Trying to decide on PhD or masters..or nothing

[pedroj012]

I majored in biology and graduated in 2010. Have not done anything biology related since then. I worked in a lab at the school for over a year. I think I would really enjoy doing research and teaching biology at the college level, but not totally sure I want to do a PhD or just a master's. Would I be severely limiting myself if I just got a master's? People have told me to just go for the PhD since it would be paid for and my options would be open, but I've seen a number of master's programs that are paid for as well, and I've seen a good number of college-level professor positions that just require a masters. I'm also really not interested in going for a PhD and just being ready to drop out after 2 years to take a master's. Anyone who's further along in their career have any advice that might help?

Thanks

[Jahoclave]

In the U.S. at least, if you're going to want to really teach, especially anything other than entry level, you're going to want that Ph.D. Also, being a per-course faculty or even adjunct can really suck, which is likely a lot of those master's level jobs.

Masters can be decent for the job market I assume, I'm not entirely sure on biology.

I think the real question is, how passionate are you about the field?

[Bakemaster]

Master's degree is adequate for community college teaching positions. That's probably more true in rural areas where there's less job competition, but at the community college where I worked a few years ago (which was in a town of about 7,000 people), instructors with doctorates were the exception rather than the rule.

Whether you think that's "real teaching" or not probably depends on how large a stick you've got up your ass. Of course if you want to do research, a community college is not a great place to be. I only know one professor at the aforementioned college who publishes regularly. He could certainly teach elsewhere but being a geologist I think he quite likes living and working at the base of a 14,000-foot volcano.

[sam_i_am]

I majored in biology and graduated in 2010. Have not done anything biology related since then. I worked in a lab at the school for over a year. I think I would really enjoy doing research and teaching biology at the college level, but not totally sure I want to do a PhD or just a master's. Would I be severely limiting myself if I just got a master's? People have told me to just go for the PhD since it would be paid for and my options would be open, but I've seen a number of master's programs that are paid for as well, and I've seen a good number of college-level professor positions that just require a masters. I'm also really not interested in going for a PhD and just being ready to drop out after 2 years to take a master's. Anyone who's further along in their career have any advice that might help?

Thanks

If you enjoy doing research and want to be a professor, than I'd say PhD all the way.

On the other hand, if you want to go into the industry and do work, than Masters is probably the best option.

[Izawwlgood]

Hi, graduate student in biology here.
I teched for 3 years after undergrad, and enjoyed it. I also decided that I wasn't interested in being a permanent tech, that I wanted more freedom, more responsibility, and possibly, more money. I highly recommend teching before deciding whether or not you want to join a graduate program.

Insofar as what is more valuable, the PhD or the Masters, you should figure out what you want, and that should inform your decision of whether or not you go for the PhD or the Masters. I've heard that in some spheres, having a Masters provides you with a better chance to be hired than a PhD, as the PhD is expected to be paid more. As far as teaching is concerned, I'd be surprised if any decent sized or respectable institution hired a non-PhD holding teacher to teach anything but the intro level coursework.

Another thing to consider, however, is that PhD programs *do* award a Masters at some point in the trek, and will provide you with a stipend; in terms of cost, a PhD is a 5-6 year investment that will only cost you time (which is a serious consideration), whereas a Masters is a ~2 year investment that will also cost you money. Generally, choosing to leave a PhD program is frowned upon, so I wouldn't treat it as a road to a free Masters, but it certainly happens.

If you have any questions about the process of applying, or what it's like as a graduate student, I'd be happy to answer.

[Bakemaster]

As an aside, there are doctoral programs that neither require a Master's Degree to enter nor award a Master's Degree at any point during the program. There are also "coterminal" programs which award two degrees (usually a bachelor's and masters, but sometimes a master's and doctoral) simultaneously upon completion. These are good things to be aware of, both in terms of knowing what options may be open to you, and in terms of checking to be sure you know the exact terms of a program before you apply and/or matriculate.

[pedroj012]

Thanks for the replies. I've been trying to get a tech position for a couple months now to get a better feel for research. I didn't especially enjoy the research I did at my college, but it was algae growth rates, and I'm more interested in cancer, the immune system, genetics.... My problem is that I know I really like to read about new discoveries, and I think I would enjoy teaching biology courses, but I'm not sure how much I would like to conduct the actual research.

I'm in Portland, Maine and there's a couple big biotech companies, but I'm starting to think I'll need to move if I want something. I was asked in an interview what I had to offer that the PhD's they were also interviewing couldn't. I said they could pay me less, but I guess it didn't matter..

[bigglesworth]

You might want to consider the field of Medical Communications; it can combine reading about the latest discoveries with education of people like doctors or professionals in the pharmaceutical industry.

[Sartorius]

Hi, graduate student in biology here.
Insofar as what is more valuable, the PhD or the Masters, you should figure out what you want, and that should inform your decision of whether or not you go for the PhD or the Masters. I've heard that in some spheres, having a Masters provides you with a better chance to be hired than a PhD, as the PhD is expected to be paid more. As far as teaching is concerned, I'd be surprised if any decent sized or respectable institution hired a non-PhD holding teacher to teach anything but the intro level coursework.

