Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Worth Going For a Graduate Degree In the Middle of Your Career?
spiffmastercow writes "After nearly a decade of professional software development, my desire to work on something more interesting than business applications has pushed me toward looking into going back to school. I'd like to go into a graduate program for Computer Science, but I need to weigh my options very carefully. Is a Ph.D. a near-guarantee of a spot in a skunkworks type of job (Microsoft Research and the like)? Is a M.S. just as good for this? How does the 'letter of recommendation' requirement work if you haven't kept in touch with your professors?"
If that comes in the form of a graduate degree, so be it.
As long as you keep learning
This sig is intentionally blank
A PhD doesn't really guarantee you anything. It can also be detrimental depending on what you want to do as some companies consider it too much or too expensive. You'll be better off starting in a Masters program and then deciding if you you really see a need or feel the desire to go for the PhD. A PhD is a LOT of work and time.
Really unless you plan to go into academia or hard core research I'd steer clear.
I don't care what you say, all I need is my Wumpabet soup.
Seriously. You'll regret it for the rest of your paltry existence if you don't.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Why not? It's, at least, free.
http://www.khanacademy.org/about
If your goal is to advance your current career, then an MBA is likely to help more than a graduate program in Computer Science. Unless you are going to a top school (like Stanford or MIT), you aren't going to learn much more in a graduate program than you would by buying books and reading them. I am in a Masters program in a decent school right now (DePaul), and I can tell you from experience that if you are learning much in a Masters program after 10 years in the field, you were a crappy developer.
If your goal is to work on something other than standard business applications, then a Masters or Ph.D. may help if you work hard enough. I am putting quite a few of my electives towards research oriented classes so I can learn more than just what the Factory pattern is (yes, over 50% of the graduate students had to learn that in class). The help of faculty and other smart students that I have found along the way has allowed me to accomplish more and learn more than I would have on my own. But you have to go out of your way to push yourself, because most graduate programs won't make you.
I assume a Ph.D. program has even more chance for research, but I have no experience to back that up. But even in Ph.D. programs, you are still spending your time in many of your classes learning what unit testing is (at least at DePaul anyway).
Since you stated that your goal may be to obtain a research job, maybe you should start by searching for jobs at Microsoft Research, HP Labs, etc. or other national laboratories. At least just to see what the requirements are.
A lot of those jobs probably do require a PhD, but depending on your experiences and skills, maybe you can convince them to hire you. Then you don't have to go through the typical 5-7 years of schooling to get there.
Monetarily, I would say it is not worth it to get a PhD. But it may be worth it intellectually. Even better if you have the finances to support it.
Graduate degree are worthless. All they help is on the resume filter that is HR. Smart people do just as well without them. Average people likely the same.
>Is a Ph.D. a near-guarantee of a spot in a skunkworks type of job (Microsoft Research and the like)?
Ha ha ha, no. I know Ph.Ds who are working as regular software developers. Unless your coursework and Ph.D thesis is about something that somebody actually cares about, you're just cannon fodder like everyone else, albeit more educated.
I know a man who got a job at Skunkworks and he only has a high school diploma. I know a drop-out with a GED who got a job at NASA. Getting a degree does not guarantee you a job. It's all about timing and your qualifications at the time.
So you're half way through your career and you don't yet have the life tools necessary to learn on your own? Skunk works is about doing NEW things, University is about teaching old things and learning how to learn on your own. A Ph D won't get you anywhere in the cutting edge, making new things and having new ideas *will*.
All you need to get into hard core cutting edge development is a computer and the will power.
If you think going back to school will help you get a cutting edge developement job, it won't. The opposite will be true, the recruiter will think you can't learn on your own, can't do new things on your own, and have to be led by your teachers. Which is exactly the wrong direction for the job you are after.
Seriously, get your computer, get your idea, make your new thing, that new thing is what will get you your cutting edge job.
So letters of recommendation don't usually mean a whole lot for a senior student. If technically competent people have given you good recommendations that's fine, but usually you find a supervisor first, then apply.
A PhD in comp sci isn't a guarantee to anything, it's usually not worth it financially (an MSc usually is), and spending 4 years, or more, of your life on 20k a year with the theoretical payout at the end of it is a bad plan. Academia is usually based on years since you completed your PhD, so even though you could talk your way into some credit as a programmer (a programmer is not a scientist by the way), so that's more likely to be more harm than good. Research is usually very front loaded in a career, you produce the good stuff before you're 40, you supervise other people doing good stuff until you're 50, and then you teach and sit on committees and supervise people who may or may not do good stuff. If you're jumping into that process late you have to realize you're going to be treated like you're supposed to be 20 years younger than you are, and well, it's just not easily workable.
In terms of industry an MSc is worth it, a PhD isn't. An MSc shows you have a bit of a step up as a self starter, a bit more advanced knowledge and interest in a specialized area and you can do something interesting that isn't necessarily financially driven which still sounds cool. (My MSc was on GPU ray tracing, which, when I did it, wasn't going anywhere fast but everyone I applied for work with knew what those things were and immediately had a connect as to something 'interesting'). But for a PhD it's not usually worth it, industry experience is more valuable (and lucrative) unless you really need a PhD for a particular job you want, which would only be in academia, it's not worth. Again, keep in mind, a PhD is definitely science, you can get by as a programmer in a BSc and an MSc but if all you are is a programmer you're going to get your arse handed to you when someone asks you to develop a novel model of a problem or a novel solution and they don't really care what language you implement it in, if at all. Where I am we have a couple of PhD's in comp sci who I don't think ever write code, ever, but they're extremely well respected because they do theory of computation and fairly sophisticated mathematics development (which their grad students might implement).
As someone else said, there's no harm in doing a masters, and it's usually upside, so it's worth doing if you're interested, and the requirements are pretty lax to get in. Don't do a coursework masters, do a thesis masters though, coursework masters is like an undergrad with more advanced topics, so you're not getting anything, those are basically there to pad 'years of experience' for foreign students looking to move to your country. A masters you can reasonably accomplish at least part of it part time and keep your job (and income) too. Here the course requirements are 4 courses total, so one or two a term for a year or two, and then a thesis after (which is basically writing a 150 page book on some topic, and having an interesting idea you can demonstrate an example of).
A PhD though... ugh. It's a lot of risk, if you're a stellar programmer already it won't make you better and you're better to just keep making money. It lets you solve more novel problems, but those can be bad precisely because they're novel, which makes them hard to solve if not unsolvable. There's no guarantee for a decent gig at the end of it either, and you might end up stuck in a job that is the same as someone with an MSc, so you've wasted 4 years or more of good earning power on it.
What is it you really want to do? Do you want to do research- develop new algorithms and approaches? Then it can help a bit. But you pretty much need to stop working and go to school to get the real benefit, the real benefit is in doing graduate research with a mentor, making connections, and studying without distractions. It isn't the classes.
If you just want to work on different types of applications- do so. Apply for jobs that do something else. Look at startups, go to local startup events. Search job listings and ignore anything that says J2EE or .NET. If you don't live near a major city, you may need to relocate. But it's easily doable- 11 years in and I haven't touched a business app yet.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Many masters are very application-oriented, and there's a chance you will end up feeling like you are doing the same job as before, but at a slightly higher level.
For most "technical" (i.e. sciences) fields, an M.S. means you take two years of classes without failing them, are able to regurgitate it out on exams, and maybe put together a Master's Thesis that's more a Rite of Passage than real work.
PhD's on the other hand, often (once again in sciences) spend the same two years learning the same coursework, and are expected to do 3-4 years of pure research, applying that knowledge, before they graduate. The sole purpose of the second (and larger) half of their tenure being to hone their ability to create rather than apply (I know many M.S. holders will be POd at that statement, but it obviously varies case by case, and I'm giving a broad brush stroke, so don't whine). Many PhD programs also give you an "honorary" masters if you fail to complete the PhD program (either by choice or by lack of research capabilities).
As an aside, many government research labs (some subgroups of which are strictly programming and computational) don't offer full time positions to anyone who doesn't have a PhD, and will only give those with an M.S. a temporary scientist position with the understanding that you are pursuing a PhD.
With that all being said and done, it really depends on what you want to do. PhDs are generally pretty high level. If you want your code to have application to something, you will most likely need a strong science background, whereby you are then using your programming skills to apply algorithms to solve problems. A PhD in CS will more likely be something very high level regarding computer science as a philosophy itself (hence doctorate of philosophy). It's quite a 180 and very likely more of a departure than you wanted to take from your current career.
Finally, as far as letters of rec go, graduate school in general is much more a case-by-case basis, and not only most admissions departments be very accommodating of any questions you might have during a phonecall, but letters of rec from work supervisors will also suffice in many cases.
Whatever you pick though, I wish you the best of luck and think you will have a great time and be happy with either one C:
I only list the drastic differences in a PhD so that you are able to weigh it properly against a Masters (including the fact that it's oftentimes less employable during a down economy, because of how much more companies are "required" to pay PhDs vs. an M.S. holder that can do the same work).
I've worked at MSR as a software developer. I have a M.Sc in CS/EE. To be a researcher there, with very few exceptions, you need a PhD. But that's a requirement, not a guarantee. You also need to either be young and promising (as determined by your publications, and how well they're received by the scientific community), or seasoned and established (as determined again by your track record of publications). "Seasoned and established" is not something you can get in a couple of years. These folks operate at the bleeding edge, you need to spend 2-3 years working really hard just to really understand what they're doing, let alone contribute something significant.
