masters, work, then back to school... is this possible?

On Sep 3, 12:08 pm, dbell <bellda2...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sep 3, 10:24 am, Dave <dspg...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 3, 9:47 am, dbell <bellda2...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > You are making the right choice if you do not screw it up by getting
> > > in debt, getting married, or otherwise committing your time and money,
> > > or losing your motivation to study or your willingness to live a
> > > "student" lifestyle, before you get around to finishing it. I would
> > > not recommend graduate school part-time, it takes too long and
> > > decreases the chance you will finish. A PhD (which I do not have)
> > > will benefit you your whole life in opportunities that might otherwise
> > > be much more difficult to obtain (opportunitities that you are
> > > qualified for, and ones you aren't, but will get because of the PhD),
> > > and some pay increase (how much depends on if you remain puirely
> > > technical or get into management). With a PhD it is easier to get into
> > > management if you want that now or later. Get it early in your carreer
> > > so you can reap as much of the benefits as possible.
>
> > > My comments are based on decades of observations in the work
> > > environment.
>
> > > Dirk (only an MSEE, and yes I wish I had finished a PhD)
>
> > > Fishilicious wrote:
> > > > Hi all, I am about to graduate with my master's degree after going straight
> > > > to graduate school from college. I was actually admitted, and intended, to
> > > > do a PhD in DSP, but after a year at my current school I realized that this
> > > > is not the right PLACE for me. So now I am thinking of going to work for a
> > > > few years to beef up my resume, then applying back to that one school that
> > > > I really want to go to. Am I making the right choice? Is this even
> > > > doable? I also have little clue to what companies / job titles I should be
> > > > looking for. Any comments or suggestions are greatly appreciated! Thank!
>
> > I have to politely disagree with Dirk, I've found there are very few
> > places where a PhD is necessary - it does however help to have at
> > least a Masters. The only place where I've seen it is mandatory is for
> > teaching at university institutions. Most of the managers I've had
> > didn't have PhDs and many didn't even have a Masters degree. Note: I'm
> > talking about engineering here and not something like an MBA. There
> > was a survey put out a couple of years ago that said a PhD wasn't cost
> > effective. In others words the salary you get (and what you would have
> > earned over 4 years) doesn't make up for the cost of doing a PhD - I
> > suspect with the ever increasing cost of university tuition that is
> > even more true now. I think the only way a PhD is cost effective is if
> > you skip the Masters and just do a PhD - Most universities don't
> > advertise that you can do this, and a lot of professors don't like it
> > because they'd like you to produce papers for them for 6 years or they
> > like to see what you do at a Masters level before committing time and
> > effort to you at a PhD level.
>
> > BTW - In my case after I did my undergrad I went to work for IBM for
> > 16 months on an internship program and then went back to do my
> > Masters. The only way I'd do a PhD is if a company paid for it.
>
> > A couple of other observations I've had:
>
> > 1) Trying to finish a graduate program part-time is extremely
> > difficult. I've seen many attempt it - most just drop out.
>
> > 2) Having some related work experience can help in picking out a good
> > thesis topic. In some cases it can also help out the company and they
> > may even help out with some of the cost of the graduate program.
> > Having the direction before you go into your graduate program is a
> > definite asset.
>
> > 3) Once you have a good paying job and more disposable income than
> > you've probably ever had - it can be difficult to go back to the grad
> > student lifestyle. Typically your needs and wants tend to grow to meet
> > your larger income e.g. car, house, vacations, trips etc.
>
> > 4) Someone else mentioned this, but once you have other commitments
> > like a wife or children it is challenging to also commit to a PhD. You
> > spend a lot of time committed to the PhD and less time with the wife
> > and kids.
>
> > Most of the people I've seen with PhDs are over rated. Doing a PhD
> > tends to focus you on a very specialized area, and you tend to miss
> > out on a lot of other generalized knowledge.
>
> > Hope the info helps.
> > Cheers,
> > Dave- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Dave,
>
> I never said it was necessary, but I have seen it open countless
> opportunities for people that furthered their career that they would
> not have gotten without a PhD. Even if they knew the exact same
> material and had the same capabilities, but no PhD, the opportunities
> would not have presented themselves in the same way. There seems to be
> a management assumption that people with PhD's are good at management
> and can work in areas that they have no expertise in. I have witnessed
> this over and over and over ... One place I worked for 10+ years, if
> you had a PhD you often became an instant manager of people and
> projects when you were hired, even if that was not your experience
> before. I have never seen any correlation between a PhD and personnel
> management abilty (often the opposite). If management is not technical
> enough to understand the technical aspects of things, they often look
> to the PhDs for answers, even if a lower level person would actually
> know more about the technology.
>
> Doing the same job I am doing now, according to the IEEE salary
> survey, it would be worth about $10K (US) extra per year, but it is
> more likely that with a PhD, I would not be doing the job I am doing
> now, I would be doing a higher paying job with the offset being >>
> $10K from my present position.
>
> Dirk

