Finding a Math Job: Preparing Before Graduation

[homeomorphic]

Blah. Too long. Too wandering. Look, there are topics where some exposition is warranted. This isn't one of them. The reality is that your reasons for not working in that field don't actually matter. They don't even matter to the interviewer.

What really matters are questions like "Does this person really want to work at this company?" Or, "Is this person going to leave as soon as a job in academia opens up?"

Try this again but make the following changes:
Reduce it to two to three sentences
Try to bring the focus back to the job
Make it clear that you are not working in academia, period (without even saying why)

Well, I'll have to think about it. I suppose part of my reasoning is that it seemed more convincing to give a reason for leaving academia.

You are not going to be employed to "understand things in a more intuitive way", or "pursue your curiosity wherever it leads".

Yeah, but you have to understand that I am saying that very specifically in the context of math and physics. That's not really how I think of working in industry. I'm thinking of it more as a way to make a living, rather than an outlet for my intellectual curiosity, alone, so it's not the same as math and physics were. I could see some issues if there was too much stuff that I didn't understand for myself, but it's my suspicion that, even if that isn't "what I'm employed to do", I can still have what I want in that regard. If I have to, I'll just work that much harder to gain the understanding that I'd like and still have time to get the job done. It's also hard to pin down exactly what is going to get on my nerves in this regard. I think I'm somewhat flexible here, especially, given that, as I said, I'm thinking of it more as a job.

In an entry level job you are employed to do what you are told to do - preferably done on time, and done right.

That's fine with me. Anything sounds pretty exciting to me, as long as it's not math research at this point. So, for the next couple years, I think I'm good. Heck, if you paid me to memorize equations by rote and plug numbers straight into them without questioning, after that PhD, I'd be happy to oblige. I'd just be so thrilled that I'm not writing my dissertation. Beyond a couple years, though, I have to think carefully about whether I can go the long haul. I'm really starting to think this actuary thing could be a good gig for me. Just enough to keep me from being bored, but simple enough not to wear me out, plus the way the job seems to be structured, making great money.

We once hired a guy who pretty much fitted the description of your quote - he must have been smart enough that we didn't pick it up in the interview. Most days, he came up with good ideas for two or three new PhD-level research projects. The only problems were

(1) He never actually accomplished anything, except coming up with lots of good research ideas.
(2) Most days, he took several hours of working time away from people who did accomplish things, explaining and asking questions about his latest idea.

Thankfully, he got bored and left before we fired him.

Yeah, I don't have lots of good research ideas. I'm sure I can get results. As I said, I'm not going into it with the same idea that I had going into academia at all. It's a fresh start, for me.

The thing about engineering is that it's hard to picture what the actual job is like because, even though I studied EE a lot more than CS, there seems to be a bigger gap between engineering school and actual practice. In the context of programming, I really don't see myself having any of these kinds of issues at all because I know what it's like to write code. The understanding I like to have would all be in place already. All that remains is to apply it. That goes for anything. If I already understand it, I'm good. So for example, probably something like 50% of the undergraduate EE curriculum is already taken care of in that regard. Already got the understanding. No one can take it away. So, I'd be good to go. I don't need to understand it better than I do, already. I'm happy to apply what I know. That's a very different thing from some crazy subject like the topology of 4-manifolds. I already understand electrical circuits or Maxwell's equations and a lot of stuff. My work is done there and that's the point. And if it's not done, it's not that hard. It's not the Poincare conjecture. No need to probe deeper, no need to prove everything rigorously. Already understand or can understand.

 

[jesse73]

Yeah, but you have to understand that I am saying that very specifically in the context of math and physics. That's not really how I think of working in industry. I'm thinking of it more as a way to make a living, rather than an outlet for my intellectual curiosity, alone, so it's not the same as math and physics were. I could see some issues if there was too much stuff that I didn't understand for myself, but it's my suspicion that, even if that isn't "what I'm employed to do", I can still have what I want in that regard. If I have to, I'll just work that much harder to gain the understanding that I'd like and still have time to get the job done. It's also hard to pin down exactly what is going to get on my nerves in this regard. I think I'm somewhat flexible here, especially, given that, as I said, I'm thinking of it more as a job.