For an engineer, there's no requirement beyond, well, being a great engineer, and B.Sc. Some other companies (notably Google) prefer to hire researchers who are _also_ great engineers. This is rare, but these folks do exist, I know a few personally. PhD requirements do apply to those engineers.
If you're looking to do something researchy for a while, just get a software developer job at a lab (MSR or elsewhere). You likely will be able to publish, if your work is not embarrassing :-) (MSR allows and encourages engineers to do their own research). Let me warn you, though, you will be working with people who have been working in the same field for a decade or more, and as a result acquired the amounts of expertise that you won't have just starting out. A few (or a lot, depending on your IQ) of them will be a lot smarter than you, which can be demoralizing to some folks. And almost all of them will know math really well, which can be a challenge for you 10 years after school, even if you did advanced math there. You will have to understand them, after all, and help them apply what they've thought up. As if this wasn't enough, 9/10ths of what you do will never go anywhere other than to the patent office, which too can be demoralizing for someone who's used to people actually using their products.
On the flipside, you will learn A TON, if you're willing to put in the effort, and the environment is the very definition of low pressure. People are pleasant and super smart, research is interesting, you don't have to pull 12 hour work days, except maybe once a year before a major conference, and since you're a precious commodity, you're given the freedom to choose projects that interest you.
Point is, it's not all as rosy as you imagine it right now, but it's a worthwhile experience nevertheless. Or at least it was for me, YMMV.
It's really up to you to figure out whether you want a PhD or not. Theoretically, a PhD does NOT have the same increase in ROI that a master's does. But if it's what you want, then it's what you want. Only *you* can decide that for yourself.
As for letters of recommendation, I think you can use a boss for at least one of them. It doesn't hurt to call up your professors from undergrad, in any case. Email them first, then call. In my experience, they always appreciate talking to one of their former students. Remember, they're people and people *need* feedback and validation of their life's work...you can be part of it.
I suggest you be realistic with the time and effort required for a PhD. You'll be back in the world of sleepless nights and final exams. Four years is *fast* and six years (or more) is more realistic.
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
Let's assume you can teach yourself anything they can teach you in a non-PhD Master's program.
Negatives:
(a) money, unless you get them to pay for it.
(b) time
(c) academia: bureaucracy, and that horrible anti-l337speak research papers are written in
Positives:
(a) practical if you're jumping fields into an entirely different career path, or if your career is kinda in a slump and you need to inject a bit of juice back into it. (Like say you just took two years off to travel the world.)
(b) extrinsic motivation, in the form of a curriculum and schedule of things to learn and do
(c) good place to meet a collected-or-similarly-unhinged significant other
In your case, it sounds like you don't need a career boost or anything, so how about just cooking up some cool shit at home, unless you want to meet some C.S. babes?
You shouldn't do a PhD just because you think it'll get you a better job, because it probably won't. Do it because you love the subject, and because you want to challenge yourself. Some time ago I wrote a blog post that sums up my feelings on doing a PhD, that you might find useful.
Is a Ph.D. a near-guarantee of a spot in a skunkworks type of job (Microsoft Research and the like)?
Having worked at MS with multiple Ph.D. holders, I can definitively say, "no". I knew testers with Ph.D.s, and team architects with nothing more than a BS. For your Ph.D. to get you into a research job, it needs to have some substance. Do your dissertation research in a cutting edge field, write papers that show you're an expert in the field, be prolific, rather than publishing the minimum to graduate, etc. If you do, they'll be more likely to hire you. And not because of the degree itself, but because of the work you did getting it. And of course if you can do that research on your own, and publish the same quality of papers, without a Ph.D. program to guide you, they'll still be interested, it's just a lot harder to achieve that level outside of academia.
I currently work for IBM Research. For a Research Staff Member position, a PhD is a mandatory qualification; a master's degree is mandatory for sweng positions. If you don't feel like reading papers all day and just whiteboarding stuff, then explaining it to a new set of people who then design it, test it, build it up to a product, then I'd suggest you go down the sweng route. If you do fancy just thinking all day and then as soon as you've got results publishing it and moving on, I'd say do a PhD.
Short version: go for the Masters, first.
Long version....
Really, you will only complete a PhD if you are genuinely, personally driven to do so. It's as much a mental endurance test as anything else. The main hurdles you need to overcome are (a) you will have to find something genuinely original to do, probably with minimal support -- this is quite the opposite of all other educational experiences -- (b) work out how to solve your Big Problem (by definition, the answer can't already be out there waiting for you), and (c) by the time you are ready to write up, assuming you've stuck it out to the point where you have something to write about, you then have to convince yourself that what is, by now, blindingly obvious to you will be seen as miraculous by everyone else (my tongue is only slightly in cheek here).
Having obtained your PhD, you will have done a fair whack of damage to your earning prospects! Industry will be suspicious of you, while universities are tough places to build careers, regardless of your career stage.
The upsides of a PhD are that you get to immerse yourself more freely and more deeply in your subject than anyone ever gets a sniff at in industry and that you should get some serious, Olympic level, brain training. That is very, very rewarding in its own right.
In a nutshell, if you must do a PhD, do it as a labour of love.
On the other hand, you could go for a Masters. Here you will find much more handholding (this is a Good Thing) and get to explore CS in much more depth than is usually possible in a first degree. Even better, a Masters is good for your career, whatever you choose to do, and many universities will give you the option of converting to the PhD course if everything is going well.
I gave up on college , if I need to know something I'ill get a book.
PhDs don't get you jobs. I can point you to plenty of PhD students that have come from the university where I work that had trouble finding work. Now to be fair, most deserved it, they weren't very good, just hoop jumpers who kept jumping through enough hoops until they got their degree (it isn't supposed to work that way, but it does).
Get a PhD if you want to do research. Basically if getting a PhD sounds like something you are interested in, then sure, go for it. Education for your own sake is never a bad thing, so long as you can afford it. However don't look at it is a "better job-getter" particularly if you already have work experience since that is what employers tend to weigh most heavily.
The only jobs you get a PhD for are jobs that require it. There are a few, mostly in academia but a few out of it. However other than that, no it doesn't help you get work to a significant degree and can even be a harm in some cases because employers will reason you'll be too expensive for them or too bored with the job and leave.
Goes double if you aren't that interested and are just going to "hoop jump" it like some of our grad students.
I have a great suggestion for you which will greatly aid you in finding the best answer:
DO YOU THINK IT WOULD MAKE YOU HAPPY?
if the abose answer is Yes then do it. Stop being motivated by money and carreer moves. You will be dead in less then 100 years so you might as well enjoy the precious time you have here doing stuff which makes you happy.
I think the real question you should ask yourself is whether a "skunkworks type of job" will make you happy. If it does just contact those type of companies and ask them directly. Tell them you are willing to study a Ph.D in order to get employed by them.
phd doesn't guarantee you anything. it might be a requirement for some big companys skunkworks lab though, especially if you're a direct hire.
getting that degree might push you just for more business applications, have fun coding that personnel management system for a client that gives contracts based on you having a phd.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
I've often wondering the same thing. It obviously depends on your idea of "worth it", but I think in many cases a career break for education can be worth it, particularly if your idea of "worth it" is to further your own education and then further the field or find innovative ways of applying the latest and greatest in your field to current problems. If your idea of "worth it" is primarily about compensation, I'd probably steer clear. Obviously it's not a guarantee, but if you make it clear to employers that your interest is in the research, not the salary, you'd find a home pretty easily. Undoubtedly many will comment on the vast amount of information available online now for this PhD level courses, but a great deal of the PhD experience is in act of doing peer reviewed research and interaction with faculty and colleagues, which can't be found on online.
I've been working for the same company for about a decade myself, though I stayed in school and got my MS in CS when the tech bubble burst. I really wanted a research related position, but I settled to a certain degree with a more typical software development gig. My current position is "comfortable", but I've often wanted to pursue a job in research rather than sitting through endless program management meetings and reading documents on how I'm supposed to write software. In the end, the thing that keeps me intellectually satisfied (aside from the compensation, which is better than average for my area) is that every so often we get a high profile, fast turnaround project where I get to interface directly with the customer and develop stuff that goes live in near real time. Even then, though, I rarely get the sense that I'm advancing the field, which is really what I'd like to do.
As for recommendation letters, I'd first recommend to others considering the "work first, then PhD path" stay in contact with those educators who mentored them. There may not be many in a Bachelor's Degree, but find a few. In the case of my MS, I'm still in touch with a few of my favorites from the department. I send them job openings and I get occasional updates. Since it doesn't sound like that's feasible in your case, I would look for recommendations from other professionals in your field and your company (but not managerial types unless they have a technical background.) You'll need to engage with someone at the university directly, probably, to
MS programs are definitely a good start, particularly if you chose a path with a strong research component,and find a university that lets you specialize a bit in your MS degree in your area of interest. (Online degrees are not an option.) As for PhD programs, I wouldn't try to get into that straight off the bat, since that's a four year commitment. Instead, do the MS route first since nearly all of it will count to your PhD and any research you do for an MS would be a jumping off point for a PhD. In general, I think PhD programs are really fond of people coming over from the real world, since they balance out all the career academics.
If your current employer has tuition reimbursement, see if you can enroll in a graduate class or two at the local university or university extension. If your professional credentials are good this shouldn't be a problem, and your company will likely see the course as continuing ed that's worth reimbursing. (I took a PhD level class in security this way, and the company paid for it even though I took it Pass/Fail.) This way you can dip your toes in relatively risk free. See how it goes and go from there.
