Said so well! On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 2:49 PM, William Silvert <[email protected]> wrote: > Wow, I hope that Jay is kidding. It's only the good debates that really make > lists exciting. Not all of us subscribe just for the job ads. > > One point that came up in several postings was the idea that some employers > are prejudiced towards the PhD and that it carries more weight than it > should. Also a complaint that not all PhDs are of comparable quality. No > doubt about that. Nor is it unreasonable -- should those of us who want to > pursue scientific careers be shut out just because we can't get into Harvard > or MIT or Princeton? > > Still, the PhD is based on in-depth research into a field, and it is natural > that if an employer wants to hire people to carry out in-depth research into > a field, they are likely to prefer PhDs. Still, even formal systems can turn > out to be flexible. I used to work for the Canadian Department of Fisheries > and Oceans where those of us with PhDs were classified as Professionals and > were slotted into five niches for Research Scientists while those without > were called Technicians and had totally different kinds of contracts (not > necessarily bad, since they got overtime and we didn't, which really sucked > when we were doing 24-hour stations at sea!). But somehow the good techs > made it quite far, and several occupy positions just as important and > influential as any PhD, including major international posts. In some > countries the PhD takes a long time to finish and may be awarded well into > one's career -- my wife was head of the Division of Oceanography at her > institute long before she got around to finishing her PhD. > > I suppose the underlying issue is not which degree is better in some sese, > but which one involves the kind of education that prospective employers are > looking for. It is unfortunately true that not all universities place as > much emphasis on teaching ability as they should, although this is not > always the case -- when I was looking for jobs early in my career I applied > to some four-year colleges and was rejected because they thought my research > record was too good and this cast doubt on my commitment to teaching! > > The only real option is to pursue one's goals with a measure of pragmatism. > A lot of people have had to adjust their plans, such as their intended > research and teaching ideas, in the face of limited opportunities. Many > students do not get where they want to go -- in particular, it is common for > prospective PhD candidates to fall off the track and end up with a masters > (if they are lucky). They usually end up as technicians, a step down from > what they had hoped for. So go as far as you can, but be realistic about > your prospects. > > Bill Silvert > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jay Beugly" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 6:45 PM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD > > > In the future I will abstain from asking controversial questions (didn't > realize this was one). >
-- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas A&M University-Texarkana Editor, Herpetological Conservation and Biology http://www.herpconbio.org Fall Teaching Schedule & Office Hours: Ecology: M,W 1-2:40 pm Cell Biology: M 6-9:40 pm (don't ask!) Forensic Science: T,R 10-11:40am Office Hours: MW 12-1, 5-6, TR 11:40-12:30, 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, and pollution. 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction MAY help restore populations. 2022: Soylent Green is People! Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
