AT PhDs

[TecHNooB]

How did you accomplish this great feat?

I feel like I am always dependent on other sources besides textbooks to understand most engineering concepts and even then, my understanding is not absolute. I have outrageous test anxiety and an equal probability of either destroying or bombing an exam. My logic is slow and shaky. I always get stuck at the math and have to grind through proofs before I can agree with something whereas my smarter friends use their outrageous logic to figure these things out on the fly. I feel like I will never match these people in thinking speed/ability.

The sad thing is I have a 3.91 GPA but if you talked to me 1 on 1, you would not believe it because I am generally as lost as everyone else prior to exam time Am I genetically limited or something? I am very, very slow. I'm not gonna give up but I'm always preturbed by how slow I am.

I also think its sad that the only purpose for undergrads is to support the grad students T_T

PS. I just bombed an exam

Edit: Cliffs: How do I push my field of study when I make so many mistakes and ask so many questions in between? If there's no guiderails, I'm afraid my logic will carry me to the wrong places..

 

[sjwaste]

Sounds like you just lack confidence.

I'm not a PhD, but I'm about to finish my JD so at least have some professional education, and my perspective on the 1 on 1 thing is that it's not necessarily about being the first to arrive at an answer. Being able to think on your feet is something, but I personally don't take anything away from folks who step back, reason in their heads a bit, and then start talking.

With a 3.91, you didn't bomb the exam. You're probably the person that always comes out talking like they did, though. That will annoy everyone around you, so I'd try to keep that in check. Don't try to act like a victim if your record speaks otherwise, folks do resent that.

Mistakes and questions are opportunities to learn. Minimize the mistakes by being more deliberate, but accept the ones you do make and learn from them. Spend some time teaching others, it will help you better grasp the material.

 

[TecHNooB]

Originally posted by: sjwaste
Sounds like you just lack confidence.

I'm not a PhD, but I'm about to finish my JD so at least have some professional education, and my perspective on the 1 on 1 thing is that it's not necessarily about being the first to arrive at an answer. Being able to think on your feet is something, but I personally don't take anything away from folks who step back, reason in their heads a bit, and then start talking.

With a 3.91, you didn't bomb the exam. You're probably the person that always comes out talking like they did, though. That will annoy everyone around you, so I'd try to keep that in check. Don't try to act like a victim if your record speaks otherwise, folks do resent that.

Mistakes and questions are opportunities to learn. Minimize the mistakes by being more deliberate, but accept the ones you do make and learn from them. Spend some time teaching others, it will help you better grasp the material.

When I do well, I know I did well. When I bomb... sometimes I end up doing well but when I state that I bombed an exam, I'm talking 40-60 range. And this usually happens due to test anxiety or if I don't 'see what I'm supposed to see'. I am not trying to be that guy, I am very scared of messing up

I'm not consistent. Many of my A's come from 90 50 90 semesters (exam 1,2,3). I always bomb one of em, whereas some of my friends never score below an 80. A good semester for me is minimizing the bombs. But I always anticipate them like a statistic.

 

[BrownTown]

getting a PH.D isn't really a matter of doing great in school or anything like that, its really a choice of how long you want to stay in school. The people I knew who went after Ph.Ds were the people who like academic pursuits more then practical ones, while the people who graduated liked real world problem (and $$$). I really liked school, but its hard to turn down a high paying job after you graduate college in order to basically be a slave for the next couple of years getting a PhD.

 

[TecHNooB]

Originally posted by: BrownTown
getting a PH.D isn't really a matter of doing great in school or anything like that, its really a choice of how long you want to stay in school. The people I knew who went after Ph.Ds were the people who like academic pursuits more then practical ones, while the people who graduated liked real world problem (and $$$). I really liked school, but its hard to turn down a high paying job after you graduate college in order to basically be a slave for the next couple of years getting a PhD.

Well, I'm not on my PhD yet. I just admire those with the strength to pursue them. I also don't think the money is that good coming out of undergrad, but maybe I'm just greedy.