I think he understood the context but your answer sounds like you "just want to make a living" which is fine but not really the answer they are looking for. I would just avoid the topic.

 

[homeomorphic]

I think he understood the context but your answer sounds like you "just want to make a living" which is fine but not really the answer they are looking for.

Looks to me like he missed the context because he thinks I'm like the guy he hired (I find the thought that I would be like that mildly amusing--can't picture it).

I would just avoid the topic.

Well, I am going to have to rethink it, but maybe I could add that I actually WANT to apply the stuff I ALREADY understand, rather than having to understand more and more stuff.

 

[Mark44]

Tip: when you quote someone, include who said it, like this:
quote=Bob Blah, blah, blah. /quote

I have to agree with Vanadium - "bizarre workings of non-mathematical minds" is at the very least extremely patronizing if not actually dripping with contempt.

You can think that all you want, but the fact remains that there was no actual feeling of contempt behind it.

Whether there was or wasn't a feeling of contempt, it still comes across that way. If you come across an obese person, and you say -- "You're really fat." -- you might rationalize this as a neutral observer merely stating a fact, but it would come across as very insulting.

Puzzlement. Not contempt.
You have to realize this seems innocuous to an insane degree to me. It's really hard for me to predict that people's reactions to me. It's just walking on eggshells all the time. No, I can't see all these coming. I'm sorry. People are going to have to just think I'm a jerk sometimes, if they are so over-sensitive because I guess I'm just not that discerning when it comes to this stuff.

Which will make it that much more difficult to get a job that involves working with other people.

I mean, from my point of view, this seems extreme to take every comment I make so seriously. It's not even that I think that they are stupid. It's just that there current skill level is like puzzle to me. That's all it is. They might even be secretly good at math, for all I know. Doesn't mean it's not hard to understand their difficulties.

Indeed, in practice, it is only rather rarely that I make a remark that people take the wrong way. Doesn't everyone do that sometimes?

Several times in this long thread I've noticed that people respond to something you've said, and your reply to them is something like, "I'm not really like that. It's only rarely that ..."

Most of my students that I tutor think highly of me and only on one occasion can I recall that one of them felt put down when I, out of concern for her, informed her that she seemed to be missing some of the prerequisite knowledge for the class (perhaps, there were a few who kept silent about it, but I highly doubt it was much more than that one). I tried to reassure her that I was not judging her, just trying to let her know what was normally expected, coming into the class, and maybe it worked, I don't know.

The only real contempt I have for the students (the ones I had to teach, not tutor) is for their readiness to complain to the department and make my life difficult, even though I was trying my best. They were just plain mean to me. Not without reason, but really a bit on the cruel side.

"Not without reason" makes me suspicious. I taught math for 21+ years, one year as a college TA, two years in a very small high school, and eighteen years in a community college, teaching the first two years of college math. My classes were generally five days a week, three quarters per year plus a couple of classes in summer school. In most of those classes students had the opportunity to provide feedback of my teaching. I have to wonder what you were doing to get your students so angry that they would complain to the department head or whatever.

If you want to see what REAL contempt looks like, look at my first teaching evaluations. That's contempt.

Or maybe, what goes around, comes around.

 

[homeomorphic]

Several times in this long thread I've noticed that people respond to something you've said, and your reply to them is something like, "I'm not really like that. It's only rarely that ..."

Maybe it's something about the thread that is making me come under fire. I'm not used to this. I'm generally known as one of the nicest guys around.

Not without reason" makes me suspicious. I taught math for 21+ years, one year as a college TA, two years in a very small high school, and eighteen years in a community college, teaching the first two years of college math. My classes were generally five days a week, three quarters per year plus a couple of classes in summer school. In most of those classes students had the opportunity to provide feedback of my teaching. I have to wonder what you were doing to get your students so angry that they would complain to the department head or whatever.

Hint: it took them like 1-2 weeks. One time, my recitation students complained on the first day. I'm just that uncharismatic, boring, and not understandable when I lecture. If you want something more specific, they said I was nervous, didn't finish my sentences, didn't explain things well. Not one person said that I was arrogant or put them down or any such nonsense because that didn't happen. I just didn't know what I was doing.

Or maybe, what goes around, comes around.

