prompt stringlengths 22 39.2k | prompt_id stringlengths 64 64 | chosen listlengths 2 2 | rejected listlengths 2 2 | messages listlengths 2 2 | score_chosen float64 5.19 10 | score_rejected float64 0 10 | other_info dict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "An MFA isn't strictly academia, but I know my degree was only partially about a job. I had been working in my artistic field for over 20 years with solid success (alongside a well-paying job in another field), but had never finished my BA. It was a thing that haunted me, just a nagging in the back of my mind that my options were limited. A nagging for 20 years that \"someday I'll go back\" I finished that BA at 44. I went ahead and completed my MFA at 47. I want a TT position, but also know very well that I am a bad candidate at a bad time and will likely never find one. I am able to adjunct, which is (partially) fulfilling. (I'm privileged that I have a solid source of income in my non-art career.) The reason I did it was because I could not face another 20 years of \"what if\" and \"I should have\". I don't know it was a *smart* choice, but the difference that piece of paper made for me was palpable.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I don't have an issue with someone pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job, per se. I just think there are better and more financially sustainable ways to pursue knowledge outside of higher education given the current state of higher education. There is just too much BS in higher education that does not contribute to the pursuit of knowledge and in many cases even detracts from it (from high-stakes testing to institutional politics to limitations on what you can and cannot study to publish or perish). If you don't want to become a professor (or something else that requires an advanced degree), then why put up with all of that?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "An MFA isn't strictly academia, but I know my degree was only partially about a job. I had been working in my artistic field for over 20 years with solid success (alongside a well-paying job in another field), but had never finished my BA. It was a thing that haunted me, just a nagging in the back of my mind that my options were limited. A nagging for 20 years that \"someday I'll go back\" I finished that BA at 44. I went ahead and completed my MFA at 47. I want a TT position, but also know very well that I am a bad candidate at a bad time and will likely never find one. I am able to adjunct, which is (partially) fulfilling. (I'm privileged that I have a solid source of income in my non-art career.) The reason I did it was because I could not face another 20 years of \"what if\" and \"I should have\". I don't know it was a *smart* choice, but the difference that piece of paper made for me was palpable.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.25641 | 4.923077 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 4,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 2226,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans to cause they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. ? My state has so many lawyers that nothing was guaranteed there. And I missed history. I missed being in a university. So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans because they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. I guess the long and short of this is to go after what you want. Doesn't matter what other people say. What would make you happy? And you're 26, still very young (found my TT job at 36)!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I don't have an issue with someone pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job, per se. I just think there are better and more financially sustainable ways to pursue knowledge outside of higher education given the current state of higher education. There is just too much BS in higher education that does not contribute to the pursuit of knowledge and in many cases even detracts from it (from high-stakes testing to institutional politics to limitations on what you can and cannot study to publish or perish). If you don't want to become a professor (or something else that requires an advanced degree), then why put up with all of that?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans to cause they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. ? My state has so many lawyers that nothing was guaranteed there. And I missed history. I missed being in a university. So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans because they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. I guess the long and short of this is to go after what you want. Doesn't matter what other people say. What would make you happy? And you're 26, still very young (found my TT job at 36)!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.25641 | 4.923077 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 4,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 6801,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans to cause they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. ? My state has so many lawyers that nothing was guaranteed there. And I missed history. I missed being in a university. So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans because they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. I guess the long and short of this is to go after what you want. Doesn't matter what other people say. What would make you happy? And you're 26, still very young (found my TT job at 36)!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I think getting a PhD is rarely worth it financially regardless of the field. Don't have a source on that though, rmb I read it somewhere. Getting a PhD is often for a better quality job and meaning, which can come in the form of your pursuit of knowledge.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans to cause they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. ? My state has so many lawyers that nothing was guaranteed there. And I missed history. I missed being in a university. So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans because they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. I guess the long and short of this is to go after what you want. Doesn't matter what other people say. What would make you happy? And you're 26, still very young (found my TT job at 36)!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.25641 | 4.25641 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 4,
"raw_score_ratio": 2,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 3364,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans to cause they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. ? My state has so many lawyers that nothing was guaranteed there. And I missed history. I missed being in a university. So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans because they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. I guess the long and short of this is to go after what you want. Doesn't matter what other people say. What would make you happy? And you're 26, still very young (found my TT job at 36)!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Personal Enrichment. Study what you want. Not what others expect.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans to cause they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. ? My state has so many lawyers that nothing was guaranteed there. And I missed history. I missed being in a university. So, to the chagrin of my mostly-blue class working family, I said I was going back to school to get an MA and a PhD in history, with JD in hand. I have student loans out the ass with law school, but I love that it allows me to blend law and history and that I can do what I want now. I have a pretty awesome job and I've never looked back. I happily pay those student loans because they have at least given me opportunities I would have never had without them. I guess the long and short of this is to go after what you want. Doesn't matter what other people say. What would make you happy? And you're 26, still very young (found my TT job at 36)!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.25641 | 4.25641 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 4,
"raw_score_ratio": 2,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 3249,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "job satisfaction......what is that? one asshole boss can ruin everything. Find happiness in hobby and do the job for sustaining that hobby.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I think getting a PhD is rarely worth it financially regardless of the field. Don't have a source on that though, rmb I read it somewhere. Getting a PhD is often for a better quality job and meaning, which can come in the form of your pursuit of knowledge.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "job satisfaction......what is that? one asshole boss can ruin everything. Find happiness in hobby and do the job for sustaining that hobby.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 5514,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "job satisfaction......what is that? one asshole boss can ruin everything. Find happiness in hobby and do the job for sustaining that hobby.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Personal Enrichment. Study what you want. Not what others expect.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "job satisfaction......what is that? one asshole boss can ruin everything. Find happiness in hobby and do the job for sustaining that hobby.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 5399,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I say do it. I went back for my PhD (decades ago) knowing how bad the job market was. I was coming out the corporate world, where I was earning good money, had good colleagues...but was entirely unfulfilled. (there has *got* to be more to life than selling people even *more* consumer shit that they don't need.) I LOVED grad school. It was exactly what I'd been looking for. But I was also realistic: chances of getting a tenure-track job were slim-to-none (made even worse by my geographical limitations.) But I knew I wanted to get a PhD *for the sake of the subject.* (My father definitely did NOT understand. He was skeptical all the way through.) In the end, I ended up tenured at an R1--a dream job. (fortunate!) But I would have been really happy with my decision even if I just went back to the corporate world. Interestingly (and for comparison) it is primarily the USA, with it's strong anti-education cultural bias (\"those who can't do, teach\"...etc etc.) that this is an issue. In Europe, IF you can get in to a PhD program, you do. And the vast majority of PhDs (at least in my humanities field) do NOT go into academia... they're \"terminal\" PhDs. But the PhD is a huge springboard in Europe for other careers (politics, law, government). I know that the skills you learn over a PhD--writing, researching, *major* project management, teaching/public speaking--translate to basically any field. In the USA, you'll have to confront cultural prejudice, where if you apply for a job with a humanities PhD they might look at you as if you're a martian (whereas if you apply with a law degree, they'll salivate... go figure.) But American emplowers can't (and shouldn't) be allowed to wallow in their own cultural ignorance. So I say: get the PhD, expand your mind, improve the brainpower of the nation. One caveat: once you're geared up to high-level academia, then going back to regular old job will be intellectually disappointing (and a bit of a letdown). (even a tenure-track job can be a letdown after grad school.... it was for me.) It can be hard to readjust your expectations if/when you don't wind up in a TT job.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I think getting a PhD is rarely worth it financially regardless of the field. Don't have a source on that though, rmb I read it somewhere. Getting a PhD is often for a better quality job and meaning, which can come in the form of your pursuit of knowledge.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I say do it. I went back for my PhD (decades ago) knowing how bad the job market was. I was coming out the corporate world, where I was earning good money, had good colleagues...but was entirely unfulfilled. (there has *got* to be more to life than selling people even *more* consumer shit that they don't need.) I LOVED grad school. It was exactly what I'd been looking for. But I was also realistic: chances of getting a tenure-track job were slim-to-none (made even worse by my geographical limitations.) But I knew I wanted to get a PhD *for the sake of the subject.* (My father definitely did NOT understand. He was skeptical all the way through.) In the end, I ended up tenured at an R1--a dream job. (fortunate!) But I would have been really happy with my decision even if I just went back to the corporate world. Interestingly (and for comparison) it is primarily the USA, with it's strong anti-education cultural bias (\"those who can't do, teach\"...etc etc.) that this is an issue. In Europe, IF you can get in to a PhD program, you do. And the vast majority of PhDs (at least in my humanities field) do NOT go into academia... they're \"terminal\" PhDs. But the PhD is a huge springboard in Europe for other careers (politics, law, government). I know that the skills you learn over a PhD--writing, researching, *major* project management, teaching/public speaking--translate to basically any field. In the USA, you'll have to confront cultural prejudice, where if you apply for a job with a humanities PhD they might look at you as if you're a martian (whereas if you apply with a law degree, they'll salivate... go figure.) But American emplowers can't (and shouldn't) be allowed to wallow in their own cultural ignorance. So I say: get the PhD, expand your mind, improve the brainpower of the nation. One caveat: once you're geared up to high-level academia, then going back to regular old job will be intellectually disappointing (and a bit of a letdown). (even a tenure-track job can be a letdown after grad school.... it was for me.) It can be hard to readjust your expectations if/when you don't wind up in a TT job.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 5986,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I say do it. I went back for my PhD (decades ago) knowing how bad the job market was. I was coming out the corporate world, where I was earning good money, had good colleagues...but was entirely unfulfilled. (there has *got* to be more to life than selling people even *more* consumer shit that they don't need.) I LOVED grad school. It was exactly what I'd been looking for. But I was also realistic: chances of getting a tenure-track job were slim-to-none (made even worse by my geographical limitations.) But I knew I wanted to get a PhD *for the sake of the subject.* (My father definitely did NOT understand. He was skeptical all the way through.) In the end, I ended up tenured at an R1--a dream job. (fortunate!) But I would have been really happy with my decision even if I just went back to the corporate world. Interestingly (and for comparison) it is primarily the USA, with it's strong anti-education cultural bias (\"those who can't do, teach\"...etc etc.) that this is an issue. In Europe, IF you can get in to a PhD program, you do. And the vast majority of PhDs (at least in my humanities field) do NOT go into academia... they're \"terminal\" PhDs. But the PhD is a huge springboard in Europe for other careers (politics, law, government). I know that the skills you learn over a PhD--writing, researching, *major* project management, teaching/public speaking--translate to basically any field. In the USA, you'll have to confront cultural prejudice, where if you apply for a job with a humanities PhD they might look at you as if you're a martian (whereas if you apply with a law degree, they'll salivate... go figure.) But American emplowers can't (and shouldn't) be allowed to wallow in their own cultural ignorance. So I say: get the PhD, expand your mind, improve the brainpower of the nation. One caveat: once you're geared up to high-level academia, then going back to regular old job will be intellectually disappointing (and a bit of a letdown). (even a tenure-track job can be a letdown after grad school.... it was for me.) It can be hard to readjust your expectations if/when you don't wind up in a TT job.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Personal Enrichment. Study what you want. Not what others expect.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I say do it. I went back for my PhD (decades ago) knowing how bad the job market was. I was coming out the corporate world, where I was earning good money, had good colleagues...but was entirely unfulfilled. (there has *got* to be more to life than selling people even *more* consumer shit that they don't need.) I LOVED grad school. It was exactly what I'd been looking for. But I was also realistic: chances of getting a tenure-track job were slim-to-none (made even worse by my geographical limitations.) But I knew I wanted to get a PhD *for the sake of the subject.* (My father definitely did NOT understand. He was skeptical all the way through.) In the end, I ended up tenured at an R1--a dream job. (fortunate!) But I would have been really happy with my decision even if I just went back to the corporate world. Interestingly (and for comparison) it is primarily the USA, with it's strong anti-education cultural bias (\"those who can't do, teach\"...etc etc.) that this is an issue. In Europe, IF you can get in to a PhD program, you do. And the vast majority of PhDs (at least in my humanities field) do NOT go into academia... they're \"terminal\" PhDs. But the PhD is a huge springboard in Europe for other careers (politics, law, government). I know that the skills you learn over a PhD--writing, researching, *major* project management, teaching/public speaking--translate to basically any field. In the USA, you'll have to confront cultural prejudice, where if you apply for a job with a humanities PhD they might look at you as if you're a martian (whereas if you apply with a law degree, they'll salivate... go figure.) But American emplowers can't (and shouldn't) be allowed to wallow in their own cultural ignorance. So I say: get the PhD, expand your mind, improve the brainpower of the nation. One caveat: once you're geared up to high-level academia, then going back to regular old job will be intellectually disappointing (and a bit of a letdown). (even a tenure-track job can be a letdown after grad school.... it was for me.) It can be hard to readjust your expectations if/when you don't wind up in a TT job.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 5871,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "If you're independently wealthy go for it",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I think getting a PhD is rarely worth it financially regardless of the field. Don't have a source on that though, rmb I read it somewhere. Getting a PhD is often for a better quality job and meaning, which can come in the form of your pursuit of knowledge.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "If you're independently wealthy go for it",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 8868,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "If you're independently wealthy go for it",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Personal Enrichment. Study what you want. Not what others expect.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "If you're independently wealthy go for it",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 8753,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "i feel like i used to think so, but seeing academia up close and becoming way less idealistic about science, academic careers, publishing and all that made me reconsider. i really don't find a single part of this fulfilling anymore (i'm more angry at the system than anything) and at this point i'd rather get a stable job and enjoy all the other things in my life (making art, travelling and so on). but i think this really depends on your priorities.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I think getting a PhD is rarely worth it financially regardless of the field. Don't have a source on that though, rmb I read it somewhere. Getting a PhD is often for a better quality job and meaning, which can come in the form of your pursuit of knowledge.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "i feel like i used to think so, but seeing academia up close and becoming way less idealistic about science, academic careers, publishing and all that made me reconsider. i really don't find a single part of this fulfilling anymore (i'm more angry at the system than anything) and at this point i'd rather get a stable job and enjoy all the other things in my life (making art, travelling and so on). but i think this really depends on your priorities.