Hi everyone,

I've signed up here in search for some objective advice, although reading a lot of these threads there seem to be a lot of negative experiences.

I have been a teacher of science for a couple of years now (PGCE + Science degree) and I am seriously considering a PhD. This doesn't seem to be a very common route at all since people usually do a PhD pretty much as soon as they graduate, or if they don't get one immediately, they do studentships and gain lab experience until they do.

I fell into a PGCE as soon as I graduated and specialised as a chemistry teacher, I do enjoy my teaching job a lot and I have the qualification to teach up to A level, but frankly speaking I don't have the sort of intellectual challenge as a science teacher to keep me going, so I am becoming disillusioned ..

I am 99% sure a PhD is what i want, i know it will mean a break from my teaching career and I just hope it doesn't throw me off track with it as it is something I really enjoy, I mean ..they say you know you're in the right job when you'd probably do what you do for free - that is me most days, but it's just ..there's something missing, maybe it is as basic as satisfying my own intellectual curiosity and achieving something I can be really proud of, I don't know.

Your thoughts/advice would be appreciated.

Hey this type of thing is more common than you may think. I have a PDGE English and was a teacher for 8 years, I served as Acting Principal Teacher for one year. I have spoken to at least two other previous teachers in this forum since I have been here - about a month.

I left teaching because it was boring as hell intellectually. 11 year old English is so low level it made my eyes itch. I also can't stand bad behaviour and all the political nonsense (although I'm sure Academic politics are worse).

Have you done an MSc? Definitely consider doing one before your PhD if you haven't.

Your experience as a teacher will absolutely help you. It will help you plan/do/review all your learning without doubt - something extremely beneficial to research which others sometimes lack. Your broad and specialised subject knowledge is also obviously a bonus. Teaching experience may also help land you work as a GTA should you want it.

Were you considering skipping an MSc?

Are you applying for funding?

If you're aiming for a lab based experimental PhD then a masters might not be necessary, particularly if you have a decent amount of lab experience from your Bachelors. Doing an MSc is less important in lab based PhDs than in other fields. That said, if you could get onto a 1+3 scheme (where year one is (kind of like) an MRes) that'd be a good way of easing yourself in.

Apart from intellectual stimulation, are there any other motivators here? Are you looking for a career switch or will you return to school teaching? To be honest the latter has a lot more career stability that research science. Be aware that what can seem like stimulating for an 8-10 week project can get tired after 4+ months (I do miss some aspects of my lab days but if I never have to count another plate of cells I'll be happy!). So although there are aspects that are stimulating you may find others to be dull and tiresome. Laboratory PhD topics are also somewhat constrained by the resources and the priorities of the lab, so you might not be able to explore things as much as perhaps you are anticipating.

Not trying to be negative, just trying to highlight a couple of things you may not have realised.

That must make research science extremely unstable.

Well, academia funds far more PhDs than post docs, so immediately there are a whole load of people who complete PhDs who then will not get an academic post. The attrition goes on at every career stage. Meanwhile pharmaceutical companies are not the employers they once were. There are some scientific areas that are growing in terms of jobs, but you have to have the right skill set.

Though compared to the arts/humanities the jobs are *relatively* plentiful in science. But it's not an easy ride, and the concept of a permanent job is not something you get to enjoy for the first 5-10 years post PhD. For all the political bleating about the value of STEM to the economy, the funding infrastructure creates a lot of wasted knowledge and opportunities.

By way of analogy, imagine that only between 5-20% of people who completed PGCEs and NQT years ever got their first fully qualified teaching job. Then imagine that if you didn't get promoted to Head of Department you got the boot. Then imagine that after several years of being a HoD you either need to get promoted to a Deputy Head/Head teacher role, or it was game over, no more teaching career, as it is cheaper to replace an experienced HoD with an NQT, even though they cannot offer the same expertise. That is what academia is like. Science is not as bad as other fields, but it is not great either.

Certainly sounds like a rough ride. I qualified as a teacher in 2006 and got a one year guaranteed position. Everything I did for the next 8 years was temporary. I did a number of 3 month, 6 month and one year contracts. I got sick of all that. I thought I may as well do it in Academia instead - which is what I always wanted anyway.

I think you need to think a bit more about what you want to do after the PhD career-wise. HazyJane is correct that there are far more PhD students completing than jobs for them. So getting a PhD-related job afterwards, whether in academia or industry, could be a tough call. And in academia short contracts are the norm for many workers, those lucky enough to get jobs.