I'm sorry, but the fact of the matter is that I didn't know how to teach them and that's all there was to it. In the second class I taught, someone even said "he's a nice guy and it's not his fault, but..."

 

[StatGuy2000]

Hint: it took them like 1-2 weeks. One time, my recitation students complained on the first day. I'm just that uncharismatic, boring, and not understandable when I lecture. If you want something more specific, they said I was nervous, didn't finish my sentences, didn't explain things well. Not one person said that I was arrogant or put them down or any such nonsense because that didn't happen. I just didn't know what I was doing.



I'm sorry, but the fact of the matter is that I didn't know how to teach them and that's all there was to it. In the second class I taught, someone even said "he's a nice guy and it's not his fault, but..."

I have a question for you; what is the tone of your voice when you speak publically? Do you have a tendency to speak in a monotone? Do you sound tired or weary? Do you have a nasal voice or a quiet voice? Because the complaint of being "uncharismatic, boring, not understandable" could have a lot to do with how you speak publically. And this is going to be a problem for you in the working world, because at some point or another you will have to give presentations to working groups explaining your work and you need to keep them engaged. Some people have a natural tendency in the tone of their voice to sound exciting or charismatic, while others do not.

The good news is that these things can be mitigated or corrected through practice. Ask someone (a friend, fellow grad student, someone you know, etc.) to hear you present on a topic, any topic (even reading out of a book) and ask for honest feedback and constructive criticism. Then consider taking a public speaking course or join Toastmasters and work on your public speaking skills. Working on such skills can do wonders in both boosting your confidence when giving speeches and making yourself more presentable in a work setting.

 

[Mark44]

homeomorphic, please use the Quote button so that whom you're replying to is identified. It looks like you are using just [ quote ] and [ /quote ] tags. To put a name with what you're quoting, add "=<user_name>" right after the word quote in the first tag, with no spaces between "quote", "=", and <user_name>. With over 900 posts to your credit in this forum, I'm surprised that you don't seem to know how to do this.

... I have to wonder what you were doing to get your students so angry that they would complain to the department head or whatever.

Hint: it took them like 1-2 weeks. One time, my recitation students complained on the first day. I'm just that uncharismatic, boring, and not understandable when I lecture. If you want something more specific, they said I was nervous, didn't finish my sentences, didn't explain things well. Not one person said that I was arrogant or put them down or any such nonsense because that didn't happen. I just didn't know what I was doing.

When you mentioned the student complaints earlier, you didn't provide any details about the nature of the complaints, saying only that they were full of contempt, and "not without reason." I could only conjecture about what the reason possibly could be.

From your description, your experience at teaching was certainly disastrous. Aside from having mastery of the subject, a teacher has to be something of an actor giving a performance. You need to speak in a voice that can be heard, with sentences that can be clearly understood. Being nervous at first is understandable, but practice can help to overcome nervousness. I can see that students would pick up on your not being able to explain a concept or equation in different words, or leaving a sentence unfinished. If this happened only rarely, I doubt that students would notice, but if it happened a lot, I'm not surprised that they would comment on it.

Was this the only experience you had at teaching? I would assume that you were in your doctoral program for 5 years at the very least, and probably longer. Often students in these programs are offered TA positions where they teach a class, and earn a stipend to help offset the cost of the degree. When I was getting my master's, I had a TA for the three quarters of my second year, and taught classes in two of those quarters. I had something of an advantage in having already taught in a high school for two years, so standing at the front of a class wasn't alien to me.

 

[Locrian]

Well, I'll have to think about it.

Why? What exactly needs thinking over?

These are (a few of) the easy questions used to cull the unprepared. You don’t need a day or even an hour to think of a reply. It should take you a few minutes to knock out a solid answer, post and move on.

PhD candidates' ability to turn the tiniest tasks into research projects is a weakness, not a strength.

 

[homeomorphic]

I have a question for you; what is the tone of your voice when you speak publically? Do you have a tendency to speak in a monotone? Do you sound tired or weary? Do you have a nasal voice or a quiet voice?

Not nasal or quiet, but the rest might apply.

Because the complaint of being "uncharismatic, boring, not understandable" could have a lot to do with how you speak publically.