Another thing to consider, however, is that PhD programs *do* award a Masters at some point in the trek, and will provide you with a stipend; in terms of cost, a PhD is a 5-6 year investment that will only cost you time (which is a serious consideration), whereas a Masters is a ~2 year investment that will also cost you money. Generally, choosing to leave a PhD program is frowned upon, so I wouldn't treat it as a road to a free Masters, but it certainly happens.

As another grad student in biology, I agree with this, but I'm a Masters student on a paid stipend, so they do exist. The rule in the sciences is that if an institution isn't paying you, you don't go there. I'd highly recommend you starting out in a Masters program to get your feet wet, so to speak. You get a pretty good idea of what other subfields are actually like and if grad school is right for you.

[pedroj012]

I'd love to find a master's program that would pay me to teach/do research. I was just under the impression that they were pretty rare. How'd you find yours?

[Sartorius]

Mine's a somewhat small state school that mostly focuses on undergrads but is big into undergraduate research. Most of the grads are on teaching assistantships (like me), but a couple of the professors have some sweet grants (and are hotshots in their field) and can support RAs. Institutions like mine are probably your best bet for funding at a Masters level. Tier 1 institutions have money but heavily prefer PhD students to Masters.

One good thing to do is to find someone doing research that you think you want to do and then go look up their grants on NIH or NSF. Researchers who have had grants on a semi-regular basis are more likely to be able to provide you some financial support. Really, find someone you want to work with who has had a somewhat recent grant and who publishes regularly. He/she might have some options for you.

[Jorpho]

What exactly makes you think you want to teach, if I may ask?

It surely varies from place to place, but during my graduate studies, TA work was a mandatory requirement for getting my stipend. One of the various reasons I stopped with a MSc is because I was increasingly fed up with said TA work.

[pedroj012]

Cool thanks for the advice.

[pedroj012]

I dunno I guess I just enjoy coming up with creative ways to get ideas across. What were you fed up with about your ta-ing? Apathetic students?

[Jorpho]

So... There is something in your experience that suggests teaching biology at the college level provides opportunities to creatively get ideas across?

There was the students, but mostly it was the marking. So much marking. And so little guidance regarding the marking.

[Izawwlgood]

I TA'd for two classes, and found I enjoyed one very much while the other was a complete and utter waste of my time.

The lab course was ~20 students, meeting once a week for 3-4 hrs, and was primarily about being prepared to walk students through the days lab, grading the three extensive written lab reports, and holding office hours. The lecture course was ~100 students that myself and another TA held office hours for, and graded exams for.

The lab course was immensely fun to TA. I formed good relationships with almost all the students, and even the least interested kids did the work and gave me some amount of attention and effort. The lecture course was a complete and utter waste of my time; even giving one of the lectures I didn't have to do anything, as students rarely attended office hours, and the class had four exams over a semester that required about 4 hrs of work each to score.

So, yeah, YMMV. My program only requires one year of TA'ing, but I believe I will be getting involved in mentorship programs or the like next year.

[Sartorius]

I enjoy teaching. I did an intro biology course which was okay but grading, like Jorpho said, was *terrible*. Lots of grades, some terribly written papers with no improvement or obvious desire to improve. It's necessary to keep a stock pile of alcohol to get through such papers. I do one-on-one teaching with electron microscopes now and don't grade and it's freaking awesome.

[Izawwlgood]

Yes, there are always students who just don't give a fuck, and it's terribly frustrating to deal with them. But then there are students who really do, and who enjoy the material and look to you not as an obstacle to their weekend drinking, but as a speed train to LEARNING AWESOME SCIENCE (!!!!!), and those interactions are totally gratifying and rewarding.

[Sartorius]

They are, and that's why teaching's fun!

[Jorpho]

Yes, there are always students who just don't give a fuck, and it's terribly frustrating to deal with them. But then there are students who really do, and who enjoy the material and look to you not as an obstacle to their weekend drinking, but as a speed train to LEARNING AWESOME SCIENCE (!!!!!)

And then there are the ones who enjoy the material and look to you as an obstacle not to their weekend drinking, but as an obstacle to LEARNING AWESOME blah. Even if you are trying to use creative ways of getting ideas across. Sometimes, especially if you are trying to use creative ways of getting ideas across.

[SU3SU2U1]

One caveat- very few phds actually get the coveted tenure track position. You have to make sure that getting a phd is worth it even if you never have a university career. It varies by subfield, but odds of a phd getting a tenure track position are likely to be <10%. When you are looking at a subfield, find out what the majority of phds in that subfield do after their phd- odds are most had similar aspirations you do now. If most phds in a subfield work in pharma and you don't want to work in pharma, find a different subfield, etc.

Non-tenure track teaching positions are plentiful, and easy to acquire, but they tend be very low paid (at my former institutions, adjuncts in physics (my field) often complained that they had been making more as graduate students!), with no job security, no benefits etc. Its a job, not really a career.

Also, I'd be wary of science careers in general- the work is fun, but the career path has been slowly eroding for decades now. Biologists have more industrial demand than physicists, but I imagine similar concerns apply- On the research side postdocs have been proliferating, academics are required to spend more and more time in postdocs to have a hope of career advancement, getting funding is becoming harder even for established researchers. On the teaching side, tenure track positions are being replaced with non-career adjuncts, community colleges have been shifting work to part-timers,etc. On the industry side, industrial labs have been slowly shrinking for quite awhile,etc.