In my experience, search committees also look for individuals who have published while in graduate school. This usually requires motivation and efforts by both the student and the advisor.
> I'm very sorry to see that a few folks have had bad experiences in grad > school. Many of us had very happy and productive times as graduate > students. But I've seen enough over the years to recognize that faults in > advisors, or in advisees, or both can result in mediocre to bad outcomes > most often for the advisee, but sometimes for the advisor as well. > > I did, however, want to comment on the statement that > > "When we graduate, we have more or less the same credentials as everyone > else (with) a degree." > > > If you intend to pursue an academic career in research, nothing could be > further than the truth. In cases where large numbers of recently minted > Ph.D.'s or post-docs apply for several jobs in the same field, often the > same, relatively few individuals get to short lists and are interviewed > across the country. Applicants whose Ph.D. research (and subsequent work) > are perceived to have significant, novel implications and be scalable > to future endeavors, and fundable by NSF or other agencies or foundations > are much more likely to be interviewed and offered jobs. That is what > search committees look for. Not that search committees never make > mistakes; they do, sometimes egregiously. A Ph.D. gets you in the door to > submit an application, but you need excellent research, combined with > strong writing and oral presentation skills, ability to think on your > feet, and empathy to interact well with students and colleagues, to have > a real chance of success at landing a job at first- or second-tier > universities. > > > Thomas J. Givnish > Henry Allan Gleason Professor of Botany > University of Wisconsin > > [email protected] > http://botany.wisc.edu/givnish/Givnish/Welcome.html > > > > > On 10/18/12, brandi gartland wrote: >> As I am currently deciding on whether to enter a PhD program vs. >> consulting work/career position, I am finding this feed quite >> informative and wanted to respond to: >> >> "When we graduate, we have more or less the same credentials as everyone >> else a degree. There are many successful scientists without Ph.D.'s but >> many more with Ph.D.'s who are unemployed." >> >> I immediately thought of sharing this documentary, as it illustrates >> this very point as well as other ideas: >> >> http://www.knowledgeoftoday.org/2012/02/education-college-conspiracy-exposed.html >> >> -It illustrates how the U.S. educational system is not what it used to >> be and "exposes the facts and truth about America's college education >> system. It was was produced over a six-month period by NIA's team of >> expert Austrian economists with the help of thousands of NIA members who >> contributed their ideas and personal stories for the film. NIA believes >> the U.S. college education system is a scam that turns vulnerable young >> Americans into debt slaves for life." >> >> >> Best wishes for us all in life, love, work, and happiness. >> >> Brandi >> M.S. Candidate Avian Sciences >> University of California, Davis >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 10:29:21 -0700 >> > From: [email protected] >> > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] "The Audacity of Graduate School" >> > To: [email protected] >> > >> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 6:40 AM, Aaron T. Dossey <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > When we graduate, we have more or less the same credentials as >> everyone else >> > > - a degree. There are many successful scientists without Ph.D.'s but >> many >> > > more with Ph.D.'s who are unemployed. >> > >> > Can you make a rough estimate of the relative frequencies of each. >> > >> > > Also, to emphasize how little we get out of >> > > a Ph.D. (a lot is stolen from us), we don't get credit for our work >> or >> > > publications because the professor always gets credit for everything >> we do >> > > while in their lab as a student or postdoc (which is something I am >> fighting >> > > on other fronts - I call it institutionalized intellectual property >> theft). >> > >> > Isn't that taken care of by the first author/last author distinction? >> > A PI may get some undeserved credit, but that's different from the >> > student not getting credit. The paper is still cited as Student et al. >> > Or are you talking about taking the student's idea outright? >> > >> > BTW, if you believe that grad students are employees to the point of >> > needing a union and thinking of their advisor as their boss, I would >> > point out that people who do creative work as employees rarely keep >> > the rights to their work. Typically, the intellectual property belongs >> > to their employer ("work done for hire"). Isn't it better to say that >> > grad students are not employees? >> > >> > -- >> > ------------- >> > Jane Shevtsov, Ph.D. >> > Mathematical Biology Curriculum Writer, UCLA >> > co-founder, www.worldbeyondborders.org >> > >> > Those who say it cannot be done should not interfere with those who >> > are doing it. --attributed to Robert Heinlein, George Bernard Shaw >> > and others > > -- >