That wasn't from the students directly. That's just my own self-deprecation.

The good news is that these things can be mitigated or corrected through practice. Ask someone (a friend, fellow grad student, someone you know, etc.) to hear you present on a topic, any topic (even reading out of a book) and ask for honest feedback and constructive criticism. Then consider taking a public speaking course or join Toastmasters and work on your public speaking skills. Working on such skills can do wonders in both boosting your confidence when giving speeches and making yourself more presentable in a work setting.

Well, at least I don't really get nervous anymore, so that's one thing I gained from teaching and giving talks. There's a lot of stuff for me to work on. Kind of overwhelming.

When you mentioned the student complaints earlier, you didn't provide any details about the nature of the complaints, saying only that they were full of contempt, and "not without reason." I could only conjecture about what the reason possibly could be.

Conjecture away, but whatever it is, I can almost guarantee it's wrong. I told you the concrete things they said in their complaints, at least from what I remember. I was never angry or yelled at them or anything. At least as far as I could tell, there wasn't anything that I did wrong, except not know what to do. The complaints to the department were not full of contempt. That was the complaints on the student evaluations. I have been a student, too. There was a math teacher I had who people didn't like too much in high school. I think he wasn't a bad guy. He might have gotten angry a few times or something. He just came across as kind of lame and nerdy or something and people judged him for it (that, and perhaps not being the best teacher). It's not like you have to commit a high crime for them to judge you.

From your description, your experience at teaching was certainly disastrous. Aside from having mastery of the subject, a teacher has to be something of an actor giving a performance. You need to speak in a voice that can be heard, with sentences that can be clearly understood. Being nervous at first is understandable, but practice can help to overcome nervousness. I can see that students would pick up on your not being able to explain a concept or equation in different words, or leaving a sentence unfinished. If this happened only rarely, I doubt that students would notice, but if it happened a lot, I'm not surprised that they would comment on it.

I don't have a problem with what the students did, except, first of all, they should have complained to me first, not the department, and secondly, all the insults on the evaluations were inappropriate and nonconstructive by any standards. My voice could be heard, but was a little flat and monotone, and that's one reason why they didn't like me.

Was this the only experience you had at teaching?

Two classes in a masters program. One summer class later in the PhD program. And recitations.

I would assume that you were in your doctoral program for 5 years at the very least, and probably longer.

Seven.

Often students in these programs are offered TA positions where they teach a class, and earn a stipend to help offset the cost of the degree. When I was getting my master's, I had a TA for the three quarters of my second year, and taught classes in two of those quarters. I had something of an advantage in having already taught in a high school for two years, so standing at the front of a class wasn't alien to me.

Some people in the program taught every semester. I only taught one summer. Partly by choice because I wanted to do different things sometimes, but they wouldn't let me teach anything besides recitations. The time I taught my own class it actually went reasonably well. What didn't go well was the insane amount of work I put into do that. No matter how hard I tried, I still suffered from a lack of charisma and my evaluations didn't get much better than lukewarm.

Why? What exactly needs thinking over?

Clearly, this is more difficult for me than it is for you. I'm kind of just procrastinating on it, I guess. The actual thinking might not take that long. The teaching one is really pretty difficult, though.

These are (a few of) the easy questions used to cull the unprepared. You don’t need a day or even an hour to think of a reply. It should take you a few minutes to knock out a solid answer, post and move on.

Well, a job is not on the line right now, and I can take advantage of that, so I did.

PhD candidates' ability to turn the tiniest tasks into research projects is a weakness, not a strength.

This is a procrastination thing, not a research thing. Also, there's other stuff in my life besides this thread. Right now, for example, I still haven't had breakfast, so I'm going to go do that.

 

[psparky]

I just skimmed through this thread and I can't help but ask myself...what SKILLS do you possesses besides your Math degree? Then I was thinking, an employer might just ask the same question. I'm not implying you don't have skils, just stating that revealing your overall skills may help with this thread.

Are you handy with fixing cars?
Home construction/remodeling?
How about fixing/trouble shooting computers?
Any good with art work?
People skills...are people drawn to you?
Performed any surgeries?...lol, kidding.
Speak more than one language?
etc...etc...etc...

