phD- unfunded?

uniqueusername

Hi all,

I'm applying for funding for my phD, and am aware of the high competition for the scholarship funds. If I didn't get it, I would be entitled to my fees being paid by the council, but no grant.

I know I have read a few times here not to do a phD unfunded, but I havent seen anything in depth about why not? Because its so labour intensive that its hard to fit in work, or because it'll be like slave labour lol? I really want to do it this year, I have no clue what Ill do otherwise!

Any help is much appreciated

Turtwig

Put simply you are going to be a researcher doing full time work you should be getting underpaid for.

HavingCrack

It's a full time job effectively, in 9-5 Monday to Friday at a minimum (working longer hours is par for the course also). Also be used to doing work at weekends and late into the night if it's a science subject. Now imagine 3-4 years of this while trying to balance a job.

sureitsgrand

Put quite simply I'd advise not to do a PhD without funding. This is for two reasons:

1. It's a full time job, simple as. In fact, as has been mentioned, it's much more than a 9-5 job. Now, I don't complain because studying something you love as a job is a pretty sweet deal. But I couldn't live (and barely do) without my funding.

2. This might sound harsh, but you gotta remember that if you've applied to a number of funding bodies/universities and haven't got anything this mightn't bode well for you. When it comes to the end of the PhD and you're looking at getting a job somewhere there'll be five other people who have gotten scholarships, awards and employers will be wondering why you haven't. An important part of a scholarship is the prestige associated with it. Now, we mightn't like this, but academia is a narcissistic career path!

Now, having said all this I know a girl who did her first year PhD unfunded but in her 2nd she got IRCHSS funding and has been published etc....i.e She's a top student. In my opinion, however, this approach is a huge risk and one that i just couldn't do myself.

So, that's my two cent. I'm sure people will disagree, however, so try and talk to as many PhD students as possible and make up your own mind.

nyarlothothep

Doing a PhD at the moment and in my experience it's irrelevant how many hours you put in, but rather what you do in those hours that counts in relation to meeting deadlines. Whether you want to do the PhD or not, balanced against the question of how you can self fund is the most important issue because it's better if you have a passion for what you're doing. Additionally you might be better off waiting for the year in order to get whatever funding opportunities come your way in addition to seriously contemplating that question.

gutenberg

I'd be inclined to agree with sureitsgrand. Academia is so competitive, and winning studentships/scholarships for PhD study is often only the first step in getting on the career ladder, which means that if you do an unfunded Phd D you're automatically at a disadvantage: the ability to attract funding, even this early in your career, is key.

I was talking to my supervisor about this and in his opinion, with the amount of PhDs being produced nowadays, any jobs that there are will go to those who secured PhD funding (preferably 'external' funding such as research councils, and at a top university): it's just an opinion, but it seems to be becoming more & more of a depressing reality.

graduate

I was talking to my supervisor about this and in his opinion, with the amount of PhDs being produced nowadays, any jobs that there are will go to those who secured PhD funding (preferably 'external' funding such as research councils, and at a top university): it's just an opinion, but it seems to be becoming more & more of a depressing reality.

This statement is simplistic, as disciplines differ in the number of PhDs produced and the availability of finding. General observations are not that helpful.

gutenberg

graduate wrote: »

This statement is simplistic, as disciplines differ in the number of PhDs produced and the availability of funding. General observations are not that helpful.

I'm inclined to agree that it does depend very much on discipline. In this case, the subject is history.

Raphael

The other problem with that idea is that not everyone is eligible for funding in the humanities - IRCHSS only fund EU students, so by that idea researchers from America, Asia of Africa who study here will never be able to get anywhere.

That said, it could definitely be a decent screening process, but it will always go alongside reference letters and publication history.

El Siglo

I got accepted onto a PhD in Queen's but because I hadn't lived in the UK for three years beforehand I didn't get the stipend. I was just curious does this then put me at a disadvantage because I still won the scholarship but I didn't get the stipend because of that rule?