If your degree path is Computer Science, you might consider an MCS (Master of Computer Science), which is a newer degree. It tends to be bit broader, and it has no research component. That might be more suitable if you're not looking at a "hard research" career.
I have a PhD in CS from a top-20 US university and now work in an industry research lab. Like most PhD recipients, I started grad school right after college and finished before starting my professional career. I would say getting the PhD is the single best decision I ever made, and looking back at my high school and college trajectory, it now seems like it was an inevitability. I always wanted to work in technology research, hack on software prototypes, work on R&D projects for a large influential company, and make more money. I've gotten all those, and I'm grateful for the opportunities. I make about 25% to 50% more in base salary than my friends who went to the same grad school but graduated with a MS degree. I also have more technical freedom at work because I have the publications and track record to back up what I'm saying. In the couple of times I sent my resume out for a new job (e.g. Google, MSFT, Facebook), I've gotten callbacks within 48 hours.
I do agree with some of the other unwashed heathens here who have only MS degrees that you can indeed get a great job with just a MS degree. But why limit yourself? Also, I agree that not all PhD programs are the same. I've seen some PhDs from 3rd tier universities work as test engineers. So in the end, I would say that you should get a PhD only if you can land at a CS grad school top-20 university. It is not worth your time getting a PhD from a university outside of this group. If you do get in, establish your area of expertise by publishing a lot of papers at top-tier conferences in order to strengthen your case for getting an interview at a lab like MSR. I recommend you do your dissertation in a field that has high value to companies, like machine learning or IR.
By the way, never take out a loan for grad school. If you work as a TA or research assistant, you will get paid while you attend school. The national average seems to be about $25k/year according to all my PhD colleagues.
A PhD is about science, not money. With a little bit of luck, you'll be in for a startup project, but otherwise, there is no big money making in science.
On the other hand, it's going to be very interesting. When you write your thesis, you will learn something about yourself: how you can cope with frustration, and how you can do stuff that you though you would never be able to do.
But it's all like professional sports, only a few make it to the top.
Here's a cool job: Whole-Body Motion Planning and Locomotion in Rough Terrains. This is to develop control software for the DARPA Humanoid Challenge. University of Texas at Austin (but really on site at NASA Houston)
The ideal candidate should have a PhD in Aerospace Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Computer Science or related fields. Record of implementation and testing experiments on real robotic systems is required. She/he should be highly familiar with robotics theory, including motion planning, kinematics, dynamics, control, and linear dynamical systems. She/he should be proficient in software development including, algorithms, dynamic simulations, object oriented programming, and realtime Linux applications. High expertise in C++ is required. Proficiency in Python and Matlab is also desired. Experience developing software using GIT revision control or a similar tool is required.
Pays $55K.
Unless you ALREADY have a burning desire to do a thesis on a specific problem, you're not going to want to do a PhD in CS (especially if that's what you do now). When you're in mid-career, programs in the same field will want you to have a specific vision for what you want to do with your thesis. If you're pursuing a PhD because you're not super happy with the type of problem you're working on now, but don't have a clear plan for how to change direction, I'd recommend checking out CS-related fields, go to a few conferences (academics tend to be very friendly to this type of inquiry) and read a few papers, then pick an area that catches your interest. You need a compelling story in your application about why you're going back to school (I thought it would guarantee me a job at MSR doesn't cut it). If you get interested in a specific program, send them (either the program, or a specific professor whose work you're interested in) an email asking what to do about the letters of rec etc.. They'll let you know a) if you have a realistic shot at getting in and b) tell you exactly what they're going to want to see. This isn't undergrad admissions, there are few hard and fast rules about the application. If you get a professor who has funding interested in you, you're going to get a slot, period.
I'd check out Biomedical engineering, Computational neuroscience, Complex systems-type programs, Bioinformatics, Machine learning (may well be in the CS dept), and Robotics, to name a few. Programs like the above tend to have excellent private-sector placement rates, since a lot of people stay in academia and you come out with a slew of rare and useful skills.
Another thing to keep in mind, is that a PhD these days is a 5-8 year commitment (unless you already have you're thesis research mapped out, see above, then 4). While you won't be paying (in any reputable program), you'll only be making ~25k a year stipend. It's not something you should embark on without doing your homework about programs, and finding something exciting enough to sustain you through years of slow, slow progress. There were three mid-career people at my PhD program, and they were fun to have around.. but one thing that stuck out about all of them, is they came in having a research project they were already obsessed with, and they hit the ground running, where all the out-of-college types like myself spent a year or two testing the waters to figure out what we wanted to do.
idiot (IQ) tests and those curve ball questions that microsoft and google throw at interviewees
I'm going to defend my PhD dissertation on Friday, actually. Anyway, the problem is that in academia, there's sometimes a big disconnect between what's happening in "the real world".
Anyway, the way I've handled it is that I've basically kept my feet in both camps. Throughout the research work I also worked part-time for a consultancy (now full time since I'm done). I'm also a CCIE. PhD alone might mean "an absent-minded professor" to a recruiter, but combined with credentials from industry side I've at least so far gotten the feeling that it's a big selling point. Which might mean more $$$$.
I have a Ph.D. in CS, and although I am highly respected by my colleagues, and currently involved in interesting projects, it did not help me much when looking for work. During various job interviews I got the impression that years of experience in the software business is considered more valuable than a Ph.D. When I did get hired, the interviewer actually had a Ph.D. himself, so he did see the value. If you look at CS job descriptions, a Ph.D. is almost never a requirement, except for university positions and some research positions, but those are scarce (in the current economy). So, a Ph.D. is no guarantee for an interesting job. There are lots of Ph.D.'s out there doing work that they are overqualified for.
A Ph.D. is really a training program for an academic career, not for a business career. The subject of a Ph.D. is often highly specialised or even obscure. So, unless you happen to know (and if you have a choice for a Ph.D. subject) what research area will become important at the big software companies in three or four years time, the subject of your Ph.D. is irrelevant, or even detrimental, for your career. (That also goes for university careers: its very difficult to fight your way into a different specialisation).
That said, I loved my time as a Ph.D. student and post-doc researcher. You should only do a Ph.D. if you are passionate about a subject. So, if you have the opportunity to do a Ph.D. and you can afford to do it, and you are inspired by the subject and driven enough to finish it, then go for it. But it's not necessarily a good career move.
assignment != equality != identity
First reference: One Professor taught you long time ago. He definitely not remembers you but you may visit him and invite him to lunch for a brief chat. He would be gratefully referring you if you told him your research plan. You may even get valuable opinions from them.
Alternatively, if all professors taught or supervised you were retired or dead, as in my situation, you may ask around if you happened to have any friends that attended higher level of academic with honors, and ask them to help.
It would be nice to find two profs for your reference. Failing that you could find one friend, or your previous boss, who is doing good in your field of research as your second reference. Unless otherwise specified, they may not expect second reference to be very academic.
Regardless of what other respondents said, a PhD is very useful title anywhere in the world: you could devote yourself into research if you happened to discover a good topic of your interest, or you could at least find a teaching job in a college. Most important, it would increase your chance of getting venture capital for your future startup if one of the founders has a PhD.
In this age of the bottom line is everything your best bet is to sit down and calculate the odds that you will earn more by furthering your educated versus the odds that you won't. Choose wrong and you will be eventually be labelled as just another one of those who were not intelligent enough to survive in today's economy, choose right and you could find yourself among the infamous 1%! Got a coin to flip?
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
From what you wrote I'd say we are about the same age, assuming that you came straight out of tertiary study and into work - and I'm considered early career and definitely NOT mid career.
It's allot of time and work and $$$$$$$ to become PhD qualified and the recognition of all that is not guaranteed. So please, check your motives and aim to fill them, and make sure there is work at the end of it. I'm working at the University that I studied at and I love my job, but I realise that many people would go crazy doing what I do in the environment that I am in.
I am not just going to agree with the popular view. In other words I have bad Karma.
Because you'll probably hate it the entire time. Figure out why you want to do science, and only if you find that you really truly love it and working on hard problems, then go for it. Coming back from industry, you already have insights within yourself of what kinds of problems you enjoy tackling. You aren't the fresh grad going into grad school simply because it's the "next step in the ladder" or something like that. You have real worldly experience. Tap into it.
This word "worth" means different things to different people. In fact it has different value at different times in the life of each person.
So in the end, for me a PHD in the middle of my life where I have other distractions is more than too hard, but I do enjoy learning, and in fact I am partaking in Algorithms. Then again I am not you. I expect most of the constructive replies to simply try and pin down the value of "worth"
I had a similar realization after about 5 years of software development. I'm now doing a Masters of Engineering in Germany, having moved from Australia. Moving country provided its own challenges for sure (ie #1 being the German language), but succeeding in spite of them has given me some extra self confidence as well. I have no regrets (apart from not doing it earlier).
:)
As far as the letter of recommendation goes, it doesn't hurt to ask, especially if you had more to do with a Professor than just attending classes (ie if they supervised a project etc). My old Honours Prof remembered me and wrote a great letter - alles klar
1. The opportunity cost is huge, as you'll earn, at best, 30k/year for 4-7 years.
2. The intellectual stimulation is unrivaled. You're essentially paid to think all day without actual work getting done usually without any time pressure, unlike anywhere in industry
3. You'll be more employable (great) for a smaller number of positions (not so great).
4. A proper PhD is a degree in philosophy. If it's done correctly, the real "skills" you should learn are field-independent ... you should be able to sit down for a period of time, process the leading research in any field, determine what the big questions are and write a grant to get into the field (whether it be birds or circuit design.)
