Canadian Report on the Labour Market Transition of PhD Graduates

[marshwiggle]

If they have actually been "sold" on misleading information, then the manufacturer selling the rights is guilty of fraud.

Are graduate students are being mislead about the costs and benefits of their education choices? If so, by whom?

And if true, do potential graduate students not know this?

The fact that there is so much adjunct porn indicates that a lot of people obviously feel they were unprepared for the reality they faced after graduation. If you want to argue that those people represent an insignificant fraction of graduates, then tell it to IHE and every other publication that regularly carries those stories.

[dismalist]

If they have actually been "sold" on misleading information, then the manufacturer selling the rights is guilty of fraud.

Are graduate students are being mislead about the costs and benefits of their education choices? If so, by whom?

And if true, do potential graduate students not know this?

The fact that there is so much adjunct porn indicates that a lot of people obviously feel they were unprepared for the reality they faced after graduation. If you want to argue that those people represent an insignificant fraction of graduates, then tell it to IHE and every other publication that regularly carries those stories.

But that would mean that graduate students on average desiring to pursue the PhD are not too bright.

[Hibush]

But that would mean that graduate students on average desiring to pursue the PhD are not too bright.

Depends on what you mean by bright. We don't prioritize competence in basic life skills in the admission process. They might not be able to assess career alternatives, or remember to put on a toque when leaving the house. But they can deconstruct Gautier like nobody's business.

[dismalist]

But that would mean that graduate students on average desiring to pursue the PhD are not too bright.

Depends on what you mean by bright. We don't prioritize competence in basic life skills in the admission process. They might not be able to assess career alternatives, or remember to put on a toque when leaving the house. But they can deconstruct Gautier like nobody's business.

So, they are victims.

[Hibush]

But that would mean that graduate students on average desiring to pursue the PhD are not too bright.

Depends on what you mean by bright. We don't prioritize competence in basic life skills in the admission process. They might not be able to assess career alternatives, or remember to put on a toque when leaving the house. But they can deconstruct Gautier like nobody's business.

So, they are victims.

:-) Would the be less victims if I wrote Trefler?

[dismalist]

But that would mean that graduate students on average desiring to pursue the PhD are not too bright.

Depends on what you mean by bright. We don't prioritize competence in basic life skills in the admission process. They might not be able to assess career alternatives, or remember to put on a toque when leaving the house. But they can deconstruct Gautier like nobody's business.

So, they are victims.

:-) Would the be less victims if I wrote Trefler?

I do know who Trefler is, but sorry, I don't get it.

[marshwiggle]

But that would mean that graduate students on average desiring to pursue the PhD are not too bright.

Depends on what you mean by bright. We don't prioritize competence in basic life skills in the admission process. They might not be able to assess career alternatives, or remember to put on a toque when leaving the house. But they can deconstruct Gautier like nobody's business.

So, they are victims.

The point is that people who may exhibit a high degree of intelligence and complex thinking in one area may fail to do so in something much more mundane, but important (such as figuring out how to pay the rent). Does that qualify as "not too bright"? Or are independent adults not responsible for certain choices they make?

[Durchlässigkeitsbeiwert]

The point is that people who may exhibit a high degree of intelligence and complex thinking in one area may fail to do so in something much more mundane, but important (such as figuring out how to pay the rent). Does that qualify as "not too bright"? Or are independent adults not responsible for certain choices they make?

I wouldn't say that academic job market counts as a mundane problem.
There are several factors in play:
1) CHE and IHE are not exactly on every prospective student's reading list
2) Standard advice in the non-academic job market is to follow footsteps of people already in the desired positions. This is likely to lead  into a dead end in modern academia.
3) Some crucial metrics are not obvious for outsiders. E.g. to start looking for / asking about an attrition rate, one need to know that it can be high enough to skew outcome stats.
4) Many metrics readily available for undergrad programs nowadays, do not exists for grad programs prompting prospective students to rely on hearsay.
5) When prompted even well-informed current professors often are reluctant to use terms that may dissuade a good student from going into a grad school.

[marshwiggle]

The point is that people who may exhibit a high degree of intelligence and complex thinking in one area may fail to do so in something much more mundane, but important (such as figuring out how to pay the rent). Does that qualify as "not too bright"? Or are independent adults not responsible for certain choices they make?