Dirk, we've obviously had different experiences. Although I have seen
just about anyone put into a manager position - even someone
incompetent because they needed the competent person to stay in their
current position (they we're too valuable where they were).

Comparing a job with and without PhD isn't really valid. Let say a 4
year PhD costs $40,000 (I'm guessing on tuition these days). If a
Masters student starts at say $40,000 a year - then over the 4 years
the PhD is starting $200,000 dollars behind.
If there is only a $10,000 difference it will take atleast 20 years to
make that up. I know that is a simplistic example, but it is more just
to bring out a point.

It gets worse if you take into account the time value of money.

I will admit there are times were a PhD can open doors - it can break
that initial barrier. For me it hasn't been an issue, I've been
recognized for the work I do.

Cheers,
David

On Sep 3, 11:53*am, Dave <dspg...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> Dirk, we've obviously had different experiences. Although I have seen
> just about *anyone put into a manager position - even someone
> incompetent because they needed the competent person to stay in their
> current position (they we're too valuable where they were).
>
> Comparing a job with and without PhD isn't really valid. Let say a 4
> year PhD costs $40,000 (I'm guessing on tuition these days). If a
> Masters student *starts at say $40,000 a year - then over the 4 years
> the PhD is starting $200,000 dollars behind.
> If there is only a $10,000 difference it will take at least 20 years to
> make that up. I know that is a simplistic example, but it is more just
> to bring out a point.
>
> It gets worse if you take into account the time value of money.
>
> I will admit there are times were a PhD can open doors - it can break
> that initial barrier. For me it hasn't been an issue, I've been
> recognized for the work I do.
>

In good places in the US, PhD candidates/students do not pay tuition,
and they get paid a basic stipend, typically $20k/year or thereabouts.
How does that change your outlook?

Julius

On Sep 3, 11:39*am, "Fishilicious" <vnz...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
>
> With all that said, I am clueless as to what kind of job would a MSEE in
> DSP would do in the work force. *I think my ideal job right now is one that
> is research / design oriented, but with the current state of economy, I
> probably should just take whatever I can get.

In DSP, with an MS and without proven analytical / theoretical
output,
you'll most likely be implementing more than analyzing or
theorizing.

>*I have been searching for
> the past few days, and seems like most job postings that require knowledge
> in DSP are heavily software related--not something I was hoping for. *Just
> tossing some of my concerns these days out there, thanks again for all the
> great replies!!

In my own experience, having gone through a PhD program in a good
place means that people expect you have done one significant project
that pushes the boundary of what is the established knowledge and/or
practice. That means that one is able to take a vague problem and
pose
a solid question that can lead to a good answer.

So far, what I have found is that other people also expect good PhD
graduates to be able to tackle new problem areas with a good
systematic approach.

I'm sure that experience like what I describe above is not attainable
only by doing a PhD, but going through a PhD program is an enabler
to put yourself through that type of experience, and hopefully with
good mentorship.