It used to be the case that a PhD would open up other options. It still can, but it often doesn't. And it can leave someone over-qualified for other posts, at least in the eyes of those considering giving the person a job, which causes problems in itself.

I don't want to sound too negative here, but I am concerned about someone leaving an - albeit high-stress job like teaching - for something less secure in the main. You also have to bear in mind that a PhD will just last 3 years or so, and what are you going to do after that. Don't assume doors and opportunities will open up. And a PhD isn't an end in itself.

Having said that though I'm a big fan of going with your heart. But keep your head on too :)

Maybe you can go back to teaching after the PhD?

I'm a qualified teacher. If you want to do it, do it. I think it extremely unlikely that you will find any difficulty returning to teaching at any point. If you complete the PhD and decide to return, all the better. If you were to return, you would, of course, be competing with cheaper NQTs with recent experience for jobs. However, teaching is one of few professions that still values academic qualifications; all the schools I know would love a Dr on staff. Furthermore, you could easily keep your foot in the door by joining an agency and doing as little work as you like to keep your teaching experience recent (and for quick extra cash).

Timmy, it surprises me that you've been unable to find a secure position in teaching. I'm not in a shortage subject (such as science) but I've had job offers thrown at me. There is no shortage of work out there for most (though there are exceptions: certain locations, for example, and supply seems to be full of ICT teachers). The amount of teachers leaving the profession is astounding (I'm one!), and I can't see it improving as conditions continue to worsen.

Good for you that you like teaching, science_teacher! I know too few who feel the same!

This is a good point. 100% of people who completed the PGCE with me (there were quite a few that dropped out!) got jobs. Yes, some were on one-year contracts (the majority were permanent), but within a year, ALL had secured permanent positions. Of course, the amount of trainees admitted onto teacher training courses are limited by government, and, also in contrast to higher education, there are no benefits in hiring short-term. (Apart from the obvious benefits of having permanent, committed, established teachers who know the school and students, it is far more expensive to hire short-term.)

Bleebles it surprise me that "ALL secured permanent positions" when and where did this happen?

It is just not the case that this happens in Scotland. No where near it. Nor Ireland, nor Canada, nor Australia, nor America. Where do you live?!!! lol

There is a lost generation of teachers in Scotland the government is now trying to cover up.

I'm guessing you are English.

http://www.macleans.ca/work/jobs/two-thirds-of-new-teachers-cant-find-full-time-work/

Yep- England. Just two years ago. It was the same for the cohort before mine: all found jobs (though I don't know the number of these that were permanent rather than a year's contract). I do know though that there is no problem with short-term contracts where I am. There are lots of teaching jobs available, but as I said, certain subjects and locations are different. If you're in a core subject and geographically mobile, there is plenty of work. Employment prospects for teachers are much, much better on the whole than for PhDers.

hi science teacher
I would definitely do a phd IF I knew that I had a job waiting for me after finishing my phd :-)

love satchi

Your location and time of qualification are/were definitely in your favour (although I am sure you were an effective classroom practitioner also). For anyone qualifying just before or after the crisis in a different part of the country i.e. Scotland and Northern Ireland (I have no knowledge of the situation in Wales) it was a different story. One job I went for i was the 11th candidate to be interviewed and there were more to come.

London seems to be a good place for availability of jobs, however some of the schools are quite rough behaviour-wise.

There are a lot of Irish teachers in England now because they couldn't get jobs at home. I am signed up for Indeed job alerts with the search criteria "English teacher" in "Scotland" and it is very rarely a job comes up.

By contrast in England there are loads on the Times Educational Supplement alerts.

So yes in England I could imagine "employment prospects for teachers are much, much better on the whole than for PhDers".

As mentioned I worked 8 years on temporary contracts. I was an effective teacher, I got on well with the kids and achieved targets. Parents liked me, as did management, and all the well-behaved kids.

The last position I was in I could have gone permanent. It took me 8 years to get into a position where I could have gone permanent. However I hated the location of the school and 8 years of temporary work, shifting from location to location, having to establish routines for work over and over and over again, while dealing with curricular changes, cuts to in-class support and resources begins to damage your health.

I am under no illusion I will get a job after my PhD but I will die trying.

Yeah me too. Teaching sucks, for the reasons you mentioned and many others. There is a reason that it's relatively easy to find a teaching job in England during these hard economic times, that Gove keeps coming up with ridiculous initiatives to entice other professionals into teaching to address the shortage, and that 40-50% leave within 4-5 years of qualifying.