiring only computer simulation you can probably get away with it. However, it will take a long time. As a PhD you need to go deep for your thesis, become a serious expert in some area of endeavor. This takes years. So even if you're really, really good I think you have to allocate at least three years for each area. However, if you are just talking knowledge, as in enough to pass your quals, you can probably get away with a year or so for each area (if you're as fast as you say), maybe two if your undergraduate preparation is weak.

Sounds very ambitious. Good luck! And, by the way, you might want to pick up a law degree along the way to make it easier to patent things.

But I'm curious, how do you know you have "knowledge equivalent to someone with a BsC in EECS, physics, chem, bio and mathematics"? And do you mean equivalent to somebody good coming out of MIT or somthing else?

 

[Office_Shredder]

They gave you horrible advice. Are you sure they weren't stating that with respect to a more specific question that you had, or they were confused about what your overarching question was? Because nobody who is 18 is supposed to have good intuition on the credential requirements of technical careers.

It would be very difficult I think to go to graduate school because when you apply there are two barriers: the first is the university at large, which dictates requirements for the program. Typically this is something along the lines of: an undergraduate degree in a related field, GPA 3.0 or higher, etc. Then you have the actual department, which will have no rigorous standards but simply tries to pick out the best candidates. If you wanted to get a graduate degree you would have to find a university willing to waive their standard requirements, which from my understanding is not very common (partially because the department has lots of very qualified candidates, and nobody is going to want to do the legwork to get the requirements waived for you. I think it's probably possible for it to happen, but requires somebody actually feeling significant personal responsibility toward you - especially since if you show up and suck, it's their *** on the line for vouching for you.

I imagine a similar problem would occur if you applied for a job in industry, but the bureaucracy is less and the competition to find good applicants is greater so there is a better chance of you finding something. I think the simplest way of having an answer for sure is find some companies to apply to, submit your application including letters of references from these professors you've worked with, mention how you're a super genius (and emphasize heavily the papers you have authored, because those are tangible as opposed to claims of study that you could be making up) and see if any of said companies are interested in you.

Again from the bureaucracy perspective, at a large company your application likely gets thrown out by human resources before it reaches anybody who might be interested in it. If these professors really think you don't need to get a degree because you're that technically skilled, ask them if they have any contacts of employers who you could send an application to - that way it will get to someone who will actually look over what you have.

 

[IGU]

Finally, my assertion is not my assertion. Its the way it is. You cannot test your way into a BS degree.

Hmm. You're not only making an assertion, but asserting a negative. Do you really believe that a BS degree can't be obtained through testing? Why? I think perhaps you are neither a scientist nor a mathematician. Proof by assertion and argument from authority is not the way it works in those fields. I don't understand why you are being so discouraging to the original poster.

 

[Shivam3013]

Most research positions require credentials (like a PhD). The best way to get such requirements waived is to personally impress somebody. It would typically have to be somebody at the level of a research director of a lab, as in the case of your failure they are responsible for not following the rules.

As to self-study to a PhD level of knowledge, that's not too hard in math if you are disciplined and very capable. But in things where there is typically some experimental component it's more difficult. If you stick to areas requiring only computer simulation you can probably get away with it. However, it will take a long time. As a PhD you need to go deep for your thesis, become a serious expert in some area of endeavor. This takes years. So even if you're really, really good I think you have to allocate at least three years for each area. However, if you are just talking knowledge, as in enough to pass your quals, you can probably get away with a year or so for each area (if you're as fast as you say), maybe two if your undergraduate preparation is weak.

Sounds very ambitious. Good luck! And, by the way, you might want to pick up a law degree along the way to make it easier to patent things.

But I'm curious, how do you know you have "knowledge equivalent to someone with a BsC in EECS, physics, chem, bio and mathematics"? And do you mean equivalent to somebody good coming out of MIT or somthing else?

Yeah, equivalent to a guy coming out of Harvard, MIT, Caltech kind with a 4-ish gpa. The fact is, I rarely get more than 5 hours of sleep and have no fun-ish life whatsoever. And I have worked with lots of problems from tough textbooks like Apostle, Rudin etc.

 

[IGU]

Yeah, equivalent to a guy coming out of Harvard, MIT, Caltech kind with a 4-ish gpa. The fact is, I rarely get more than 5 hours of sleep and have no fun-ish life whatsoever. And I have worked with lots of problems from tough textbooks like Apostle, Rudin etc.

Okay. I don't see any reason for you to change the way you're learning since it seems to be working for you. But do you have the time to spend, or will you have to earn a living along the way? For earning a living, credentials are certainly less of a problem if you work for yourself. Jobs and Gates were pretty happy with the letters CEO rather than PhD (or BS for that matter). But usually earning a living leaves you with not that much time to pursue learning.

Have you considered applying for a Thiel Fellowship?

 

[ModestyKing]

Shivam,

I'm kind of curious what a fellow like you has done research in - could you link to one of your published papers? I'm a bit impressed.
It sounds like, however, you have two options: Start your own company/business with what you know, or do what these fellows are recommending - get the info of some employers from you professors, as in, ask them where you could send an application that'd be reviewed directly.