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 13344,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "i feel like i used to think so, but seeing academia up close and becoming way less idealistic about science, academic careers, publishing and all that made me reconsider. i really don't find a single part of this fulfilling anymore (i'm more angry at the system than anything) and at this point i'd rather get a stable job and enjoy all the other things in my life (making art, travelling and so on). but i think this really depends on your priorities.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Personal Enrichment. Study what you want. Not what others expect.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "i feel like i used to think so, but seeing academia up close and becoming way less idealistic about science, academic careers, publishing and all that made me reconsider. i really don't find a single part of this fulfilling anymore (i'm more angry at the system than anything) and at this point i'd rather get a stable job and enjoy all the other things in my life (making art, travelling and so on). but i think this really depends on your priorities.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 13229,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "If you do, make sure you’re aware of how the department supports (or doesn’t) people who don’t want academic jobs. A whole lot of attitudes that the degree is only meant to prepare people for TT professorship. And if you’re in a place like that it’s soul crushing.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I think getting a PhD is rarely worth it financially regardless of the field. Don't have a source on that though, rmb I read it somewhere. Getting a PhD is often for a better quality job and meaning, which can come in the form of your pursuit of knowledge.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "If you do, make sure you’re aware of how the department supports (or doesn’t) people who don’t want academic jobs. A whole lot of attitudes that the degree is only meant to prepare people for TT professorship. And if you’re in a place like that it’s soul crushing.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 16098,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "If you do, make sure you’re aware of how the department supports (or doesn’t) people who don’t want academic jobs. A whole lot of attitudes that the degree is only meant to prepare people for TT professorship. And if you’re in a place like that it’s soul crushing.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Personal Enrichment. Study what you want. Not what others expect.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "If you do, make sure you’re aware of how the department supports (or doesn’t) people who don’t want academic jobs. A whole lot of attitudes that the degree is only meant to prepare people for TT professorship. And if you’re in a place like that it’s soul crushing.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 15983,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job has priced itself out of the market.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I think getting a PhD is rarely worth it financially regardless of the field. Don't have a source on that though, rmb I read it somewhere. Getting a PhD is often for a better quality job and meaning, which can come in the form of your pursuit of knowledge.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job has priced itself out of the market.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 16624,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead? | 33ae85e216d16e91643daf324768403ca5848f2f0c0c4a04649bad6a7186f3bf | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job has priced itself out of the market.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Personal Enrichment. Study what you want. Not what others expect.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Do you believe academia is worth pursuing for reasons other than getting a job? Sorry, I'm going to rant a bit as to the reasons why I'm asking this question, but I do genuinely want to know your answer. **Start rant:** I want to get a PhD in English, probably concentrating on Comp & Rhet or Critical Theory/Cultural Studies. I want to do this because I find it fulfilling, point blank. I feel like that upsets a lot of people. With the job market like it is, it's like people resent that you might want an advanced degree in something that won't immediately or directly translate to a job, and pursue it for a reason other than getting a job. I have 9 years of experience in editing and writing for the web. I'm not worried about making decent money. I'm hoping that getting a PhD will make me more qualified for other types of work--like editing a scholarly journal, becoming a professor (even an adjunct while I have a second job), doing editing and/or writing for an organization like the UN, or writing for a more academic/scholarly-type website--but at the end of the day, I want to better my scholarly skills. I want to be better at doing research, better at writing, better at thinking, etc., for its own sake and for my fulfillment. And I want to do what I love to do: write and do research. Am I going to get into a lot of debt for this? I don't think I'll pursue it unless I get a tuition waiver and a decent stipend. I'm not going into a humanities degree with rose-colored glasses. But nor am I shunning it because I might not need a PhD for whatever job I end up getting or because the academic job market is bad (right now, not necessarily forever. I'm 26, and hopefully my life will be long). **-end rant** How many of you believe in pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job? There used to be the idea that the pursuit of knowledge was noble for its own sake, or to advance the mind of the person pursuing the education. Is that sentiment dead?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Pursuing academia for reasons other than getting a job has priced itself out of the market.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "thttho",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 16509,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.89
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "- They have a well-defined research plan that's approved by their advisor and committee in the early stages. - Their work doesn't involve making new tools (e.g., they're applying an existing computational or bench technique to a new material or sample). - They start doing real experiments while taking their core classes, possibly because they're very quick or are otherwise well prepared (e.g., they received strong coverage in undergrad). - They either aren't very curious about their technique and results or they resist this curiosity and avoid doing a lot of characterization and blue-sky experiments. - They get lucky with their results or are able to convincingly identify the successful aspects of their failures. - They write the papers and make the figures as they do the experiments. They use the papers as chapters of their thesis, adding only introduction and conclusion chapters. - They assertively manage their advisors to review manuscripts quickly and to not ratchet up expectations. - They have one or more committee members who apply pressure on the advisor if necessary not to delay the defense. (Coming from someone who took 5 1/2 years but had a few very disciplined colleagues.) EDIT: This seemed to click with a lot of people, so I wanted to add a few more shared characteristics of the individuals I worked with: - They had a concrete plan for their career for after graduation; grad school was a means to an end and not a space for exploration. - They had a limited tolerance for \"what-if\" discussions and mostly wanted to get back into the lab and work. - They didn't necessarily have the most supportive advisor but did know what levers to pull to move forward (e.g., different adversarial styles or networking to pull in high-clout individuals to support them against the advisor). - They didn't necessarily feel that they were very smart, but they did feel that they could attack any challenge and prevail. They didn't get sidetracked long by an experiment going wrong or a piece of equipment not working; that would certainly be on the top of their mind until they addressed the issue, but it wouldn't shake their confidence in their research. They weren't overly confident or egotistical in their progress or successes either. In other words, they weren't married to their research; they just *did the work every day* as the units of progress accumulated. So: dispassionate, tenacious, steely, organized, savvy, and lucky.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Almost every PhD student in Europe has already done a masters (so less classes and more experience going in), which is the main reason their PhDs are shorter. In the U.S., talking about B.S. to PhD directly, it's usually more about the program than the student, honestly. For example, students finishing in 3 years are very unlikely at a university that does lab rotations for the first year, because they need to be starting their main projects right away. Different universities also have different required lengths of time between prelim and final exam. For example at Purdue in BME, you must have at least 12 months between your prelim and your final defense. Since in wet lab work it's often \"nothing's working, nothing's working, oh! It's working!\", students often prelim here late in their 3rd year to ~halfway through their 4th year, meaning they absolutely cannot graduate before 4-5.5 complete years. In another department (like MechE here) or another university that only requires 6 months in between, they will likely still prelim around the same time, but will then defend and graduate in 3.5-4.5 years instead. Different universities also require different amounts of classes, and somewhere with more coursework will mean less time in the lab in your early years in the program. I don't think 1-2 extra classes a semester will seem like it makes that much of a difference, but if you're really try to push to have a full research thesis and papers out in 3 years, that extra class time each semester adds up. The same thing is true for universities that require students to TA (or students who select/need to TA as their funding). Lastly, these students likely came into an established project in the lab. Perhaps they shadowed a graduate student who was about to leave (and getting a publication early in their program along the way) and then took over with a good idea of the techniques needed and the project direction. You can try to make sure you're in this situation when you interview potential PIs, but sometimes it's just luck.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "- They have a well-defined research plan that's approved by their advisor and committee in the early stages. - Their work doesn't involve making new tools (e.g., they're applying an existing computational or bench technique to a new material or sample). - They start doing real experiments while taking their core classes, possibly because they're very quick or are otherwise well prepared (e.g., they received strong coverage in undergrad). - They either aren't very curious about their technique and results or they resist this curiosity and avoid doing a lot of characterization and blue-sky experiments. - They get lucky with their results or are able to convincingly identify the successful aspects of their failures. - They write the papers and make the figures as they do the experiments. They use the papers as chapters of their thesis, adding only introduction and conclusion chapters. - They assertively manage their advisors to review manuscripts quickly and to not ratchet up expectations. - They have one or more committee members who apply pressure on the advisor if necessary not to delay the defense. (Coming from someone who took 5 1/2 years but had a few very disciplined colleagues.) EDIT: This seemed to click with a lot of people, so I wanted to add a few more shared characteristics of the individuals I worked with: - They had a concrete plan for their career for after graduation; grad school was a means to an end and not a space for exploration. - They had a limited tolerance for \"what-if\" discussions and mostly wanted to get back into the lab and work. - They didn't necessarily have the most supportive advisor but did know what levers to pull to move forward (e.g., different adversarial styles or networking to pull in high-clout individuals to support them against the advisor). - They didn't necessarily feel that they were very smart, but they did feel that they could attack any challenge and prevail. They didn't get sidetracked long by an experiment going wrong or a piece of equipment not working; that would certainly be on the top of their mind until they addressed the issue, but it wouldn't shake their confidence in their research. They weren't overly confident or egotistical in their progress or successes either. In other words, they weren't married to their research; they just *did the work every day* as the units of progress accumulated. So: dispassionate, tenacious, steely, organized, savvy, and lucky.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 6.833333 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 250,
"raw_score_ratio": 4.1666666667,
"raw_score_rejected": 60,
"seconds_difference": 2273,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "- They have a well-defined research plan that's approved by their advisor and committee in the early stages. - Their work doesn't involve making new tools (e.g., they're applying an existing computational or bench technique to a new material or sample). - They start doing real experiments while taking their core classes, possibly because they're very quick or are otherwise well prepared (e.g., they received strong coverage in undergrad). - They either aren't very curious about their technique and results or they resist this curiosity and avoid doing a lot of characterization and blue-sky experiments. - They get lucky with their results or are able to convincingly identify the successful aspects of their failures. - They write the papers and make the figures as they do the experiments. They use the papers as chapters of their thesis, adding only introduction and conclusion chapters. - They assertively manage their advisors to review manuscripts quickly and to not ratchet up expectations. - They have one or more committee members who apply pressure on the advisor if necessary not to delay the defense. (Coming from someone who took 5 1/2 years but had a few very disciplined colleagues.) EDIT: This seemed to click with a lot of people, so I wanted to add a few more shared characteristics of the individuals I worked with: - They had a concrete plan for their career for after graduation; grad school was a means to an end and not a space for exploration. - They had a limited tolerance for \"what-if\" discussions and mostly wanted to get back into the lab and work. - They didn't necessarily have the most supportive advisor but did know what levers to pull to move forward (e.g., different adversarial styles or networking to pull in high-clout individuals to support them against the advisor). - They didn't necessarily feel that they were very smart, but they did feel that they could attack any challenge and prevail. They didn't get sidetracked long by an experiment going wrong or a piece of equipment not working; that would certainly be on the top of their mind until they addressed the issue, but it wouldn't shake their confidence in their research. They weren't overly confident or egotistical in their progress or successes either. In other words, they weren't married to their research; they just *did the work every day* as the units of progress accumulated. So: dispassionate, tenacious, steely, organized, savvy, and lucky.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "They probably got really lucky with their project: it went smoothly, probably did not involve mice, no major problems or setbacks. They would still have to work really hard the whole time.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "- They have a well-defined research plan that's approved by their advisor and committee in the early stages. - Their work doesn't involve making new tools (e.g., they're applying an existing computational or bench technique to a new material or sample). - They start doing real experiments while taking their core classes, possibly because they're very quick or are otherwise well prepared (e.g., they received strong coverage in undergrad). - They either aren't very curious about their technique and results or they resist this curiosity and avoid doing a lot of characterization and blue-sky experiments. - They get lucky with their results or are able to convincingly identify the successful aspects of their failures. - They write the papers and make the figures as they do the experiments. They use the papers as chapters of their thesis, adding only introduction and conclusion chapters. - They assertively manage their advisors to review manuscripts quickly and to not ratchet up expectations. - They have one or more committee members who apply pressure on the advisor if necessary not to delay the defense. (Coming from someone who took 5 1/2 years but had a few very disciplined colleagues.) EDIT: This seemed to click with a lot of people, so I wanted to add a few more shared characteristics of the individuals I worked with: - They had a concrete plan for their career for after graduation; grad school was a means to an end and not a space for exploration. - They had a limited tolerance for \"what-if\" discussions and mostly wanted to get back into the lab and work. - They didn't necessarily have the most supportive advisor but did know what levers to pull to move forward (e.g., different adversarial styles or networking to pull in high-clout individuals to support them against the advisor). - They didn't necessarily feel that they were very smart, but they did feel that they could attack any challenge and prevail. They didn't get sidetracked long by an experiment going wrong or a piece of equipment not working; that would certainly be on the top of their mind until they addressed the issue, but it wouldn't shake their confidence in their research. They weren't overly confident or egotistical in their progress or successes either. In other words, they weren't married to their research; they just *did the work every day* as the units of progress accumulated. So: dispassionate, tenacious, steely, organized, savvy, and lucky.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 1.740741 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 250,
"raw_score_ratio": 9.2592592593,
"raw_score_rejected": 27,
