| ▲ | TimorousBestie an hour ago |
| Very perplexing. There’s already a 3-4 year advanced degree in the United States with an optional thesis component that companies in relevant industries can intervene in and direct if they so desire. So why are they calling it a doctorate? I don’t see the point. It’s not like the NSF under this administration is particularly fond of STEM doctorates. I’m open to any theories about what the real point of this is. |
|
| ▲ | a_bonobo an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| It is ideology. It's very obvious the current US government thinks that universities are a waste of money, and that industry is where everything happens. This industry PhD shuffles money from the university's pockets into industry pockets. It's in line with the recent shrinking of PhD visa lengths in the US (from technically-infinite-but-usually-6-to-7-years to 4 years) |
|
| ▲ | guitarsteve an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Sorry, I’m a bit thrown off. What degree are you referring to? Masters is usually about 2 years, though it could be longer in some cases or if worked on part-time. PhD is often 4-6+. What 3-4 year degree did you mean? Bachelors? |
| |
| ▲ | mburns an hour ago | parent [-] | | I assume they're referring to Professional (Graduate) degrees, like JD or MD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_degree#United_Sta... | | |
| ▲ | annzabelle 5 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Are there professional degrees like that for, say, mathematics or physics? An aside, the Actuarial profession's fellowship credentials (FSA/FCAS) are considered to be roughly equivalent in content to a professional doctorate (not counting a medical residency), and have a completely different format. It's mostly exam based from pure self study, and aspiring actuaries typically work full time in the industry after passing the first 2-3 exams and finishing a bachelor's (which can be in any subject). Typical travel time from the first exam to the fellowship credential is 6-8 years, IIRC. Employers pay employees for some study time and for exam leave for each exam, with a bonus for each one passed. I bring this all up because there are a lot of other ways for education to be structured outside of the BS -> MS -> PhD pathway, and there are ways for learning to be integrated with industry. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | k1musab1 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Funneling money from the government to private research that doesn't have to be disclosed, as the public funding won't be for research, but for student placement. |
| |
|
| ▲ | alephnerd an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > There’s already a 3-4 year advanced degree in the United States with an optional thesis component... There isn't. And if you are trying to snarkily describe an MS, then most MS programs are too short. > So why are they calling it a doctorate? I don’t see the point. It’s not like the NSF under this administration is particularly fond of STEM doctorates. The I-PhD is basically a formalization of industry-sponsored PhDs based on the program site [0] [0] - https://uidp.org/i-phd-scholars/ |
| |
| ▲ | lokar an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Is this for people who already have an MS, so 6 total? | | |
| ▲ | alephnerd an hour ago | parent [-] | | No. It's basically allocating funding for 250 PhD seats across a couple top engineering programs (CMU, UCSD, UIUC, Columbia SEAS, Penn SEAS, etc) with the expectation that said research would be linked with an industrial partner (eg. HPE, Bayer, Nvidia) Edit: I just reread your comment. I think it is for students who are already doing their MS or have previously done so and are applying to PhD programs | | |
| ▲ | smelendez 40 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Probably also for students with “just” a bachelor’s. Most PhD students don’t enter with a master’s. I do wonder if NSF is hoping to seed more industry-sponsored PhDs as well, e.g., the first will be funded by NSF to establish the program, and industry will fund more once the program gets going. Definitely makes sense to me they call it a PhD, not a master’s. A PhD is more prestigious and signals the holder is ready and eager to do cutting-edge research and has some experience doing so. There are all kinds of master’s degrees (I say as someone who has one) and reasons for getting them, so they’re not as strong a signal of anything in particular. And they can mean someone switched careers, someone dropped out of a PhD program, someone took advanced classes during undergrad, someone got a bachelor’s in one country and wanted to study and work in another, etc. | |
| ▲ | nxobject an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Re: Bayer - the non-health industry side? I'm surprised NIH hasn't rolled out something like this earlier, to be honest, with their increasing emphasis on commercialisation. | |
| ▲ | lokar an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Huh, odd. I could see trying to get back to everyone normally finishing in 6. But 4 seems really short. |
|
| |
| ▲ | TimorousBestie an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > There isn't. My coworkers holding such degrees would beg to differ. > And if you are trying to snarkily describe an MS, then most MS programs are too short. It wasn’t snarky, it was a listing of common points between the two. I don’t see what distinguishes this from a MS. A year still isn’t enough time to write a doctoral-level thesis, so if the I-PhD is supposed to represent a “longer MS” then it’s still insufficient. | | |
| ▲ | lokar an hour ago | parent [-] | | Where does an MS take more then 2 years? | | |
| ▲ | oivey an hour ago | parent [-] | | I guess people doing night school maybe? That’s pretty clearly not what this is. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | mathisfun123 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > There’s already a 3-4 year advanced degree in the United States with an optional thesis component that companies in relevant industries can intervene in and direct if they so desire. You're making this up as you go. No MS lasts 3-4 years, almost all MS theses are book reports/unpublished because the student is primarily attending classes, almost none are directed by industry (see points 1 and 2). |
| |
| ▲ | dnautics an hour ago | parent [-] | | sometimes an institution will give an ms as a consolation prize for time spent not being able to finish a phd [0]. in those cases they can be upwards of 5 years, but they certainly aren't industry driven [0] often a leadership or personality failure of the PI | | |
| ▲ | lokar 42 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | My program had an exam after 2 years. You could fail completely, do well enough to leave with a MS, or fully pass and continue to a PhD. | |
| ▲ | mathisfun123 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Why do people do this kind of "well actually" thing? Yes you're correct but it has nothing to do with whether the degree itself is intended for that. | | |
| ▲ | smelendez 35 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I mean, how common is a terminal master’s program in STEM fields? I imagine there are departments where it’s more common to get a master’s by dropping out of the PhD program early than through any other path. Especially for people with a bachelor’s in the same field. | | |
| ▲ | mathisfun123 11 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > mean, how common is a terminal master’s program in STEM fields? Lololol extremely. They're cash cows because of foreign students paying full price and not getting tuition waivers. > Especially for people with a bachelor’s in the same field. Lol bruh an enormous number of schools have 4+1 programs to enable students getting terminal MS even easier. |
|
|
|
|