5. Using a PhD to get into a particular position is a horrible idea.
I would think carefully before I got a PhD. It is really training you to be a college professor. If that isn't what you want to do, then I would recommend NOT perusing a PhD. There are some doors outside of academia that it will open, but there are more doors that it closes. People really are reluctant to hire PhDs for jobs that don't require one.
On the other hand, I would whole heatedly recommend a masters degree. You will learn some cool stuff, have opportunities to meet new people, and you can probably do it with out putting your life on hold for several years.
Why bother? Japanorama gives out a free Ph.D. diploma.
Download it at
http://www.japanorama.com/images/diploma.gif
I had to return to academia after 10 years in industry as a PhD had become the minimum entry requirement in UK bioscience. The process was long and unrewarding, and I wouldn't recommend it to anybody. It wont earn me much more money than before, but it guarantee's I can still compete in the job market for a new job if I'm made redundant.
For computer science, however I see a lot of non-PhD level senior staff who have a huge portfolio of applications they've developed, and businesses they've run. So if you don't need huge amounts of equipment to do your work, like bioscience, I would focus on getting a shed load of freelance contracts and building myself up that way. The PhD is more or less just a buff for your CV. Ultimately, it's what you can do that companies are interested in, and a PhD often doesn't deliver this. You will spend a long time grinding at something that wont work, often under the cosh of an academic that doesn't know their arse from their elbow. The PhD is also focuses on building a skillset during the training that again is a portfolio of things you've done, plus the "Dr" title bumping up your "streed cred".
So personally, if I could freelance I would say hell no don't do a PhD, but if you can't then probably hell yes, it's a necessary evil and no company will ever pay for formal training.
I never stop my career while I learn, and I never stop learning in the middle of climbing the corporate ladder
I first entered the work force when I was in my primary school, working part time, during the evening hours, earned money to help my family, which was dirt poor
But I did not drop out of school
All my "holidays" became working fulltime - while my classmates went for vacations, I worked and worked
From primary school to secondary, to university, I worked while study.
Even after I obtained my first university degree, and landed a relatively comfortably paying job, I never stopped studying - I enrolled in graduate schools, as part time student
I obtained my graduate degrees that way
Now that I'm running my own businesses, and have a lot of people working with me, I still cannot stop learning - I guess the minute I stop learning is the minute I die
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Hi there!
Speaking from experience here -- I have the US equivalent to a masters degree in computer engineering. Other than my permanent residency paperwork for my US green card and my Russian permanent worker permit, nobody has ever bothered to really go into what school or what degrees I hold. I started programming/building systems in 1984 (I was 17), and was working hands on with cool things by 1988 (real-time controllers, a windowing system for character based terminals and RM-COBOL, etc.). Since then I have seldom worked with run-o-the-mill business applications development. I spent my whole career building/designing infrastructure-type software (compilers, network/system management tools, industrial robots, big data analysis and knowledge discovery) and the common theme has always been that it's been up to me to both stay current and to figure out the areas that I will find interesting. I've been chief architect at a Fortune-5 company, and have been involved in all kinds of cool development projects/startups/companies because I keep sharpening the knives (my skills). I managed to do this by investing time in these basic two items:
1. Always learn something new. I spend at least 8 hours/week researching new things to apply at work -- if I know it, I'll find a place to implement it
2. Don't underestimate relationships! Go out and meet new people. IRC (irc://irc.freenode.net in particular) has been huge for business and professional development for me
In development relationships -- get involved in 2 or more open source projects that you find interesting. Contribute. Challenge. Use them. Contribute some more. Become a trusted voice. Be generous with advice, and learn as much as you can from others. Go to your local users groups. If you're near Silicon Valley or some other tech hub, join a business association or two, and go schmooze. Get yourself invited to speak at a conference or two. Become a domain expert. Start a newsletter or blog. Develop a network.
Luck is what you find at the intersection of readiness and opportunity. Go to school (yey! I wish I could do that again!) but, most important, remember that your career is your responsibility and that you must invest time in developing it so that interesting and lucrative things come your way. The most important thing, regardless of how you decide to gain new knowledge, is that you find your problem domains interesting and fun. Otherwise your career will stagnate regardless of your educational level because you won't be engaged. Every time I did something just for the paycheque, the return on my time/energy investment was low and those projects didn't last long. Every time I've done something that sounds fun and challenging I end up getting a bigger payout (economic, professional, etc.) than I expected. In my latest venture, for example, I get to work shoulder-to-shoulder with PhD super boffins from SRI International and other places. On paper I'm the intellectual pigmy -- but in practice we just work together, get things done, and I just found out that the work I did made them decide to include me in two patent filings. Works for me -- and my career.
So -- PhD, MsC, BBQ - whatever you do -- make sure you're passionate about it, that you have fun, and that you invest the time and energy necessary to make you proficient at it. The rewards will follow.
Cheers!
http://eugeneciurana.com | http://ciurana.eu
1) Is a Ph.D. a near-guarantee of a spot in a skunkworks type of job (Microsoft Research and the like)?
No, as mentioned above. Only a small fraction of PhDs end up at top places, industrial or otherwise. A strong record of publications or impressive projects (and a good degree) is still no guarantee but is more important that the answer to "PhD: yes or no?" There is a big difference between a degree from a strong institution and from a lower-tier one as well. Also, the level of finishing students varies greatly. There are always some students, even at top programs, who end up getting a degree but if the work and thesis aren't strong, there is no chance of a good job at a research institution or lab.
2) Is a M.S. just as good for this?
No. Master's level programs are quite different than doctoral programs.
3) How does the 'letter of recommendation' requirement work if you haven't kept in touch with your professors?
A letter from a faculty member that says "I have no specific recollection of this student but my records show good grades" doesn't carry much weight. A strong letter from someone not in academia who is familiar with your recent work is probably more valuable.
One thing to be aware of is that in many programs, there can be a bias against older students. That is, supervising a doctoral student is a great deal of work for the advisor, and many advisors would prefer to spend that limited energy on a bright, promising 22-year old who may have an impact over a long period rather than someone who isn't as likely to have such a long career, particularly if they are likely to head to academia. Reasonable or not, this bias is present at many research institutions.
As mentioned in other comments, don't do it just for the possibility of improved job prospects. A PhD is difficult, and if you aren't doing something that you have a profound interest in and love for, you are likely to struggle.
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
Concerning letters of recommendation: they do not have to come from professors or from a boss. When I went back for my MSEE, I used letters of recommendation from two colleagues and one from a friend. If letters specifically need to come from someone you've worked for then that will be stated in the requirements for entry from the particular graduate school you apply for.
You'll need to get official transcripts from each of the colleges you've attended. Typically these are required to come in envelopes with a signature over the seal. I suggest ordering an extra copy from each school for your own records. [This is mostly "just a good idea", but there are cases where schools have lost their records. The University of New Orleans, for instance, lost my sister's academic records there after the school was flooded during hurricanes Katrina back in 2005.]
The next thing you'll need to do is take the Graduate Record Exam (GRE). Having taken it I'll give you the following advice: concerning the Quantitative section what you most need to know is if you can answer each question you're given in less than 2 minutes. The computerized version of the test also does not allow you to go back and change your answers, because the test is adaptive -- the questions get harder as you answer lower questions correctly. Harder questions are also worth more points, so it's very important to answer the lower questions correctly in order to get to the harder ones. The paper-based GRE exam doesn't have these issues, if these are still being offered. In the Verbal section of the GRE, if possible be creative in your essay writing. At the end of the GRE exam you're asked what schools you want your GRE scores to be transmitted to (after you're told what they are right then and there, except for the essay section), so you should know what schools you're planning to apply to beforehand.
Your transcripts and letters of recommendation are generally given to the school with your application. The GRE scores are transmitted directly to the school.
Good luck and enjoy grad school. ;-)
I've noticed throughout my career that the people working on MBAs and PhDs choose their graduate projects on what they think the CS community needs (not based on anything except assumptions). Where the mid-career graduate students are rooted much more in the real world. The projects are based on real needs and are more useful to the general community. Just my $0.02 from the professional community.
Is a Ph.D. a near-guarantee
There are no guarantees. At one point your job stops being so much about your degrees and it becomes much more about the soft skills you demonstrate as a person. I've met many people near the top of my field who are absolutely useless outside a very narrow set of parameters. But they have lots of degrees and graduated with top honors from excellent schools. They're not stupid, they just don't know how to apply their knowledge.
While a degree can certainly help if you have the time and resources, it's not a golden ticket so don't expect it to be.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
A PhD can help you reach some positions that otherwise will not be available for you. It is a common requisite for academia and research positions in the industry. Sometimes also helps with management tracks, but the argument for this is debatable.
In general, a PhD does not have a great career ROI, because you get a much better position/salary inside the industry by spending the same amount of time (3-6 years) specializing in industry-related topics. And this difference never catches up if you do a PhD. I am careful to point this out when I am interviewing PhD candidates, because if they are in for monetary reasons, they might have better alternatives. Also, a PhD sooner or later gets under your skin, and you need a strong motivation to finish it. You need to like it and be at least somewhat passsionate about it. If you are not sure of the reasons why you are doing it, you might drop out at that point.