"seconds_difference": 1465,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "- They have a well-defined research plan that's approved by their advisor and committee in the early stages. - Their work doesn't involve making new tools (e.g., they're applying an existing computational or bench technique to a new material or sample). - They start doing real experiments while taking their core classes, possibly because they're very quick or are otherwise well prepared (e.g., they received strong coverage in undergrad). - They either aren't very curious about their technique and results or they resist this curiosity and avoid doing a lot of characterization and blue-sky experiments. - They get lucky with their results or are able to convincingly identify the successful aspects of their failures. - They write the papers and make the figures as they do the experiments. They use the papers as chapters of their thesis, adding only introduction and conclusion chapters. - They assertively manage their advisors to review manuscripts quickly and to not ratchet up expectations. - They have one or more committee members who apply pressure on the advisor if necessary not to delay the defense. (Coming from someone who took 5 1/2 years but had a few very disciplined colleagues.) EDIT: This seemed to click with a lot of people, so I wanted to add a few more shared characteristics of the individuals I worked with: - They had a concrete plan for their career for after graduation; grad school was a means to an end and not a space for exploration. - They had a limited tolerance for \"what-if\" discussions and mostly wanted to get back into the lab and work. - They didn't necessarily have the most supportive advisor but did know what levers to pull to move forward (e.g., different adversarial styles or networking to pull in high-clout individuals to support them against the advisor). - They didn't necessarily feel that they were very smart, but they did feel that they could attack any challenge and prevail. They didn't get sidetracked long by an experiment going wrong or a piece of equipment not working; that would certainly be on the top of their mind until they addressed the issue, but it wouldn't shake their confidence in their research. They weren't overly confident or egotistical in their progress or successes either. In other words, they weren't married to their research; they just *did the work every day* as the units of progress accumulated. So: dispassionate, tenacious, steely, organized, savvy, and lucky.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": ">What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? Some of this depends on the student, but a lot of it depends on the institution, the program requirements, and the dissertation project. I started my doctoral program immediately after finishing undergrad. I had two years of full-time coursework, and I completed my foreign language competency during the first semester (read: translating four totally different article excerpts in German from my field--linguistics). I completed my comprehensive examinations (general and specialty) the following year, wrote and defended my dissertation prospectus, and prepared for fieldwork. I spent every summer in the field (read: East/East-Central Africa), and I wrote and defended my dissertation during the fourth year. Because my program did not have any RA or TA requirements, I was free to adjunct on my own time as available/suited. Additionally, my coursework was arranged by the program so that it could be completed entirely in those first two years. I knew that I would only get one shot at this, so I planned meticulously and worked through everything ahead of schedule. In hindsight, I actually wish I had slowed down and enjoyed the experience a little bit more. The academic world can make it impossible to distinguish the \"personal\" from the \"professional\" after a while.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "- They have a well-defined research plan that's approved by their advisor and committee in the early stages. - Their work doesn't involve making new tools (e.g., they're applying an existing computational or bench technique to a new material or sample). - They start doing real experiments while taking their core classes, possibly because they're very quick or are otherwise well prepared (e.g., they received strong coverage in undergrad). - They either aren't very curious about their technique and results or they resist this curiosity and avoid doing a lot of characterization and blue-sky experiments. - They get lucky with their results or are able to convincingly identify the successful aspects of their failures. - They write the papers and make the figures as they do the experiments. They use the papers as chapters of their thesis, adding only introduction and conclusion chapters. - They assertively manage their advisors to review manuscripts quickly and to not ratchet up expectations. - They have one or more committee members who apply pressure on the advisor if necessary not to delay the defense. (Coming from someone who took 5 1/2 years but had a few very disciplined colleagues.) EDIT: This seemed to click with a lot of people, so I wanted to add a few more shared characteristics of the individuals I worked with: - They had a concrete plan for their career for after graduation; grad school was a means to an end and not a space for exploration. - They had a limited tolerance for \"what-if\" discussions and mostly wanted to get back into the lab and work. - They didn't necessarily have the most supportive advisor but did know what levers to pull to move forward (e.g., different adversarial styles or networking to pull in high-clout individuals to support them against the advisor). - They didn't necessarily feel that they were very smart, but they did feel that they could attack any challenge and prevail. They didn't get sidetracked long by an experiment going wrong or a piece of equipment not working; that would certainly be on the top of their mind until they addressed the issue, but it wouldn't shake their confidence in their research. They weren't overly confident or egotistical in their progress or successes either. In other words, they weren't married to their research; they just *did the work every day* as the units of progress accumulated. So: dispassionate, tenacious, steely, organized, savvy, and lucky.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 250,
"raw_score_ratio": 35.7142857143,
"raw_score_rejected": 7,
"seconds_difference": 171,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "They probably got really lucky with their project: it went smoothly, probably did not involve mice, no major problems or setbacks. They would still have to work really hard the whole time.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 7.5 | 7.055556 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 39,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.4444444444,
"raw_score_rejected": 27,
"seconds_difference": 8479,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "The biggest difference is just program/advisor/department/institutional expectations. Once you finish all the classes and other on paper requirements like qualifying exams, it's just about convincing your committee you're done. Minimal coursework and minimal or no TA expectations helps too.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 7.5 | 7.055556 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 39,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.4444444444,
"raw_score_rejected": 27,
"seconds_difference": 4999,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Project scope, and advisor. If your advisor is happy with 5 5.5 average students end up with that average. If the advisor wants higher turnover then the students graduate earlier. Same department one lab always does 3-4, another lab 5.5 ish, another lab 5.5-6. Want a short PhD don’t pick an advisor with a long turnover",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 7.5 | 6.55 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 39,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.95,
"raw_score_rejected": 20,
"seconds_difference": 5567,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I’m in a discipline that has a good job market. I finished in four years with no pubs and still had a job offer one year before graduation.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 7.5 | 5.5 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 39,
"raw_score_ratio": 3,
"raw_score_rejected": 13,
"seconds_difference": 6989,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished mine PhD in engineering in less than 4 yrs after BS, with a couple of publications. As many have mentioned here, my project had: 1. No animal model 2. Relatively straight up project scope, good amount computational beside wetlab work 3. No lab rotation (so I started my project since day 1) But also, my PI was running out of funding (so I always knew I had a deadline), which forced me to work ~50-70hrs/weeks.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 7.5 | 4.954545 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 39,
"raw_score_ratio": 3.5454545455,
"raw_score_rejected": 11,
"seconds_difference": 3969,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Something to consider: Why do you want to finish quickly? If your ultimate goal is an academic job, your plan should be to graduate with a competitive CV. Finishing in 3 years with a dissertation but few or no pubs under your belt would be an academic career dead end, in my field.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 7.5 | 4.954545 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 39,
"raw_score_ratio": 3.5454545455,
"raw_score_rejected": 11,
"seconds_difference": 134,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "lol my PI be like: wanna graduate in 3-4 yrs? over ma dead body!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 7.5 | 4.6 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 39,
"raw_score_ratio": 3.9,
"raw_score_rejected": 10,
"seconds_difference": 3609,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": ">What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? Some of this depends on the student, but a lot of it depends on the institution, the program requirements, and the dissertation project. I started my doctoral program immediately after finishing undergrad. I had two years of full-time coursework, and I completed my foreign language competency during the first semester (read: translating four totally different article excerpts in German from my field--linguistics). I completed my comprehensive examinations (general and specialty) the following year, wrote and defended my dissertation prospectus, and prepared for fieldwork. I spent every summer in the field (read: East/East-Central Africa), and I wrote and defended my dissertation during the fourth year. Because my program did not have any RA or TA requirements, I was free to adjunct on my own time as available/suited. Additionally, my coursework was arranged by the program so that it could be completed entirely in those first two years. I knew that I would only get one shot at this, so I planned meticulously and worked through everything ahead of schedule. In hindsight, I actually wish I had slowed down and enjoyed the experience a little bit more. The academic world can make it impossible to distinguish the \"personal\" from the \"professional\" after a while.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 7.5 | 2.928571 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 39,
"raw_score_ratio": 5.5714285714,
"raw_score_rejected": 7,
"seconds_difference": 7185,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I successfully completed my PhD in Psychology in 3 years and could have done this in less time if the data collection had gone to plan. The main things for me were: •treat it as a job... 9-5 Monday to Friday •don’t take on other academic work... so many times I saw other students get prevented from moving forward because they overcommitted to marking, teaching and supporting other projects. •plan meticulously... and expect things to go wrong. Factor in slow university processes and data collection by taking the general rule of 3x the time of what you estimate. •communicate... stay on top of you supervisor and other stakeholders in the project. Keep pushing. •push back... can be quite political in the university world. If needed push back on changes others want to make if will be large changes to suit their own careers. Other work... obviously money to live is always a consideration so for some not having a paying job is not feasible. However, if you are financially in a position to do this then I found it allowed me to stay focused. These ideas may not work for everyone though!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 7.5 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 39,
"raw_score_ratio": 9.75,
"raw_score_rejected": 4,
"seconds_difference": 1275,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Sometimes places have a lower bar for graduation if you are not seeking an academic job. But it depends.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When I got to grad school, I was already 36 years old. When I got my advisor, I said, \"I'd like to finish in four years, to start my post-Ph.D. career.\" She replied, \"Okay, let's come up with a list of things you need to do to graduate. Do those, and you'll graduate.\" It worked out fine, and I pulled it off in four years. The downside: I didn't really end up with a deep publication record. It was adequate, but not superstar-level. Had I stuck around for a couple more years, I'm certain I could have pushed out many more papers and done some good follow-on research. It worked out fine, though, and I'm happily in a teaching position at a dream school.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 7.5 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 39,
"raw_score_ratio": 19.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 1830,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "The biggest difference is just program/advisor/department/institutional expectations. Once you finish all the classes and other on paper requirements like qualifying exams, it's just about convincing your committee you're done. Minimal coursework and minimal or no TA expectations helps too.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Project scope, and advisor. If your advisor is happy with 5 5.5 average students end up with that average. If the advisor wants higher turnover then the students graduate earlier. Same department one lab always does 3-4, another lab 5.5 ish, another lab 5.5-6. Want a short PhD don’t pick an advisor with a long turnover",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "The biggest difference is just program/advisor/department/institutional expectations. Once you finish all the classes and other on paper requirements like qualifying exams, it's just about convincing your committee you're done. Minimal coursework and minimal or no TA expectations helps too.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 6.730769 | 6.380769 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 27,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.35,
"raw_score_rejected": 20,
"seconds_difference": 568,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "The biggest difference is just program/advisor/department/institutional expectations. Once you finish all the classes and other on paper requirements like qualifying exams, it's just about convincing your committee you're done. Minimal coursework and minimal or no TA expectations helps too.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I’m in a discipline that has a good job market. I finished in four years with no pubs and still had a job offer one year before graduation.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "The biggest difference is just program/advisor/department/institutional expectations. Once you finish all the classes and other on paper requirements like qualifying exams, it's just about convincing your committee you're done. Minimal coursework and minimal or no TA expectations helps too.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 6.730769 | 5.653846 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 27,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.0769230769,
"raw_score_rejected": 13,
"seconds_difference": 1990,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "The biggest difference is just program/advisor/department/institutional expectations. Once you finish all the classes and other on paper requirements like qualifying exams, it's just about convincing your committee you're done. Minimal coursework and minimal or no TA expectations helps too.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": ">What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? Some of this depends on the student, but a lot of it depends on the institution, the program requirements, and the dissertation project. I started my doctoral program immediately after finishing undergrad. I had two years of full-time coursework, and I completed my foreign language competency during the first semester (read: translating four totally different article excerpts in German from my field--linguistics). I completed my comprehensive examinations (general and specialty) the following year, wrote and defended my dissertation prospectus, and prepared for fieldwork. I spent every summer in the field (read: East/East-Central Africa), and I wrote and defended my dissertation during the fourth year. Because my program did not have any RA or TA requirements, I was free to adjunct on my own time as available/suited. Additionally, my coursework was arranged by the program so that it could be completed entirely in those first two years. I knew that I would only get one shot at this, so I planned meticulously and worked through everything ahead of schedule. In hindsight, I actually wish I had slowed down and enjoyed the experience a little bit more. The academic world can make it impossible to distinguish the \"personal\" from the \"professional\" after a while.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "The biggest difference is just program/advisor/department/institutional expectations. Once you finish all the classes and other on paper requirements like qualifying exams, it's just about convincing your committee you're done. Minimal coursework and minimal or no TA expectations helps too.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 6.730769 | 3.873626 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 27,
"raw_score_ratio": 3.8571428571,
"raw_score_rejected": 7,
"seconds_difference": 2186,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Project scope, and advisor. If your advisor is happy with 5 5.5 average students end up with that average. If the advisor wants higher turnover then the students graduate earlier. Same department one lab always does 3-4, another lab 5.5 ish, another lab 5.5-6. Want a short PhD don’t pick an advisor with a long turnover",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I’m in a discipline that has a good job market. I finished in four years with no pubs and still had a job offer one year before graduation.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Project scope, and advisor. If your advisor is happy with 5 5.5 average students end up with that average. If the advisor wants higher turnover then the students graduate earlier. Same department one lab always does 3-4, another lab 5.5 ish, another lab 5.5-6. Want a short PhD don’t pick an advisor with a long turnover",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 6.282051 | 5.74359 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 20,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5384615385,
"raw_score_rejected": 13,
"seconds_difference": 1422,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Project scope, and advisor. If your advisor is happy with 5 5.5 average students end up with that average. If the advisor wants higher turnover then the students graduate earlier. Same department one lab always does 3-4, another lab 5.5 ish, another lab 5.5-6. Want a short PhD don’t pick an advisor with a long turnover",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": ">What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? Some of this depends on the student, but a lot of it depends on the institution, the program requirements, and the dissertation project. I started my doctoral program immediately after finishing undergrad. I had two years of full-time coursework, and I completed my foreign language competency during the first semester (read: translating four totally different article excerpts in German from my field--linguistics). I completed my comprehensive examinations (general and specialty) the following year, wrote and defended my dissertation prospectus, and prepared for fieldwork. I spent every summer in the field (read: East/East-Central Africa), and I wrote and defended my dissertation during the fourth year. Because my program did not have any RA or TA requirements, I was free to adjunct on my own time as available/suited. Additionally, my coursework was arranged by the program so that it could be completed entirely in those first two years. I knew that I would only get one shot at this, so I planned meticulously and worked through everything ahead of schedule. In hindsight, I actually wish I had slowed down and enjoyed the experience a little bit more. The academic world can make it impossible to distinguish the \"personal\" from the \"professional\" after a while.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Project scope, and advisor. If your advisor is happy with 5 5.5 average students end up with that average. If the advisor wants higher turnover then the students graduate earlier. Same department one lab always does 3-4, another lab 5.5 ish, another lab 5.5-6. Want a short PhD don’t pick an advisor with a long turnover",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 6.282051 | 4.424908 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 20,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.8571428571,
"raw_score_rejected": 7,
"seconds_difference": 1618,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I’m in a discipline that has a good job market. I finished in four years with no pubs and still had a job offer one year before graduation.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": ">What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? Some of this depends on the student, but a lot of it depends on the institution, the program requirements, and the dissertation project. I started my doctoral program immediately after finishing undergrad. I had two years of full-time coursework, and I completed my foreign language competency during the first semester (read: translating four totally different article excerpts in German from my field--linguistics). I completed my comprehensive examinations (general and specialty) the following year, wrote and defended my dissertation prospectus, and prepared for fieldwork. I spent every summer in the field (read: East/East-Central Africa), and I wrote and defended my dissertation during the fourth year. Because my program did not have any RA or TA requirements, I was free to adjunct on my own time as available/suited. Additionally, my coursework was arranged by the program so that it could be completed entirely in those first two years. I knew that I would only get one shot at this, so I planned meticulously and worked through everything ahead of schedule. In hindsight, I actually wish I had slowed down and enjoyed the experience a little bit more. The academic world can make it impossible to distinguish the \"personal\" from the \"professional\" after a while.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I’m in a discipline that has a good job market. I finished in four years with no pubs and still had a job offer one year before graduation.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.833333 | 4.97619 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 13,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.8571428571,