I wouldn't say that academic job market counts as a mundane problem.
There are several factors in play:
1) CHE and IHE are not exactly on every prospective student's reading list
2) Standard advice in the non-academic job market is to follow footsteps of people already in the desired positions. This is likely to lead  into a dead end in modern academia.
3) Some crucial metrics are not obvious for outsiders. E.g. to start looking for / asking about an attrition rate, one need to know that it can be high enough to skew outcome stats.
4) Many metrics readily available for undergrad programs nowadays, do not exists for grad programs prompting prospective students to rely on hearsay.
5) When prompted even well-informed current professors often are reluctant to use terms that may dissuade a good student from going into a grad school.

This one counts 10x all of the rest put together. The biggest factor in most students' decision to go to grad school is probably the advice of their own professors. And for that reason, faculty ought to tak that responsibiilty seriously enough to try and provide accurate, unbiased counsel.

[mleok]

The point is that people who may exhibit a high degree of intelligence and complex thinking in one area may fail to do so in something much more mundane, but important (such as figuring out how to pay the rent). Does that qualify as "not too bright"? Or are independent adults not responsible for certain choices they make?

I wouldn't say that academic job market counts as a mundane problem.
There are several factors in play:
1) CHE and IHE are not exactly on every prospective student's reading list
2) Standard advice in the non-academic job market is to follow footsteps of people already in the desired positions. This is likely to lead  into a dead end in modern academia.
3) Some crucial metrics are not obvious for outsiders. E.g. to start looking for / asking about an attrition rate, one need to know that it can be high enough to skew outcome stats.
4) Many metrics readily available for undergrad programs nowadays, do not exists for grad programs prompting prospective students to rely on hearsay.
5) When prompted even well-informed current professors often are reluctant to use terms that may dissuade a good student from going into a grad school.

This one counts 10x all of the rest put together. The biggest factor in most students' decision to go to grad school is probably the advice of their own professors. And for that reason, faculty ought to tak that responsibiilty seriously enough to try and provide accurate, unbiased counsel.

The reality is that even when informed of the overwhelming odds, say that only 10% of PhDs go on to tenure-track positions, students have a tendency to process this information by thinking that they're in the top 10% of their undergraduate cohort, so those odds aren't so bad. Except of course they're not competing with their undergraduate cohort, but rather a much more selective PhD cohort.

[Durchlässigkeitsbeiwert]

The reality is that even when informed of the overwhelming odds, say that only 10% of PhDs go on to tenure-track positions, students have a tendency to process this information by thinking that they're in the top 10% of their undergraduate cohort, so those odds aren't so bad. Except of course they're not competing with their undergraduate cohort, but rather a much more selective PhD cohort.

For me this only puts additional onus on the current faculty to be as pro-active and open as possible in communicating the job market state to prospective and current students including department-specific outcomes.
If students are informed about their chances in this specific program along the lines "based on the last 10 years, most likely outcome in our program is that you will drop out ABD after 6 years",  then in my opinion it indeed becomes a matter of a "personal choice". However, I am not aware of anybody being this honest. So, my attitude towards such programs is pretty much the same as towards majority of for-profit colleges. Except, they are actually better in disclosing outcomes than most academics.

[apl68]

The reality is that even when informed of the overwhelming odds, say that only 10% of PhDs go on to tenure-track positions, students have a tendency to process this information by thinking that they're in the top 10% of their undergraduate cohort, so those odds aren't so bad. Except of course they're not competing with their undergraduate cohort, but rather a much more selective PhD cohort.

For me this only puts additional onus on the current faculty to be as pro-active and open as possible in communicating the job market state to prospective and current students including department-specific outcomes.
If students are informed about their chances in this specific program along the lines "based on the last 10 years, most likely outcome in our program is that you will drop out ABD after 6 years",  then in my opinion it indeed becomes a matter of a "personal choice". However, I am not aware of anybody being this honest. So, my attitude towards such programs is pretty much the same as towards majority of for-profit colleges. Except, they are actually better in disclosing outcomes than most academics.

My graduate faculty were taking this seriously with their talented undergrads back in the 1990s, so this is not exactly new.  But some of us (like me) didn't get the benefit of that sort of realistic and well-informed undergrad mentor advice.  I'd like to think that such advice is far more the norm today than it was 30 years ago.