If you want to do research, if you feel that, for personal reasons, you want a PhD, by all means go for it. If you want to improve your knowledge/resume/employment, I would suggest to consider other, more focused ways to achieve this goal.
I'm 33 and I joined a so-called "Open University" this year. The courses are tailored for self-study and you get online coaching from a teacher. It will take quite a few years before I get my master-degree, but since I can study at my own pace, I can do the exam when I feel I'm ready.
I combine this with a fulltime job. It's not really for the degree I joined, but to learn new interesting stuff (like AI and crypto-stuff).
I'm sure there are similar Open University programs in your country too.
...You are over-qualified and under-paid. If we give you a raise, we will break the cosmic balance of the universe.
It will not set you apart as much as you'd like. Instead find an engineering discipline you like (and is in demand) and study that. Your long industry programming experience AND subject matter knowledge will make you in high demand.
Examples include;
* electronical engineering + programming => lots of jobs in embedded systems.
* mechanical engineering + programming => lots of jobs in Computer Aided Manufacturing or similar.
* chemical engineering + programming => lots of jobs in the oil industry.
I was working a full-time job that related to my undergrad major before I started grad school. I was then in a hurry to get started on a PhD thinking I was already on the old side of things (I was the oldest grad student in my starting class). I ended up setting myself up for abuse and neglect by not thinking through the process adequately and finding a mentor who would really mentor me and meet my career needs.
That left me with worse credentials for what I wanted to do next than what I had going in, and I effectively lost money in the process as grad student stipends are pretty well minimum wage.
So pick your options carefully. And go in with both eyes wide open; don't choose anything quickly or by feeling.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I think you're looking at it the wrong way. Within a research group (academic or industry) the researcher positions are very competitive. A PhD doesn't guarantee a job. A PhD is required for a job.
However, without the PhD, there are still staff engineering roles. Engineering-wise, it'll be mostly the same stuff you are working on now, maybe even simpler. But the domain will be more difficult, fun, and interesting. Of course an MS will help make your resume stand out over BS candidates. But, it is more valuable here than in the business world since PhDs value education more.
However, an MS generally not required for a staff engineering role. I don't see a reason not to apply for both jobs and schools at the same time. The applications are due in November/December and you still have plenty of time research schools and to get recommendations (get started early). Schools recognize that you don't know your professors anymore and recommendations for MS programs from your boss work fine. After going back to school or working as a staff engineer for a few years (or both), you'll be able to make a more informed decision about a PhD. Hopefully you will get your name on some papers and better recommendations from PhD boss or professors. Then, you'll have a more competitive PhD application, get accepted into a better school, and have a better chance to beat the PhD rat race.
BTW, just like business applications, research applications can get boring after a while too. You probably don't get paid as well either.
I went back for my masters in computer science somewhat later in life. I never thought it would be of benefit in my career. In fact, I took the program because work was being stingy about following their own training and development guidelines for their employees. I sought to "refresh" my skillset, but never expected it to impact my actual job. As it turned out, it was a significant factor in getting me into my next two jobs, and even helped bump my salary up.
But the point here is that I was doing it because I wanted to immerse myself in the newer technology and what the heck? Get a degree while I was at it. The actual piece of paper was so not my focus, I even now often forget that I HAVE the degree!
But if you go back for the advanced degree, do yourself a favor. There are often two ways to go through the program. You can take the easiest classes and just go for the degree, or you can really get your money's worth and take the interesting and deep classes. Spend every moment you can engaging with the professors about the details more interesting to you (before and after class, etc.). Take advantage of your time in the program...especially if you are footing the bill for it. That way, no matter if the degree helps you get a job or not, you got value out of your time and money spent by adding to your own knowledge and skillset.
I know people in management that won't hire PhDs for that exact reason. You hire one because they have specialized knowledge in a particular area. The problem is that when the work is done in that area and they move on to other projects, they act (and are treated by management) superior to everyone else when they no longer have an edge over anyone. In fact, the hoop jumping seem to go against innovation. There are plenty of really smart people who also hold a PhD, but from what I've seen there are at least as many hoop jumpers. YMMV of course.
I've known lots of people who accumulated extra credentials and haven't made any extra progress in their careers. They're stuck and more education didn't help.
As many other posters have pointed out, advanced degrees aren't like trade school where a job is pretty much guaranteed. If that's what you're looking for, try medicine or accounting.
Never forget the mantra: "It's not what you know, it's who you know." Join your industry group (IEEE for instance). Go to conferences. Do committee work. Pitch in, get your hands dirty. Get known in the industry as someone who sees the big picture and is a self-starter. Broaden you horizons. Get a mentor. If you put in similar effort, you will do much better than if you get an extra degree.
I was 28 years old when I entered university. With a background in law enforcement and military the idea of being some prep-school university type was not something I wanted to do. In my late 30s I received my Masters degree in computer science and saw a significant increase in perception of how my income was made. After the dot.bomb I was doing pretty good but shrinking staffs, horrible hours, executives who ran IT shops like they were slave pens, had me burning out pretty quick. I'd stepped out of doing the stuff I thought was fun and started getting paid to do stuff nobody thought was fun. I took a mid-university professor job, but they wanted me to get a PhD. A masters degree is sort of like being a journeyman. You've mastered the discipline. A PhD is about defining the future of the discipline. There are a lot of junk PhDs out there. I've read their dissertations. There are a lot of good people with bad degrees and bad people with good degrees. Look at the trends to define rather than specific anecdotal evidence like my case. Don't mix up the history PhDs with the Computer Science or Technology degrees. What I would say was that I took nearly a 66% cut in pay to become a professor and full time researcher. I got the opportunity to do what I want, when I want, and how I want. After I got my PhD I ended up in one of the top engineering schools in the world, have done tours at major science institutions and government agencies, and turn down opportunities to work with others. So, yes a mid life PhD can be a great thing for your career. You will find that people who don't have a PhD don't have any clue what it means to have one are either jealous or ignorant. A research based doctorate (PhD) versus an applied doctorate (DSc) will give you a broader understanding of what research is and how it is done. I was just speaking at a major national lab to a bunch of masters degree students about why they should get a PhD. I told them "don't do it." Unless, you love research, are willing to commit 5 to 7 years towards the goal, have your employers buy off, family buy in, and time management skills to die for. Nobody listens but the PhD is really about what you put into the effort. That will be obvious when you finish the longest test of your life. The dissertation. In the end that will determine whether it was worth it.
--- Location Unknown
No.
Get some Dover math and computer science books, they're cheaper. I looked at a mid-career master's degree several years ago, and it was too expensive versus the career boost, which at the time was negligible. I would help myself much more by learning new stuff (so I learned Android) than getting a MS degree. I did a lot of research, and at the time (ca 2009) no one said an MS degree would be better than more experience. (You can also enter the dreaded "overqualified" area.)
Dover books are cheap, and good. They just reprinted a functional programming book from the late 80s that gives you the foundations you need to learn the subject. They have numerous math books for discrete math, including the book that inspired Godel Escher and Bach (i.e. it has the math topics without all the fluff you have to wade through in GEB). You can use some Dover books and other cheap books to learn the theory behind computing, and then apply it to learn functional programming, Hadoop/big data, etc which could make you more valuable.
I started my PhD at 39, and completed at 46, doing all of the work part-time.
I work in R&D for a very large computer company, and found that a mid-career PhD was very useful.
First and foremost, in my own mind, a PhD put me on an equal footing with the large numbers of PhDs that I work for (and with) on a daily basis. I "found my voice" once I had a PhD.
Second, I happened to select a topic that grew in importance after I completed my dissertation, making me one of the company experts in the field.
What did I learn while doing my PhD? Given the point in my career when I did the PhD work, the coursework provided me with a complete refresher course in CS (especially since my undergrad was Electrical Engineering). I also learned that a PhD doesn't mean you're smart, or make you smarter. A PhD is supposed to teach you to perform independent research. But it's primarily a measure of stubbornness.
A PhD doesn't really guarantee you anything. It can also be detrimental depending on what you want to do as some companies consider it too much or too expensive. You'll be better off starting in a Masters program and then deciding if you you really see a need or feel the desire to go for the PhD. A PhD is a LOT of work and time. Really unless you plan to go into academia or hard core research I'd steer clear.
Not really. I'd say for a person looking to go back to grad school, he/she'd be better off finishing the MS degree, then force his way into a company like Google or Lockheed Martin. That is, big engineering firms known for having in-house career development programs and fat school reimbursement benefits. Use the MS studies to prepare to the interviews, and try and try until you get there. Then work your way to anything resemble a R&D program and begin your studies for a Ph.D.
In particular with companies like these mentioned above, a person can work himself up to a position of Principal Engineer, Chief Scientist or Architect or Engineering Program Manager (not project manager, but program manager.) My suggestion is always to go for the Ph.D but only with a clear vision of what type of role (not work, but role) you want to do.
Also, one should take into account that such plans of actions are to be made with a 10-15 year timespan. Some cringe at this. Others do not. I certainly do not (and I'm about to turn 43.) 10-15 years will come to pass anyways, so I might as well do something with it (provided the limited time available due to family, etc.)
This is not for the people who only wants to make money, but for someone having a passion or seeking one. To make money, lots of money, it only suffices to be a code monkey, charging a lot for badly coded shit, walking away without taking responsibility. This is the typical modus operandi in the software industry.
Or one can try doing good work while surrounded by code monkeys.