If I were an employer, I would ask these questions. The things I mention above tend to help people in the workplace. And if the answer was no to all of them...I would say...ok...what do you do?

Also, you may want to consider some CHANGE...you seem very stuck in your ways. Almost everyone needs some sort of CHANGE to help them succeed in life. Especially when unemployed.

 

[homeomorphic]

I just skimmed through this thread and I can't help but ask myself...what SKILLS do you possesses besides your Math degree? Then I was thinking, an employer might just ask the same question. I'm not implying you don't have skils, just stating that revealing your overall skills may help with this thread.

Are you handy with fixing cars?
Home construction/remodeling?
How about fixing/trouble shooting computers?
Any good with art work?
People skills...are people drawn to you?
Performed any surgeries?...lol, kidding.
Speak more than one language?
etc...etc...etc...

I have a few other skills, but I'm not sure anyone cares. I play piano and draw pretty well. I'm just not sure anyone cares about that. They want to see programming or database stuff or something like, plus maybe people skills or communication skills. They might think it's nice that I can play Chopin, but I don't think that's going to be a priority for anyone. How's that going to help with the job? Might give me something to talk about if there are classical music fans around, but beyond that, I don't know.

Also, you may want to consider some CHANGE...you seem very stuck in your ways. Almost everyone needs some sort of CHANGE to help them succeed in life. Especially when unemployed.

That's not really fair to say. I'm making quite a few changes. If I get defensive sometimes, that doesn't mean I'm not taking some of it into account, in spite of how it may appear. It just might take it a while to sink in, and not everything is going to be something I can just wake up the next day and magically make it different. And for some things, I'm just not going to be able to change because I'm simply not capable of it. I'm not particularly stuck in my ways. It's easy to misinterpret what I say, and I've spotted some clear-cut errors that people made in this thread in that regard, not all of which I bothered to point out.

 

[Vanadium 50]

If there is one theme in this thread, it's a lack of putting yourself in the employer's shoes: What can you do to make her money? You have complained that you've been misinterpreted or misunderstood several times in this thread: why do you think it is that people are drawing these conclusions?

 

[psparky]

I'm not sure why you don't just teach math at a university with your PHD. Good money, good hours, summers are off, etc. Yes, there is certainly work involved, that's why they pay you.

What could possibly be better than molding young minds into intelligent adults.

When you are 80 or 90 years old, you can look back and think about all the thousands of people you have helped. What could be better or more satisfying? Isn't that really what life is all about?

 

[ParticleGrl]

I'm not sure why you don't just teach math at a university with your PHD. Good money, good hours, summers are off, etc. Yes, there is certainly work involved, that's why they pay you.

Full time jobs at universities are very hard to get. This is like telling a musician "I'm not sure why you don't just become a rockstar. "

 

[homeomorphic]

If there is one theme in this thread, it's a lack of putting yourself in the employer's shoes: What can you do to make her money?

Well, I do think I could do more of that, but I also have a limited ability to do so, not being that familiar with what it's actually like to do these jobs. I just know that I'm capable of doing stuff in classes and learning things on my own. Some of that will directly translate into tasks I could do on the job, but a lot of it is just a big unknown to me.

You have complained that you've been misinterpreted or misunderstood several times in this thread: why do you think it is that people are drawing these conclusions?

Well, sometimes, I get lazy about fleshing things out, and maybe at times, I try to be brief when it's not called for because I do value being concise, even if I am not always good at it. Also, I'm just not that discerning when it comes to stuff people are offended by because, personally, I don't get offended very easily, and I tend not to judge people that much (I do, but my judgments are usually pretty soft ones), so I can't understand it when other people do.

I'm not sure why you don't just teach math at a university with your PHD. Good money, good hours, summers are off, etc. Yes, there is certainly work involved, that's why they pay you.

I'm so bad at it that it's not just work. It's not having any life outside work. That's how hard I will have to work to not even do a good job, but to just barely squeak by with the students having a lukewarm opinion of me as a professor. I wanted to be a mathematician, not a teacher. And it turned out that at least as far as today's research is concerned, I'm astoundingly bad at research and not really interested in it, anyway. The only thing I know enough about to publish on is spin-offs on my thesis, which I am not really interested in. That's one of the things that made my PhD so painful. What am I expected to do as a math professor? Research and teaching. And both of those things, I not only failed at, but failed miserably. I still don't have any publications. I could do it if I wanted to, I think. The university here will give me an adjunct position because they know me, and then I could work really hard on it and get someone to watch me and give me a teaching recommendation, and maybe I could publish my thesis work. But why fight for something that doesn't sound that great anyway?