I'm a fairly new graduate myself, but having discussed this with quite
a
few colleagues, most agree that the best thing that they got out of
doing
a PhD is the discipline in formulating problems properly, coming up
with
ways to estimate or approximate what you need to know or design,
and being able to prove that what you propose is a good method or
not.

Again, getting training in the above is not limited only to going for
a
PhD, but top research institutions are where there are typically the
best
collections of minds to admire and to learn from. At least in my own
experience, which seems to be shared by many other colleagues from
my student days.

But you haven't answered the questions that I pose above yet, and I
think that those questions are important.

Julius

On Sep 3, 12:53*pm, Dave <dspg...@netscape.net> wrote:
> On Sep 3, 12:08 pm, dbell <bellda2...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 3, 10:24 am, Dave <dspg...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 3, 9:47 am, dbell <bellda2...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > > You are making the right choice if you do not screw it up by getting
> > > > in debt, getting married, or otherwise committing your time and money,
> > > > or losing your motivation to study or your willingness to live a
> > > > "student" lifestyle, before you get around to finishing it. *I would
> > > > not recommend graduate school part-time, it takes too long and
> > > > decreases the chance you will finish. *A PhD (which I do not have)
> > > > will benefit you your whole life in opportunities that might otherwise
> > > > be much more difficult to obtain (opportunitities that you are
> > > > qualified for, and ones you aren't, but will get because of the PhD),
> > > > and some pay increase (how much depends on if you remain puirely
> > > > technical or get into management). With a PhD it is easier to get into
> > > > management if you want that now or later. Get it early in your carreer
> > > > so you can reap as much of the benefits as possible.
>
> > > > My comments are based on decades of observations in the work
> > > > environment.
>
> > > > Dirk (only an MSEE, and yes I wish I had finished a PhD)
>
> > > > Fishilicious wrote:
> > > > > Hi all, I am about to graduate with my master's degree after going straight
> > > > > to graduate school from college. *I was actually admitted, and intended, to
> > > > > do a PhD in DSP, but after a year at my current school I realizedthat this
> > > > > is not the right PLACE for me. *So now I am thinking of going to work for a
> > > > > few years to beef up my resume, then applying back to that one school that
> > > > > I really want to go to. *Am I making the right choice? *Is this even
> > > > > doable? *I also have little clue to what companies / job titlesI should be
> > > > > looking for. *Any comments or suggestions are greatly appreciated! Thank!
>
> > > I have to politely disagree with Dirk, I've found there are very few
> > > places where a PhD is necessary - it does however help to have at
> > > least a Masters. The only place where I've seen it is mandatory is for
> > > teaching at university institutions. Most of the managers I've had
> > > didn't have PhDs and many didn't even have a Masters degree. Note: I'm
> > > talking about engineering here and not something like an MBA. There
> > > was a survey put out a couple of years ago that said a PhD wasn't cost
> > > effective. In others words the salary you get (and what you would have
> > > earned over 4 years) doesn't make up for the cost of doing a PhD - I
> > > suspect with the ever increasing cost of university tuition that is
> > > even more true now. I think the only way a PhD is cost effective is if
> > > you skip the Masters and just do a PhD - Most universities don't
> > > advertise that you can do this, and a lot of professors don't like it
> > > because they'd like you to produce papers for them for 6 years or they
> > > like to see what you do at a Masters level before committing time and
