Ph.D. in a Nutshell.

Should I get my Ph.D. from abroad or should I stay in India? What's the difference between a 3-year Ph.D., a 5 year Ph.D., or a 7 year Ph.D. program? Today, I'll touch on these questions sharing my own personal experience.

Now that you've made up your mind that for the next few years at least, you'll invest your time and efforts into research and academia. So, here are a few pointers for you. While I was preparing my Ph.D. applications, I read quite a few threads and articles discussing the advantages and disadvantages of studying in India, most threads tilted towards pursuing a Ph.D. program abroad. While it may be true in some cases, it's definitely not the whole truth. Let me explain why. India has few of the best science programs in the world. Especially in space science, physics, mathematics, and engineering among others. In India, we have islands of excellence in a sea of mediocrity. Some institutes like I.I.Sc. Bangalore, mother I.I.T.s, I.S.R.O. to name a few, have extremely high research throughput. But again, Ph.D. has a closed atmosphere and you'll be mostly focused on your research. Some of the best researchers at least in my field of research belong to Indian academia. India is also a very diverse nation with almost a completely different culture depending on where you were born and where you end up in research. Although, it goes without saying that the research infrastructure needs to be improved with reforms in academic investments, infrastructure, faculties, administration, and motivation. Research depends a lot on the relationship between supervisors and their protégés. A more transparent and open culture of discussions, reviews, and feedback will go a long way to improve the quality of the theses produced. I believe that India is definitely moving in that direction but still has a long way to cover. Elevation of societal scientific temperament and awareness about the role research plays in the development of nations will surely make a positive impact. Exposure to different cultures also opens up the minds to a more global outlook to target hard problems. But in the end, the choice should always be made on the basis of your aptitude, exposure, and willingness for the personal investment of time and capital.

Another very important question that definitely lacks a very clear answer is the difference among different durations of Ph.D. programs. What's with the different lengths of these programs, after all, they are all Ph.D., right? Well to answer this, we should circle back to the nature of Ph.D. as a degree. Different schools have different takes on Ph.D. For example, most schools in the U.S.A., Japan, and Taiwan consider Ph.D. as an academic degree. Often, you'll be taking a series of relevant courses like you do in a master's program and climb your way to be eligible for pursuing independent research. This is a very important distinction that defines the duration of a Ph.D. In most European research organizations, there is no need for taking this series of courses, and you enroll in a Ph.D. program that already has a research objective and well-defined scope. On the other hand, in other programs, you have to identify a problem first which itself is a part of your Ph.D. journey. You will choose your supervisor after the admissions, although you may or may not be asked to name a few potential supervisors while applying. That's the reason why most Ph.D. scholars in Europe usually graduate within 3-4 years and others take 6-7 years and sometimes even more to reach their defense. In some cases, you may also be involved in teaching assistance where you'll be directly or indirectly involved in teaching university students.

In my opinion, the duration of a Ph.D. is of little relevance if you intend to pursue a career in research. Ph.D. offers a lot of learning opportunities. I'll end by sharing a quote by Roger Penrose:

"Sometimes it's the detours that turn out to be fruitful ideas."

Keep exploring!