"raw_score_rejected": 7,
"seconds_difference": 196,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished mine PhD in engineering in less than 4 yrs after BS, with a couple of publications. As many have mentioned here, my project had: 1. No animal model 2. Relatively straight up project scope, good amount computational beside wetlab work 3. No lab rotation (so I started my project since day 1) But also, my PI was running out of funding (so I always knew I had a deadline), which forced me to work ~50-70hrs/weeks.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": ">What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? Some of this depends on the student, but a lot of it depends on the institution, the program requirements, and the dissertation project. I started my doctoral program immediately after finishing undergrad. I had two years of full-time coursework, and I completed my foreign language competency during the first semester (read: translating four totally different article excerpts in German from my field--linguistics). I completed my comprehensive examinations (general and specialty) the following year, wrote and defended my dissertation prospectus, and prepared for fieldwork. I spent every summer in the field (read: East/East-Central Africa), and I wrote and defended my dissertation during the fourth year. Because my program did not have any RA or TA requirements, I was free to adjunct on my own time as available/suited. Additionally, my coursework was arranged by the program so that it could be completed entirely in those first two years. I knew that I would only get one shot at this, so I planned meticulously and worked through everything ahead of schedule. In hindsight, I actually wish I had slowed down and enjoyed the experience a little bit more. The academic world can make it impossible to distinguish the \"personal\" from the \"professional\" after a while.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished mine PhD in engineering in less than 4 yrs after BS, with a couple of publications. As many have mentioned here, my project had: 1. No animal model 2. Relatively straight up project scope, good amount computational beside wetlab work 3. No lab rotation (so I started my project since day 1) But also, my PI was running out of funding (so I always knew I had a deadline), which forced me to work ~50-70hrs/weeks.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.705128 | 5.1337 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 11,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5714285714,
"raw_score_rejected": 7,
"seconds_difference": 3216,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Something to consider: Why do you want to finish quickly? If your ultimate goal is an academic job, your plan should be to graduate with a competitive CV. Finishing in 3 years with a dissertation but few or no pubs under your belt would be an academic career dead end, in my field.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "lol my PI be like: wanna graduate in 3-4 yrs? over ma dead body!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Something to consider: Why do you want to finish quickly? If your ultimate goal is an academic job, your plan should be to graduate with a competitive CV. Finishing in 3 years with a dissertation but few or no pubs under your belt would be an academic career dead end, in my field.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.705128 | 5.605128 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 11,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.1,
"raw_score_rejected": 10,
"seconds_difference": 3475,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Something to consider: Why do you want to finish quickly? If your ultimate goal is an academic job, your plan should be to graduate with a competitive CV. Finishing in 3 years with a dissertation but few or no pubs under your belt would be an academic career dead end, in my field.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": ">What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? Some of this depends on the student, but a lot of it depends on the institution, the program requirements, and the dissertation project. I started my doctoral program immediately after finishing undergrad. I had two years of full-time coursework, and I completed my foreign language competency during the first semester (read: translating four totally different article excerpts in German from my field--linguistics). I completed my comprehensive examinations (general and specialty) the following year, wrote and defended my dissertation prospectus, and prepared for fieldwork. I spent every summer in the field (read: East/East-Central Africa), and I wrote and defended my dissertation during the fourth year. Because my program did not have any RA or TA requirements, I was free to adjunct on my own time as available/suited. Additionally, my coursework was arranged by the program so that it could be completed entirely in those first two years. I knew that I would only get one shot at this, so I planned meticulously and worked through everything ahead of schedule. In hindsight, I actually wish I had slowed down and enjoyed the experience a little bit more. The academic world can make it impossible to distinguish the \"personal\" from the \"professional\" after a while.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Something to consider: Why do you want to finish quickly? If your ultimate goal is an academic job, your plan should be to graduate with a competitive CV. Finishing in 3 years with a dissertation but few or no pubs under your belt would be an academic career dead end, in my field.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.705128 | 5.1337 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 11,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5714285714,
"raw_score_rejected": 7,
"seconds_difference": 7051,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Something to consider: Why do you want to finish quickly? If your ultimate goal is an academic job, your plan should be to graduate with a competitive CV. Finishing in 3 years with a dissertation but few or no pubs under your belt would be an academic career dead end, in my field.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I successfully completed my PhD in Psychology in 3 years and could have done this in less time if the data collection had gone to plan. The main things for me were: •treat it as a job... 9-5 Monday to Friday •don’t take on other academic work... so many times I saw other students get prevented from moving forward because they overcommitted to marking, teaching and supporting other projects. •plan meticulously... and expect things to go wrong. Factor in slow university processes and data collection by taking the general rule of 3x the time of what you estimate. •communicate... stay on top of you supervisor and other stakeholders in the project. Keep pushing. •push back... can be quite political in the university world. If needed push back on changes others want to make if will be large changes to suit their own careers. Other work... obviously money to live is always a consideration so for some not having a paying job is not feasible. However, if you are financially in a position to do this then I found it allowed me to stay focused. These ideas may not work for everyone though!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Something to consider: Why do you want to finish quickly? If your ultimate goal is an academic job, your plan should be to graduate with a competitive CV. Finishing in 3 years with a dissertation but few or no pubs under your belt would be an academic career dead end, in my field.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.705128 | 3.955128 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 11,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.75,
"raw_score_rejected": 4,
"seconds_difference": 1141,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Something to consider: Why do you want to finish quickly? If your ultimate goal is an academic job, your plan should be to graduate with a competitive CV. Finishing in 3 years with a dissertation but few or no pubs under your belt would be an academic career dead end, in my field.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Sometimes places have a lower bar for graduation if you are not seeking an academic job. But it depends.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Something to consider: Why do you want to finish quickly? If your ultimate goal is an academic job, your plan should be to graduate with a competitive CV. Finishing in 3 years with a dissertation but few or no pubs under your belt would be an academic career dead end, in my field.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.705128 | 1.205128 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 11,
"raw_score_ratio": 5.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 1696,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "lol my PI be like: wanna graduate in 3-4 yrs? over ma dead body!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": ">What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? Some of this depends on the student, but a lot of it depends on the institution, the program requirements, and the dissertation project. I started my doctoral program immediately after finishing undergrad. I had two years of full-time coursework, and I completed my foreign language competency during the first semester (read: translating four totally different article excerpts in German from my field--linguistics). I completed my comprehensive examinations (general and specialty) the following year, wrote and defended my dissertation prospectus, and prepared for fieldwork. I spent every summer in the field (read: East/East-Central Africa), and I wrote and defended my dissertation during the fourth year. Because my program did not have any RA or TA requirements, I was free to adjunct on my own time as available/suited. Additionally, my coursework was arranged by the program so that it could be completed entirely in those first two years. I knew that I would only get one shot at this, so I planned meticulously and worked through everything ahead of schedule. In hindsight, I actually wish I had slowed down and enjoyed the experience a little bit more. The academic world can make it impossible to distinguish the \"personal\" from the \"professional\" after a while.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "lol my PI be like: wanna graduate in 3-4 yrs? over ma dead body!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.641026 | 5.212454 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 10,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.4285714286,
"raw_score_rejected": 7,
"seconds_difference": 3576,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": ">What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? Some of this depends on the student, but a lot of it depends on the institution, the program requirements, and the dissertation project. I started my doctoral program immediately after finishing undergrad. I had two years of full-time coursework, and I completed my foreign language competency during the first semester (read: translating four totally different article excerpts in German from my field--linguistics). I completed my comprehensive examinations (general and specialty) the following year, wrote and defended my dissertation prospectus, and prepared for fieldwork. I spent every summer in the field (read: East/East-Central Africa), and I wrote and defended my dissertation during the fourth year. Because my program did not have any RA or TA requirements, I was free to adjunct on my own time as available/suited. Additionally, my coursework was arranged by the program so that it could be completed entirely in those first two years. I knew that I would only get one shot at this, so I planned meticulously and worked through everything ahead of schedule. In hindsight, I actually wish I had slowed down and enjoyed the experience a little bit more. The academic world can make it impossible to distinguish the \"personal\" from the \"professional\" after a while.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.576923 | 5.291209 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 9,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.2857142857,
"raw_score_rejected": 7,
"seconds_difference": 11615,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Four years is pretty common in my field, but most programs require a masters degree to be admitted. Some assistantships have an expiration date (four years, for example), which means that if you don't finish everything up by then, you'll either have to pay out of pocket, or not finish at all. Which is pretty good incentive.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.576923 | 5.076923 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 9,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 6,
"seconds_difference": 4162,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I successfully completed my PhD in Psychology in 3 years and could have done this in less time if the data collection had gone to plan. The main things for me were: •treat it as a job... 9-5 Monday to Friday •don’t take on other academic work... so many times I saw other students get prevented from moving forward because they overcommitted to marking, teaching and supporting other projects. •plan meticulously... and expect things to go wrong. Factor in slow university processes and data collection by taking the general rule of 3x the time of what you estimate. •communicate... stay on top of you supervisor and other stakeholders in the project. Keep pushing. •push back... can be quite political in the university world. If needed push back on changes others want to make if will be large changes to suit their own careers. Other work... obviously money to live is always a consideration so for some not having a paying job is not feasible. However, if you are financially in a position to do this then I found it allowed me to stay focused. These ideas may not work for everyone though!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.576923 | 4.326923 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 9,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.25,
"raw_score_rejected": 4,
"seconds_difference": 5705,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "PhD in Communication, so not a physical science and I can't speak to that, but I finished in four years. I was one of four, in my cohort of fourteen, to do so. Four or five others washed out by the time I finished, it was a while ago and I can't remember specifically. I also saw a ton of people in my discipline and others take forever, like the maximum possible time, to finish before being timed out. Without editorializing, the differences are that I worked consistently, met all of my deadlines, didn't take on the weird entitled attitude that seemed rampant, and followed the timeframe that I thought everyone else would. Also, I had an MA when I started, I'm in the US, and I was a few years older than what I often called the \"straight-throughs,\" so I may have been a little more motivated not to waste my time.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.576923 | 3.576923 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 9,
"raw_score_ratio": 3,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 3451,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Usually: - he programs have few course requirements. - The qualifying exams are not too brutal. - They got lucky with a project(s) that didn't need to be restarted or just completely aborted. - They are in a field where they can accomplish everything without leaving the building (e.g. not research that involves any kind of fieldwork or traveling to another lab). - They already had most of the skills they needed to complete their work, and the rest they could learn along the way pretty quickly. In other words, they have relatively easy-going programs (that can still have very high standards) and have projects that are relatively unchallenging when it comes to luck, or the skills or materials needed to complete them. I did a 4 year PhD and I actually wouldn't necessarily recommend it.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.576923 | 3.576923 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 9,
"raw_score_ratio": 3,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 327,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Sometimes places have a lower bar for graduation if you are not seeking an academic job. But it depends.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I saw a couple people pull it off. The traits they had were 1) Smart even among the other PhD candidates 2) Super hard working. Read papers instead of hanging out. Always at work for 10+ hours etc. 3) Chose a productive thesis adviser 4) Chose a realistic topic that didnt get them stuck. Had realistic expectations about what their PhD thesis would be. 5) (optional) were a couple years older, had families and were highly motivated as only an adult with real problems can be to finish and provide for their family.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.576923 | 2.076923 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 9,
"raw_score_ratio": 4.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 6260,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I only have two friends who graduated in four years. They weren't especially organized or meticulous or assertive. One of them took most of their core graduate classes as an undergrad, which sped things up by a year, and he did computational research, so he didn't have to build anything. One of them simply had low expectations put on him. He was asked to do a project that required building something, he did it, published his results, and didn't want to continue in academia so there was no reason to stick around.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Four years is pretty common in my field, but most programs require a masters degree to be admitted. Some assistantships have an expiration date (four years, for example), which means that if you don't finish everything up by then, you'll either have to pay out of pocket, or not finish at all. Which is pretty good incentive.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I only have two friends who graduated in four years. They weren't especially organized or meticulous or assertive. One of them took most of their core graduate classes as an undergrad, which sped things up by a year, and he did computational research, so he didn't have to build anything. One of them simply had low expectations put on him. He was asked to do a project that required building something, he did it, published his results, and didn't want to continue in academia so there was no reason to stick around.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 5.282051 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.1666666667,
"raw_score_rejected": 6,
"seconds_difference": 6137,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Four years is pretty common in my field, but most programs require a masters degree to be admitted. Some assistantships have an expiration date (four years, for example), which means that if you don't finish everything up by then, you'll either have to pay out of pocket, or not finish at all. Which is pretty good incentive.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I successfully completed my PhD in Psychology in 3 years and could have done this in less time if the data collection had gone to plan. The main things for me were: •treat it as a job... 9-5 Monday to Friday •don’t take on other academic work... so many times I saw other students get prevented from moving forward because they overcommitted to marking, teaching and supporting other projects. •plan meticulously... and expect things to go wrong. Factor in slow university processes and data collection by taking the general rule of 3x the time of what you estimate. •communicate... stay on top of you supervisor and other stakeholders in the project. Keep pushing. •push back... can be quite political in the university world. If needed push back on changes others want to make if will be large changes to suit their own careers. Other work... obviously money to live is always a consideration so for some not having a paying job is not feasible. However, if you are financially in a position to do this then I found it allowed me to stay focused. These ideas may not work for everyone though!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Four years is pretty common in my field, but most programs require a masters degree to be admitted. Some assistantships have an expiration date (four years, for example), which means that if you don't finish everything up by then, you'll either have to pay out of pocket, or not finish at all. Which is pretty good incentive.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.384615 | 4.884615 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 6,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 4,
