Forum: Masters vs. PhD in Bioinformatics
I've been hearing a lot of mixed reviews about this. What are the benefits of getting a PhD over a Masters for bioinformatics if one is planning on going in the direction of industry? PhDs are more for academia is that correct? I'm in a masters program right now and all my PhD friends are trying to get me to convert
0 answers
No answers yet.
Log in to answer this question.
More posts like this
-
Forum: Does a PhD or work experience set you up better to do bioinformatics work in industry?
written by buhbs •
-
Relevance for publications in a bioinformatics/computational biology job
written by vitor •
-
Forum: Job opportunities in Europe, with and without a PhD
written by Leendert •
-
Forum: Advice for a start in Bioinformatics
written by greesh.nk •
-
Is it still worth it to pursue a Ph.D. degree in Bioinformatics?
written by davidenoma •
-
Forum: Current MCB major thinking of going into Bioinformatics
written by SeYu •
-
Forum: Better for my career: Degree in computer science or Phd in bioinformatics?
written by BioinfGuru
-
Forum: Bioinformatics Career plans and developments
written by juncheng
-
career for bioinformatics in USA . are there any job opportunities for a student who have complete…
written by vijethabitragunta •
-
How Pivotal Is A Masters When Getting A Job In Bioinformatics?
written by Kyra •
Hello jolespin!
This seems to be the most abundant job related question: https://www.biostars.org/local/search/page/?q=masters+phd are any of these discussions useful for your question? I wouldn't close a forum thread normally, but this has become so redundant.
Also, I do not just get why people cannot simply follow their own preference, why does this have to be discussed from this utilitarian point of view: what's most accepted? what's most profitable?
For this reason we have closed your question. This allows us to keep the site focused on the topics that the community can help with.
If you disagree please tell us why in a reply below, we'll be happy to talk about it.
Cheers!
This sort of boiler plate response doesn't even fit this question. It's a Forum question on a relevant topic. Many of the similar posts I examined didn't have answers, but rather simply had complaints that the topic was redundant (and thus were devoid of information, and don't count). Both of the comments above have advice worthy of discussion (i.e. forum material). The person is asking a very specific question. Things can change between now and when the last question was asked, and this question is asked in a slightly different way (which may elicit a slightly different response). Why not just link to some relevant (existing) answers, and point out anything that might have changed? Or answer the particular angle? There's a fine line between splitting hairs, and tiresome redundancy (pun intended). Closing a forum post shuts off voices.
Think why have these "what should I do with my life" questions no good answers? Maybe because there is no good answer, except "do what you want", "follow your interests", "do what you are good at". Other pros and cons have been discussed well ad nauseam. Why not put links, they are listed automatically on the right: Similar posts or use the search.
If there are no good answers it's not because they don't exist, it's because people don't create them. There are a million ways to say "do what's best for you". Those who consider it ad nauseam need not participate. Some people think a few love songs are sufficient, others see the nuance in 10,000. If jolespin did not lift a finger to search before asking, then I share your annoyance. However, assuming that's not the case, if all these questions were parsed into an AI system they would all end up parameterized slightly differently. I see them as all slightly different. The nature of forum posts is to allow discussion, and people should be allowed to ask for a fresh take. Things change. Diversity of responses and opportunities for response, in a forum setting, harm no one, and those fed up with the subject need not participate.
Feel free to add a good answer to one of the other 50 threads.
Just FYI, this was a Question. I moved it to a Forum post because it was the least I could do to give this broadly asked advice post some validity. I do not understand why anyone needs to attack forum folks for choosing not to help someone out with an issue that leads to a whirlpool.
I do agree that people can contribute their views, and I also agree with Michael's comment that someone wishing to contribute can do so in the other discussions.
There are hundreds of posts on this topic on biostars, try searching for them. As I am writing this comment, there are at least 10 just under "Similar posts" in the right column. Moreover, what's good for you depends massively on what you want to do, what work pace works for you, how much freedom and supervision you prefer and so on..
Thank you @seidel for understanding the nature of my question. I truly do appreciate it. To those who have provided redundant negative comments...I was asking a very specific question that is referring to going into industry. I wasn't asking "what should I do with my life" I was asking what the benefits are for having a PhD over a Masters in biotechnology. The questions on the side of mine: Masters Or Phd In Bioinformatics did not answer my question, Master In Bioinformatics In Progress, Next Step? has helped a little bit but I'm asking specifically what the benefits of a PhD are in industry... Not if I'm going into academia....Not to be a tenured professor...Not asking someone to make a life decision for me or to talk about big life decisions....Most of these topics are discussing the trade-offs for masters and PhD which is not what I was asking. Just because the title of the question overlaps does not mean the content is the same. That is a problem on my part and I should have worded it more directly but it's pointless now since the question has been closed yet people are still providing negative feedback on the nature of the question. Sorry to have inconvenienced anyone
I would have worded the question as "I'm going into industry, will a PhD significantly benefit me?". Also, mention that you've searched around - that establishes your effort.My experience is that industry attributes more value to experience than just qualifications, However, PhD might be a gateway qualification in that a simple Masters might not give you an edge in an interview. A PhD in CompBio is less than or equivalent to a few years of post Masters XP in terms of knowledge gain. Go for the PhD if you have the age and financial leeway. If not, if you can take the marginally low pay for a few years, go for just a Masters.
EDIT: I just noticed - your wording kinda mentions the benefit for industry angle.