Being an adjunct is not an enviable position, and as a tenure-track professor, I could almost guarantee I would not get tenure. If I did get tenure, I would be miserable for many, many years doing boring research I am not interested in, just to be able to have something to publish (those thesis spin-offs). Interesting, for me = no publications, as we have seen so far.

What could possibly be better than molding young minds into intelligent adults.

Well, I do that right now. I'm a tutor. I find that far easier and more rewarding because it's easier to get immediate feedback. It's a conversation, not a monologue.

When you are 80 or 90 years old, you can look back and think about all the thousands of people you have helped. What could be better or more satisfying? Isn't that really what life is all about?

Well, in engineering, I could build cool stuff. To me, that could be more exciting. In software, I could write cool programs. As an actuary, I would be helping to provide a necessary service. As a quant, I'm not sure how necessary I would be, but I think someone ought to do it, and I'd be making so much money, I could just quit and do what I want after a few years.

As for teaching, as I said, it's kind of like asking me to be a ballet dancer. It's not what I signed up for, and I have no particular talent for it or anything (in fact, I'm particularly bad at it). It just doesn't make sense.

Full time jobs at universities are very hard to get. This is like telling a musician "I'm not sure why you don't just become a rockstar. "

It's a valid point that I might not actually be able to do it, but I think I'd have a good shot at it, if that is what I wanted. In math, I think it's a little bit easier. I might end up at a community college or something, but it's not quite as competitive as physics, from the statistics I've seen. Anyway, it's all a moot point because I don't want to do that. I'm considering taking an adjunct position temporarily to buy myself more time, but it might not be a very good way to buy time because I'm not sure that I'll have much time left to work on my other marketable skills, as I've been doing.

 

[Vahsek]

The only thing I know enough about to publish on is spin-offs on my thesis, which I am not really interested in.

I thought that throughout one's time in graduate school, one learns that mathematical research is a real pain which is rarely fruitful.

Also, I'm pretty sure that one is supposed to move away from his/her research topic when carrying out later research, and this is supposed to be quite do-able by a phd-holder. Learning new techniques and exploring new areas in your field of research is part of what mathematical research is, so you would not be limited to working on spin-offs from your thesis only.

 

[Physics_UG]

So homeomorphic, what exactly did you envision yourself doing after you got your PhD? What are your career dreams? You must have had some sort of foresight while in school. I think you should pursue your dream.

 

[homeomorphic]

I thought that throughout one's time in graduate school, one learns that mathematical research is a real pain which is rarely fruitful.

And yet, few PhDs emerge with zero publications. "Rarely fruitful" is fine. It's "rarely fruitful" with the contrary expectation of being fruitful due to pressure to publish that is the problem.

Also, I'm pretty sure that one is supposed to move away from his/her research topic when carrying out later research, and this is supposed to be quite do-able by a phd-holder.

Supposed to be. I'm capable of learning new things, but I don't see publications coming out from me at the rate that they seem to be expected--not even close. It's a question of speed. I can do it, it's just going to take me 5 times as long as the next guy. Also, I'm interested in actually going quite far from PhD, not just moving to neighboring things. I'm more interested in physics than topology.

While I don't think my PhD is a pity-PhD, it's a real PhD, it's more of a case of being on the borderline and deserving credit for what I did, rather than a good PhD, given with the confidence that I am actually capable of succeeding at research. I can do it, but only just barely. It may be the case that there is no such thing as a good researcher, just people who are the least terrible at it. However, I am one of the people who is the MOST terrible at it. The least terrible people are still much better than I am.

Learning new techniques and exploring new areas in your field of research is part of what mathematical research is, so you would not be limited to working on spin-offs from your thesis only.

I would, if I expect to get any more publications in the near future. I'd have to stick to what I know for my speed to be anywhere near competitive. Learning new areas takes time.

