Continue Working or Pursue a Graduate Degree? 4

[TurbulentSolace]

Greetings,

Over the past few years, I have scoured through these forums occasionally, and most of you have a ton of useful wisdom to share with everyone. So, I figured that I would ask all of you for your opinion on my recent dilemma - a dilemma which I can't seem to figure out even after about 6 months of thought. I'd really appreciate it if you could provide any insight whatsoever.

About two years ago, I graduated from a respectable college with two BS degrees (mechanical engineering and physics), and I ended up graduating at the top of my class (I did very very well in school). As you can tell, I've always been attracted to the more mathematical and technical side of engineering, and I always saw myself going back to grad school someday - as I've always been into academia both within and outside of school. Well, once graduation approached, I decided that I would take some time off from school. I wanted to work a bit and figure out what area of engineering to focus on; it seemed somewhat silly to dive straight into grad school for something as broad as just mechanical engineering. To make full use of the degree and experience, I thought that I could explore a bit, find a niche which suits me, and then delve further into that subject area's rabbit hole. Thus, I ended up snagging a very good job right before graduating at a very respectable, world-wide company. The pay was very good for a starting position ($66K), and, in general, I was treated very well at that company. However, since I am very very technical, I was instantly bored and displeased with the job. Regardless, I persevered and tried everything to find more engaging work - including sitting down with my supervisor and discussing the situation with him. Unfortunately, I continued to work on equipment quote/scope documents, and I hardly did anything considered "engineering".

Well, since I am in a "career development" type of program at the company, I was able to move to a new position after a year. Unlike the previous position, this was a "real" engineering job, and I was given many responsibilities. However, I still felt very bored with my work (mostly vessel design conforming to ASME BPVC code - including design, drafting, scope/proposal, project management kind of work....basically anything you could see in a typical engineering position). TBH, I've always been more intrigued by deriving equations and theories used for engineering ideas, and the cookbook process found within ASME codes thoroughly bothered me and squashed my curiosity (though, I see how it is somewhat needed). Out of everything I worked on, the chance to write my own program for automatically designing and sizing out equipment was probably the most fulfilling thing I've ever done in industry. Despite this dissatisfaction, I persevered and am currently moving onto another position after another year. Furthermore, I ended up getting quite a generous raise around Christmas time (I now make $74K), and both of my bosses were very satisfied with all of my work.

Well, during that last job, I decided to apply to graduate schools to open up more doors/choices for myself. When I heard back from schools, I was surprised to find out that I had been accepted to a very respected, ivy league school, and they wanted to give me a full ride (free tuition and an annual $28,000 living stipend). However, the caveat is that it would be for a phd program - which is another 4-6 years of schooling. Furthermore, I would have to quit my current job, move to the new area (it's actually closer to my hometown though), and work my ass off again. Obviously, both options (to continue to work or go back to school) are very good, and I am honored to have been offered them. However, I am lost within a cloud of ambivalence; I can't make a decision as to what to do! I have a feeling that I would thoroughly enjoy graduate school, but 4-6 years is a lot of time to invest into schooling. That would be 4-6 years of savings down the drain (at least $120K of savings lost), and 4-6 years of lost work experience. I do have 2 years of experience now, but I feel as though I would be considered entry-level still after graduating again. This makes me fear that I might have trouble getting another job after graduation (shitty job market), and I might start at what I'm making now, which would be very disappointing. Also, I have never done research before, so I don't know if I would be good at or even enjoy it; I only know that I would enjoy participating in classes once again. The whole situation is a HUGE gamble, and I have heard that a phd can sometimes be a detriment to your career.

In terms of making a wise decision, I was thinking that I could continue to work and go to a local, less prestigious school for a master's part-time instead (my employer has a reimbursement program). This way, I would still save money, get more work experience, and further my education. However, it's so hard for me to turn down the honor and respect of a free ride to an ivy league school. Furthermore, I started my 3rd, new position on Monday, and I really don't like it that much already. I haven't done much (and don't wish to jump to conclusions), but it seems like I'll be modeling stuff up in autopipe and doing absolutely no calculations (aside from allowing the program to do stress/dispalcement calcs for me). Working really makes me feel like a mindless zombie, and I'd find it difficult to work and go to school afterwards =/...

Do any of you have any advice? What would you do in my situation? Hopefully I don't sound like a whiney asshole; I am very grateful for these opportunities, but, sometimes, too many open doors can turn into a curse very quickly.