Or one can try going as far as possible with a corporate-sponsored grad education at an engineering firm that is known for building awesome crap.
The later is the only reasonable target for people thinking of going back to school for a Ph.D.
One might succeed, or might not. As Michael Jordan once said: "I can accept failure, everyone fails at something. But I can't accept not trying."
But CS is not IT and there are other good tech / trades schools out there.
College isn't for everyone. Some very bright students thrive better while learning a hands-on trade, for example, than they do in a classroom. Others simply can't afford the time or tuition of college because of their personal circumstances.
For some stuff the college time table does not work that well. and there is lot's of NON degree IT classes out there as well.
College also has the well rounded idea that adds a lot fluff and filler that most people do not need.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-03-11/news/ct-oped-0311-page-20120311_1_college-costs-rise-kayla-heard-college-attendance
"As college costs rise," he said, "people are asking: Aren't there cheaper ways of certifying competence and skills to employers?"
" Author of the 2004 book "Going Broke by Degree: Why College Costs Too Much," Vedder sees a disconnect between the cost of college and the needs of the job market. He has found as many as one out of three college graduates today to be in jobs that historically were filled by people with less education.
"These are jobs that do not require higher-level learning skills, critical thinking skills, or writing skills or anything of that nature," he said in a telephone interview."
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-03-25/news/ct-oped-0325-page-20120325_1_collegiate-learning-assessment-college-students-richard-arum
"One new book, "Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses," by sociologists Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa, questions whether a large chunk of today's college students are learning much on campus that they didn't already know."
"Ohio University's Richard Vedder, my former economics professor who gave me the collegiate GED test idea, is even more blunt in his assessment of today's academia: "Universities are becoming more like country clubs," he said, with climbing walls, indoor tracks and other luxuries that give students "something else to do with their free time besides drink and have sex."
"That would be just another reason for us Americans to develop more innovative alternatives to college, like alternative GED-style certifications of what individuals actually know and how eagerly they will learn, not just how many classes they have taken."
Graduate degree are worthless. All they help is on the resume filter that is HR.
Depends on your education, what kind of work you do, and what kind of companies/contracts you apply for and your professional aspirations. Almost every job I've had since I left grad school has been thanks of my grad education and my research on security and distributed computing. So, YMMV obviously.
Smart people do just as well without them.
That's an unquantifiable oxymoron. Smart people do well with or without them. Most smart people get them. Less intelligent/capable people do not, so...
Average people likely the same.
Because average is the new sexy</rolls eyes>
Newsflash: chances are the poster is not average (simply by demonstrating a desire to continue with his formal education.) Average people do not take the reins in their career choices, preferring to go with the flow. Nothing wrong with that, but it is as risky as the alternative (which is to be above average.)
As a member of a highly ranked graduate school, I have been shocked at the heavy recruiting we get from all the big companies. I returned to graduate school in mid-career for the same reason (building supercomputers for the DoD got boring). Financially, it isn't very profitable, since it has been years of not investing in my retirement. But in terms of exposure to interesting places to work, it has been a huge boon. MBA programs aren't about the education as much as they are about the network of people you make through the program. To a lesser degree, the same is true of CS graduate degree. The recruiting here is very heavy and through my friends I can get an inside opinion about a variety of employers. I'm about to head off to an "internship" that pays more (six figures) than I made when I quit my last job. The internships almost always lead to jobs offers. Are they all research positions? No. The world just doesn't need a million researchers. The bigger need is for programmers. Still, many of the positions are on more interesting projects than I found through other channels. Only the best of the best PhD's stay in research. And that is probably reasonable. As others have stated, anyone can get a PhD. Acquiring one is more about persistence than brilliance.
The MS makes more financial sense, but usually involves less research. At the same time, I don't know any PhD's who can't get a job either. I don't think you will necessarily need a letter of recommendation. You can try the approach of getting into someone's work, and start a line of communication with them. Professors are always looking for capable programmers who are genuinely interested in their work (and not just interested because they need an advisor). It is fairly easy to get in if a professor wants you in. Of course, if you want your degree to be paid for, start off aiming for a PhD and leave with an MS if you don't think the full path is worth it.
I got an MBA 10 years into my career and all it did was open lots of doors. It has been very good for my career and my earning power. Now, I own the place and couldn't be happier.
If I were to offer advice, I would suggest that you not pursue another graduate degree unless it significantly increases your upward career mobility or facilitates some other life-long goal. Don't do it if you want to do the same job. There are other ways to become better at whatever it is you do that are more appropriate and less costly.
Also, I wouldn't do it for notoriety, or to get published, or to become a world-renowned anything. That attention can only bring you trouble (and it will).
I got my MBA to learn the dos and don'ts of starting and running a business, and after a few years in management at the company I was working for, went out on my own. I will never, ever go to work for someone else as long as I live - there is just no comparison. I had no problem giving up engineering for management because I enjoy the variety and the unexpected.
You may or may not be the same way. So, it's all about what you want to do with your life and what makes you happy. Think long and hard about it before you make any life decisions.
you're trying to discourage people from going to public school, yet you yourself went to one of the largest public universities in north america.
you're trying to tell people not to use government resources, or that government resources are bad, yet you benefit from the resources of the largest (in both population and land size) province in canada.
you try to tell people that what is good for them is what is in somalia, yet you've only read a book on it - and it was a work of fiction written by a woman who was high on drugs when she wrote it.
,bR>
you call yourself an atheist, yet you openly worship a man who currently lives in texas.
you call for "personal freedom" yet you celebrate oppression of the vote in the us so that your cult leader has a chance at moving forward.
you want freedom of speech, yet you use a sock puppet on slashdot to further your message when you feel you cannot write enough religious material on here with just one account.
I recently gave a talk at HOPE about why hackers should consider going on for graduate school, and especially for a doctorate. The video is available here:
http://jlg.name/blog/2012/08/why-you-should-consider-graduate-school/
I've worked with a handful of students who went to grad school "mid-career". In some cases the Ph.D. was a stepping stone to the next job they wanted (it worked), in others it was a means to change the nature of their work to something more interesting/challenging/fulfilling (it worked there too).
Re your questions:
- Near-guarantee: No. But in my experience a Ph.D. opens the door for a lot of jobs, many of which are not obvious at the time you enter grad school.
- M.S.: No, it's not just as good as a doctorate for the purpose you describe.
- Letters of recommendation: Generally should be from people who are familiar with you and your recent work, but who are able to cast their comments to resonate with an academic reader.
Toward the end of my one-hour talk I convey some of the advice I heard from faculty members about how to get into grad school (including about letters of recommendation).
When I went back to school for my MS, one of my instructors (from a major think tank for the US Gummint, DC 'burbs) got this question during class one day. He suggested that two Masters degrees - say, an MBA and an MS - were much more useful than a PhD in terms of finding a job.
Of course, this doesn't necessarily get you into a skunkworks, if that was your plan. But if you're expecting to work in a business (vs., say, a scholastic or purely research setting), the combination of two Masters degrees could open a lot more doors than a PhD. Businesses like tech staff who understand business.
And I suspect most of us /.ers are working in some sort of business setting. But that's just a guess.
You might already be doing cutting edge development. If you are really good, a Ph.D. can help you move ahead. Be brutally honest with yourself. If you have the chops for it - you know it deep inside, and it's a living, burning passion that is going to manifest itself in real innovation which will put you at odds with some organizations, and drive you to the front of others. It will drive you to find an organization that values real innovation, and in that kind of organization, that kind of creativity and brilliance is always rewarded with concomitant challenges. A Ph.D. in such an organization would accompany - not drive - ascent to a position on the cutting edge, but the sheepskin wouldn't be needed. If you don't have those kinds of chops, you still might be a really decent programmer capable of producing solid code. But getting a Ph.D. may not be as helpful as working on some good projects. And if after all is said and done you're a mediocre coder - a Ph.D. will look good on your wall with your other meaningless certificates and accolades, but will only produce eyerolls and cynicism from your colleagues and supervisors.
So what does going to School have to do with finding interesting work? If you want to do interesting work then just do it, nobody is forcing you to build CRUD apps for life. You see there are two types of people in this world, those that produce and those that talk about producing. The producers are in that small 5-10% category, then there is the rest.
After not graduating on time after working my butt off, take it from me: modern colleges are a waste of time and money whether you're doing undergrad or graduate work. In the four years it takes to win a plaque to put on a shelf you could learn new skills yourself and earn more money than your debt's worth. I've learned more outside of college than in classes.
All you need to push the cutting edge is a computer and an idea. The end product judge through the eyes of the employer is what gets you the cutting edge job.
The piece of paper does not substitute for the product he makes, a piece of paper saying 'he did cutting edge work' has less value than actual cutting edge work itself.
The hand holding you get for PhD from your prof, also a completely negative thing in the eyes of employers, who want people without the hand holding.
There's no advantage to doing a PhD, you basic degree gets you past HR, the-idea and implementation-of-the-idea gets you the cutting edge job, not the piece of paper saying someone thought it was good.
Just some thoughts based on personal experiences in recent times...
I enrolled in a higher degree earlier this year after 15 years as an IT professional. My undergrad was in the applied sciences (chemistry / microbiology) and thus the school is making jump through some hoops by first enrolling as a research masters, with the intention of articulating to a research doctorate after 1 year.
Before enrolling, I spent almost a year determining what areas interest me - basically, looking at what I did when I procrastinate, and where my procrastination activities took me.