Without a doubt OP you better love what you want to study because sometimes that isn't enough when the rent is due and you're broke. Attracting funding is one thing, but the most important criteria coming out of the PhD now, next to running conferences and teaching is having a publication or two behind you. Even if it's one publication in a peer-reviewed international journal, it's one more than you started with. If you can manage that and still write the bloody thesis and not live like a hobo for three or four years then you're doing well.

avalon68

uniqueusername wrote: »

Hi all,

I'm applying for funding for my phD, and am aware of the high competition for the scholarship funds. If I didn't get it, I would be entitled to my fees being paid by the council, but no grant.

I know I have read a few times here not to do a phD unfunded, but I havent seen anything in depth about why not? Because its so labour intensive that its hard to fit in work, or because it'll be like slave labour lol? I really want to do it this year, I have no clue what Ill do otherwise!

Any help is much appreciated

It really depends on the discipline - I would never consider doing a science/lab based PhD without funding. The hours are ridiculous and you would never be able to keep up with work and a side job. Plus, in all honesty it would be pretty demoralizing slaving away for no pay. It may be possible to do a desk based PhD in combination with a job, but I still wouldnt recommend it. Also, as people have mentioned - its important to demonstrate that you can attain funding. Funding is also necessary for attending conferences, which again are vital for career progression. Have you discussed the funding issue with your proposed supervisor? Are they helping you write the proposal?

cambridge

I think if you look at the amount of people that burn themselves out during a funded PhD you'd be mad to go down this avenue without significant funding. People that are doing a funded PhD often complain about the subsistence living. How could you fathom 3-4 years without an income? unless you're getting bank rolled by your millionaire granny you should rethink this. You might be able to do a year, but would you last a PhD ?

gutenberg

El Siglo wrote: »

I got accepted onto a PhD in Queen's but because I hadn't lived in the UK for three years beforehand I didn't get the stipend. I was just curious does this then put me at a disadvantage because I still won the scholarship but I didn't get the stipend because of that rule?

I am experiencing the same issue here at Cambridge, having secured TWO scholarships that, for UK students, would have seen them fully funded but for me as an EU student are only partial :mad:

I think the fact that you secured it will be enough, as you can still list it on your CV. How are you managing for the stipend part?

Elvis_Presley

uniqueusername wrote: »

Hi all,

I'm applying for funding for my phD, and am aware of the high competition for the scholarship funds. If I didn't get it, I would be entitled to my fees being paid by the council, but no grant.

I know I have read a few times here not to do a phD unfunded, but I havent seen anything in depth about why not? Because its so labour intensive that its hard to fit in work, or because it'll be like slave labour lol? I really want to do it this year, I have no clue what Ill do otherwise!

Any help is much appreciated

What's your subject area? If it's something like Engineering or Science definitely don't think of doing it without funding. Humanities might be different in the sense that there's much less industrial funding out there, but that said, if you want a career in academia and can't get funding at the first and easiest step, then maybe you should reconsider. I couldn't imagine doing mine without funding, it would be f*cking brutal! Sometimes having the cost of a few pints in your pocket can make any level of frustration OK again!

El Siglo

gutenberg wrote: »

I am experiencing the same issue here at Cambridge, having secured TWO scholarships that, for UK students, would have seen them fully funded but for me as an EU student are only partial :mad:

I think the fact that you secured it will be enough, as you can still list it on your CV. How are you managing for the stipend part?

Okay-ish. I mean it's a lot of pasta and rashers but it's not abject poverty. I do some work and make enough to cover some costs of living and my family would help me when I need it. One thing which has been handy is the fact that Belfast is a cheap city, cheaper than Cambridge and way cheaper than London.

The UK government need to seriously reassess not funding EU and/or Irish students because it's a joke to be doing the same work as everyone else, qualify for the scholarship and not have your living expenses covered for (even though the money has been allocated for that project).

sureitsgrand

El Siglo wrote: »

The UK government need to seriously reassess not funding EU and/or Irish students because it's a joke to be doing the same work as everyone else, qualify for the scholarship and not have your living expenses covered for (even though the money has been allocated for that project).

This has always grated with me. Especially when UK students are entitled to the full whack of any IRCHSS funding (and I believe IRCSET as well).

gutenberg

sureitsgrand wrote: »

This has always grated with me. Especially when UK students are entitled to the full whack of any IRCHSS funding (and I believe IRCSET as well).

THIS! So much this! But I suppose the UK research councils can argue that they don't exclude on nationality as such, but residency: if I had been living in the UK for two more years before I applied for the PhD, I would have been entitled to the full amount. But I am 100% in agreement with you, it's so unfair.