Thanks for any input you guys can provide,
Turbulent Solace

 

[Maui]

I wholeheartedly agree that a Ph.D. is not an indicator of superior intelligence. Nor is an MD degree, a Master's degree, a Bachelor's degree, a PE license, or any other degree or license for that matter. Like any other discipline, earning a PhD requires the individual to satisfy a minimum set of criteria. These criteria are established by the Universities that grant these diplomas. Earning the degree does require some minimum level of intelligence, but it demands more perseverance than anything else.

We all probably know at least one doctor, lawyer, teacher, etc. who we would consider to be below average in intelligence. This is normal. If you start out with an idiot and provide them with a formal education, you'll end up with an educated idiot. The process doesn't change who you are. But if you are fortunate enough to receive a good education it does expose you to what has been learned by the others who came before you. What you do with that knowledge depends entirely on you. But in the end it guarantees you nothing.

The range of capabilities among people are huge, whether they receive a formal education or not. A good example of this is Srinivasa Ramanujan, a brilliant man who possessed an incredible aptitude for mathematics. You can read about him here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan

He died at a relatively young age, but provided insight into mathematical concepts and research that is still being pursued to this day. And he didn't even have a bachelor's degree as far as I know. In physics Michael Faraday is another good example. PhDs [italic]are[/italic] underappreciated here in the United States because industry does not value them. In Germany the story is very different. The educational system they have in Germany tends to do a better job of weeding out the slackers, and PhDs there command well deserved respect. I wish it was that way here.

Maui

http://www.EngineeringMetallurgy.com

 

[steelmtllrgst]

Hi Turbulent.

It sound like you want the ultimate compromise of a good steady income and a doctoral degree. It is possible to do this - painful but possible. With the right student, sponsor and university you can try to arrange to study part-time for a doctoral degree while continuing to work a normal job. It will require some special approvals from most universities such as a waiver on the typical residency requirements and completion times for milestones (entry exams, candidacy, thesis proposal, etc.) but for a good student any wise institution is willing to bend the rules a bit.

My advice is to follow the path of the professional MS degree, but select all of the coursework so that it will be applicable to the doctoral degree requirements as well. Complete 100% the coursework and MS program and then you can devote all of your part-time work to the necessary doctoral functions without the additional burden of coursework during your doctoral studies. There is one major trick here in that you will probably have to find your own funding. There is plenty of money out there from non-profit societies and they are always searching for applicable research programs that their members will find interesting.

Start with the MS, get most of the coursework out of the way and then begin planning your proposal for funding and to the university towards your final term of coursework.

GOOD LUCK - this is not by any means the easy path, but it is the path that will accomplish your goals of theoretical/academic higher education and you will continue to have a strong income. Expect a total of 8 years at least for the MS+PhD part time, and say goodbye to all weekends and evenings for that time period.

 

[Maui]

Correction- I should have added in my post above "And he didn't even have a bachelor's degree as far as I know [italic]when he developed most of his theories[/italic]".

http://www.EngineeringMetallurgy.com

 

[SNORGY]

Sorry Maui...
In my view, a Ph.D. IS an indicator of superior intelligence.
I don't know how that can be disputed.

 

[CANPRO]

If you're comparing two individuals you could say that one is more intelligent than the other because he has a Ph.D. and the other does not. But to actually decide you would have to see what the other had done to educate themselves, because there are many ways to educate yourself. The non Ph.D. could have accumulated more knowledge than the Ph.D. if he had the time and was a strong learner. And when I think of what it means to be intelligent I hold the ability to learn higher than knowledge gained.

Additionally, unless they both had the same professional and personal interests there would be no way to accurately compare their level of intelligence. In the extreme example... The Ph.D. loves to do math and spend time inside writing computer programs. Other guy is a tribesman somewhere in the jungle. Neither of them would survive in the others world. Who is more intelligent?

 

[IRstuff]

I saw a NOVA? special on Ramanujan a long time ago. There were things that he came up with that his PhD professors couldn't even understand

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[loki3000]

lots of complexes in this thread

 

[loki3000]

also hurricanes, isn't pipe stress done in FEA software?
i briefly worked at an institute where they did pipe stress (low-cycle thermal fatigue, nuclear reactor pipes) with Abaqus.

 

[KENAT]

Sorry, didn't mean to detour this thread into a PhD bashing session. Just posting a little of my personal experience with Phd's that I work with in industry in response to the OP's view of Phd's being underappreciated. I do not think all Phd's are stupid or even 'out of touch' or 'not very practical'.... However, in my experience there are Phd's who just don't seem like they're "all that", and it's a bigger % than I would have expected.

So Snorgy, I dispute your contention base on my experience - a small data set admittedly but there you have it.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[sirmick]

I also went the two BS route in college, though I did not graduate top of class. I didn't study hard enough I suppose.

