Anyone in PhD program?

i'm going to do something that is possibly not totally kosher, but makes sense to me and cut and paste most of a post of mine from another thread:

i am in a bs to phd program, and did go directly from my bsn to the phd program. actually, i was in an accelerated program and graduated in december, so i had 9 months between where i worked full time. until just a couple of weeks ago i worked part time, so i've been getting clinical experience as i'm in school.

first of all i have to say that i love being in a phd program. i love being immersed in the world of ideas and the discourse that goes with it. the conversations and discussions can be so exciting! i love what my adviser once said to me: "working on your phd is the only time where the main activity that is expected of you is to think." it feels quite indulgent and luxurious...if deep thinking is something that gets you excited. the hard part is the lack of structure. yes, while i was in core courses there was some structure, and i even had a couple of exams, but mostly it's a matter of "this is the general context, now figure out something related to it and your area of interest, research it, synthesize it, and write it up in a logical, concise way that adds to the discussion." a heck of a lot easier to say than do! also, once you get to dissertation phase, the only structure is that which you create for yourself -- procrastination (like writing here) is a mine field. you will only progress as fast as you push yourself (or your adviser/chair pushes you), and it is a bit of a shock to suddenly not have the regular company of that tight group of people who were/are your cohort (or, as a friend of mine puts it, "litter mates.")

now, i'll try and answer your questions:

i don't want to do one right away, but i think that will be my goal, plus a dnp or msn as a pediatric or neonatal nurse practitioner

first off, if you want to get an advanced clinical degree, realize that there is a time limit to masters prepared ap practitioners--i don't remember exactly (2012?) but that's something to keep in mind. there are lots of phds with advanced practice degrees, but generally it's a tricky balance to maintain much of a clinical practice and advance yourself in research and/or academia.

what's the phd program like? a lot of reading and research? and does it prepare you for anything else besides being a professor and research?

yes, a lot of reading and research. and writing. and rewriting. and rewriting. and thinking. you have to be able to take honest criticism/critique. you have to be prepared for an iterative process. you might read some things several times, you will definitely write anything of import many, many times (example, my first chapter, one of 3 i have to write before i defend my proposal, and then do my research, and then analyze it and write it up, i have rewritten at least 8 times. and it's not done). you will learn how to critique and share your critiques of other people's work as well as how to take feedback. as stated above, you'll learn to synthesize information, and also bring forth your own ideas.

most people with phds are in academia. not all do research, especially as the funding climate has gotten tighter and more competitive. another iterative process that involves a lot of rejection as well as potential for success. there are places like the va, some institutes and maybe policy positions, but if you're not interested in research and/or teaching, you really shouldn't put yourself through this.

how competitive is it to get into the programs and is there anything i can do in my career now as an rn to make myself more competitive?

the competition depends on the institution. most will require a gre score. you also have to write an essay, and they look not only at your content but the quality of your writing. even more competitive is funding -- unlike some phd programs in other fields, where one is almost guaranteed funding, it can be spotty. most important though, is you have to find a program where there are enough people with the same research interests as you that you have someone to be your mentor/adviser/chair. and you probably want there to be a group of people interested in what you are (or related areas) so that there is some depth in the program for you.

frankly, i wasn't planning on going on, certainly not at first, but i was wooed by the gero department at my university (ohsu). they had funding, they had great depth (one of the first 5 hartford centers). mostly though, i just fell in love with these women -- they were smart, enthusiastic,nurturing, they were doing exciting work: i wanted to spend time in their company and learning from them. i will say that this is not the norm in academe in general, and while i'm sure there are other programs that are also wonderful, i think it really behooves someone contemplating a program to visit it first. that said, i know there are programs that are mostly on-line, and for me, that would not cut it at all. it is this community of scholars which gets me excited and keeps me going.

doing leadership work helps, as that is a large part of what is expected of you: leadership, research, teaching. getting back to your original comment about getting an ap degree, most universities judge their tenure track folk on three areas: teaching, research and service. "service" can be things like being on committees, but it can also incorporate clinical work (and i think some schools/programs insist on you maintaining some kind of practice).

there are a lot of hoops to jump through. you have course work, and then all the steps that lead up to embarking on your research (each school is different). it helps to have milestones, but sometimes they feel like so much nonsense. and the intensity of getting to that point is often met with deflation afterwards when you realize that you're not done, you just have to work on the next hoop (even defending your dissertation isn't the end point, 'cause there's always edits to do).

having watched some people come into the program and leave, i have to say that doctoral education is not for everyone. i think you really need to come in with a burning question, or at least something you feel very passionate about (what about children/neonates are you interested in?) i don't think there is the kind of "weeding out" process that folks talk about in other parts of education, but there are points that it becomes clear that this is not the right path for someone, and the best thing then to do is to call it quits. it's too much work and the rewards are really more work, so if you don't love it don't push it. the career path isn't a bed of roses either -- teaching has a large learning curve and no clear delineation of work/nonwork time. i am so grateful that my program started offering some education classes. i don't feel quite so unprepared for that role.

research is even worse as you are always thinking about how to get the next project funded as you're working on this one. furthermore, if you want a good research career, the expectation is to do a post-doc, usually someplace other than where you did your phd. i'm hoping/planning to finish by 6/09 (that's when my current funding ends), and if i don't get paperwork in/accepted for a post-doc in time, i'm thinking of taking some time off after i'm done and just doing some clinical work for the break of being able to leave my job at the end of the day.

sorry to have gone on so long. i'm really glad to be doing what i'm doing, but in some ways it's the hardest thing i've ever done -- while there are people who are supporting me along the way*, this is one situation where the only one who ultimately can do the work is me.

