Timeline for Are PhD Students and PhD Researchers the same thing?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 2020 at 10:40 | comment | added | Tim Kuipers | Many people don't know the term 'PhD'. If I say I am a PhD student then people think I'm just a student. What I do doesn't correspond with their mental image of a student. That is one reason for using the term 'PhD researcher' | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 22:54 | comment | added | Bill Barth | @Trylks, technically impossible, yes, but likely close enough. Maybe you can edit your question to add the stuff about strikes so that it's not so vague. Things are basically fine in the US right now. There's no apparent need to point out to everyone who reads your CV here that students and research assistants are researchers, too. People seem to get it. I hire PhDs who are mostly off the academic track, and I don't need to ask "Did you do research during your time as a PhD student?" | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 21:13 | comment | added | Trylks | 1. "people who hire PhDs generally know […] entails." My point: That is impossible. 2. "It shouldn't be a downside […] on a CV." Few things are the way they should (if any is). If they were, we would not be using misleading terms in our CVs. Maybe we can fix that! Maybe there is already a fix for that, some common alternative term, I thought I found one, that's why I asked. A correct answer would have been "No", a good answer: "No, but X is equivalent". Where I live people are going on strikes for similar matters. But that's not the point, the question was meant to benefit all in the community | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 20:53 | comment | added | Bill Barth | @Trylks, which is why we don't have discussions in the comments. I meant that people who hire PhDs generally know what the role of a PhD student entails. It shouldn't be a downside to see the word "student" on a CV. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 20:51 | comment | added | Trylks | @BillBarth I really doubt that even a PhD can know what was part of the role or other PhD. There is a huge variability, especially depending on the supervisor, who may be guiding the student, micromanaging the student, or giving a complete freedom (doing of the student more of a research fellow). There is also a huge variability in theoretical vs applied fields, and many other variables. In any case and to the very least, the word "student" is misleading. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 20:28 | comment | added | Bill Barth | @Trylks, I haven't seen this to be a problem. Not all places use HR people to do the screening, and many hiring managers are aware of what a graduate student researcher was doing when they are looking to hire a PhD. They know that being a student researcher was part of the role, and they know this because they have hired PhDs before. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 20:24 | comment | added | Trylks | @BillBarth Well, I personally finished the PhD and moved out of academia, where HR people may care or not care about the word "researcher" (which I think would be the appropriate term), but in general they despise the word "student". However, I think that the whole topic may be relevant and important for people that are not me (or you for the matter). As such, I have not tried to be vague, but to be general, for the general interest of the community. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 20:05 | comment | added | Bill Barth | @Trylks, that's a pretty vague response to my question. Are you being rejected for a position or pay level because you're not a "researcher" in someone or some bureaucracy's eyes? I think PhD students are researchers and should be paid. I was regarded so and was paid, though not very well, but tuition was free and I got healthcare benefits. If you're trying to fudge or puff up your CV by adding the word "researcher" to it somewhere, that might not be OK. Some people might not even read far enough to notice. My student title was "Graduate Research Assistant" and everyone knew what that meant. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 19:52 | comment | added | Trylks | Being a researcher is important, to become a senior researcher after several years of research. Not being a student is important, because a PhD is a real job, even if it is not recognized as such, and the pay is really low. Both things are important for the salary, a very important thing, especially when it means the difference between being able to afford something important or not. Human resource departments are (or pretend to be) quite clueless in many occasions. Therefore, it is better to write things in a way that gives them little excuses to not acknowledge your work or skills. | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 11:52 | comment | added | Bill Barth | @MikeyMike, I've seen similar things, but they almost always make the distinction that the applicant must be within X years after receiving their PhD. They're often very clear about their requirements. Being just a "researcher" is not a requirement I've ever seen. The word may be thrown around a bit cavalierly in the RFP, but the Requirements section lays out the details clearly in every case I've ever come across. | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 11:22 | comment | added | Nikey Mike | Some time ago I have read some papers about the separations between phd students and junior researchers in terms of the possibility to apply for grant applications. | |
| Jun 19, 2016 at 20:45 | history | answered | Bill Barth | CC BY-SA 3.0 |