> > > effort to you at a PhD level.
>
> > > BTW - In my case after I did my undergrad I went to work for IBM for
> > > 16 months on an internship program and then went back to do my
> > > Masters. The only way I'd do a PhD is if a company paid for it.
>
> > > A couple of other observations I've had:
>
> > > 1) Trying to finish a graduate program part-time is extremely
> > > difficult. I've seen many attempt it - most just drop out.
>
> > > 2) Having some related work experience can help in picking out a good
> > > thesis topic. In some cases it can also help out the company and they
> > > may even help out with some of the cost of the graduate program.
> > > Having the direction before you go into your graduate program is a
> > > definite asset.
>
> > > 3) Once you have a good paying job and more disposable income than
> > > you've probably ever had - it can be difficult to go back to the grad
> > > student lifestyle. Typically your needs and wants tend to grow to meet
> > > your larger income e.g. car, house, vacations, trips etc.
>
> > > 4) Someone else mentioned this, but once you have other commitments
> > > like a wife or children it is challenging to also commit to a PhD. You
> > > spend a lot of time committed to the PhD and less time with the wife
> > > and kids.
>
> > > Most of the people I've seen with PhDs are over rated. Doing a PhD
> > > tends to focus you on a very specialized area, and *you tend to miss
> > > out on a lot of other generalized knowledge.
>
> > > Hope the info helps.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Dave- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Dave,
>
> > I never said it was necessary, but I have seen it open countless
> > opportunities for people that furthered their career that they would
> > not have gotten without a PhD. Even if they knew the exact same
> > material and had the same capabilities, but no PhD, the opportunities
> > would not have presented themselves in the same way. There seems to be
> > a management assumption that people with PhD's are good at management
> > and can work in areas that they have no expertise in. I have witnessed
> > this over and over and over ... One place I worked for 10+ years, if
> > you had a PhD you often became an instant manager of people and
> > projects when you were hired, even if that was not your experience
> > before. I have never seen any correlation between a PhD and personnel
> > management abilty (often the opposite). If management is not technical
> > enough to understand the technical aspects of things, they often look
> > to the PhDs for answers, even if a lower level person would actually
> > know more about the technology.
>
> > Doing the same job I am doing now, according to the IEEE salary
> > survey, it would be worth about $10K (US) extra per year, but it is
> > more likely that with a PhD, I would not be doing the job I am doing
> > now, I would be doing a higher paying job with the offset being >>
> > $10K from my present position.
>
> > Dirk
>
> Dirk, we've obviously had different experiences. Although I have seen
> just about *anyone put into a manager position - even someone
> incompetent because they needed the competent person to stay in their
> current position (they we're too valuable where they were).
>
> Comparing a job with and without PhD isn't really valid. Let say a 4
> year PhD costs $40,000 (I'm guessing on tuition these days). If a
> Masters student *starts at say $40,000 a year - then over the 4 years
> the PhD is starting $200,000 dollars behind.
> If there is only a $10,000 difference it will take atleast 20 years to
> make that up. I know that is a simplistic example, but it is more just
> to bring out a point.
>
> It gets worse if you take into account the time value of money.
>
> I will admit there are times were a PhD can open doors - it can break
> that initial barrier. For me it hasn't been an issue, I've been
> recognized for the work I do.
>
> Cheers,
> David- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

