Should I do a doctorate straight after my master or work for a while first?
I have a BSc in Software Engineering, and I am now doing an MS in Software Engineering (taking more advanced courses and such).
Once I am done with my MS I would like to do a PhD in a software engineering related research topic, but I am not sure if I should get a job for a few years after my MS - or jump straight into a PhD?
With regards to long term goals I do not think I will want to do full-time teaching but I would like to do some part-time teaching (at University level, not picky about graduate vs undergraduate) alongside a professional career.
At this point I am not considering the monetary aspect of a PhD vs. a job. I would simply like to know if one approach is academically and professionally better than the other.
Thank you.
EDIT
Ideally, I would like to work with new, cutting edge technologies, and be an "expert" in my field - hence why I thought of doing a PhD. I would love to perform research as long as I can then apply the results in an industrial setting. At this moment I do not think I am interested in a pure research career.
phd masters job-search job
add a comment |
I have a BSc in Software Engineering, and I am now doing an MS in Software Engineering (taking more advanced courses and such).
Once I am done with my MS I would like to do a PhD in a software engineering related research topic, but I am not sure if I should get a job for a few years after my MS - or jump straight into a PhD?
With regards to long term goals I do not think I will want to do full-time teaching but I would like to do some part-time teaching (at University level, not picky about graduate vs undergraduate) alongside a professional career.
At this point I am not considering the monetary aspect of a PhD vs. a job. I would simply like to know if one approach is academically and professionally better than the other.
Thank you.
EDIT
Ideally, I would like to work with new, cutting edge technologies, and be an "expert" in my field - hence why I thought of doing a PhD. I would love to perform research as long as I can then apply the results in an industrial setting. At this moment I do not think I am interested in a pure research career.
phd masters job-search job
A PhD is primarily for training you to do research. You haven't mentioned whether you are interested in a research-oriented career (in academia or in industry)?
– ff524♦
7 hours ago
1
I've updated my question!
– Goofynose
7 hours ago
add a comment |
I have a BSc in Software Engineering, and I am now doing an MS in Software Engineering (taking more advanced courses and such).
Once I am done with my MS I would like to do a PhD in a software engineering related research topic, but I am not sure if I should get a job for a few years after my MS - or jump straight into a PhD?
With regards to long term goals I do not think I will want to do full-time teaching but I would like to do some part-time teaching (at University level, not picky about graduate vs undergraduate) alongside a professional career.
At this point I am not considering the monetary aspect of a PhD vs. a job. I would simply like to know if one approach is academically and professionally better than the other.
Thank you.
EDIT
Ideally, I would like to work with new, cutting edge technologies, and be an "expert" in my field - hence why I thought of doing a PhD. I would love to perform research as long as I can then apply the results in an industrial setting. At this moment I do not think I am interested in a pure research career.
phd masters job-search job
I have a BSc in Software Engineering, and I am now doing an MS in Software Engineering (taking more advanced courses and such).
Once I am done with my MS I would like to do a PhD in a software engineering related research topic, but I am not sure if I should get a job for a few years after my MS - or jump straight into a PhD?
With regards to long term goals I do not think I will want to do full-time teaching but I would like to do some part-time teaching (at University level, not picky about graduate vs undergraduate) alongside a professional career.
At this point I am not considering the monetary aspect of a PhD vs. a job. I would simply like to know if one approach is academically and professionally better than the other.
Thank you.
EDIT
Ideally, I would like to work with new, cutting edge technologies, and be an "expert" in my field - hence why I thought of doing a PhD. I would love to perform research as long as I can then apply the results in an industrial setting. At this moment I do not think I am interested in a pure research career.
phd masters job-search job
phd masters job-search job
edited 7 hours ago
Goofynose
asked 7 hours ago
GoofynoseGoofynose
514
514
A PhD is primarily for training you to do research. You haven't mentioned whether you are interested in a research-oriented career (in academia or in industry)?
– ff524♦
7 hours ago
1
I've updated my question!
– Goofynose
7 hours ago
add a comment |
A PhD is primarily for training you to do research. You haven't mentioned whether you are interested in a research-oriented career (in academia or in industry)?