El Siglo wrote: »

Okay-ish. I mean it's a lot of pasta and rashers but it's not abject poverty. I do some work and make enough to cover some costs of living and my family would help me when I need it. One thing which has been handy is the fact that Belfast is a cheap city, cheaper than Cambridge and way cheaper than London.

The UK government need to seriously reassess not funding EU and/or Irish students because it's a joke to be doing the same work as everyone else, qualify for the scholarship and not have your living expenses covered for (even though the money has been allocated for that project).

Again I completely agree. And I'm glad you're managing. As my parents helped me out with my master's degree they're not in a position to give me any help with the PhD- so I'll need to go on trying to get another scholarship to cover the last bit of funding I need. So exasperating!

djpbarry

uniqueusername wrote: »

I know I have read a few times here not to do a phD unfunded, but I havent seen anything in depth about why not? Because its so labour intensive that its hard to fit in work, or because it'll be like slave labour lol

All of the above. You will be utterly, utterly miserable and it’s very unlikely you’ll see it through. Don’t do it.

djpbarry

gutenberg wrote: »

I was talking to my supervisor about this and in his opinion, with the amount of PhDs being produced nowadays, any jobs that there are will go to those who secured PhD funding (preferably 'external' funding such as research councils, and at a top university): it's just an opinion, but it seems to be becoming more & more of a depressing reality.

I couldn’t disagree more – employers will be far more concerned with what you achieved during your PhD than where you obtained funding from. It’s not something I was ever asked during an interview for a post-doc position – nobody cares. People generally are not terribly interested where you did your PhD either. The fact that <insert small Irish institution here> is virtually unheard of outside Ireland doesn’t matter a damn if your PhD produced publications!

gutenberg

djpbarry wrote: »

I couldn’t disagree more – employers will be far more concerned with what you achieved during your PhD than where you obtained funding from. It’s not something I was ever asked during an interview for a post-doc position – nobody cares. People generally are not terribly interested where you did your PhD either. The fact that <insert small Irish institution here> is virtually unheard of outside Ireland doesn’t matter a damn if your PhD produced publications!

As I said above, I agree. However this attitude clearly exists among some academics...

djpbarry

gutenberg wrote: »

As I said above, I agree. However this attitude clearly exists among some academics...

Oh I'm sure it does, but I would be very wary of working for/with anyone who placed value in such things. The majority of people are really not that interested.

El Siglo

I think the issue with funding is whether you're going for more funding after the PhD (i.e. postdoc land) where you have to show that you've demonstrated an ability to attract funding (it doesn't have to be much, but a couple of hundred here and there for conferences and stuff). From that you build up your profile, but this is only if you're planning on staying in academia. To echo what djpbarry is saying, it's what you achieved during your PhD that counts.

jennyhogstrom

I agree with the previous posts. I wouldn't do a PhD unfunded. It's slave work and you would definitely not have time for a second job. At least not if you're doing a PhD in biomedical science. I did 45-50h weeks for my Master's...slave work!

Even though obtaining funding is important I don't think that will affect getting jobs in the future. At least not abroad. I would say it's more important that you've worked in a good group, published in (high impact) journals etc. Then again, it's Ireland. I did my Master's at a top University, have really good grades, work at one of the best cancer labs in Europe and got two different funding for my Master's but I didn't obtain funding for a PhD in Ireland. So can't really say what's the most important factor in Ireland (obviously none of the above).

dyl10

I would think it could be a bad idea for many reasons - but you've only one life so either go for it, or try to get some work experience and come back and get funding later.

Black Swan

Although there are exceptions, in general, be you a PhD/scholarship applicant, a tenure-track faculty, or already tenured: research follows money.

You can't always follow your passion. Your research proposal that you submit to university is not encased in concrete, and often changes after participation in additional curriculum, faculty guidance, and interaction with the changing scholarly literature.

I was advised to change my research interest to one somewhat different than I originally wanted, the alternative having greater funding potential. After 5 applications with attached research proposals, 2 universities declined, but 3 accepted me with varying levels of funded free-rides for fall 2012.