David,

Being recognized for the work you do can come and go with management,
changes in companies, the economy, .... I hope you don't take that as
a given no matter how good you might be. I hope you don't take
continuous employment for granted either. I had a friend at a large
division of a huge corporation who won the very prestigious yearly
division technology award one year and was out of a job two years
later when the economy tanked (the company didn't tank).

You are not really starting as far behind as your calculations
suggest. Yes you will have made less money while in school, but you
will have had less expenses, and where you are financially after a few
years working instead of school depends greatly on how you spend your
money. For most people the extra income won't go into the bank and a
lot of people will not have a great deal more to show (cash or paid
for durable goods) one way or another at the time the PhD student is
out of school for a few years.

At some point the PhD who can be hired to do things that he may not
really be qualified for may have a job while the MS who isn't given
that option is not employed or fully employed. This could happen a few
times in your career. That can be very costly and needs to enter into
your computations.

The financial analysis we have done is not clear cut. If I had it to
do over I would do it. I would do it as early as possible because
later it may not be feasible or reasonable. Inflation and time cost of
money does need to be factored in, as does opportunity. If I had been
single, 2 years of $10K now would have easily paid for me to get a PhD
25 years ago (tuition and living costs) and I would not have had to
work during school.

Just my opinion,

Dirk

BTW, 4 X 40K = 160K < 200K :-)

>On Sep 3, 8:28=A0am, Rune Allnor <all...@tele.ntnu.no> wrote:
>> On 3 Sep, 15:09, "Fishilicious" <vnz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all, I am about to graduate with my master's degree after going
stra=
>ight
>> > to graduate school from college. =A0I was actually admitted, and
intend=
>ed, to
>> > do a PhD in DSP, but after a year at my current school I realized
that =
>this
>> > is not the right PLACE for me. =A0So now I am thinking of going to
work=
> for a
>> > few years to beef up my resume, then applying back to that one school
t=
>hat
>> > I really want to go to. =A0Am I making the right choice?
>>
>> No one can answer that but you. It depends on what you *really* want
>> from your job - what makes *you* tick. Som epeople want to teach,
>> and get their kicks from watching students finally 'get' it after
>> weeks or months of hard work. Others want to make an impact in
>> an organization by solving problems or gacilitating new ways of
>> work. Others still just want the title and paycheck, while yet
>> others just want an undisturbed office where they can hide in
>> obscurity till retirement.
>>
>> Rune
>
>I agree with Rune. Nobody here can answer your question without
>significant uncertainty. The best you can hope for from posting here
>is to get some help in pointing things out which you may not have
>anticipated yourself.
>
>In my personal experience, I know quite a few people who promised
>that they would "go back to school" but very very few do. Those who
>do tend to have found work that is very academic-oriented and/or
>research-oriented.
>
>Further, you should consider the following questions seriously:
>
>1. what makes you think that your current place is not the
> right place for you,
>
>2. what makes you think that another place will be the right place
> for you?
>
>3. why do you want to do a PhD in the first place?
>
>4. why not transfer to a different PhD program rather than "go to
> work"?
>
>Julius
>

Let me answer these:

1. what makes you think that your current place is not the
right place for you,

-- Again, mostly because of the social atmosphere: just doesn't feel like
people here are focused. Also because the project I'm involved with is
just boring. I looked into the projects done by other group's, they don't
interest me.

2. what makes you think that another place will be the right place
for you?

-- Wanted to go there since youth, better reputation, location, social
atmosphere...

3. why do you want to do a PhD in the first place?

-- Self accomplishment, that's pretty much it.

4. why not transfer to a different PhD program rather than "go to
work"?
-- don't think I can make it in. Also because I'm considering patent law,
and law school requires work experience.

On Sep 3, 2:23*pm, "Fishilicious" <vnz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 4. why not transfer to a different PhD program rather than "go to
> * * work"?
> -- don't think I can make it in. *Also because I'm considering patent law,
> and law school requires work experience.

May I ask whether your admission chances will improve after you
leave school for a few years?

"Fishilicious" <vnzens@gmail.com> wrote in
news:zpidnYXATJnoESPVnZ2dnUVZ_r7inZ2d@giganews.com :

> Hi all, I am about to graduate with my master's degree after going
> straight to graduate school from college. I was actually admitted,
> and intended, to do a PhD in DSP, but after a year at my current
> school I realized that this is not the right PLACE for me. So now I
> am thinking of going to work for a few years to beef up my resume,
> then applying back to that one school that I really want to go to. Am
> I making the right choice? Is this even doable? I also have little
> clue to what companies / job titles I should be looking for. Any
> comments or suggestions are greatly appreciated! Thank!
>
>
>

Your thinking is entirely backwards. Your education should be leading up
to a career of your choosing. You don't make a career choice based on your
level of education.

Figure out what you want to do with your life, then figure out how much
education you need to do it.


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

>On Sep 3, 2:23=A0pm, "Fishilicious" <vnz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 4. why not transfer to a different PhD program rather than "go to
>> =A0 =A0 work"?
>> -- don't think I can make it in. =A0Also because I'm considering patent
l=
>aw,
>> and law school requires work experience.
>
>May I ask whether your admission chances will improve after you
>leave school for a few years?
>

Well, that's the part that I don't know. I am certainly hoping that's the
case should I be able to get involved in some good projects at work.