"seconds_difference": 1543,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Four years is pretty common in my field, but most programs require a masters degree to be admitted. Some assistantships have an expiration date (four years, for example), which means that if you don't finish everything up by then, you'll either have to pay out of pocket, or not finish at all. Which is pretty good incentive.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Sometimes places have a lower bar for graduation if you are not seeking an academic job. But it depends.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Four years is pretty common in my field, but most programs require a masters degree to be admitted. Some assistantships have an expiration date (four years, for example), which means that if you don't finish everything up by then, you'll either have to pay out of pocket, or not finish at all. Which is pretty good incentive.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.384615 | 3.384615 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 6,
"raw_score_ratio": 3,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 2098,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I only have two friends who graduated in four years. They weren't especially organized or meticulous or assertive. One of them took most of their core graduate classes as an undergrad, which sped things up by a year, and he did computational research, so he didn't have to build anything. One of them simply had low expectations put on him. He was asked to do a project that required building something, he did it, published his results, and didn't want to continue in academia so there was no reason to stick around.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I successfully completed my PhD in Psychology in 3 years and could have done this in less time if the data collection had gone to plan. The main things for me were: •treat it as a job... 9-5 Monday to Friday •don’t take on other academic work... so many times I saw other students get prevented from moving forward because they overcommitted to marking, teaching and supporting other projects. •plan meticulously... and expect things to go wrong. Factor in slow university processes and data collection by taking the general rule of 3x the time of what you estimate. •communicate... stay on top of you supervisor and other stakeholders in the project. Keep pushing. •push back... can be quite political in the university world. If needed push back on changes others want to make if will be large changes to suit their own careers. Other work... obviously money to live is always a consideration so for some not having a paying job is not feasible. However, if you are financially in a position to do this then I found it allowed me to stay focused. These ideas may not work for everyone though!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I only have two friends who graduated in four years. They weren't especially organized or meticulous or assertive. One of them took most of their core graduate classes as an undergrad, which sped things up by a year, and he did computational research, so he didn't have to build anything. One of them simply had low expectations put on him. He was asked to do a project that required building something, he did it, published his results, and didn't want to continue in academia so there was no reason to stick around.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 4.698718 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.75,
"raw_score_rejected": 4,
"seconds_difference": 7680,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I only have two friends who graduated in four years. They weren't especially organized or meticulous or assertive. One of them took most of their core graduate classes as an undergrad, which sped things up by a year, and he did computational research, so he didn't have to build anything. One of them simply had low expectations put on him. He was asked to do a project that required building something, he did it, published his results, and didn't want to continue in academia so there was no reason to stick around.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "PhD in Communication, so not a physical science and I can't speak to that, but I finished in four years. I was one of four, in my cohort of fourteen, to do so. Four or five others washed out by the time I finished, it was a while ago and I can't remember specifically. I also saw a ton of people in my discipline and others take forever, like the maximum possible time, to finish before being timed out. Without editorializing, the differences are that I worked consistently, met all of my deadlines, didn't take on the weird entitled attitude that seemed rampant, and followed the timeframe that I thought everyone else would. Also, I had an MA when I started, I'm in the US, and I was a few years older than what I often called the \"straight-throughs,\" so I may have been a little more motivated not to waste my time.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I only have two friends who graduated in four years. They weren't especially organized or meticulous or assertive. One of them took most of their core graduate classes as an undergrad, which sped things up by a year, and he did computational research, so he didn't have to build anything. One of them simply had low expectations put on him. He was asked to do a project that required building something, he did it, published his results, and didn't want to continue in academia so there was no reason to stick around.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 4.115385 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 5426,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I only have two friends who graduated in four years. They weren't especially organized or meticulous or assertive. One of them took most of their core graduate classes as an undergrad, which sped things up by a year, and he did computational research, so he didn't have to build anything. One of them simply had low expectations put on him. He was asked to do a project that required building something, he did it, published his results, and didn't want to continue in academia so there was no reason to stick around.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Usually: - he programs have few course requirements. - The qualifying exams are not too brutal. - They got lucky with a project(s) that didn't need to be restarted or just completely aborted. - They are in a field where they can accomplish everything without leaving the building (e.g. not research that involves any kind of fieldwork or traveling to another lab). - They already had most of the skills they needed to complete their work, and the rest they could learn along the way pretty quickly. In other words, they have relatively easy-going programs (that can still have very high standards) and have projects that are relatively unchallenging when it comes to luck, or the skills or materials needed to complete them. I did a 4 year PhD and I actually wouldn't necessarily recommend it.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I only have two friends who graduated in four years. They weren't especially organized or meticulous or assertive. One of them took most of their core graduate classes as an undergrad, which sped things up by a year, and he did computational research, so he didn't have to build anything. One of them simply had low expectations put on him. He was asked to do a project that required building something, he did it, published his results, and didn't want to continue in academia so there was no reason to stick around.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 4.115385 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 2302,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I only have two friends who graduated in four years. They weren't especially organized or meticulous or assertive. One of them took most of their core graduate classes as an undergrad, which sped things up by a year, and he did computational research, so he didn't have to build anything. One of them simply had low expectations put on him. He was asked to do a project that required building something, he did it, published his results, and didn't want to continue in academia so there was no reason to stick around.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Sometimes places have a lower bar for graduation if you are not seeking an academic job. But it depends.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I only have two friends who graduated in four years. They weren't especially organized or meticulous or assertive. One of them took most of their core graduate classes as an undergrad, which sped things up by a year, and he did computational research, so he didn't have to build anything. One of them simply had low expectations put on him. He was asked to do a project that required building something, he did it, published his results, and didn't want to continue in academia so there was no reason to stick around.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 2.948718 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 3.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 8235,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished my Ph.D. (in chemistry) in 3.5 years. I worked 12-14 hour days, seven days a week, with no breaks. I was organized, determined, and ended up with 4 papers and several patents, but also years of exhaustion to get through before I could be normal again.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I successfully completed my PhD in Psychology in 3 years and could have done this in less time if the data collection had gone to plan. The main things for me were: •treat it as a job... 9-5 Monday to Friday •don’t take on other academic work... so many times I saw other students get prevented from moving forward because they overcommitted to marking, teaching and supporting other projects. •plan meticulously... and expect things to go wrong. Factor in slow university processes and data collection by taking the general rule of 3x the time of what you estimate. •communicate... stay on top of you supervisor and other stakeholders in the project. Keep pushing. •push back... can be quite political in the university world. If needed push back on changes others want to make if will be large changes to suit their own careers. Other work... obviously money to live is always a consideration so for some not having a paying job is not feasible. However, if you are financially in a position to do this then I found it allowed me to stay focused. These ideas may not work for everyone though!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished my Ph.D. (in chemistry) in 3.5 years. I worked 12-14 hour days, seven days a week, with no breaks. I was organized, determined, and ended up with 4 papers and several patents, but also years of exhaustion to get through before I could be normal again.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.320513 | 5.070513 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 5,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.25,
"raw_score_rejected": 4,
"seconds_difference": 8172,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished my Ph.D. (in chemistry) in 3.5 years. I worked 12-14 hour days, seven days a week, with no breaks. I was organized, determined, and ended up with 4 papers and several patents, but also years of exhaustion to get through before I could be normal again.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "PhD in Communication, so not a physical science and I can't speak to that, but I finished in four years. I was one of four, in my cohort of fourteen, to do so. Four or five others washed out by the time I finished, it was a while ago and I can't remember specifically. I also saw a ton of people in my discipline and others take forever, like the maximum possible time, to finish before being timed out. Without editorializing, the differences are that I worked consistently, met all of my deadlines, didn't take on the weird entitled attitude that seemed rampant, and followed the timeframe that I thought everyone else would. Also, I had an MA when I started, I'm in the US, and I was a few years older than what I often called the \"straight-throughs,\" so I may have been a little more motivated not to waste my time.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished my Ph.D. (in chemistry) in 3.5 years. I worked 12-14 hour days, seven days a week, with no breaks. I was organized, determined, and ended up with 4 papers and several patents, but also years of exhaustion to get through before I could be normal again.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.320513 | 4.653846 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 5,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.6666666667,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 5918,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished my Ph.D. (in chemistry) in 3.5 years. I worked 12-14 hour days, seven days a week, with no breaks. I was organized, determined, and ended up with 4 papers and several patents, but also years of exhaustion to get through before I could be normal again.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Usually: - he programs have few course requirements. - The qualifying exams are not too brutal. - They got lucky with a project(s) that didn't need to be restarted or just completely aborted. - They are in a field where they can accomplish everything without leaving the building (e.g. not research that involves any kind of fieldwork or traveling to another lab). - They already had most of the skills they needed to complete their work, and the rest they could learn along the way pretty quickly. In other words, they have relatively easy-going programs (that can still have very high standards) and have projects that are relatively unchallenging when it comes to luck, or the skills or materials needed to complete them. I did a 4 year PhD and I actually wouldn't necessarily recommend it.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished my Ph.D. (in chemistry) in 3.5 years. I worked 12-14 hour days, seven days a week, with no breaks. I was organized, determined, and ended up with 4 papers and several patents, but also years of exhaustion to get through before I could be normal again.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.320513 | 4.653846 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 5,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.6666666667,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 2794,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished my Ph.D. (in chemistry) in 3.5 years. I worked 12-14 hour days, seven days a week, with no breaks. I was organized, determined, and ended up with 4 papers and several patents, but also years of exhaustion to get through before I could be normal again.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Sometimes places have a lower bar for graduation if you are not seeking an academic job. But it depends.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I finished my Ph.D. (in chemistry) in 3.5 years. I worked 12-14 hour days, seven days a week, with no breaks. I was organized, determined, and ended up with 4 papers and several patents, but also years of exhaustion to get through before I could be normal again.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.320513 | 3.820513 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 5,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 8727,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I successfully completed my PhD in Psychology in 3 years and could have done this in less time if the data collection had gone to plan. The main things for me were: •treat it as a job... 9-5 Monday to Friday •don’t take on other academic work... so many times I saw other students get prevented from moving forward because they overcommitted to marking, teaching and supporting other projects. •plan meticulously... and expect things to go wrong. Factor in slow university processes and data collection by taking the general rule of 3x the time of what you estimate. •communicate... stay on top of you supervisor and other stakeholders in the project. Keep pushing. •push back... can be quite political in the university world. If needed push back on changes others want to make if will be large changes to suit their own careers. Other work... obviously money to live is always a consideration so for some not having a paying job is not feasible. However, if you are financially in a position to do this then I found it allowed me to stay focused. These ideas may not work for everyone though!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Sometimes places have a lower bar for graduation if you are not seeking an academic job. But it depends.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I successfully completed my PhD in Psychology in 3 years and could have done this in less time if the data collection had gone to plan. The main things for me were: •treat it as a job... 9-5 Monday to Friday •don’t take on other academic work... so many times I saw other students get prevented from moving forward because they overcommitted to marking, teaching and supporting other projects. •plan meticulously... and expect things to go wrong. Factor in slow university processes and data collection by taking the general rule of 3x the time of what you estimate. •communicate... stay on top of you supervisor and other stakeholders in the project. Keep pushing. •push back... can be quite political in the university world. If needed push back on changes others want to make if will be large changes to suit their own careers. Other work... obviously money to live is always a consideration so for some not having a paying job is not feasible. However, if you are financially in a position to do this then I found it allowed me to stay focused. These ideas may not work for everyone though!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.25641 | 4.25641 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 4,
"raw_score_ratio": 2,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 555,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My PhD in biomedical engineering (US, from BS degree) took 5 years. Realistically, to get it all done in 4 years you would have questionable life-balance and miss out on a lot of opportunities for growth outside your lab space. I think if you prioritize your project (don’t take on teaching, mentoring, outreach, extracurriculars, or collaborations) and work very smart/hard, you could do it. Would it be everything a longer PhD could be? No. Will you burn out? Maybe. If you want to stay in academia, I’d advise staying as long as you need to rack up publications and set yourself up for a career. Not all PhDs are created equal. Make yours something you’re proud of.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "PhD in Communication, so not a physical science and I can't speak to that, but I finished in four years. I was one of four, in my cohort of fourteen, to do so. Four or five others washed out by the time I finished, it was a while ago and I can't remember specifically. I also saw a ton of people in my discipline and others take forever, like the maximum possible time, to finish before being timed out. Without editorializing, the differences are that I worked consistently, met all of my deadlines, didn't take on the weird entitled attitude that seemed rampant, and followed the timeframe that I thought everyone else would. Also, I had an MA when I started, I'm in the US, and I was a few years older than what I often called the \"straight-throughs,\" so I may have been a little more motivated not to waste my time.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My PhD in biomedical engineering (US, from BS degree) took 5 years. Realistically, to get it all done in 4 years you would have questionable life-balance and miss out on a lot of opportunities for growth outside your lab space. I think if you prioritize your project (don’t take on teaching, mentoring, outreach, extracurriculars, or collaborations) and work very smart/hard, you could do it. Would it be everything a longer PhD could be? No. Will you burn out? Maybe. If you want to stay in academia, I’d advise staying as long as you need to rack up publications and set yourself up for a career. Not all PhDs are created equal. Make yours something you’re proud of.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.25641 | 4.923077 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 4,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 6184,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My PhD in biomedical engineering (US, from BS degree) took 5 years. Realistically, to get it all done in 4 years you would have questionable life-balance and miss out on a lot of opportunities for growth outside your lab space. I think if you prioritize your project (don’t take on teaching, mentoring, outreach, extracurriculars, or collaborations) and work very smart/hard, you could do it. Would it be everything a longer PhD could be? No. Will you burn out? Maybe. If you want to stay in academia, I’d advise staying as long as you need to rack up publications and set yourself up for a career. Not all PhDs are created equal. Make yours something you’re proud of.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Usually: - he programs have few course requirements. - The qualifying exams are not too brutal. - They got lucky with a project(s) that didn't need to be restarted or just completely aborted. - They are in a field where they can accomplish everything without leaving the building (e.g. not research that involves any kind of fieldwork or traveling to another lab). - They already had most of the skills they needed to complete their work, and the rest they could learn along the way pretty quickly. In other words, they have relatively easy-going programs (that can still have very high standards) and have projects that are relatively unchallenging when it comes to luck, or the skills or materials needed to complete them. I did a 4 year PhD and I actually wouldn't necessarily recommend it.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My PhD in biomedical engineering (US, from BS degree) took 5 years. Realistically, to get it all done in 4 years you would have questionable life-balance and miss out on a lot of opportunities for growth outside your lab space. I think if you prioritize your project (don’t take on teaching, mentoring, outreach, extracurriculars, or collaborations) and work very smart/hard, you could do it. Would it be everything a longer PhD could be? No. Will you burn out? Maybe. If you want to stay in academia, I’d advise staying as long as you need to rack up publications and set yourself up for a career. Not all PhDs are created equal. Make yours something you’re proud of.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.25641 | 4.923077 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 4,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 3060,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My PhD in biomedical engineering (US, from BS degree) took 5 years. Realistically, to get it all done in 4 years you would have questionable life-balance and miss out on a lot of opportunities for growth outside your lab space. I think if you prioritize your project (don’t take on teaching, mentoring, outreach, extracurriculars, or collaborations) and work very smart/hard, you could do it. Would it be everything a longer PhD could be? No. Will you burn out? Maybe. If you want to stay in academia, I’d advise staying as long as you need to rack up publications and set yourself up for a career. Not all PhDs are created equal. Make yours something you’re proud of.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Sometimes places have a lower bar for graduation if you are not seeking an academic job. But it depends.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My PhD in biomedical engineering (US, from BS degree) took 5 years. Realistically, to get it all done in 4 years you would have questionable life-balance and miss out on a lot of opportunities for growth outside your lab space. I think if you prioritize your project (don’t take on teaching, mentoring, outreach, extracurriculars, or collaborations) and work very smart/hard, you could do it. Would it be everything a longer PhD could be? No. Will you burn out? Maybe. If you want to stay in academia, I’d advise staying as long as you need to rack up publications and set yourself up for a career. Not all PhDs are created equal. Make yours something you’re proud of.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.25641 | 4.25641 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 4,
"raw_score_ratio": 2,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 8993,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "PhD in Communication, so not a physical science and I can't speak to that, but I finished in four years. I was one of four, in my cohort of fourteen, to do so. Four or five others washed out by the time I finished, it was a while ago and I can't remember specifically. I also saw a ton of people in my discipline and others take forever, like the maximum possible time, to finish before being timed out. Without editorializing, the differences are that I worked consistently, met all of my deadlines, didn't take on the weird entitled attitude that seemed rampant, and followed the timeframe that I thought everyone else would. Also, I had an MA when I started, I'm in the US, and I was a few years older than what I often called the \"straight-throughs,\" so I may have been a little more motivated not to waste my time.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Sometimes places have a lower bar for graduation if you are not seeking an academic job. But it depends.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "PhD in Communication, so not a physical science and I can't speak to that, but I finished in four years. I was one of four, in my cohort of fourteen, to do so. Four or five others washed out by the time I finished, it was a while ago and I can't remember specifically. I also saw a ton of people in my discipline and others take forever, like the maximum possible time, to finish before being timed out. Without editorializing, the differences are that I worked consistently, met all of my deadlines, didn't take on the weird entitled attitude that seemed rampant, and followed the timeframe that I thought everyone else would. Also, I had an MA when I started, I'm in the US, and I was a few years older than what I often called the \"straight-throughs,\" so I may have been a little more motivated not to waste my time.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 2809,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs. | 58f6c7c7d824684b8950045448548deec6cd0bd48651046e7d3c52b031afc5cc | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Usually: - he programs have few course requirements. - The qualifying exams are not too brutal. - They got lucky with a project(s) that didn't need to be restarted or just completely aborted. - They are in a field where they can accomplish everything without leaving the building (e.g. not research that involves any kind of fieldwork or traveling to another lab). - They already had most of the skills they needed to complete their work, and the rest they could learn along the way pretty quickly. In other words, they have relatively easy-going programs (that can still have very high standards) and have projects that are relatively unchallenging when it comes to luck, or the skills or materials needed to complete them. I did a 4 year PhD and I actually wouldn't necessarily recommend it.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Sometimes places have a lower bar for graduation if you are not seeking an academic job. But it depends.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Completing PhD in 3-4 years? How do some people end up completing their PhD (in the USA) in 4 years? I've seen people in Chemistry and Materials Sciences complete their PhDs in 4 years directly after their bachelor's and that too without compromising the number and quality of publications. What traits set these students apart and what skills need deliberate practice to follow their footsteps? ​ PS: I'm not talking about PhD programs in the European universities where the length of PhD is much shorter in general. But that is an interesting topic too. The students in the European universities also produce similar works like that of US grad students but they take much less time to complete their PhDs.",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Usually: - he programs have few course requirements. - The qualifying exams are not too brutal. - They got lucky with a project(s) that didn't need to be restarted or just completely aborted. - They are in a field where they can accomplish everything without leaving the building (e.g. not research that involves any kind of fieldwork or traveling to another lab). - They already had most of the skills they needed to complete their work, and the rest they could learn along the way pretty quickly. In other words, they have relatively easy-going programs (that can still have very high standards) and have projects that are relatively unchallenging when it comes to luck, or the skills or materials needed to complete them. I did a 4 year PhD and I actually wouldn't necessarily recommend it.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "hi98zv",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 5933,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.97
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "When it's not a \"coronvirus semester\", I consider it a pass/fail on a PhD application as a \"took a diet version of the course\", so maybe like a half a course worth. It usually doesn't matter, but it would not look good if that course was the research area of interest. I don't think there's a consensus yet about how to interpret it for this semester specifically.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 8.569444 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 175,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.4305555556,
"raw_score_rejected": 72,
"seconds_difference": 9241,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is petitioning for this as well. On the one hand, I don't care because I have a good GPA and also grad school grades don't matter. On the other, I've had way too many run ins with supervisors/employers/whatever asking for my transcripts (even from undergrad!) to think that a P/NP semester will not create problems for me in the future. If one thing is clear, it's that people are heavily overestimating the memory and attention of adcoms. A couple years on, a lot of people will need a reminder that Spring 2020 was Coronavirus Spring. You will have to include an explanatory note about the pass fail for every transcript you send.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 5.354839 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 175,
"raw_score_ratio": 5.6451612903,
"raw_score_rejected": 31,
"seconds_difference": 9033,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ive seen this as well. I have a student who is worried about their 4.0 gpa dropping. They are an excellent student and need the campus enviroment as their home isnt conducive to learning.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 4.75 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 175,
"raw_score_ratio": 6.25,
"raw_score_rejected": 28,
"seconds_difference": 8221,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Where I am re a number of universities, the PhD defense is pass/fail. Courses from masters up are A you pass, B you are basically warned and if you do it in a subsequent semester you are on probation and must get back to an A, which is basically pass/fail. All professors know this and A's are given out liberally, so one has to be fairly determined to get a B and not continue.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 175,
"raw_score_ratio": 14.5833333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 12,
"seconds_difference": 2097,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We'll have to reevaluate how we as a college will look at those scores. Right now, it's our policy to not accept classes for transfer credit if the student took them pass/fail. That will probably change but only for this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 175,
"raw_score_ratio": 15.9090909091,
"raw_score_rejected": 11,
"seconds_difference": 4332,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Ours went this way: students have one week after getting their final (A-F) grades to decide whether to turn them into P/F grades. If they decide to do P/F, the course still counts as a requirement for majors, but does not contribute to their GPA. This is all mandated from above so professors don't have to choose anything. I think this splits the difference somewhat nicely. It's basically saying, \"courses are still real courses,\" but \"if you don't do as well as you'd hoped, you can make the course not count towards your GPA, but still get graduation credit for it.\" I also am glad it doesn't make me pick; I'm not the good guy or the bad guy here. The students, if the Reddit forum for our university is to be trusted, seem to like this option as well. (I've talked to my own students about this, most seem very happy with it. My honors freshmen worried a little that this will require explanation for grad or med school admissions but I've assured them that the admissions people are going to understand that this was a weird semester and they'll hardly be the only ones in this situation.)",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 175,
"raw_score_ratio": 87.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 6666,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university made every course Pass/Fail this semester. They believed this was more fair than giving students it as an option in a time of crisis, since having the choice pressures people to opt for normal grading to remain competitive (in GPA) with others who also opt for normal grading and manage to get A's. Essentially, they felt there would be a stigma to choosing P/F, since it would essentially be admitting you don't think you could get an A in these circumstances. Another argument they made was that, due to the sudden adoption of remote learning in most courses and the extreme pressures put on faculty during this outbreak, it was unreasonable to expect instructors to be able to adequately judge the difference between A vs B vs C level work this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Where I am re a number of universities, the PhD defense is pass/fail. Courses from masters up are A you pass, B you are basically warned and if you do it in a subsequent semester you are on probation and must get back to an A, which is basically pass/fail. All professors know this and A's are given out liberally, so one has to be fairly determined to get a B and not continue.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university made every course Pass/Fail this semester. They believed this was more fair than giving students it as an option in a time of crisis, since having the choice pressures people to opt for normal grading to remain competitive (in GPA) with others who also opt for normal grading and manage to get A's. Essentially, they felt there would be a stigma to choosing P/F, since it would essentially be admitting you don't think you could get an A in these circumstances. Another argument they made was that, due to the sudden adoption of remote learning in most courses and the extreme pressures put on faculty during this outbreak, it was unreasonable to expect instructors to be able to adequately judge the difference between A vs B vs C level work this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 6.794872 | 5.461538 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 28,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 12,
"seconds_difference": 7898,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university made every course Pass/Fail this semester. They believed this was more fair than giving students it as an option in a time of crisis, since having the choice pressures people to opt for normal grading to remain competitive (in GPA) with others who also opt for normal grading and manage to get A's. Essentially, they felt there would be a stigma to choosing P/F, since it would essentially be admitting you don't think you could get an A in these circumstances. Another argument they made was that, due to the sudden adoption of remote learning in most courses and the extreme pressures put on faculty during this outbreak, it was unreasonable to expect instructors to be able to adequately judge the difference between A vs B vs C level work this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We'll have to reevaluate how we as a college will look at those scores. Right now, it's our policy to not accept classes for transfer credit if the student took them pass/fail. That will probably change but only for this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university made every course Pass/Fail this semester. They believed this was more fair than giving students it as an option in a time of crisis, since having the choice pressures people to opt for normal grading to remain competitive (in GPA) with others who also opt for normal grading and manage to get A's. Essentially, they felt there would be a stigma to choosing P/F, since it would essentially be admitting you don't think you could get an A in these circumstances. Another argument they made was that, due to the sudden adoption of remote learning in most courses and the extreme pressures put on faculty during this outbreak, it was unreasonable to expect instructors to be able to adequately judge the difference between A vs B vs C level work this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 6.794872 | 5.249417 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 28,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.5454545455,
"raw_score_rejected": 11,
"seconds_difference": 10133,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university made every course Pass/Fail this semester. They believed this was more fair than giving students it as an option in a time of crisis, since having the choice pressures people to opt for normal grading to remain competitive (in GPA) with others who also opt for normal grading and manage to get A's. Essentially, they felt there would be a stigma to choosing P/F, since it would essentially be admitting you don't think you could get an A in these circumstances. Another argument they made was that, due to the sudden adoption of remote learning in most courses and the extreme pressures put on faculty during this outbreak, it was unreasonable to expect instructors to be able to adequately judge the difference between A vs B vs C level work this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My US grad school was entirely pass/fail (with the possibility for \"low pass\" and \"pass with honors\" when extra distinctions needed to be made) for all MA and PhD coursework and exams. So there is some legibility for those sorts of grading systems already.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university made every course Pass/Fail this semester. They believed this was more fair than giving students it as an option in a time of crisis, since having the choice pressures people to opt for normal grading to remain competitive (in GPA) with others who also opt for normal grading and manage to get A's. Essentially, they felt there would be a stigma to choosing P/F, since it would essentially be admitting you don't think you could get an A in these circumstances. Another argument they made was that, due to the sudden adoption of remote learning in most courses and the extreme pressures put on faculty during this outbreak, it was unreasonable to expect instructors to be able to adequately judge the difference between A vs B vs C level work this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 6.794872 | 2.194872 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 28,
"raw_score_ratio": 5.6,
"raw_score_rejected": 5,
"seconds_difference": 5661,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university made every course Pass/Fail this semester. They believed this was more fair than giving students it as an option in a time of crisis, since having the choice pressures people to opt for normal grading to remain competitive (in GPA) with others who also opt for normal grading and manage to get A's. Essentially, they felt there would be a stigma to choosing P/F, since it would essentially be admitting you don't think you could get an A in these circumstances. Another argument they made was that, due to the sudden adoption of remote learning in most courses and the extreme pressures put on faculty during this outbreak, it was unreasonable to expect instructors to be able to adequately judge the difference between A vs B vs C level work this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work in university admissions now but I taught up until last year. My office doesn't like pass/fail because we don't have a sufficient way of calculating what that really means. In fact, we just don't take pass fail courses into consideration in our admissions process. Other offices obviously will be different, and it probably depends a lot on what school you're applying to and what school you're applying from. From a teaching perspective, I think it makes perfect sense, especially at a graduate level. But from an admissions perspective, things get more complicated. It's not that it can't be done, it's just that many offices aren't familiar enough with the system. So if I were the student, I would be concerned about what school I wanted to go to for my PhD and how they specifically look at pass/fail grades. Edited to add that of course, for the next few years, people in admissions will get used to seeing Spring, 2020 as a weird semester that will be dealt with differently by each school. We already know that we'll have to be more diligent with that semester in particular to see what happened for the individual student.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university made every course Pass/Fail this semester. They believed this was more fair than giving students it as an option in a time of crisis, since having the choice pressures people to opt for normal grading to remain competitive (in GPA) with others who also opt for normal grading and manage to get A's. Essentially, they felt there would be a stigma to choosing P/F, since it would essentially be admitting you don't think you could get an A in these circumstances. Another argument they made was that, due to the sudden adoption of remote learning in most courses and the extreme pressures put on faculty during this outbreak, it was unreasonable to expect instructors to be able to adequately judge the difference between A vs B vs C level work this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 6.794872 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 28,