I then spent 6 months, and visits to 8 institutions around the country looking for possible advisors - basically people whom I think I could work with for several years.
For me, the thesis is an escape from the mundane, and hopefully formal recognition of my knowledge - even though I believe my peers consider my knowledge quite good to start with.
I don't expect my study to get me a better job, etc, etc - but it *may* open some doors. Who knows... I may even commercialise some of my thesis (I have already ensured that the institution doesn't have any claim over my IP, including engaging a good lawyer to wade through the university guff BEFORE I enrolled)
If you are coming from industry, you certainly will see things in a different light compared to those who have only been in academia (i.e. you probably wont be as disillusioned with the system as most academics seems to be, but you still need to play their game to a reasonable extent unfortunately).
Also, having been a practitioner, I imagine you will also have quite a number of ideas in the back of your mind from things you have seen that make you thinkg that "there is a better way" so to speak.
On the other hand, if you are considering a grad degree to get a better job, then perhaps it may be wise to just change focus - such as going form sysadmin to programmer or vice versa. Or if you are a coder, then perhaps look as different paradigms (haskell / parallel programming / etc/ etc). or if you are in management, then perhaps look at going back to a purely technical role - there are lots of possibilities.
From what I have seen in recent years, a PhD or Masters probably wont get you a better job, nor get you into a commercial R&D role. If that is what you are after, then perhaps use your time on a needy opensource project that fits within you area of interest and become quite active in that project - I think you may be more likely to get an offer from a prospective employer based on effort put towards an opensource project over attaining a grad degree.
Good luck!
Depends on what you mean by worth and if you can afford it or expect a immediate return. I did a BSc Comp Sci (2003) then wandered into internal consultancy/business analysis scarcely writing a line of code for 5 years. Got laid off. Did an MSc (2011) in the high falutin' finance mathematics, got my coding mojo back. Joined a sexy fin tech shop doing HFT. Made a whole bunch of new motivated friends from college. Doing interesting work. Not sure if it would be possible if I had family to support or was particularly concerned about the opportunity cost of taking a year out.
Though it helps to be in UK where the fees were about $7k for a top 10.
Let's look at it from a costs/benefits perspective. Suppose you are making $70k/yr and it takes you 7 years to get a Phd. (3 years masters + 4 years Phd if you take the traditional route). Suppose in the end after scholarships, grants, tuition, room and board etc. you end up spending 70k. In addition you will have lost $490K in income for a net cost of $560k. Suppose you double your salary of $70K/yr to $140K/yr. It would take you 8 years to recapitalize on your education. Of course YMMV and the quality of life issue is having a job that doesn't bore you to tears. But in terms of $$ a 1 year or 18 month MBA may be a better value.
Something to consider.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
Up to a master's degree, "job-qualifying" seems to be pertinent. For a doctorate degree, however, it becomes very much less about checking a box than really exploring a particular discipline, in ways you cannot anticipate.
I got my DCS at age 40, primarily to explore a particular topic in software engineering, but also to credential myself for university teaching. Since, the teaching thing has gone to the ditch, between university politics and this push to do everything 'on-line', both not for me. I now work for a large aerospace company that has given me really good opportunities as a result of both my education and experience, but the work I'm currently doing only occasionally encounters my academic 'training'. Looking back, the doctorate was more about perspective-building than specific training or qualification for particular jobs.
My career experience just reinforces the only good career advice I've ever heard, from a Canadian Air Force major general: 1) do your current job the best you know how, and 2) as much as possible, take on the opportunities that come to you. I think #2 sometimes isn't fully appreciated, but the resume you'll build in practicing it is the single most valuable thing you'll ever acquire...
To invoke the spirit of Troy McClure, "HI! You may remember me from such great releases as LinuxPPC 4.1 and 2000 Q3!" As it happened, I went well away from computers, and I'm now firmly ensconced in a major metro area local government. My "plan B" if I didn't win election (which I did, twice in two years!) was to go to grad school, and study urban planning. To do that would pretty much require me to step down from my current post. That would mean a great loss of influence, which I will say is pretty darn cool to have. (We geeks know we rule the world, but it's even cooler to have some acknowledgment of it.)
This would be a significant mid-stream shift. I'm guaranteed to be in office for the next 3.5 years, and afterward I would either have to run for reelection or implement plan B. Or plan C. In the meantime, I think I will stick to it, being in office. This has been a good opportunity for me to think out loud, and as I'm in a good place right now and able to do good work while trying to help ensure a minimum of negative dorkiness affects my constituents. We're looking at moving to some kind of Kloüd systems, and I'm starting to investigate tablet-based solutions for a major department that still has its customers fill out all the forms on paper.
Me and the computer industry are kind of like Al Pacino in The Godfather Part II — "I try to get out but they keep on dragging me back in!"
But it's not too bad, really.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
For any field and any career there are times that you can take a turn into a related field. I think it are those times that a graduate degree makes the most sense. Other wise they are only valued if they are required for advancement, continued employment, etc.
Fate, not faith.
Microsoft Research is hardly skunk works.
Secondly: Skunk works is too broad. You need to find a fields, say robotics, and focus on that.
Third: There is no guaranteeing, but A Ph.D. will get you to the short list.
Forth: Make contact in the field you are interested in. There are ALWAYS ways to get around a requirement if you know the right people.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I had a similar question to the OP, but I took the first two years of a CS degree then switched and got a BS in physics. Now I'm a programmer/sysadmin but want to eventually drop the sysadmin part (which got my foot in the door to do the programming, so very helpful). Longer term an MS in CS is where I would like to end up, has anyone else gone back for an undergrad degree in a different field when already holding a BS?
Clearly you're someone who doesn't know the first thing about graduate education.
If you want to do something cutting edge you generally require support and resources. No, writing the next Facebook is not cutting edge.
I worked in Operations for many, many years. I was making over 100k a year, operations earned time-and-a-half overtime pay (12-hour shifts 6-7 days a week). I left that to work outside of IT, taking a 50% pay-cut just so I could have my weekends and life back with no on-call. Money is a motivator, but not everything.
If you are working on something you love and earn enough money to live a lifestyle you enjoy you have hit things perfectly. And having a sense of accomplishment at the end of the day is a great thing you can't put a price tag on.
I had similar occur to me when I started my graduate work. In a hurry, I joined the project that seemed the most interesting to me without many questions for the supervisor about him and his work. I stupidly thought because it was interesting on paper, I would like to do it.
Unfortunately, what actually happened was that since I was the new researcher of the group, I got many terrible assignments including coming in overnight and weekends to check on things or fix equipment. When this wasn't always possible (due to schedule, etc.), I slowly gained negative reports, despite my constant communication with him regarding my situation (often I couldn't make it in, and sometimes when I did, I would be waiting for data or a report or something from another professor, whom wouldn't give it to me, and so I was sitting around twiddling thumbs as far as his project was concerned; I studied more while waiting to see if I could find my own direction, which sometimes I arrived at a conclusion which conflicted with the mentor's plan when I suggested it). One day the mentor called me in the office, effectively said he felt I wasn't committed to the project or interested in it, and he would no longer take me as a student. Thankfully I had backup contacts in the department that helped me salvage the degree under different stewardship, but it is a bitter memory.
I highly advise learning about your mentor/supervisor as much as you can up front. Ask research students how he/she acts and behaves, what work is expected and when; ask students in his/her class their opinion of them. Ask SPECIFICALLY what you will work on and what your job role/responsibilities will be. Make sure you find a relaxed environment that offers a bit of autonomy and flexibility, but a mentor that cares enough to help when you get stuck. I was with one that thought more like a manager, constantly breathing down your neck about deadlines and work to meet HIS grant deadline. Didn't give a shit about me pursuing my interests, or helping me get there. Don't get stuck in that like I did.
If you're asking for career advice on Slashdot, you're probably too stupid for the top tier jobs you're looking to obtain by boosting your education.
"Is it worth going for a graduate degree [...]?"
The simple answer to this is "No".
A PhD won't get you a job. It certainly won't land you a cushy faculty position at a prestigious University. And it won't magically transport you back in time fifty years to a point in history in which having a degree was valuable. It will give you a few things you won't get anywhere else, though:
- A guaranteed topic of conversation when you meet other graduate students and post-docs.
- A keen insight into what is wrong with the education system today.
- Stress, anxiety, and possibly some new drugs to be dependant on. Sure, you could get those elsewhere, but not in the same concentrated form that you get with grad school.
If you have a real reason for doing this and a definite goal in mind, then go ahead with it. But don't decide to go to grad school because you think it's a fun thing to do unless you are already independently wealthy and want to support your therapist financially for a few more years.
buddy's step-aunt brought in $21917 last month. she is making an income on the laptop and bought a $513400 home. All she did was get fortunate and set to work the tips written on this website makecash16.comONLY
I'm not a CS guy so I can't speak directly to your industry. Speaking in general, the PhD thing is a bit of hit or miss. I have several friends who have PhDs in a science field, such as Physics or BioChem, and they recently transferred from the Academia world to private industry. THey all found it quite difficult to do so because in private industry, many companies felt they only needed the quality and complexity of work from someone with a Master's, but the person with the Master's would expect less pay than the PhD. So if you think of the job market in your field as a pyramid, where the bottom is grunt programming work (Bachelor's), the middle range is decent development work (master's equivalent), and the top is the interesting, exciting stuff requiring complex and intricate knowledge (PhD equivalent work), then getting a PhD can potentially make you more attractive to that top of the pyramid, however it may make you less attractive to the mid range of the pyramid. Are there a lot of industry jobs out there for PhD in CS work? Is there a lot of jobs relative to the number of people out there with PhDs? If not, then you need to be careful about getting the PhD because if you don't land that skunkworx kind of job you may have a hard time finding something else.