From a practical standpoint, the important thing during this Great Recession is to be first admitted with adequate funding to where you can dedicate yourself fully to your PhD programme, without worry for tuition, fees, books, rent, food, utilities, etc. All else comes later, including the reacquisition of your passion (provided someone will pay for it).

avalon68

jennyhogstrom wrote: »

Even though obtaining funding is important I don't think that will affect getting jobs in the future. At least not abroad. I would say it's more important that you've worked in a good group, published in (high impact) journals etc. Then again, it's Ireland. I did my Master's at a top University, have really good grades, work at one of the best cancer labs in Europe and got two different funding for my Master's but I didn't obtain funding for a PhD in Ireland. So can't really say what's the most important factor in Ireland (obviously none of the above).

While I agree the group, and obviously papers published are vital - the ability to obtain funding will have a positive impact on future applications especially abroad. Im stateside at the moment and almost everyone in the lab obtained some funding during their PhD and/or postdoc. Keeping in mind the limited job opportunities in academia in Ireland, and the likelihood of needing to emigrate for career progression, its important to check off as many of these boxes as possible

kellyi3

uniqueusername wrote: »

Hi all,

I'm applying for funding for my phD, and am aware of the high competition for the scholarship funds. If I didn't get it, I would be entitled to my fees being paid by the council, but no grant.

I know I have read a few times here not to do a phD unfunded, but I havent seen anything in depth about why not? Because its so labour intensive that its hard to fit in work, or because it'll be like slave labour lol? I really want to do it this year, I have no clue what Ill do otherwise!

Any help is much appreciated

Hi uniqueusername.

I'm just about finished the first year of my PhD and have had my fees paid but no other financial assistance. If you're coming straight from a master's degree I'd urge you to put a lot of thought into starting a PhD if you're unsure about funding. I was working full time between completing my masters and starting my PhD so I was lucky enough to have savings to help me through the year but these savings are definitely not getting me through another year.

If you do have a job you are entitled to take a year's career break (if you haven't taken one) that can be used for a return to education. This means that if your PhD is not for you you could go back to work a year later. Bear in mind that taking a career break means you cannot work in Ireland but you can still be in receipt of a scholarship, if you're lucky enough to get one, as these are tax exempt.

I took a career break myself this year and despite the lack of an income budgeting my savings has allowed me to still have a bit of a life (although going out for pints or whatever is now monthly instead of weekly and the xmas shopping was less extravagant). The year devoted to the PhD has been beneficial to me as the first year of my course involved completing a number of modules which with the time constraints of a job would not have been completed. Its also given me peace of mind that at least if I don't get funding I'll have an income come October again. I'm aware a return to work will impact the completion of a PhD but in these economic times everything has to be considered.

To sum up this rambling post I wouldn't recommend doing a PhD entirely unfunded over the four or five years it takes when doing it full time. If you have the savings you may get through first year but after that I'm not optimistic. A career break if you can take one is a good option but I'm also aware employers might not be as accommodating as mine was. Any questions please PM me.

djpbarry

kellyi3 wrote: »

If you do have a job you are entitled to take a year's career break...

I find that very hard to believe.

avalon68

djpbarry wrote: »

I find that very hard to believe.

I believe it used to be the case with certain jobs, particularly within the public sector. A relative of mine took one to travel for a year. I have to say i think its the most ridiculous thing ever . the thing now is you may not have a job to go back to anyway.

djpbarry

avalon68 wrote: »

I believe it used to be the case with certain jobs, particularly within the public sector. A relative of mine took one to travel for a year. I have to say i think its the most ridiculous thing ever . the thing now is you may not have a job to go back to anyway.

What I'm mainly referring to here is the idea that one has an "entitled to take a year's career break" - there is absolutely no such legal entitlement. Sure, some employers will sponsor their employees to go back to education, but generally in a part-time capacity.

As for taking a year out to go travelling, if I were an employer and one of my employees asked me for a year off to go on holidays, they would be left in no doubt that they would not have a job to come back to.

Raphael

It can be written in as an entitlement in some contracts, though. When an employee of yours has 18 months of training and 5 years of experience behind them, frinstance, I really doubt you'd fire them over wanting to take a 12 month holiday. Situations exist where the job values the employee more than vice versa, and provided that it isn't a piss taking exercise, those jobs will be willing to deal in such a way they don't lose that employee.