 

[Physics_UG]

As a professor, you personally are not generating ALL of the ideas. You presumably have some PhD students to help carry out projects and generate ideas too.

 

[homeomorphic]

So homeomorphic, what exactly did you envision yourself doing after you got your PhD. What are your career dreams? You must have had some sort of foresight while in school. I think you should pursue your dream.

I saw myself being a math professor, but the reality of being a math professor is nothing like the dream. The dream was fake. I think I just need to make a living. Turning something into a job makes it a chore and takes all the fun out of it. I'd rather do something that I was just interested in enough to get something out of it and not be totally bored. If I'm really passionate about it, that is probably going to just make it too hard for me to live up to people's expectations because it makes me want to do it my own way, not someone else's way. I care about it too much. If I don't care about it, it's so much easier for me to do it someone else's way.

You are not paid to do things your own way. You are paid to do things someone else's way, unless you are one of the lucky few whose own way happens to coincide with other people's way. Even if you are self-employed, this is still true because you are still at the mercy of your customers.

So, my dream, now, if you want a dream, is just to save up enough money that I can spend the rest of my life, doing as I please, without the burden of having to make a living. Doing artwork and selling it, playing piano, writing about math and science, a little tutoring. The things that it's too hard for me to make a living at by themselves. It would just be extremely risky, if not suicide to expect to make a living at this sort of thing, as it stands. Plus, I'd actually like to try some of these jobs I've been mentioning out, like being an actuary or engineer or programmer, long enough for it to be worth someone's while to pay me to do it.

 

[Vahsek]

homeomorphic,

all what you've said so far seem to be justified. However, I still think that the academia route was worth a try. You could have taken up a post-doc position and see where it would have led you to. Maybe it could have worked out, and maybe you would like it. If it didn't, then you would have no choice but to give up. All I'm saying is that you seem to have made some rash decisions.

 

[homeomorphic]

all what you've said so far seem to be justified. However, I still think that the academia route was worth a try.

Already tried. That was grad school. Didn't work out.

You could have taken up a post-doc position and see where it would have led you to.

I doubt I could get a postdoc. Community college is more like it. My adviser isn't going to give me the best recommendation, and even if he did, I have no publications. And as far as a teaching recommendation, I think, as I said, my best bet would be to take an adjunct position here because I'm not sure anyone would write me one, particularly not a good one.

Maybe it could have worked out, and maybe you would like it.

Well, anything is possible. But you have to bet on the odds, using the information you have.

If it didn't, then you would have no choice but to give up. All I'm saying is that you seem to have made some rash decisions.

I think it's a quite a rational decision. I didn't like grad school. Being a post-doc or professor is a lot like grad school. I sort of feel as if I am a graduate school drop-out, whose drop-out date just happened to land a little after finishing than before. I finished just to show that I could, rather than because I wanted to continue. In a way, I already quit math a year before finishing the PhD. The rest was just going through the motions.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Vashek, your profile says you're in High School. I think that you might need to accept that you might have to defer to the perspective of those farther along the career path than you are. And the fact that the OP says he is uninterested in these careers.

 

[Vahsek]

Vashek, your profile says you're in High School. I think that you might need to accept that you might have to defer to the perspective of those farther along the career path than you are. And the fact that the OP says he is uninterested in these careers.

Yeah, I agree. And I apologize if my perspective was too naive.

 

[homeomorphic]

Okay, I'm going to try to take a crack at the two problem questions again.

"Why aren't you teaching?"

Teaching would only allow me to pass on what I know to other people and wouldn't allow me to put it into practice in the real world. I enjoy explaining things to people, but my preference is to be able to have a conversation about it, rather than just lecturing or talking to the same two students that participate in class most of the time, although I do enjoy occasionally giving presentations on topics that interest me.

(This answer isn't quite the real answer, but it's still true, and it's about as close to I can get without being negative.)

"Wouldn't you rather be working in the field you studied?"

Adapting to things I haven't studied is something I would have to do if I worked in math, anyway. As for what I did study, I had a change of heart when I saw the research that was actually being done, in contrast to what I had seen in my classes. Studying advanced math taught me things about how to motivate myself, how to manage a big project, as well as a lot of practice with more basic math that could be useful in other careers, so I hope to use some of what I learned in an indirect way.