In regards to letters of recommendation, don't worry about old professors. Use your professional connections in industry; you've been doing this for several years so rely on people who know you and your work level now. Your undergrad professors don't know you or your work anymore. That should be fine. PLus if you can do the Masters while working maybe you can get it paid for isntead of taking out student loans.
Going back to the pyramid analogy, I suspect that the top level, interesting development jobs will also likely hire based on who the project lead knows. The big advantage of the Masters, and even the PhD, is you can get yourself known by meeting professors at the top levels of your field, networking with people doing interesting things, and with the PhD, getting published papers to start developing a name and reputation. That's how you'll get a job with a high end development house. Just having the degree won't mean spit, but going through the degree can open up a network of people who can help you.
I made that choice for similar reasons and it was not the best move for me. I got a good job out of college, but I was working with older technologies. I tried breaking into newer ones ("java, the internet, and the web") at the time, but since I didn't have experience with it, I had a hard time getting traction. My dream job was working for a company like Pixar or ILM, but I had almost no background in animation. So I decided to go back to grad school.
I got my masters and focused on animation (which convinced me I didn't actually want to work for Pixar or ILM). The masters was a very worthwhile experience. I was exposed to academic research, learned how to read it, and the basics of how to produce my own. I made some great contacts and friends. I would highly recommend a Masters degree for someone who wants to drastically change the focus of their career, or who thinks they'd like to eventually work in a research setting, or at least publish papers based on their job.
As for the Ph.D. I'm just about to finish. And I should have left a long time ago. It turns out, there are VERY few jobs in corporate research. Most companies have or are shuttering their "pure" research divisions. And when they aren't, they're making sure that actual products come out of that research (nobody wants to be Xerox PARC circa 1980, where their best research ideas are brought to market by another company). If you want to be a professor in Computer Science or Computer Engineering, then definitely get a Ph.D. There is no guarantee of getting a corporate research job with one, and you will probably find you would have to be competitive at the top level of academic institutions (as in, applying successfully to be a professor at places like Stanford, MIT, UC Berkeley, and so on) to be considered for those jobs right out of grad school. Actually, being a professor for a decade or so (even if you're not at a top tier institution) is a great way to get noticed and hired in corporate research. But you'd have to be a good one.
Finally, as far as letters of recommendation for the grad school application go, you should talk to the places you're applying to. In my case, I got letters of recommendation from my manager, and his manager, and another manager at that level. Most grad schools would accept those letters in lieu of ones from your undergraduate professors 10-20 years ago.
Incredibly, most employers will pay your tuition for you to get the MS degree, but care very little after you get it. No changes in assignments, pay, or promotion, it's like it never happened.
I should know, I got my first MS after 15 years in the workforce, and am about to finish my second after 25 years in the workforce. I'm going over the study guide for the PhD qualifiers as I speak...
After about 10-15 years as a techie, I wound up doing technical jobs in a science field. After a few years, I did a graduate certificate in that science, to open more doors job-wise. Once I get some debt paid off, I hope to take several more classes for a MSc... but I don't want a Ph.D.
Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I have a Ph.D. in CS, which I got the usual way---I went straight from undergraduate into a Ph.D. program. Jobwise I'm a bit of an odd case. I am not really doing research any more, but I work in a very specialized field where almost everyone has graduate degrees.
I don't see any problem with going for a Ph.D. from industry, in fact many of the best students come from that route. Anything that gives you a unique perspective is likely to help with research. You can email the admissions program about the letters of recommendation. I'm not really sure how to handle it, but that really shouldn't be something that stops you.
My advice though would be to only go for it if you really want to do research. Realize what that means---reading and writing research papers and focusing on a very narrow field. Ideally, you should figure out what the top conference in your favorite field is and start reading some papers now. Maybe even doing some of your own research on the side. If reading and writing papers sounds like a huge chore, then I'd stick with your current job, but if it excites you, then getting a Ph.D. would probably be great for you.
Do be aware of course that there is a big cost to getting a Ph.D., which you pay in years of your life. Make sure you get a feel for how long a typical student graduates at any university you consider, so that you understand the cost going in. If I were starting over, I might consider some of the European schools as that would be a fun experience and they tend to graduate faster.
That way you will understand the theory behind why someone would "like fries with that".
FWIW, I went back to school using the companies tuition reimbursement program, graduated with an M.Admin, 4.0 GPA, and my manager did not even mention it in my review! No promotion, no recognition.
But I have gotten much better response from applications for jobs at other companies.
Go figure
Mid career. Man, facing some of the same stuff myself, cause most people in my family live to 100 and are active until the end.
However ...
Yes, good idea.
No, not a guarantee.
A PhD would help, but it is the NETWORKING from your classmates and those above and below you in the field that will get you the job. It does stop the annoying five interviews process though, so you end up usually only doing two instead.
I'm on my (counts on fingers) 10th career at this point. They blur together after a while. Time to get another doctorate.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I just completed my MS in Software Engineering this June. I got a BS in Computer Science in 2000 and in 2006 decided to go back to school to get my MS for several reasons. At the time I felt my job was getting to be brain-dead grunt work and I wanted to prove to myself that I could still handle the complicated stuff. So I went back part time - it was a 45 credit program and took about 9 a year (3 courses). My employer reimbursed about half of it so I considered it to be a pay raise. :) It took me 6 years, but now have the confidence that I can still do the complex stuff and learned some great things. I'm required to stay at my employer for a period of time since they reimbursed me, so I don't know yet how much having the degree will help in the job field, but to me it was worth it.
It was a lot of work and I often grew fed up with it, but pulled through and am finally done. As for a PHD, I'm not considering one yet. Maybe in another 6 years... :)
Sounds like you want a job where you get to do more meaningful work than what you do now. You don't need an advanced degree to do that. Just figure out how to make a significant contribution to humanity and then go do it. Working as a researcher at Google or Microsoft would be cool, granted, but you can also get there by being super innovative and sharing your output with the world. Academia has its place, and I'm 100% for continuing education throughout life, but it also has a way of teaching you more about what you can't do than what you can do. If you choose to get a PhD, don't be one of those "Doctors" who becomes so smart that they can point out 100 different reasons why something won't work. Be one that can think of 100 reasons why it can work.
Find out what venture capitalists are funding and do your thesis on the underlying theories/technology.
School is a decent place to learn some of the precursor skills that might enable you to do advanced things. It is your ability to do very hard problem solving in cross domain groups that will bring you to the next level. An MS, as long as it doesn't require over specialization is okay. Most Phds are not worth it. Just scan the titles of most Phd papers. They have 17 adjectives if even one of those adjectives is missing the paper doesn't apply. God luck feel free to reach out to me if you want to discuss this further.
The answer is "Yes". The successful candidate does not just take the courses offered at one university and do some "applied" research to get a Ph.D. You search around all the R&D going on both in the industry and in Academia and try to find a combination path for your thesis so that your are uniquely qualified. Masters degree tells that you have mastered some subject matter whereas the Ph.D tells that you can independently think through a problem and will find a solution. Most who do Ph.D and work for industry become vertically qualified and they can always move laterally because they have the basic knowledge in R&D. So, a CS Ph.D with a combination of say, Neuroscience, AI, Machine learning and Bioinformatics or medicine or nano technology or parallel programming of clusters and so on, can guarantee a highly paying job. Also, after few years in the industry plus some publications, you can easily move to academia and start small company. The opportunities are endless and depends on your enthusiasm to learn, explore new cross-subject areas and so on. You don't get a Golden parachute, but will be highly respected, get royalty from your books, income from your enterpreneurial business and so on. You have endless opportunities for you. You can not be a horse with eye shadows, rather you need an open mind. No one can actually create a successful path and plan for you. I have done it and I am happy I did it with lots of difficulties. I am planning for another Ph.D in intellectual property law at Yale University in 2013 the first of its kind in the world. If money and security is the only concern for you, no one can help you.
I'm 27 and considering going back to university to finish my degree (25% credits before leaving) and maybe a little more. I've done fairly well for myself with my own study and experience, but I want to really push it to the next level and feel I could do better with something more exciting with a better education behind me.
MIT and a bunch of other universities are starting to put their classes online, generally for free. You get education, not credentials, but depending on your goals that may be fine.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
There are a lot of ways to get an education besides going back to school, either full-time or night-school. I've had friends who got MBAs going to school at night, because they wanted both the knowledge and the official credentials to get a better job. Graduate technical degrees are usually harder to do part-time, though there are some places that support it. (For instance, Stevens Tech in Hoboken has a very broad-based undergrad engineering curriculum during the daytime for full-time students, but grad courses at night, mostly taught by adjunct faculty, for people with full-time jobs who want to get graduate degrees part-time.)
If your objective is to get the education, rather than the credentials, the options are a lot different. MIT and many other major universities are starting to put their courses online, so while the experience isn't the same as being in school, and you don't get a shingle when you're done, you also don't have to stop working for a chunk of time, and you can pick the courses you want to take without the same structural limitations. If you want to do computer science or math, that can work really well. If you want to do biology or chemistry or other fields that require actual labs and equipment, there's a lot to be said for an actual school. (On the other hand, there are starting to be DIY-Biology hackerspaces.)
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks