Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know the exact answer, but in my field, it is near 100% for reputable PhD programs.
Just because something doesn't cost you anything (out of pocket opportunity costs need to be considered) doesn't necessarily mean it is worthwhile devoting 5-7 years of your life getting, particularly when a good number of jobs, even STEM jobs, consider a PhD a negative when you apply for them.
I don't know the exact answer, but in my field, it is near 100% for reputable PhD programs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchemist80
Just because something doesn't cost you anything (out of pocket opportunity costs need to be considered) doesn't necessarily mean it is worthwhile devoting 5-7 years of your life getting, particularly when a good number of jobs, even STEM jobs, consider a PhD a negative when you apply for them.
This is the post that I was responding to:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzourah2006 What percentage of PhD programs today provide full tuition remission and a stipend?
Neither that post nor my response had anything to do with whether or not it was a worthwhile endeavor. I was addressing the cost/funding issue .
Did something in my post lead you believe that I don't understand the cost/benefit trade-off related to a PhD in my field?
And FYI, "out of pocket costs" AREN'T "opportunity costs."
And FYI, "out of pocket costs" AREN'T "opportunity costs.
Which is why I mentioned them. Tuition reimbursements cover the out of pocket costs but the stipend doesn't even come close to making up for the lost opportunity costs especially in many of the sciences where the PhD actually hurts your prospects of employment and the 5-7 years it took make it tough to conceal the PhD. Someone came up with a PhD expunging service as a gag where the PhD years are covered up as a fake job at a biotech start up that went belly up. I actually think that may be a good idea.
Last edited by MSchemist80; 03-31-2015 at 03:24 PM..
I don't know the exact answer, but in my field, it is near 100% for reputable PhD programs.
This is the case in my field as well, but I'd be willing to bet the # of non-reputable schools offering programs and charging very high prices is increasing.
*Discussing Opportunity Cost*
The benefit in my field which helps offset the opportunity cost is the fact that after you are ABD you can technically begin working at least part-time, so in essence it is only 1 year more than a Masters program, but with tuition remission and a stipend. i was earning slightly less than an entry level MS in year 4 as much as a typical early career MS in year 5 and more than an MS in my final year of grad school. So my opportunity cost was 1 year of salary, but I avoided tuition and living expenses for my time there whereas the students from the MS program came out 50-60k in debt on average.
You need a PhD in business to teach at many colleges. The MBA students have to be taught by someone.
True but shouldn't that be people that actually run a business rather then those that talk about it? Chances are someone can learn more from a chamber of commerce or score rather then getting a phd in business. Doctorates make sense if there is significant research. I don't know if any business research specifically out there. It's not a hard science and it isn't exactly a soft/social science. Accounting does not have that much of a variance to study and try to do research.
Quote:
Exactly. This is why chemists, pharmacologists, and other scientists watch the drugs they create be pushed on to the public even though they know there are problems with them or that they need to be further tested. These scientists have killed thousands of people for profit.
Well to be fair we do have to consider that what is made is not always owned by the individual. If a company makes bleach and chlorine they make bleach and chlorine. They aren't making chlorine gas although when combined that is what occurs. Profit isnt' always a bad thing. Technically we could argue that true altruism does not exist. Without the concept of say...heaven and a afterlife how many deeply religious people would continue to be religious? Of course on the inverse one can say that extreme atheists are simply what they oppose in trying to "save" people. Without incentives people pretty much do nothing. Same with animals to a point. It is part of basic evolutionary biology.
True but shouldn't that be people that actually run a business rather then those that talk about it? Chances are someone can learn more from a chamber of commerce or score rather then getting a phd in business. Doctorates make sense if there is significant research. I don't know if any business research specifically out there. It's not a hard science and it isn't exactly a soft/social science. Accounting does not have that much of a variance to study and try to do research.
Well to be fair we do have to consider that what is made is not always owned by the individual. If a company makes bleach and chlorine they make bleach and chlorine. They aren't making chlorine gas although when combined that is what occurs. Profit isnt' always a bad thing. Technically we could argue that true altruism does not exist. Without the concept of say...heaven and a afterlife how many deeply religious people would continue to be religious? Of course on the inverse one can say that extreme atheists are simply what they oppose in trying to "save" people. Without incentives people pretty much do nothing. Same with animals to a point. It is part of basic evolutionary biology.
There is tons of research being conducted in business schools. PhDs in business are significantly different than MBAs. I had several classes with our management PhDs as I/O and management have significant overlap, especially on the O side of I/O. Org. Design, Leadership, financial modeling, behavioral economics, etc.
Check out the Academy of Management and its journals if you are actually interested.
Here is the top Business journal as far as impact factor goes.
True but shouldn't that be people that actually run a business rather then those that talk about it? Chances are someone can learn more from a chamber of commerce or score rather then getting a phd in business. Doctorates make sense if there is significant research. I don't know if any business research specifically out there. It's not a hard science and it isn't exactly a soft/social science. Accounting does not have that much of a variance to study and try to do research.
Well to be fair we do have to consider that what is made is not always owned by the individual. If a company makes bleach and chlorine they make bleach and chlorine. They aren't making chlorine gas although when combined that is what occurs. Profit isnt' always a bad thing. Technically we could argue that true altruism does not exist. Without the concept of say...heaven and a afterlife how many deeply religious people would continue to be religious? Of course on the inverse one can say that extreme atheists are simply what they oppose in trying to "save" people. Without incentives people pretty much do nothing. Same with animals to a point. It is part of basic evolutionary biology.
For cutting edge research in accounting, check out the following journals:
Accounting Review
Journal of Accounting Research
Contemporary Accounting Research
Journal of Accounting and Economics
True but shouldn't that be people that actually run a business rather then those that talk about it? Chances are someone can learn more from a chamber of commerce or score rather then getting a phd in business. Doctorates make sense if there is significant research. I don't know if any business research specifically out there. It's not a hard science and it isn't exactly a soft/social science. Accounting does not have that much of a variance to study and try to do research.
Two other people have pointed out the research that's being done in business, so I won't be redundant.
Quote:
Well to be fair we do have to consider that what is made is not always owned by the individual. If a company makes bleach and chlorine they make bleach and chlorine. They aren't making chlorine gas although when combined that is what occurs. Profit isnt' always a bad thing. Technically we could argue that true altruism does not exist. Without the concept of say...heaven and a afterlife how many deeply religious people would continue to be religious? Of course on the inverse one can say that extreme atheists are simply what they oppose in trying to "save" people. Without incentives people pretty much do nothing. Same with animals to a point. It is part of basic evolutionary biology.
There are and have been scientists who worked directly on projects creating WMDs and pharmaceuticals that are problematic. I don't have a problem with people doing things for profit as long as those things aren't created, intentionally or through negligence, to kill or harm innocent people.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