 

[Locrian]

Teaching would only allow me to pass on what I know to other people and wouldn't allow me to put it into practice in the real world. I enjoy explaining things to people, but my preference is to be able to have a conversation about it, rather than just lecturing or talking to the same two students that participate in class most of the time, although I do enjoy occasionally giving presentations on topics that interest me.

I like that much better. As you practice this response, you may see ways to boil it down even further – that would be helpful. But I think it’s perfectly presentable as is.

Practice this answer and be sure that when you say it live, you don't wander or add to it.

(This answer isn't quite the real answer, but it's still true, and it's about as close to I can get without being negative.)

Well sure. You’re not lying on a bed next to your psychologist, nor are you a witness on the stand. You’re trying to convince them you 1) would like to work for them (and would stay there if hired) and 2) that you will perform well. They’re going to ask you questions that don’t address those two topics, and you’re going to politely move the conversation back to those topics if possible.

Well, some questions are just going to be to get to know you; don’t redirect those. But the whole “why aren’t you doing X” line of inquiry deserves to be managed appropriately.

Adapting to things I haven't studied is something I would have to do if I worked in math, anyway. As for what I did study, I had a change of heart when I saw the research that was actually being done, in contrast to what I had seen in my classes. Studying advanced math taught me things about how to motivate myself, how to manage a big project, as well as a lot of practice with more basic math that could be useful in other careers, so I hope to use some of what I learned in an indirect way.

I like this, and I think the first sentence is especially true.

Think about changes you made to these interview questions and see if they need to be made to your cover letter. Your cover letter follows the same rules: be positive, be polite and be on message. The cover letter needs to get them to open your resume, and the resume needs to get them to give you a call.

Many people who will interview you have wildly incorrect notions of what a PhD means and what opportunities are available to them. (I often tell the story on this board about the actuarial hiring manager who didn’t consider an astrophysics PhD because he was sure they could get six figures in academia, and so wouldn’t want the low entry level salary). At the end of the interview, asking what concerns they have is a great way to dig these up and address them. You might even phrase it as “My background is a little unusual, I’d love to address any questions or concerns you have.”

I just got done doing a job search last fall and suffered through over two dozen interviews. If you want to go over more interview questions let me know. My experience is that you need a pretty big bank of carefully crafted answers to not get tripped up.

 

[homeomorphic]

If you want to go over more interview questions let me know. My experience is that you need a pretty big bank of carefully crafted answers to not get tripped up.

Yeah, maybe some more examples would be good.

Big news: I seem to have a possible interview, finally. I don't know that it's an extremely promising one, so maybe it isn't actually such big news. I don't expect to get the job. It's a programming/finance type job.

I'm going to be extremely busy the next couple weeks because they want me to take a programming test in a language that I don't really know, and I also am a bit behind on my studying for the actuarial exam. So, things are about to become INSANE. I think I will need a tiny bit of down time to keep from going crazy, but I plan to make a schedule and follow it to the letter and maybe work 12 hour days until this is over.

So, I don't know how much I will be on here, but on the other hand, I could probably use a little preparation for the interview or else all the studying could be pointless, anyway.

 

[chiro]

If it is programming and the interviewers are looking for experience (given that they have it as well), it will probably be difficult, if not impossible to fake.

The years of debugging alone is the kind of thing that will give you real working knowledge in this field.

Obviously if they don't get expect that then ignore what I am saying but otherwise, be aware of this.

 

[homeomorphic]

If it is programming and the interviewers are looking for experience (given that they have it as well), it will probably be difficult, if not impossible to fake.

The years of debugging alone is the kind of thing that will give you real working knowledge in this field.

Obviously if they don't get expect that then ignore what I am saying but otherwise, be aware of this.

They already know I'm new to the language, so I'm not really trying to fake anything. Just trying to actually learn it. I don't really expect to get the job, but if I pick up another thing to put on my resume along the way, that will be good.

 

[chiro]

Good luck with the interview - what you are saying sounds like some quant jobs where they want smart people with a lot of mathematics knowledge that can pick up advanced concepts quickly.

Given your PhD and assuming the above, I think you have more of a shot than you think.