"raw_score_ratio": 9.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 5353,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university made every course Pass/Fail this semester. They believed this was more fair than giving students it as an option in a time of crisis, since having the choice pressures people to opt for normal grading to remain competitive (in GPA) with others who also opt for normal grading and manage to get A's. Essentially, they felt there would be a stigma to choosing P/F, since it would essentially be admitting you don't think you could get an A in these circumstances. Another argument they made was that, due to the sudden adoption of remote learning in most courses and the extreme pressures put on faculty during this outbreak, it was unreasonable to expect instructors to be able to adequately judge the difference between A vs B vs C level work this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university made every course Pass/Fail this semester. They believed this was more fair than giving students it as an option in a time of crisis, since having the choice pressures people to opt for normal grading to remain competitive (in GPA) with others who also opt for normal grading and manage to get A's. Essentially, they felt there would be a stigma to choosing P/F, since it would essentially be admitting you don't think you could get an A in these circumstances. Another argument they made was that, due to the sudden adoption of remote learning in most courses and the extreme pressures put on faculty during this outbreak, it was unreasonable to expect instructors to be able to adequately judge the difference between A vs B vs C level work this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 6.794872 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 28,
"raw_score_ratio": 14,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 12467,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Where I am re a number of universities, the PhD defense is pass/fail. Courses from masters up are A you pass, B you are basically warned and if you do it in a subsequent semester you are on probation and must get back to an A, which is basically pass/fail. All professors know this and A's are given out liberally, so one has to be fairly determined to get a B and not continue.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We'll have to reevaluate how we as a college will look at those scores. Right now, it's our policy to not accept classes for transfer credit if the student took them pass/fail. That will probably change but only for this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Where I am re a number of universities, the PhD defense is pass/fail. Courses from masters up are A you pass, B you are basically warned and if you do it in a subsequent semester you are on probation and must get back to an A, which is basically pass/fail. All professors know this and A's are given out liberally, so one has to be fairly determined to get a B and not continue.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.769231 | 5.678322 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 12,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.0909090909,
"raw_score_rejected": 11,
"seconds_difference": 2235,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Where I am re a number of universities, the PhD defense is pass/fail. Courses from masters up are A you pass, B you are basically warned and if you do it in a subsequent semester you are on probation and must get back to an A, which is basically pass/fail. All professors know this and A's are given out liberally, so one has to be fairly determined to get a B and not continue.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Where I am re a number of universities, the PhD defense is pass/fail. Courses from masters up are A you pass, B you are basically warned and if you do it in a subsequent semester you are on probation and must get back to an A, which is basically pass/fail. All professors know this and A's are given out liberally, so one has to be fairly determined to get a B and not continue.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.769231 | 0.769231 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 12,
"raw_score_ratio": 6,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 4569,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We'll have to reevaluate how we as a college will look at those scores. Right now, it's our policy to not accept classes for transfer credit if the student took them pass/fail. That will probably change but only for this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We'll have to reevaluate how we as a college will look at those scores. Right now, it's our policy to not accept classes for transfer credit if the student took them pass/fail. That will probably change but only for this semester.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.705128 | 1.205128 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 11,
"raw_score_ratio": 5.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 2334,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We are having the same debate and it's carrying over into the faculty senate now. My personal take sis that we should relax policies and *offer* P/F grading to anyone who wants it, but we should not *require* it for all students. My logic is simply that many students in my classes are doing very well-- sitting on strong As so far --and it would be unfair to them to force them into P/F grading. I would be pissed as hell to have my A grade converted to a P in their place. For grad school I simply wouldn't care. I understand it varies a lot between fields, but in mine (humanities) graduate school grads are meaningless. In my Ph.D. program everyone got As all the time, and if you got two Bs in one semester you were put on probation. As a veteran of over two dozen academic search committees I can attest that we *never* look at grades when evaluating candidates for faculty or admin positions-- they just don't matter in most fields.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My US grad school was entirely pass/fail (with the possibility for \"low pass\" and \"pass with honors\" when extra distinctions needed to be made) for all MA and PhD coursework and exams. So there is some legibility for those sorts of grading systems already.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We are having the same debate and it's carrying over into the faculty senate now. My personal take sis that we should relax policies and *offer* P/F grading to anyone who wants it, but we should not *require* it for all students. My logic is simply that many students in my classes are doing very well-- sitting on strong As so far --and it would be unfair to them to force them into P/F grading. I would be pissed as hell to have my A grade converted to a P in their place. For grad school I simply wouldn't care. I understand it varies a lot between fields, but in mine (humanities) graduate school grads are meaningless. In my Ph.D. program everyone got As all the time, and if you got two Bs in one semester you were put on probation. As a veteran of over two dozen academic search committees I can attest that we *never* look at grades when evaluating candidates for faculty or admin positions-- they just don't matter in most fields.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 5.048718 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.4,
"raw_score_rejected": 5,
"seconds_difference": 11361,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We are having the same debate and it's carrying over into the faculty senate now. My personal take sis that we should relax policies and *offer* P/F grading to anyone who wants it, but we should not *require* it for all students. My logic is simply that many students in my classes are doing very well-- sitting on strong As so far --and it would be unfair to them to force them into P/F grading. I would be pissed as hell to have my A grade converted to a P in their place. For grad school I simply wouldn't care. I understand it varies a lot between fields, but in mine (humanities) graduate school grads are meaningless. In my Ph.D. program everyone got As all the time, and if you got two Bs in one semester you were put on probation. As a veteran of over two dozen academic search committees I can attest that we *never* look at grades when evaluating candidates for faculty or admin positions-- they just don't matter in most fields.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work in university admissions now but I taught up until last year. My office doesn't like pass/fail because we don't have a sufficient way of calculating what that really means. In fact, we just don't take pass fail courses into consideration in our admissions process. Other offices obviously will be different, and it probably depends a lot on what school you're applying to and what school you're applying from. From a teaching perspective, I think it makes perfect sense, especially at a graduate level. But from an admissions perspective, things get more complicated. It's not that it can't be done, it's just that many offices aren't familiar enough with the system. So if I were the student, I would be concerned about what school I wanted to go to for my PhD and how they specifically look at pass/fail grades. Edited to add that of course, for the next few years, people in admissions will get used to seeing Spring, 2020 as a weird semester that will be dealt with differently by each school. We already know that we'll have to be more diligent with that semester in particular to see what happened for the individual student.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We are having the same debate and it's carrying over into the faculty senate now. My personal take sis that we should relax policies and *offer* P/F grading to anyone who wants it, but we should not *require* it for all students. My logic is simply that many students in my classes are doing very well-- sitting on strong As so far --and it would be unfair to them to force them into P/F grading. I would be pissed as hell to have my A grade converted to a P in their place. For grad school I simply wouldn't care. I understand it varies a lot between fields, but in mine (humanities) graduate school grads are meaningless. In my Ph.D. program everyone got As all the time, and if you got two Bs in one semester you were put on probation. As a veteran of over two dozen academic search committees I can attest that we *never* look at grades when evaluating candidates for faculty or admin positions-- they just don't matter in most fields.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 4.115385 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 11053,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We are having the same debate and it's carrying over into the faculty senate now. My personal take sis that we should relax policies and *offer* P/F grading to anyone who wants it, but we should not *require* it for all students. My logic is simply that many students in my classes are doing very well-- sitting on strong As so far --and it would be unfair to them to force them into P/F grading. I would be pissed as hell to have my A grade converted to a P in their place. For grad school I simply wouldn't care. I understand it varies a lot between fields, but in mine (humanities) graduate school grads are meaningless. In my Ph.D. program everyone got As all the time, and if you got two Bs in one semester you were put on probation. As a veteran of over two dozen academic search committees I can attest that we *never* look at grades when evaluating candidates for faculty or admin positions-- they just don't matter in most fields.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is giving students the choice. I think that’s the best way to go. For students like myself that are trying to bump up to the next level of honors before graduating this May, I’d feel a little disappointed if it was taken away.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We are having the same debate and it's carrying over into the faculty senate now. My personal take sis that we should relax policies and *offer* P/F grading to anyone who wants it, but we should not *require* it for all students. My logic is simply that many students in my classes are doing very well-- sitting on strong As so far --and it would be unfair to them to force them into P/F grading. I would be pissed as hell to have my A grade converted to a P in their place. For grad school I simply wouldn't care. I understand it varies a lot between fields, but in mine (humanities) graduate school grads are meaningless. In my Ph.D. program everyone got As all the time, and if you got two Bs in one semester you were put on probation. As a veteran of over two dozen academic search committees I can attest that we *never* look at grades when evaluating candidates for faculty or admin positions-- they just don't matter in most fields.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 4.115385 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 3733,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We are having the same debate and it's carrying over into the faculty senate now. My personal take sis that we should relax policies and *offer* P/F grading to anyone who wants it, but we should not *require* it for all students. My logic is simply that many students in my classes are doing very well-- sitting on strong As so far --and it would be unfair to them to force them into P/F grading. I would be pissed as hell to have my A grade converted to a P in their place. For grad school I simply wouldn't care. I understand it varies a lot between fields, but in mine (humanities) graduate school grads are meaningless. In my Ph.D. program everyone got As all the time, and if you got two Bs in one semester you were put on probation. As a veteran of over two dozen academic search committees I can attest that we *never* look at grades when evaluating candidates for faculty or admin positions-- they just don't matter in most fields.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "We are having the same debate and it's carrying over into the faculty senate now. My personal take sis that we should relax policies and *offer* P/F grading to anyone who wants it, but we should not *require* it for all students. My logic is simply that many students in my classes are doing very well-- sitting on strong As so far --and it would be unfair to them to force them into P/F grading. I would be pissed as hell to have my A grade converted to a P in their place. For grad school I simply wouldn't care. I understand it varies a lot between fields, but in mine (humanities) graduate school grads are meaningless. In my Ph.D. program everyone got As all the time, and if you got two Bs in one semester you were put on probation. As a veteran of over two dozen academic search committees I can attest that we *never* look at grades when evaluating candidates for faculty or admin positions-- they just don't matter in most fields.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 2.948718 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 3.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 18167,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university has gone optional pass/fail for *everyone*. Classes will be p/f by default, with the option to \"unmask\" your grades for each course. People will know their letter grade beforehand when deciding whether or not to receive letter grade. Any class that remains p/f is getting a \"covid\" note attached to it, which basically states the class was taken Win2020 during the outbreak, and to not hold any p/f courses against the person.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My US grad school was entirely pass/fail (with the possibility for \"low pass\" and \"pass with honors\" when extra distinctions needed to be made) for all MA and PhD coursework and exams. So there is some legibility for those sorts of grading systems already.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university has gone optional pass/fail for *everyone*. Classes will be p/f by default, with the option to \"unmask\" your grades for each course. People will know their letter grade beforehand when deciding whether or not to receive letter grade. Any class that remains p/f is getting a \"covid\" note attached to it, which basically states the class was taken Win2020 during the outbreak, and to not hold any p/f courses against the person.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 5.048718 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.4,
"raw_score_rejected": 5,
"seconds_difference": 24712,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My US grad school was entirely pass/fail (with the possibility for \"low pass\" and \"pass with honors\" when extra distinctions needed to be made) for all MA and PhD coursework and exams. So there is some legibility for those sorts of grading systems already.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My US grad school was entirely pass/fail (with the possibility for \"low pass\" and \"pass with honors\" when extra distinctions needed to be made) for all MA and PhD coursework and exams. So there is some legibility for those sorts of grading systems already.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.320513 | 3.820513 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 5,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 6806,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university has gone optional pass/fail for *everyone*. Classes will be p/f by default, with the option to \"unmask\" your grades for each course. People will know their letter grade beforehand when deciding whether or not to receive letter grade. Any class that remains p/f is getting a \"covid\" note attached to it, which basically states the class was taken Win2020 during the outbreak, and to not hold any p/f courses against the person.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My institution went to a blanket P/F policy for the remainder of the semester and these were the main points brought up by students: Benefits: your high achieving students will be more likely to prioritize their own health, and it facilitates equity for all since not all students will have the same resources available to complete the semester (and chances are that several will see people they care about end up in ICU or worse). Risks: check on what impacts P/F has on the gpa and then check in with financial aid regarding any potential risks of loss in scholarships that may befall some students",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university has gone optional pass/fail for *everyone*. Classes will be p/f by default, with the option to \"unmask\" your grades for each course. People will know their letter grade beforehand when deciding whether or not to receive letter grade. Any class that remains p/f is getting a \"covid\" note attached to it, which basically states the class was taken Win2020 during the outbreak, and to not hold any p/f courses against the person.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 5.048718 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.4,
"raw_score_rejected": 5,
