Phd Funding :cry:

melbury

My son received the dreaded AHRC letter yesterday, turning him down flat! It seems terrible that they are the only real source of funding available and only 1 in 4 get anything at all, it just doesn't seem fair. He has searched high and low for alternatives, but as his subject is history, there is very little to be had.

He managed to self-fund through his Masters year with a lot of help, but to commit to three more years just seems impossible. Borrowing from a bank is just too expensive, especially when he already has the usual student loan
increasing daily.

What kind of a start would that be facing around £50,000+ of debt?

Voyager2002

melbury wrote:

My son received the dreaded AHRC letter yesterday, turning him down flat! It seems terrible that they are the only real source of funding available and only 1 in 4 get anything at all, it just doesn't seem fair. He has searched high and low for alternatives, but as his subject is history, there is very little to be had.

He managed to self-fund through his Masters year with a lot of help, but to commit to three more years just seems impossible. Borrowing from a bank is just too expensive, especially when he already has the usual student loan
increasing daily.

What kind of a start would that be facing around £50,000+ of debt?

Sorry to hear of your disappointment.

I am amazed that AHRC fund as many as 1 in 4 of their applicants. I am a working academic, and have just submitted a major research proposal -- my career depends on it. According to the funder, only about 10 per cent of good projects get funded -- that is the kind of career for which a PhD prepares you!

You are right that borrowing money to self-fund for a PhD would be inadvisable -- the debt and interest at the end would be substantial, but there is no guarantee of a job, and even if he did get a research fellowship, that would only be a fixed-term contract (insecure), and at a fairly low salary.

The only consolation is that for many subjects it is perfectly possible to do a PhD on a part-time basis. The Open University provides very good supervision, and tuition fees that are far more reasonable than most other universities.

melbury

I think it is totally disgraceful that there is so little money available for Masters and PHd studies. Too much is given away at the other end nowadays, especially paying children to stay on at school!

Voyager2002

melbury wrote:

I think it is totally disgraceful that there is so little money available for Masters and PHd studies. Too much is given away at the other end nowadays, especially paying children to stay on at school!

So how much (from your tax and mine) should be spent on post-graduate education?

From a strictly accountant's-eye perspective, remember that spending money "at the other end" is a very good investment for society -- someone who cannot read and write properly is unlikely to be able to acquire any skills that our economy needs; will be poorly-paid throughout their lives and so i. will probably be unhealthy and so a drain on the health service, and ii. is unlikely to pay significant amounts of tax. Clearly, spending money to equip such a person with the basic skills needed in order to be able to qualify for a reasonable job is money well spent, from virtually any point of view. OTOH most people who would consider post-graduate education are already well-educated and able to pursue a worthwhile career. It is far from clear how much value would be added by education beyond degree level.

Dead_Eye_Jones

I think if you love your subject enough you'll get through it. If you dont love your subject enough then you really shouldnt be thinking about a PHD.

When I did my degree I worked with a number of phd students and it really struck me how many of them were just doing it to put off getting a real job and starting their careers. The 2nd/3rd year guys in some cases were really depressed about it and many were close to quitting, it was clear that a phd wasnt right for them.

Dont let that put you off though, if you love the subject then go for it. But, dont do it if you think it will be a good career option, unless you are looking to work in a specialised academic field having a phd can be a hinderance when looking for an entry level grad job.

GL!

melbury

Voyager2002 wrote:

So how much (from your tax and mine) should be spent on post-graduate education?

From a strictly accountant's-eye perspective, remember that spending money "at the other end" is a very good investment for society -- someone who cannot read and write properly is unlikely to be able to acquire any skills that our economy needs; will be poorly-paid throughout their lives and so i. will probably be unhealthy and so a drain on the health service, and ii. is unlikely to pay significant amounts of tax. Clearly, spending money to equip such a person with the basic skills needed in order to be able to qualify for a reasonable job is money well spent, from virtually any point of view. OTOH most people who would consider post-graduate education are already well-educated and able to pursue a worthwhile career. It is far from clear how much value would be added by education beyond degree level.

Yes but surely children should be quite able to ready and write before even leaving primary school, never mind starting secondary education. Isn't that what going to school is all about? Suppose it just shows the state our schools are in in this country!

melbury

melbury wrote:

Yes but surely children should be quite able to ready and write before even leaving primary school, never mind starting secondary education. Isn't that what going to school is all about? Suppose it just shows the state our schools are in in this country!

Sorry that should of course be read and NOT ready!!!

Also, to become a lecturer a Phd is really necessary and there have to be lecturers to educate the generations following on behind - don't you think? It just seems that the government is quite prepared waste millions of our tax money on totally useless things without looking ahead.

tr3mor

melbury wrote:

My son received the dreaded AHRC letter yesterday, turning him down flat! It seems terrible that they are the only real source of funding available and only 1 in 4 get anything at all, it just doesn't seem fair. He has searched high and low for alternatives, but as his subject is history, there is very little to be had.

He managed to self-fund through his Masters year with a lot of help, but to commit to three more years just seems impossible. Borrowing from a bank is just too expensive, especially when he already has the usual student loan
increasing daily.

What kind of a start would that be facing around £50,000+ of debt?

Why should he get funded to do a PhD in history that's gonna be of no benefit to anyone but himself? Take it as a hint that it's about time for him to leave uni and get a job!

flossy_splodge

Oh dear oh dear oh dear! And to think we wonder what is taking the GREAT out of Great Britiain. Education for its own sake is what once made us leaders in the world. Our current system where there is supposed to be payback for everything is why we are rapidly becoming a 3rd world country with a total lack of discipline and work ethic. To do a PhD requires stamina, discipline and dedication. Qualities that to me appear to be sadly lacking in the upcoming generations so to put down someone who is trying to figure out the feasibility of progressing their knowledge is at best disgraceful. Shame on you. We will soon have few enough ABLE to consider higher levels of degrees as so many of those emerging from New Labour's education mess can neither read, write nor articulate their ideas adequately. Lucky for me actually. I am paid by worried parents to give 'out of school' tuition to get their offspring back up to the standard the parents remember being the norm. I have pre GCSE students who frequently do not know what eg an even number is or what a noun is etc. God help us all.:eek:

Barcode

tr3mor wrote:

Why should he get funded to do a PhD in history that's gonna be of no benefit to anyone but himself? Take it as a hint that it's about time for him to leave uni and get a job!

In your opinion.

A proper understanding of historic events can help us become more informed about the present, and possibly inform our decisions about the future. It may not have the practical value of say, some scientific subjects; but that does not mean it is useless.

A PhD is a job. Everybody I know doing one spends at least eight hours a day reading, writing etc. It is also a requisite if one wants to pursue an academic career (which I do).

The majority of people who apply to the AHRC are fundable on paper - (at my university, we're only encouraged to apply if we have a decent 2:1 or above) - but funds are limited. The fact that you dismiss certain disciplines so easily suggests you do not properly understand what is involved (I do not mean this as an insult - my historical knowledge is not super-informed either).

I hope the person who wants to study history is able to seek funding from other sources and wish them the best. I don't feel the need to be insulting. Perhaps some may regard what you do as irrelevant, but that does not entitle them to be rude about it.