– ff524♦
7 hours ago
1
I've updated my question!
– Goofynose
7 hours ago
A PhD is primarily for training you to do research. You haven't mentioned whether you are interested in a research-oriented career (in academia or in industry)?
– ff524♦
7 hours ago
A PhD is primarily for training you to do research. You haven't mentioned whether you are interested in a research-oriented career (in academia or in industry)?
– ff524♦
7 hours ago
1
1
I've updated my question!
– Goofynose
7 hours ago
I've updated my question!
– Goofynose
7 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Many schools will allow you to teach part time with a masters. So this argues for the work experience.
Fields differ. In chemistry or physics, I would say push on to the Ph.D. For one thing it is more the norm to go through, for another it is sometimes perceived as the entry level degree (big chemical companies like to hire Ph.D. chemist vs. BS/MS chemE.
In engineering, I would lean more to the work option versus the advanced degree. Software probably even more so. Many great coders have no degree.
Finally, while you asked us to factor out money, there are a lot of social rewards from being an earner versus a student. It's a good thing to learn what work is like.
Give what you have said about yourself and the field, I would lean towards getting a job. Can go back later (if you miss it). Also, if you get burnt out or need a break or stalled out for promotions or laid off during a recession, you can consider further schooling at that time.
New contributor
add a comment |
Work first. There're many reasons for this:
- It's not true that you can't work with cutting-edge technologies without a PhD. You certainly can, and it might even be a better use of your time since you avoid the administrative processes that you must do with a PhD. Check out the various graduate programs that employers offer. There might be high entry requirements, but if you can do PhD studies you can clear that bar also.
- You likely earn more. It's not just for the next 3-5 years that you need for a PhD. If you do a PhD, after you graduate, you'll need to find a job. If you get a job now, you'll already have a job. If you do well you might even command a higher salary in 5 years' time compared to entering the market as a fresh PhD.
- You might find you don't need a PhD. This could especially be the case if you work with other PhD-holders. You might find that you have the same duties, or that you're already capable of doing what they do. In this case a PhD is not very useful for your career and you might as well stay put.
- If #3 doesn't happen, then you have a better idea why you're doing a PhD. You know what you want to learn, why you want to learn it, and how that skill is going to be useful for you after you graduate.
It's my observation that people who work first and then go to a PhD are much more likely to have thought seriously about why they're studying. That is a good thing. I'm not saying you shouldn't do a PhD, but you should have good, clear reasons for why you're doing it to avoid possible future regret.
Absolutely. You go, girl!
– guest
4 hours ago
add a comment |
In some ways it is easier to continue directly to the doctorate. The letters you get in support of an application will be fresher and academically oriented. You won't have to deal with getting "rusty" on concepts or behind the times on theory.
It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student.
You can, of course, use either path to explore whether it is the right path, but it is, I think easier to move from academia to industry than the other way.
In some fields, of course, industrial experience is valued and if you had the right position, say at Google or similar, it would be helpful. But most of the people reading your application will be more familiar with situations of people moving to a higher level in academia than moving from industry to academia.
That said, a decision you make now doesn't have to be your final answer for your life.
"It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student." That's true. But can look at it the other way on "obligations". Deferring family, marriage, house is a frequent down side of grad school. The infertile 20s...
– guest
5 hours ago
It can be, but I finished up married with two children.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
Good girl! (Hope you can laugh, but well..the avatar.) ;-)
– guest
5 hours ago
1
@guest, you are making assumptions. Try not to do that.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
In my opinion (as a non-studying BSc post grad with a view to attain MSc and PhD) there are a couple of contradictory answers.
One, it is easier to continue your academia non-stop so the self education and acquired knowledge doesn't stagnate (use it or lose it).
Two, it is a very valuable skill set to have experience in the field of a workplace, even one unrelated to your studies.
Best compromise is a year as an intern at a placing relevant to your chosen area of study. That way you get the best of both worlds. Your knowledge doesn't stagnate, in fact it may likely proliferate, and two you can show real world experience on your CV/resume.
Some employers are known to look with disdain on pure academics, especially those who 'worked their way up the ranks'.
New contributor
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f123119%2fshould-i-do-a-doctorate-straight-after-my-master-or-work-for-a-while-first%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Many schools will allow you to teach part time with a masters. So this argues for the work experience.
Fields differ. In chemistry or physics, I would say push on to the Ph.D. For one thing it is more the norm to go through, for another it is sometimes perceived as the entry level degree (big chemical companies like to hire Ph.D. chemist vs. BS/MS chemE.
In engineering, I would lean more to the work option versus the advanced degree. Software probably even more so. Many great coders have no degree.
Finally, while you asked us to factor out money, there are a lot of social rewards from being an earner versus a student. It's a good thing to learn what work is like.
Give what you have said about yourself and the field, I would lean towards getting a job. Can go back later (if you miss it). Also, if you get burnt out or need a break or stalled out for promotions or laid off during a recession, you can consider further schooling at that time.
New contributor
add a comment |
Many schools will allow you to teach part time with a masters. So this argues for the work experience.
Fields differ. In chemistry or physics, I would say push on to the Ph.D. For one thing it is more the norm to go through, for another it is sometimes perceived as the entry level degree (big chemical companies like to hire Ph.D. chemist vs. BS/MS chemE.
In engineering, I would lean more to the work option versus the advanced degree. Software probably even more so. Many great coders have no degree.
Finally, while you asked us to factor out money, there are a lot of social rewards from being an earner versus a student. It's a good thing to learn what work is like.
Give what you have said about yourself and the field, I would lean towards getting a job. Can go back later (if you miss it). Also, if you get burnt out or need a break or stalled out for promotions or laid off during a recession, you can consider further schooling at that time.
New contributor
add a comment |
Many schools will allow you to teach part time with a masters. So this argues for the work experience.
Fields differ. In chemistry or physics, I would say push on to the Ph.D. For one thing it is more the norm to go through, for another it is sometimes perceived as the entry level degree (big chemical companies like to hire Ph.D. chemist vs. BS/MS chemE.
In engineering, I would lean more to the work option versus the advanced degree. Software probably even more so. Many great coders have no degree.
Finally, while you asked us to factor out money, there are a lot of social rewards from being an earner versus a student. It's a good thing to learn what work is like.
Give what you have said about yourself and the field, I would lean towards getting a job. Can go back later (if you miss it). Also, if you get burnt out or need a break or stalled out for promotions or laid off during a recession, you can consider further schooling at that time.
New contributor
Many schools will allow you to teach part time with a masters. So this argues for the work experience.
Fields differ. In chemistry or physics, I would say push on to the Ph.D. For one thing it is more the norm to go through, for another it is sometimes perceived as the entry level degree (big chemical companies like to hire Ph.D. chemist vs. BS/MS chemE.
In engineering, I would lean more to the work option versus the advanced degree. Software probably even more so. Many great coders have no degree.
Finally, while you asked us to factor out money, there are a lot of social rewards from being an earner versus a student. It's a good thing to learn what work is like.
Give what you have said about yourself and the field, I would lean towards getting a job. Can go back later (if you miss it). Also, if you get burnt out or need a break or stalled out for promotions or laid off during a recession, you can consider further schooling at that time.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 5 hours ago
guestguest
1072
1072
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
Work first. There're many reasons for this:
- It's not true that you can't work with cutting-edge technologies without a PhD. You certainly can, and it might even be a better use of your time since you avoid the administrative processes that you must do with a PhD. Check out the various graduate programs that employers offer. There might be high entry requirements, but if you can do PhD studies you can clear that bar also.
- You likely earn more. It's not just for the next 3-5 years that you need for a PhD. If you do a PhD, after you graduate, you'll need to find a job. If you get a job now, you'll already have a job. If you do well you might even command a higher salary in 5 years' time compared to entering the market as a fresh PhD.
- You might find you don't need a PhD. This could especially be the case if you work with other PhD-holders. You might find that you have the same duties, or that you're already capable of doing what they do. In this case a PhD is not very useful for your career and you might as well stay put.