On Sep 3, 4:53*pm, "Fishilicious" <vnz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, that's the part that I don't know. *I am certainly hoping that's the
> case should I be able to get involved in some good projects at work. *

Considering you do not know what your "job" will be yet, nobody
can tell. But keep in mind that admissions to a good PhD program
is completely determined by whether the admissions committee
think that you can do top-notch research or not. Now you can work
backwards and think how different factors effect this estimate.
For example, doing well in classes should be a given, otherwise
how will you have time to do good research? In this sense, taking
time off for work can't really help.

If your "work" can be used to demonstrate your potential to do top-
notch research, then it can help. But the trick is of course to find
this happy situation. Ideally you have a few published papers,
and also very good recommendations from supervisors with good
credentials. At the minimum you need strong recommendations
from supervisors who are perceived to be able to judge your ability
to thrive in a PhD program, and that you can include a good
description of a significant accomplishment or two.

There will be differences in whether you are applying for schools
in the US or not, I don't think you've mentioned this in your posts.

But who knows. Some "theoretical" advisors like to get students
with industrial experience because they may need lab monkeys
to do implementation work for the other, more theoretical students.
Not necessarily a bad deal for everybody involved.

Julius

Fishilicious wrote:
>> On 3 Sep, 18:08, dbell <bellda2...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I never said it was necessary, but I have seen it open countless
>>> opportunities for people that furthered their career that they would
>>> not have gotten without a PhD. Even if they knew the exact same
>>> material and had the same capabilities, but no PhD, the
>>> opportunities would not have presented themselves in the same way.
>>
>> I would never encourage anyone to go for a PhD degree, and in the
>> past I have often wondered what one can do with a degree that one
>> can't do without it.
>>
>> However, I have been in the position where a project proposal of
>> mine was met with 'who do *you* think you are to think you can
>> do what lots of smart people have attmpted and failed?' where my
>> PhD degree + former affiliations with certain R&D institutions
>> came in handy.
>>
>> Not a card to be played too often, but potentially very effective.
>>
>> Rune
>
> Wow thanks for all the replies! Well just a couple of things I would
> like to add. The reason I don't think this is the right place is
> primarily one that is social, same goes for why I wanted to do a PhD
> to start with. I wanted to get the degree as a kind of self
> accomplishment, not because I'm passionate about the research or want
> a higher pay. I know this is not a good reason to do graduate
> school, but it pretty much carried me through undergraduate, and now
> master's.
>
> On a more logical note, I do have the concern that MS will cause me to
> eventually hit a glass ceiling. Together with the fact that I still
> wish to attend that one school I wanted to since high school, I'm
> looking to reapply in a few years. However, PhD isn't the only thing
> I'm considering. Now, I don't think I'm fit for management, so the
> other option from what I heard would be patent law. But then again,
> these are all up in the air right now, need to get a job first.
>
> With all that said, I am clueless as to what kind of job would a MSEE
> in DSP would do in the work force. I think my ideal job right now is
> one that is research / design oriented, but with the current state of
> economy, I probably should just take whatever I can get. I have been
> searching for the past few days, and seems like most job postings
> that require knowledge in DSP are heavily software related--not
> something I was hoping for. Just tossing some of my concerns these
> days out there, thanks again for all the great replies!!

The "D" in DSP pretty much guarantees it's gonna be software. Even if you
are designing FPGAs, that's a lot like "software".

If you want to do research then it's either a University or possibly a
government lab.

Your motive for doing the PhD program is fine. But, as others have
suggested, not much of a glass ceiling involved unless you want to be a
professor.

Consider that there are very few "DSP" workers at all. Instead there are
engineers who develop products which have some DSP in them. As things get
smaller / chips get more comprehensive / it's entirely possible for one EE
to design a product from start to finish with just a bit of mechanical
engineering help for the box, structure, cooling and maybe the power
supply.... That's fairly common practice in product companies and entails
much more in the job than DSP. The new grad EE type engineers I hired
usually had done a real project with an FPGA, usually had skills in software
and understood a variety of things - including DSP or image processing or
......

Fred