<-- wants 70k starting :laugh:

 

[CycloWizard]

Money is NEVER a reason to get a PhD, at least in engineering, trust me on that. As a post-doc, you'll be looking at around $37k (NIH starting pay for 2008). If you take an engineering position without a post-doc, you can make anywhere from $60-80k. If you take a business/sales position with a PhD in engineering, you can start at $80-110k. Or, if you take your bachelor's degree and work for five years, you can get up to the $80k level without living in poverty for five years. All of my undergrad roommates were EE's/ME's who virtually all got masters degrees (5 year BS/MS) before entering the workforce. They started at the same pay level I did when I finished my PhD in chemical engineering (around $65k). I also know about 60 other people with PhD's from the 3.5 years in the PhD program, so the ranges I gave above are pretty reliable. Or, at least they were before everyone went into a hiring freeze.

As far as being "slow" goes, that doesn't mean anything as far as your ability to get a PhD. When I was an undergrad, I was a terrible student. I was slow on the uptake as well, graduated with a 2.96 GPA, and always made a ridiculous number of stupid mistakes on every homework problem and exam. There were a few contributing things that made me this way (came from a non-accredited high school and had never studied before in my life; started taking grad courses junior year while working 30 hours a week doing research; averaged about 2 hours of sleep per night). I was the kind of student that I now hate having in my classes - didn't get my homework finished, was sloppy, and made lots of stupid mistakes every time. I also got a couple of peer-reviewed publications out and lots of good recommendations, but I'm not sure if it was worth the other shenanigans.

Grad school is a different animal. It is designed for people to take courses (2-3 per semester) and do research at the same time. This usually requires working 80+ hours a week for 5-6 years while getting paid about $25k (I started at $12k ), so you really have to be pretty driven and/or like what you're doing to make it. Or, you can be like my wife and just figure out exactly what needs to be done and only go into the lab when you're going to do it. Then you can graduate in 4 years working 20 hours a week. But most people have to do the time and feel their way through the problems they encounter in their research. The whole being slow thing doesn't matter after a while because you literally become the only person in the world who knows what you know. Studying the same thing for so long ensures that you have a robust knowledge base around your area, through sheer time spent if nothing else. If you're slow like me, you'll have to put in a little more time, but you'll find that 99% of grad students put in "more" time.

Anyway, enough rambling for now. If you have specific questions, I can try to answer them. Otherwise, if you want a scarily realistic perspective on what it's like to be a PhD student, go read PhD Comics from start to finish. If you get a PhD, Jorge will probably come to your school at some point and give a talk, so it's best to be prepared when you meet him. And when you pick him up at the airport, don't ask him what part of China he's from - he was born in Panama.

 

[lurk3r]

Same rules apply as undergrad, its a fine balancing act of beer, coffee and bills, or was that pills ...

 

[invidia]

If you are doing a hard science PhD (physics, chemistry, etc.) just for the money, you are going the wrong path. The money you make there is just ENOUGH to pay the bills.

You do it for the fame or contribution to the field. I didn't go for my PhD in physics, because I wanted the money and decided to end with a MS in physics and CE.

 

[CP5670]

I feel like I am always dependent on other sources besides textbooks to understand most engineering concepts and even then, my understanding is not absolute. I have outrageous test anxiety and an equal probability of either destroying or bombing an exam. My logic is slow and shaky. I always get stuck at the math and have to grind through proofs before I can agree with something whereas my smarter friends use their outrageous logic to figure these things out on the fly. I feel like I will never match these people in thinking speed/ability.

I know what you're talking about, but this sort of "quick thinking" ability only matters up to a point. After you pass the qualifying exam, the problems you encounter for your thesis (and later on) are going to be far too difficult to be able to figure out instantly, and require you to spend months or years on them. Actually, many students who are great test takers find this transition to be difficult.

As for the money, that varies a lot with what exactly you do after finishing the PhD. Some career tracks pay much better than others. Although if a higher pay is your main concern, there are other ways to get it with less effort.

Grad school is a different animal. It is designed for people to take courses (2-3 per semester) and do research at the same time. This usually requires working 80+ hours a week for 5-6 years while getting paid about $25k (I started at $12k ), so you really have to be pretty driven and/or like what you're doing to make it.

This depends a lot with the specific program and field you're in. There are some with minimal or no course requirements. But yeah, you want to genuinely enjoy the subject or it will become very difficult to get through it.

I'm a math nerd and my thesis work doesn't feel like work at all. Although I could do without the TA duties.

You do it for the fame or contribution to the field. I didn't go for my PhD in physics, because I wanted the money and decided to end with a MS in physics and CE.

I would say you do it because you like the field and want a research oriented job in it. Only a tiny proportion of PhDs will get any sort of fame.