- If #3 doesn't happen, then you have a better idea why you're doing a PhD. You know what you want to learn, why you want to learn it, and how that skill is going to be useful for you after you graduate.
It's my observation that people who work first and then go to a PhD are much more likely to have thought seriously about why they're studying. That is a good thing. I'm not saying you shouldn't do a PhD, but you should have good, clear reasons for why you're doing it to avoid possible future regret.
Absolutely. You go, girl!
– guest
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Work first. There're many reasons for this:
- It's not true that you can't work with cutting-edge technologies without a PhD. You certainly can, and it might even be a better use of your time since you avoid the administrative processes that you must do with a PhD. Check out the various graduate programs that employers offer. There might be high entry requirements, but if you can do PhD studies you can clear that bar also.
- You likely earn more. It's not just for the next 3-5 years that you need for a PhD. If you do a PhD, after you graduate, you'll need to find a job. If you get a job now, you'll already have a job. If you do well you might even command a higher salary in 5 years' time compared to entering the market as a fresh PhD.
- You might find you don't need a PhD. This could especially be the case if you work with other PhD-holders. You might find that you have the same duties, or that you're already capable of doing what they do. In this case a PhD is not very useful for your career and you might as well stay put.
- If #3 doesn't happen, then you have a better idea why you're doing a PhD. You know what you want to learn, why you want to learn it, and how that skill is going to be useful for you after you graduate.
It's my observation that people who work first and then go to a PhD are much more likely to have thought seriously about why they're studying. That is a good thing. I'm not saying you shouldn't do a PhD, but you should have good, clear reasons for why you're doing it to avoid possible future regret.
Absolutely. You go, girl!
– guest
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Work first. There're many reasons for this:
- It's not true that you can't work with cutting-edge technologies without a PhD. You certainly can, and it might even be a better use of your time since you avoid the administrative processes that you must do with a PhD. Check out the various graduate programs that employers offer. There might be high entry requirements, but if you can do PhD studies you can clear that bar also.
- You likely earn more. It's not just for the next 3-5 years that you need for a PhD. If you do a PhD, after you graduate, you'll need to find a job. If you get a job now, you'll already have a job. If you do well you might even command a higher salary in 5 years' time compared to entering the market as a fresh PhD.
- You might find you don't need a PhD. This could especially be the case if you work with other PhD-holders. You might find that you have the same duties, or that you're already capable of doing what they do. In this case a PhD is not very useful for your career and you might as well stay put.
- If #3 doesn't happen, then you have a better idea why you're doing a PhD. You know what you want to learn, why you want to learn it, and how that skill is going to be useful for you after you graduate.
It's my observation that people who work first and then go to a PhD are much more likely to have thought seriously about why they're studying. That is a good thing. I'm not saying you shouldn't do a PhD, but you should have good, clear reasons for why you're doing it to avoid possible future regret.
Work first. There're many reasons for this:
- It's not true that you can't work with cutting-edge technologies without a PhD. You certainly can, and it might even be a better use of your time since you avoid the administrative processes that you must do with a PhD. Check out the various graduate programs that employers offer. There might be high entry requirements, but if you can do PhD studies you can clear that bar also.
- You likely earn more. It's not just for the next 3-5 years that you need for a PhD. If you do a PhD, after you graduate, you'll need to find a job. If you get a job now, you'll already have a job. If you do well you might even command a higher salary in 5 years' time compared to entering the market as a fresh PhD.
- You might find you don't need a PhD. This could especially be the case if you work with other PhD-holders. You might find that you have the same duties, or that you're already capable of doing what they do. In this case a PhD is not very useful for your career and you might as well stay put.
- If #3 doesn't happen, then you have a better idea why you're doing a PhD. You know what you want to learn, why you want to learn it, and how that skill is going to be useful for you after you graduate.