To answer your question you need to identify what it is you want out of life. Money is a tool to enjoy life. You also want to derive satisfaction from what it is you do at work and you feel that working on more challenging analytical problems would provide that. My thinking is once you learn the more difficult math and it becomes rote then you would lose the challenge yet again. To provide the intellectual stimulation you desire it appears that projects will have to be more or less unique each time.

Now what is stopping you from doing a bit of both? Working at a job that industry values and making a good paycheck while doing independent study to broaden your abilities. Dean Kamen didn't graduate yet seemed to do alright for himself and his work is probably very satisfying. The access to information is so easy nowadays.

http://www.mit.edu

has a lot of free resources on advanced engineering and science topics. More then most can devour in a decade or five. So since the PhD DOES have huge opportunity costs and money is a concern work to beef up your skills on your time. Get paid on someone else's time and keep an eye open for a job that will allow you to use your new knowledge in a field you like.

You also cannot discount the skills you learn in the private sector that university usually won't expose you to.

Now if you prefer the university feel and environment then go the PhD route and do some research/teach. Find a means to do some consulting if you miss the lucre.

 

[loki3000]

yeah, MIT does have those courses freely available, but it's still better to have at least a MS. it's much more difficult to get into a desired advanced research field even if you have the knowledge. (i'm not talking about simple linear ansys strength checks)

you can do it through hard work of course, but on the other hand being indespensible makes it even more difficult for your boss to let you go (depends on company structure, standardds though) to some other dept in the company (if it even has one).

 

[TurbulentSolace]

Hey Guys,

Man, since this post, so much stuff has happened; yet, now I feel just as confused as I once was. Here's a recap of everything that happened over the past few months and, again, a plea for advice. Any input/wisdom from you guys would be very appreciated; I'm at a very low point right now. Last minute, I decided to just take the dive and plunge straight into the PhD program. So, I set up a leave of absence with my employer, left on very good terms, and set up arrangements for a job after graduation (just in case). Well, at first, I really seemed to like the program and enjoyed the material. However, I quickly learned that a phd program is drastically different from any undergraduate program, and a lot of qualities surrounding the class structures have really started to irritate me. For one thing, I'd say that 75% of class material is expected to be learned outside of class/lectures/provided resources. Normally, I'd be fine with this sort of thing. However, given that we have so little time and sometimes no textbooks for classes, I find myself spending more time looking for usable resources - as opposed to actually learning (which can be very frustrating). Furthermore, a lot of the content is VERY abstract, and, while I thought I liked theory, I feel like I would never use this material ever again in my entire life. I spend a LOT of time (until now, I would spend almost every second studying in a day) studying this material, and I still find that I'm struggling in grasping the ideas; their abstract nature makes it very difficult to fully understand.

Here's the dilemma: I feel like I'm completely grinding myself down working on this material, and I'm starting to think that it's all not worth it at all =/. I have learned some practical information (mostly transport stuff related to diffusion, conduction, and fluid mechanics), but I'm not doing well in any of my classes (despite all of the time invested into everything). Furthermore, I've failed all of my exams (though...averages were very very low) despite knowing the material very thoroughly, and I'm not even sure if I'm going to be able to utilize this degree in the long run if I fail everything. I really want to do well and succeed, but, at this point, I feel like my time would be better invested into something else; I'm starting to think that this is certainly not for me and have been heavily contemplating dropping out and going back to my former employer. Have any of you dropped out of graduate school, and, if so, what happened after doing so? Did it adversely affect your marketability in the work force? Did you ever wish that you had finished everything? I hate quitting things and have always done very well in everything that I've attempted, but I am beyond discouraged at this point and just want to be happy. A part of me is pushing me to at least get a master's degree (which would be at least 1.5 more years) especially since I have free tuition and a stipend, but my heart is starting to lose interest in everything. I'm starting to feel my passion for engineering - which was burning very fiercely upon graduating undergraduate - completely dying. It's a combination of feeling underutilized and bored in industry with the discouragement experienced in graduate school; it's as if I'm a statue being reduced to dust blowing in the wind. *sigh* What would you guys suggest that I do?

 

[MikeHalloran]

Ever failed at anything before? Welcome.

Get laid.

Get drunk.

Studying like a robot is not working for you.
So do it differently.
It doesn't matter what you change, because none of it is working.
Change something at random.

Evaluate your situation.
Take appropriate action.
Recurse.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[TheTick]

Almost Halloween. Time for old threads to rise from the dead.

 

[MikeHalloran]

I'm still hoping for a happy ending.


Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[IRstuff]

When I went to college, I skipped Physics 1 and started in Physics 2. So, the second week of school, my compatriots had just taken a quiz in Physics 1, and one particular guy got a 7 out of 50, and was trying to decide whether the school was just too tough for him. A couple of days later, he found out that the highest score, out of ~200 freshmen, was 12 out of 50, and the intent of the testing and level of work was to weed out dilettante, wanna-be physics majors (we had tons of them). One of my roommates switched from physics to English Lit when we declared majors because of that one class.

I don't know if that your case, but I think graduate courses are all about the details, nuances, and esoterica; otherwise, you'd get everything you need in undergrad classes. Nonetheless, not everyone is cut out to get PhDs; otherwise, everyone would have one. Have you every seen Professional Master Chef, where they try to get chefs to do the Michelin one and two star cooking? It's all about detail and perfection; just throwing a pork chop on the plate is nowhere good enough. You say you failed all your tests; did you get the exams back? Have you reviewed them to find out what you missed, and are they things you can fix for the next test? I have to wonder whether you have what it takes?

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[TurbulentSolace]

Yeah, I have received all of my exams back so far, and I don't think that my performance was lacking; I thoroughly knew all of the content prior to taking each exam, and I am confident in that. For both tests, the averages were a 40% and a 50%, and all students did very poorly on both exams; the classes are structured very poorly, and homeworks/exams have little to do with class material or anything in our provided textbooks. TBH, I understand the material, but I feel as though I am no longer intrigued by this stuff. Some of it has to do with the disillusionment incited from industry work (theory just isn't used as much, unfortunately....), and I guess that I'm just tired of playing this whole "school" politics game. I just wanted to learn without any bullshit blocking my way.

Do you guys think that I would hurt my career if I quit after this semester and went back to my old employer? I was very cautious when leaving (set up a leave of absence) and have very good references and reputation within the company. I see no reason why I wouldn't be welcomed back. Before talking to them, I might throw out a few resumes, but I feel like I'm in an awkward position. With 2 years of experience, I have too much experience to apply for the entry-level positions, yet most experienced positions are asking for at least 5 years of experience. Any advice? I think that the best approach would be to finish up the semester and then call it quits if I'm still not feeling it.

 

[IRstuff]

"homeworks/exams have little to do with class material or anything in our provided textbooks."

I would expect that the instructor would disagree. I think that too many students have gotten lazy, and expect exams to reflect some problem the instructor already covered. Many lazy instructors in the primary and secondary, and even college levels will give out the exam problems ahead of time. That should not be the case; in college, we had take-home, open-book exams, because the instructors knew that there were no problems in class or homework that were copied into the exams. The exams are supposed to force you to extrapolate from the information in the text and homework into new problems. That's the whole point of the post-graduate degrees; that's what's supposed to earn you a "Master of Science" degree.

When you are working real engineering invention problems, there is not necessarily any textbook or paper that will have the solution. So, yes, a new problem has little to do with anything you previously did, and you are paid the big bucks to figure out how to solve these new problems, particularly as a PhD.

There have been recent surveys that show that secondary school students are generally woefully unprepared for college. Likewise, many college graduates are woefully unprepared to do real work or to take on post-graduate work. This is nothing new, per se, only the percentage of the unprepared has changed. I've run across an alleged BSEE that got a 4.0 GPA from college who couldn't solve a trivial circuit problem, i.e., he was accidentally given the same problem 3 times and couldn't solve it, even after it had been explained to him twice.

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[FeX32]

Interesting thread. I agree with Maui and IRStuff and others. The PhD is not cut out for everyone. It does not necessarily mean those who do are vastly superior in intelligence. It DOES mean that those individuals have demonstrated that you have done a cutting-edge, long-term project with minimal supervision from beginning to end, and that you have expertise in a certain general area and deep expertise in a certain subarea. It also means you can do quality science, that you have the brainpower and skills for analytical thinking, and that you can pick up new things quickly. etc..
Other engineers may also possess some of these qualities, but it is likely that may also not..

TurbulentSolace, don't fret the marks in grad school. I can tell you that as long as your marks are not vastly below your peers you will be fine. The dept. will not fail the entire class. This I can tell you for sure. So no worries.


Fe (IronX32)

 

[huda79]

I recommend you go back to your employer if you believe the Phd program is not for you. Losing a semester is not a big deal over a career of 40 years.

Seems like you are a smart guy who just needs a more technical position. Try networking within your previous company to find out which positions look attractive to you or find a job with another company.

I think people who want Phds know it early on and do not go back and forth. They have a specific personality and mindset.