PhDs: is doctoral education in trouble in the UK?

There's a class issue.

One of the issues that the article doesn't address is the quality of those doctoral students. This no doubt varies dramatically by area but I would argue that the average quality of a doctoral candidate has declined dramatically. I have been part of various doctoral consortium at major conferences for decades (as well as being responsible for all or some parts of doctoral programmes at two schools in the UK). Some of these consortium are 'elite' in the sense that they are invitation only and the candidates go through a submission process (getting in is viewed as a strong signal of quality). However, despite this all of the faculty overseeing the consortium have noticed the dramatic decline in the quality of the student's work -- invariably viewing it as probably unpublishable and the candidate not going to do well in the job market. This has also been seen in the candidates who apply for junior positions (I have never had so many cases where the whole slate of candidates is viewed as not employable -- forcing us to go back into the market constantly). In addition, in overseeing doctoral applications it is astonishing at how many we end up binning. To keep the load down, we would triage hundreds of applications before they got to a committee simply because the candidates records are so poor that we wouldn't want to waste the committee's time going through the hundreds of applications that fail to meet the criteria (btw, one university's response to this was basically to say that our standards were too high and that all that is required to join a doctoral programme is a 'pass'). The bigger question is why? And the answer seems to be two fold. One is like the article in the THE about does a PhD payoff? When you compare the salaries that a solid well-educated well-trained student with strong marks could make outside academia with the 'poundland' salary of £50K for a lecturership (after also waiting several years to get that 'lucrative' (sarcasm) salary), you would have to be mad to think it is worth the time, money and effort. Second, working in academia is not what it once was. I used to say that the difference between academics and non-academics was that "academics gave up money for freedom and time to do what you wanted, while non-academics give up time and freedom for money". Today's all-administrative university world is one where freedom and time are no longer there (since they reduced the KPIs and productivity measures that senior administrators live and die by) but the money is still 'chump change'. If you are going to treated like a corporate drone you might as well be paid to be a drone. However, young scholars today are treated like drones (one VC at a prior university referred to the faculty as 'content providers') and paid like janitors.

A few other points to raise. 1. If there is a limited, and even declining pot of money for PhDs, then perhaps the best or least worst option is to fund fewer PhDs but at a much higher level. Stipends are currently low especially given the rate of inflation and the fact that, as the article points out, many excellent candidates who would have pursued academic careers in the past can earn more money more quickly in other sectors. 2. There are also implications for the sector, institutions and disciplines in terms of EDI. Many EDI initiatives require having an expanded pipeline of talent that will eventually feed through to faculty, professoriate, senior positions. A reduction of PhD opportunities would seem to reduce the pipeline unless combined with measures to mitigate the effects (e.g. ring fencing funding for particular groups).

"UK universities are really ‘making brains for other countries’, which is not good policy” - Following generations where the UK acted as a force for siphoning off the intellectual and academic cream from other countries, especially those in the global south, perhaps we are at a time where 'making brains for other countries' could be seen as a small token of reciprocity in a globally inequitable system.

I am generally in agreement with the previous comments, particularly with respect to an academic career. I am retiring at the end of this year and wholeheartedly agree that the job is not what it was. I have nephews in their 20s who earn over £50K and historically, there would be a price for that in terms of freedom. However, the increased administrative burden on academics means that most are just in poorly paid positions unless they are research superstars. I do not encourage students to do PhDs because if they have any doubts then they should do something else. One unrelated point is that in my university, it is perfectly possible to commence a PhD without an MSc.

"One of the issues that the article doesn't address is the quality of those doctoral students" (Comment #2). In Australia it has become far to easy to gain PhD enrolment and to get through; hence reduced confidence in the PhD as a qualification. Here are three examples with which I am directly familiar. 1/ An NESB candidate says to her regular tennis partner: 'Knee it sore. Me not tennising today. You just tennising youself." Three weeks later she submits her thesis (in English) and it passes without a hitch. 2/ Another NESB candidate cries as she shows me a draft thesis chapter. At least 80% has been crossed out and the supervisor, in tiny scrawl, has rewritten it in the margins without consulting her. A few months later she is through and goes into a senior academic role in her home country. 3/ I examine a thesis and find serious problems, with research method in particular, for which there is no description, let alone justification. I cannot come close to passing it, and recommend resubmission after a great deal of extra work that I specify in many pages of detail. Two weeks later I receive a cheque and a note of thanks for examining the thesis, which has passed.

#8 second line: "far too easy"

Perhaps a greater emphasis should be placed on alternative routes for obtaining a PhD. For example, I obtained my first degree by completing a so-called 'college-based sandwich course', which included a significant amount of industrial experience; and went on to obtain my PhD whilst working full-time at a research institute. I found the professional research experience invaluable during my undergraduate and postgraduate journey.

What’s the point of training researchers when the job market for research is so weak? Academic jobs are so awful and working conditions are dreadful.most phds especially the good ones don't go into academia or research anymore.