* although that's another point -- it devours your life. if you have a partner/children/others who depend on you, they have to buy into this too. you can't do it w/o their support, and they can't expect your life not to change.

hope that helps. pm me if you want to talk any more

Can I say I like you very much right now?! Thank you so much for the information--very helpful and informative!

So, you should already have a question in mind for the dissertation before you start applying? Makes sense, just something I hadn't thought of before. I'll have to think on that one for awhile. I'm going into the NICU at a large children's hospital, so perhaps I'll think of some ideas once I get my feet more wet.

I definitely want to teach at nursing school, partly because I've always wanted to and partly so that I could teach students and not terrorize them or bully them like some of the prof's I got or some of my fellow students.

As for research...it'd be really awesome, but I don't think I'd want a career out of it.

I am in a PhD program too, though only a little ways into it. Thank you marachne for your comments--they are very informative and insightful.

Regarding having a topic in mind for your dissertation, yes, you should have some idea of what you want to research for the reasons stated above. In my personal experience, I looked at two schools. I found that one school wanted me to have a fairly specific research question right from the beginning. The other school (the one I am attending) wanted a general idea/topic (so you can be matched with someone with similar interests), but you don't have to commit to a specific research question right away. I preferred this approach; other people may feel differently. I can see both sides of it. This was just one of the reasons I chose the school I did.

I think it's a good idea to have some idea what you are interested in. It becomes a kind of ritual: the beginning of every term, everyone goes around, says their name and their "area of interest." People come in with anything from a very vague sort of idea to something very specific...and no matter what, your ideas will change (remember what I said about the iterative process).

To use a personal example: I knew I wanted to do something around "end of life care." I also thought that would have something to do with hospice. Because the head of the gero department was someone who had done a lot of work around family caregivers, and others were involved with that work, it started to come to the foreground of my consciousness. Then, looking at my own clinical practice, I realized that I was always not only checking on how my patient was doing, but if there was family around, I was checking in on/with them...it made me realize that I had a pretty strong affinity for family caregivers (FCG), and a developing understanding of the challenges they have and the crucial role that they play in the healthcare system. As I became more familiar with the FCGs I also became more aware of issues of CG and dementia (didn't hurt any that that was my mentor/adviser's focus). I was pretty sure I was going to do my dissertation on FCG of people w/dementia at end of life, b/c most of the dementia research has been in mild/moderate dementia, and that hospice was based in a cancer model and not designed to help people with chronic, life limiting illnesses. In the mean time, I became a research assistant on a study looking at hospice in assisted living. I had no interest in assisted living, but it was a great opportunity. Out of this study came the information that both the AL people and the hospice people felt strongly that a major factor in people staying in AL until death was family involvement. I even presented at GSA (huge international conference) on this, prefacing it by saying "we didn't talk to any FCGs" At the dinner following, my adviser and the co-PI of the study suggested that, because dementia research is such a mature field, maybe I should look at doing a study of family CG of AL residents at end of life. And so that became my dissertation! I'm still interested in dementia (particularly in conjunction with PTSD) at end of life, but my next study will probably be something about transitions of AL residents who have to move out at end of life....it's called building a program of research.

So, a few pieces of advice:

1. Recognize that your topic will probably change, if nothing else to become more focused (one person described a dissertation this way: "think of a dog. now think of a flea on a dog. now think of a hair on the flea on the dog. That's your dissertation.") You go in wanting to do earth shattering research. You find that the goal of the program is to graduate, and you modify you goal to something that is doable. Still clinically relevant, sound science, but a lot smaller than you probably expected going in.
   
2. Use clinical experience to inform you decisions -- when working, look at things not only from an immediate level, but what's going on here? Where are the gaps? One thing I really like about my program is that they really focus on doing clinically relevant work. If it isn't going to inform practice, if it isn't something that people in the field will care about, why bother? An example of how I've used this is that I was able to do a palliative care fellowship. It improved my clinical skills immensely, but it also gave me a better understanding of palliative (rather than simply hospice) care, and gave me LOTS of ideas about other research ideas (such as the PTSD & dementia issue)
   
3. Reuse everything you can. One advantage of having an idea of what you want to study means that many of your papers can come from that perspective -- and both inform your thinking and possibly provide material for later use.

Sorry for going on again, succinct is not my strength, but a skill I need to improve!

Great posts, Marachne!