"seconds_difference": 10566,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university has gone optional pass/fail for *everyone*. Classes will be p/f by default, with the option to \"unmask\" your grades for each course. People will know their letter grade beforehand when deciding whether or not to receive letter grade. Any class that remains p/f is getting a \"covid\" note attached to it, which basically states the class was taken Win2020 during the outbreak, and to not hold any p/f courses against the person.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work in university admissions now but I taught up until last year. My office doesn't like pass/fail because we don't have a sufficient way of calculating what that really means. In fact, we just don't take pass fail courses into consideration in our admissions process. Other offices obviously will be different, and it probably depends a lot on what school you're applying to and what school you're applying from. From a teaching perspective, I think it makes perfect sense, especially at a graduate level. But from an admissions perspective, things get more complicated. It's not that it can't be done, it's just that many offices aren't familiar enough with the system. So if I were the student, I would be concerned about what school I wanted to go to for my PhD and how they specifically look at pass/fail grades. Edited to add that of course, for the next few years, people in admissions will get used to seeing Spring, 2020 as a weird semester that will be dealt with differently by each school. We already know that we'll have to be more diligent with that semester in particular to see what happened for the individual student.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university has gone optional pass/fail for *everyone*. Classes will be p/f by default, with the option to \"unmask\" your grades for each course. People will know their letter grade beforehand when deciding whether or not to receive letter grade. Any class that remains p/f is getting a \"covid\" note attached to it, which basically states the class was taken Win2020 during the outbreak, and to not hold any p/f courses against the person.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 4.115385 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 24404,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university has gone optional pass/fail for *everyone*. Classes will be p/f by default, with the option to \"unmask\" your grades for each course. People will know their letter grade beforehand when deciding whether or not to receive letter grade. Any class that remains p/f is getting a \"covid\" note attached to it, which basically states the class was taken Win2020 during the outbreak, and to not hold any p/f courses against the person.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is giving students the choice. I think that’s the best way to go. For students like myself that are trying to bump up to the next level of honors before graduating this May, I’d feel a little disappointed if it was taken away.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university has gone optional pass/fail for *everyone*. Classes will be p/f by default, with the option to \"unmask\" your grades for each course. People will know their letter grade beforehand when deciding whether or not to receive letter grade. Any class that remains p/f is getting a \"covid\" note attached to it, which basically states the class was taken Win2020 during the outbreak, and to not hold any p/f courses against the person.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 4.115385 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.3333333333,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 17084,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university has gone optional pass/fail for *everyone*. Classes will be p/f by default, with the option to \"unmask\" your grades for each course. People will know their letter grade beforehand when deciding whether or not to receive letter grade. Any class that remains p/f is getting a \"covid\" note attached to it, which basically states the class was taken Win2020 during the outbreak, and to not hold any p/f courses against the person.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university has gone optional pass/fail for *everyone*. Classes will be p/f by default, with the option to \"unmask\" your grades for each course. People will know their letter grade beforehand when deciding whether or not to receive letter grade. Any class that remains p/f is getting a \"covid\" note attached to it, which basically states the class was taken Win2020 during the outbreak, and to not hold any p/f courses against the person.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.448718 | 2.948718 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 7,
"raw_score_ratio": 3.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 31518,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My institution went to a blanket P/F policy for the remainder of the semester and these were the main points brought up by students: Benefits: your high achieving students will be more likely to prioritize their own health, and it facilitates equity for all since not all students will have the same resources available to complete the semester (and chances are that several will see people they care about end up in ICU or worse). Risks: check on what impacts P/F has on the gpa and then check in with financial aid regarding any potential risks of loss in scholarships that may befall some students",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work in university admissions now but I taught up until last year. My office doesn't like pass/fail because we don't have a sufficient way of calculating what that really means. In fact, we just don't take pass fail courses into consideration in our admissions process. Other offices obviously will be different, and it probably depends a lot on what school you're applying to and what school you're applying from. From a teaching perspective, I think it makes perfect sense, especially at a graduate level. But from an admissions perspective, things get more complicated. It's not that it can't be done, it's just that many offices aren't familiar enough with the system. So if I were the student, I would be concerned about what school I wanted to go to for my PhD and how they specifically look at pass/fail grades. Edited to add that of course, for the next few years, people in admissions will get used to seeing Spring, 2020 as a weird semester that will be dealt with differently by each school. We already know that we'll have to be more diligent with that semester in particular to see what happened for the individual student.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My institution went to a blanket P/F policy for the remainder of the semester and these were the main points brought up by students: Benefits: your high achieving students will be more likely to prioritize their own health, and it facilitates equity for all since not all students will have the same resources available to complete the semester (and chances are that several will see people they care about end up in ICU or worse). Risks: check on what impacts P/F has on the gpa and then check in with financial aid regarding any potential risks of loss in scholarships that may befall some students",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.320513 | 4.653846 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 5,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.6666666667,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 13838,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My institution went to a blanket P/F policy for the remainder of the semester and these were the main points brought up by students: Benefits: your high achieving students will be more likely to prioritize their own health, and it facilitates equity for all since not all students will have the same resources available to complete the semester (and chances are that several will see people they care about end up in ICU or worse). Risks: check on what impacts P/F has on the gpa and then check in with financial aid regarding any potential risks of loss in scholarships that may befall some students",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is giving students the choice. I think that’s the best way to go. For students like myself that are trying to bump up to the next level of honors before graduating this May, I’d feel a little disappointed if it was taken away.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My institution went to a blanket P/F policy for the remainder of the semester and these were the main points brought up by students: Benefits: your high achieving students will be more likely to prioritize their own health, and it facilitates equity for all since not all students will have the same resources available to complete the semester (and chances are that several will see people they care about end up in ICU or worse). Risks: check on what impacts P/F has on the gpa and then check in with financial aid regarding any potential risks of loss in scholarships that may befall some students",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.320513 | 4.653846 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 5,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.6666666667,
"raw_score_rejected": 3,
"seconds_difference": 6518,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My institution went to a blanket P/F policy for the remainder of the semester and these were the main points brought up by students: Benefits: your high achieving students will be more likely to prioritize their own health, and it facilitates equity for all since not all students will have the same resources available to complete the semester (and chances are that several will see people they care about end up in ICU or worse). Risks: check on what impacts P/F has on the gpa and then check in with financial aid regarding any potential risks of loss in scholarships that may befall some students",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My institution went to a blanket P/F policy for the remainder of the semester and these were the main points brought up by students: Benefits: your high achieving students will be more likely to prioritize their own health, and it facilitates equity for all since not all students will have the same resources available to complete the semester (and chances are that several will see people they care about end up in ICU or worse). Risks: check on what impacts P/F has on the gpa and then check in with financial aid regarding any potential risks of loss in scholarships that may befall some students",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.320513 | 3.820513 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 5,
"raw_score_ratio": 2.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 20952,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "The benefit would be that students who are currently undergoing a crisis don't feel the additional pressure of numeric grades skewing their GPA (my school went credit/nc). I know, personally, I have elderly and individuals with mental illness in my family and they have been having a hell of a time. That translates to me trying to do damage control from 3 states away. So, on my last quiz, I didn't study as much as I should/could/would have liked. Knowing that I can go pass/fail is a load off my mind. Other hand, for my program, I need to have met all my KASA standards to qualify for certification and Cr/NCr (or pass/fail) doesn't fulfill the requirements to show that I have met that standard. So, I would have to retake the class/delay my program before I graduate, which offsets my internship/CFY, Praxis, etc. Mixed bag, depends on your program.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "The benefit would be that students who are currently undergoing a crisis don't feel the additional pressure of numeric grades skewing their GPA (my school went credit/nc). I know, personally, I have elderly and individuals with mental illness in my family and they have been having a hell of a time. That translates to me trying to do damage control from 3 states away. So, on my last quiz, I didn't study as much as I should/could/would have liked. Knowing that I can go pass/fail is a load off my mind. Other hand, for my program, I need to have met all my KASA standards to qualify for certification and Cr/NCr (or pass/fail) doesn't fulfill the requirements to show that I have met that standard. So, I would have to retake the class/delay my program before I graduate, which offsets my internship/CFY, Praxis, etc. Mixed bag, depends on your program.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 34348,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work in university admissions now but I taught up until last year. My office doesn't like pass/fail because we don't have a sufficient way of calculating what that really means. In fact, we just don't take pass fail courses into consideration in our admissions process. Other offices obviously will be different, and it probably depends a lot on what school you're applying to and what school you're applying from. From a teaching perspective, I think it makes perfect sense, especially at a graduate level. But from an admissions perspective, things get more complicated. It's not that it can't be done, it's just that many offices aren't familiar enough with the system. So if I were the student, I would be concerned about what school I wanted to go to for my PhD and how they specifically look at pass/fail grades. Edited to add that of course, for the next few years, people in admissions will get used to seeing Spring, 2020 as a weird semester that will be dealt with differently by each school. We already know that we'll have to be more diligent with that semester in particular to see what happened for the individual student.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work in university admissions now but I taught up until last year. My office doesn't like pass/fail because we don't have a sufficient way of calculating what that really means. In fact, we just don't take pass fail courses into consideration in our admissions process. Other offices obviously will be different, and it probably depends a lot on what school you're applying to and what school you're applying from. From a teaching perspective, I think it makes perfect sense, especially at a graduate level. But from an admissions perspective, things get more complicated. It's not that it can't be done, it's just that many offices aren't familiar enough with the system. So if I were the student, I would be concerned about what school I wanted to go to for my PhD and how they specifically look at pass/fail grades. Edited to add that of course, for the next few years, people in admissions will get used to seeing Spring, 2020 as a weird semester that will be dealt with differently by each school. We already know that we'll have to be more diligent with that semester in particular to see what happened for the individual student.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 7114,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates? | 9524c8d7fdafcb0908bdde2f887d1ff9c13637fb0b17f62f145f8eaf820953bf | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is giving students the choice. I think that’s the best way to go. For students like myself that are trying to bump up to the next level of honors before graduating this May, I’d feel a little disappointed if it was taken away.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is letting me pick and choose. I was thinking of doing gen eds as pass/no pass and my major classes for a grade? Any thoughts?",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "University surveying whether to go pass/fail. What are the benefits for students? What are the risks? For what are probably obvious reasons, my university is surveying grad students to see if we prefer a pass/fail grade. This is my second masters, and I hope to go into a PhD afterward. I felt like taking a pass/fail was the obvious choice, but people have given me doubts. What do you think? How would you evaluate a pass/fail grad school metric for next year's PhD candidates?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My university is giving students the choice. I think that’s the best way to go. For students like myself that are trying to bump up to the next level of honors before graduating this May, I’d feel a little disappointed if it was taken away.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 5.192308 | 4.692308 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "fnivm7",
"raw_score_chosen": 3,
"raw_score_ratio": 1.5,
"raw_score_rejected": 2,
"seconds_difference": 14434,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.98
} |
Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share? | b595211f5e697b2be2bd9e461902ef45191a1cbb1c707ac5da5d9f6282b2fdf5 | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Yup! 6 years PhD, spent reading and writing, my two favorite things since forever. Then fell in love with researching my dissertation. TT job in history dept, love my colleagues and school. Committee work sucks, and I don’t get to research as much as I’d like, but surround yourself in grad school and your career who care and appreciate you. I’m lucky, I know, but it’s possible!",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 7.957447 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "e2ywgg",
"raw_score_chosen": 143,
"raw_score_ratio": 3.0425531915,
"raw_score_rejected": 47,
"seconds_difference": 9466,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.92
} |
Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share? | b595211f5e697b2be2bd9e461902ef45191a1cbb1c707ac5da5d9f6282b2fdf5 | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Yeah. I had very stand-off supervisors who let me run my own project with occasional nudges in the right direction. I had a much longer postdoc period than I wanted but I met some awesome people , got some great opportunities, and experienced a lot of cool stuff. That in turn has made my academic posts now much easier. I love teaching, and I love my research. I have built a group of collaborators who I trust and enjoy working with.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 7.333333 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "e2ywgg",
"raw_score_chosen": 143,
"raw_score_ratio": 3.6666666667,
"raw_score_rejected": 39,
"seconds_difference": 13027,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.92
} |
Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share? | b595211f5e697b2be2bd9e461902ef45191a1cbb1c707ac5da5d9f6282b2fdf5 | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "My PhD was a mess, but after that I got a PostDoc which turned into tenured position. There are ups and downs, but in general, I wouldn't do anything else and not sure if I'd want to go anywhere else.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 5.28 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "e2ywgg",
"raw_score_chosen": 143,
"raw_score_ratio": 5.72,
"raw_score_rejected": 25,
"seconds_difference": 9324,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.92
} |
Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share? | b595211f5e697b2be2bd9e461902ef45191a1cbb1c707ac5da5d9f6282b2fdf5 | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Yes. I enjoyed doing my PhD (UK, Russell Group), found it not difficult or stressful, completed it within time, and got an Oxbridge postdoc on my third job interview. I work a lot and the expectations are high, but I love my job.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "e2ywgg",
"raw_score_chosen": 143,
"raw_score_ratio": 11,
"raw_score_rejected": 13,
"seconds_difference": 3403,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.92
} |
Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share? | b595211f5e697b2be2bd9e461902ef45191a1cbb1c707ac5da5d9f6282b2fdf5 | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Be aware that your question is like asking for stories of lottery winners. It would be unwise to make career decisions based on these responses.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "e2ywgg",
"raw_score_chosen": 143,
"raw_score_ratio": 11,
"raw_score_rejected": 13,
"seconds_difference": 7216,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.92
} |
Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share? | b595211f5e697b2be2bd9e461902ef45191a1cbb1c707ac5da5d9f6282b2fdf5 | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "Yep, I had a long and winding road, but more because of my scattered focus than any specific problems with my advisor or school. I actually enjoyed most of it. Am now tenured in a great department.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | [
{
"content": "Does anyone have any positive experiences of getting a PhD and working in academia? I’ve seen so many articles and posts about the negative aspects of getting a PhD and finding a decent job in academia (particularly the humanities). All of the struggles and downsides seem completely valid, but surely there are those out there who have more positive experiences. Anyone willing to share?",
"role": "user"
},
{
"content": "I work at a tiny liberal arts college, and I love it. I’m absurdly underpaid, but I live simply and what I make is enough for the bills and a decent retirement. Best of all, I genuinely look forward to getting to work every morning, and lots of my former students morph into (admittedly far flung) friends. It’s a good life.",
"role": "assistant"
}
] | 10 | 0 | {
"domain": "askacademia_train",
"post_id": "e2ywgg",
"raw_score_chosen": 143,
"raw_score_ratio": 35.75,
"raw_score_rejected": 4,
"seconds_difference": 8704,
"source": "stanfordnlp/SHP",
"upvote_ratio": 0.92
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.