Three years for PhDs ‘not long enough’

There seems to be an assumption that all PhD students will progress into academic posts. In my experience (and that of an Institute of Physics {IoP} survey a few years ago) this is not the case. Half of the students according to the IoP do not enter academia and a fraction of a percent reach the highest academic grades. Most of my former students work in commercial computer security and finance posts. The norm of between three and four years should suffice. It is hard enough to get any UK students to take PhDs now so lengthening the period would only make matters worse.

I think the issue here is the maximum period of study allowed. There is no good reason to have a one size fits all approach across all disciplines. The maximum period of study, as long as satisfactory progress is being made towards completion of the PhD, could certainly be more than 3 years for many disciplines.

Is this extended PhD going to cost the same overall, or will the fees increase? There already is a maximumn period of study. If need be, those 3 years can be extended and in many cases they are, often to complete the final writing stage. Being a PhD candidate/student is already a blurry enough role at universities. Some consider them staff, some consider them students. In some disciplines they are used as cheap labour. There can be some flexibility in the length of PhDs, but funding should be clarified and supervision should also be monitored a bit better to avoid situations where the PhD ends up being the typical doormat of some full time staff... for a now formally extended period of time.