[dunefox]

> I would be very suspicious that they will burden me with all kind of side activities (e.g. tutoring undergraduate students, handling bureaucracy, paper work, etc.) that are not really of any actual help towards the thesis.

So, every PhD position? I have looked at dozens and almost none don't require teaching, paper work, bureaucracy, organisational work, etc. done. I was even warned by one person that this weekend will be the first free weekend in months. Because of teaching, etc. I don't know how meaningful work can be done like this.

[ghego1]

I'm sorry the hear that, and I think it's mostly worng.

I should add though that some activities are indeed useful, one of those is certainly teaching. If PhD students have full responsibility over the course, or part of the course, of which they're entrusted, it can be a very productive activity.

It is particularly formative if PhD students are entrusted with teaching activities covering subjects closely related to their thesis. In this way they can practice speaking over the things they are studying, which brings a ton of experience and positive growth.

On the contrary, if it's just teaching to cover hours that the professor to which the course is appointment is not willing to do, than it's much less attractive.

As a general rule, I'd suggest to a PhD student to be as selfish as possible. Although apparently counterintuitive, in their position it is a good rule of thumb to only engage in things that bring some tangible (but not necessarily immediate) utility. There are way too many professors willing to take advantage of younger positions for their own agenda. And that is also why it's very important who your thesis supervisor is.

Finally: never underestimate the "contractual power" that a PhD student has over a professor. Apart of few exceptions, professors need PhD students more than PhD students need professors. And in the case of those exceptions in which the professor is so well known and respected that there is a waiting list to be a PhD student, then I'd bet that it will also be so because such professor knows how to properly supervise PhD students.

[bumby]

>Apart of few exceptions, professors need PhD students more than PhD students need professors.

Can you elaborate on this? I'm not disagreeing, but colleges/professors certainly like to project the opposite in many cases

[lasfter]

Professors depend on grant money and they need to push out papers to be competitive in grant applications. The vast, vast majority of work in research is done by grad students. Without students, professors would have to do everything themselves or compete with industry for talent they can't afford.

Students by contrast need professors for training and advice. Whether they receive these from their advisor depends on the lab. In bigger labs junior students learn more from senior students and post-docs than professors.

[geebee]

Just as an anecdote. I was in a doctoral program in engineering, and I mastered out into a 90k/yr job (this was in the early 2000s) writing cplex code to optimize supply chains. A buddy in the PhD program was doing nearly identical work for a 15k/yr stipend.

[zmb_]

> I'm sorry the hear that, and I think it's mostly worng.

I think there is just a large variance between countries and/or fields. I've worked in CS/EE in three top EU universities, and in every case I've seen, PhD students working in a research group had a heavy load of both teaching and project work on top of their PhD research.