It's my observation that people who work first and then go to a PhD are much more likely to have thought seriously about why they're studying. That is a good thing. I'm not saying you shouldn't do a PhD, but you should have good, clear reasons for why you're doing it to avoid possible future regret.
answered 4 hours ago
AllureAllure
27.9k1484137
27.9k1484137
Absolutely. You go, girl!
– guest
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Absolutely. You go, girl!
– guest
4 hours ago
Absolutely. You go, girl!
– guest
4 hours ago
Absolutely. You go, girl!
– guest
4 hours ago
add a comment |
In some ways it is easier to continue directly to the doctorate. The letters you get in support of an application will be fresher and academically oriented. You won't have to deal with getting "rusty" on concepts or behind the times on theory.
It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student.
You can, of course, use either path to explore whether it is the right path, but it is, I think easier to move from academia to industry than the other way.
In some fields, of course, industrial experience is valued and if you had the right position, say at Google or similar, it would be helpful. But most of the people reading your application will be more familiar with situations of people moving to a higher level in academia than moving from industry to academia.
That said, a decision you make now doesn't have to be your final answer for your life.
"It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student." That's true. But can look at it the other way on "obligations". Deferring family, marriage, house is a frequent down side of grad school. The infertile 20s...
– guest
5 hours ago
It can be, but I finished up married with two children.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
Good girl! (Hope you can laugh, but well..the avatar.) ;-)
– guest
5 hours ago
1
@guest, you are making assumptions. Try not to do that.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
In some ways it is easier to continue directly to the doctorate. The letters you get in support of an application will be fresher and academically oriented. You won't have to deal with getting "rusty" on concepts or behind the times on theory.
It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student.
You can, of course, use either path to explore whether it is the right path, but it is, I think easier to move from academia to industry than the other way.
In some fields, of course, industrial experience is valued and if you had the right position, say at Google or similar, it would be helpful. But most of the people reading your application will be more familiar with situations of people moving to a higher level in academia than moving from industry to academia.
That said, a decision you make now doesn't have to be your final answer for your life.
"It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student." That's true. But can look at it the other way on "obligations". Deferring family, marriage, house is a frequent down side of grad school. The infertile 20s...
– guest
5 hours ago
It can be, but I finished up married with two children.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
Good girl! (Hope you can laugh, but well..the avatar.) ;-)
– guest
5 hours ago
1
@guest, you are making assumptions. Try not to do that.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
In some ways it is easier to continue directly to the doctorate. The letters you get in support of an application will be fresher and academically oriented. You won't have to deal with getting "rusty" on concepts or behind the times on theory.
It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student.
You can, of course, use either path to explore whether it is the right path, but it is, I think easier to move from academia to industry than the other way.
In some fields, of course, industrial experience is valued and if you had the right position, say at Google or similar, it would be helpful. But most of the people reading your application will be more familiar with situations of people moving to a higher level in academia than moving from industry to academia.
That said, a decision you make now doesn't have to be your final answer for your life.
In some ways it is easier to continue directly to the doctorate. The letters you get in support of an application will be fresher and academically oriented. You won't have to deal with getting "rusty" on concepts or behind the times on theory.
It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student.
You can, of course, use either path to explore whether it is the right path, but it is, I think easier to move from academia to industry than the other way.
In some fields, of course, industrial experience is valued and if you had the right position, say at Google or similar, it would be helpful. But most of the people reading your application will be more familiar with situations of people moving to a higher level in academia than moving from industry to academia.
That said, a decision you make now doesn't have to be your final answer for your life.
edited 7 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
40k9126207
40k9126207
"It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student." That's true. But can look at it the other way on "obligations". Deferring family, marriage, house is a frequent down side of grad school. The infertile 20s...
– guest
5 hours ago
It can be, but I finished up married with two children.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
Good girl! (Hope you can laugh, but well..the avatar.) ;-)
– guest
5 hours ago
1
@guest, you are making assumptions. Try not to do that.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
"It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student." That's true. But can look at it the other way on "obligations". Deferring family, marriage, house is a frequent down side of grad school. The infertile 20s...
– guest
5 hours ago
It can be, but I finished up married with two children.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
Good girl! (Hope you can laugh, but well..the avatar.) ;-)
– guest
5 hours ago
1
@guest, you are making assumptions. Try not to do that.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
"It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student." That's true. But can look at it the other way on "obligations". Deferring family, marriage, house is a frequent down side of grad school. The infertile 20s...
– guest
5 hours ago
"It can also be difficult to return to life as a student if you get used to living off a better salary and also gain some obligations that might be hard to deal with as a student." That's true. But can look at it the other way on "obligations". Deferring family, marriage, house is a frequent down side of grad school. The infertile 20s...
– guest
5 hours ago
It can be, but I finished up married with two children.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
It can be, but I finished up married with two children.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
Good girl! (Hope you can laugh, but well..the avatar.) ;-)
– guest
5 hours ago
Good girl! (Hope you can laugh, but well..the avatar.) ;-)
– guest
5 hours ago
1
1
@guest, you are making assumptions. Try not to do that.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
@guest, you are making assumptions. Try not to do that.
– Buffy
5 hours ago
add a comment |
In my opinion (as a non-studying BSc post grad with a view to attain MSc and PhD) there are a couple of contradictory answers.
One, it is easier to continue your academia non-stop so the self education and acquired knowledge doesn't stagnate (use it or lose it).
Two, it is a very valuable skill set to have experience in the field of a workplace, even one unrelated to your studies.
Best compromise is a year as an intern at a placing relevant to your chosen area of study. That way you get the best of both worlds. Your knowledge doesn't stagnate, in fact it may likely proliferate, and two you can show real world experience on your CV/resume.
Some employers are known to look with disdain on pure academics, especially those who 'worked their way up the ranks'.
New contributor
add a comment |
In my opinion (as a non-studying BSc post grad with a view to attain MSc and PhD) there are a couple of contradictory answers.
One, it is easier to continue your academia non-stop so the self education and acquired knowledge doesn't stagnate (use it or lose it).
Two, it is a very valuable skill set to have experience in the field of a workplace, even one unrelated to your studies.
Best compromise is a year as an intern at a placing relevant to your chosen area of study. That way you get the best of both worlds. Your knowledge doesn't stagnate, in fact it may likely proliferate, and two you can show real world experience on your CV/resume.
Some employers are known to look with disdain on pure academics, especially those who 'worked their way up the ranks'.
New contributor
add a comment |
In my opinion (as a non-studying BSc post grad with a view to attain MSc and PhD) there are a couple of contradictory answers.
One, it is easier to continue your academia non-stop so the self education and acquired knowledge doesn't stagnate (use it or lose it).
Two, it is a very valuable skill set to have experience in the field of a workplace, even one unrelated to your studies.
Best compromise is a year as an intern at a placing relevant to your chosen area of study. That way you get the best of both worlds. Your knowledge doesn't stagnate, in fact it may likely proliferate, and two you can show real world experience on your CV/resume.
Some employers are known to look with disdain on pure academics, especially those who 'worked their way up the ranks'.
New contributor
In my opinion (as a non-studying BSc post grad with a view to attain MSc and PhD) there are a couple of contradictory answers.
One, it is easier to continue your academia non-stop so the self education and acquired knowledge doesn't stagnate (use it or lose it).
Two, it is a very valuable skill set to have experience in the field of a workplace, even one unrelated to your studies.
Best compromise is a year as an intern at a placing relevant to your chosen area of study. That way you get the best of both worlds. Your knowledge doesn't stagnate, in fact it may likely proliferate, and two you can show real world experience on your CV/resume.
Some employers are known to look with disdain on pure academics, especially those who 'worked their way up the ranks'.
New contributor
edited 4 hours ago
Anyon
7,27522842
7,27522842
New contributor
answered 4 hours ago
BrainilackBrainilack
111
111
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f123119%2fshould-i-do-a-doctorate-straight-after-my-master-or-work-for-a-while-first%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
A PhD is primarily for training you to do research. You haven't mentioned whether you are interested in a research-oriented career (in academia or in industry)?
– ff524♦
7 hours ago
1
I've updated my question!
– Goofynose
7 hours ago