• neuropean
    link
    fedilink
    510 months ago

    Not usually for STEM in America, but we also don’t require a masters degree for PhD.

    Still for most people in my program, it was 4 years of undergrad, followed by 2-4 years in a lab, then 5-7 years for a PhD, then another 2-5 years for post-doc, then finally get hired.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      110 months ago

      Assuming you get hired after “only” your first postdoc:-). Some people do two or even three of those (though two longer ones can take more time overall than three shorter ones). And yet you hear of people that manage it even then, especially if there is even a temporary upswing somewhere e.g. a “cluster hire”.

      These days it seems difficult to speak of what is “standard” b/c the rules seem to have changed radically since the Tea Party rose to power, and rather than things returning to “normal” after the various recessions semi-recently, they instead seem to be shifting to an entirely different state altogether.

      It is so bad that a huge fraction of people getting PhDs won’t find jobs in the same specialty area - e.g. physics has been notorious for this for decades already, even though someone trained in that rigorous discipline often has little trouble moving to another area where they are often in high demand:-).

      • Dr. Bob
        link
        fedilink
        English
        110 months ago

        The length/number of post-docs scales directly with your start up costs.

        Need a computer and a desk? You can go on the market right after your PhD or one post-doc. Need seven figures of equipment plus animal space? Don’t expect to get a job until you’re pushing forty.

        Committees want to see a strong funding track record before they make that kind of investment

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          110 months ago

          Meh, would it not depend more on the saturation of the field? Like a physicist may literally only need a computer and desk (and a small salary, supported by teaching), while a biologist might need lets say contracting funds to do DNA sequencing, and yet even in that scenario the latter might still find a job more readily than the former? Though heavily influenced by factors such as willingness to move to elsewhere especially another country.

          Additionally which (sub-)field someone is in has implications for how readily available even small amounts of funds are, especially if the various committees are using the hiree to obtain funds from a known source?