Open Forum

Hi all,

I completed my Master's in art history in 2010, and have been working in the museum field for the past six years. I had originally intended to take a year or two off and then go back to grad school for a PhD, but obviously things haven't worked out that way. I've been a curator at the Roswell Museum and Art Center for the last three years, and plan on staying another two in order to finish a couple of large-scale exhibitions and catalogues. In the meantime, I've been debating what to do next. I like the job I have now, but I don't want to work in a small, perpetually cash-strapped museum forever if I can help it. I like museum work, but I wouldn't mind being at a larger institution with more resources. 

My professors from grad school expect me to go back for the PhD, but I'm debating whether I should. On the one hand, most of the positions I'm interested in include "PhD strongly preferred" in their job descriptions, so I feel that having only a Master's puts me at a disadvantage. On the other hand, by mid-2018 I'll have 8 years' worth of curatorial experience, 5 of which will have been spent as a full curator, as well as an assistant to the interim director during the 2015-2016 year, so in my opinion that experience has to be worth something. Though I'd like to return to academia and spend several years dedicating myself to studying and writing again, I haven't forgotten what a stressful experience it was the first time around. Moreover, having had a comfortable salary (and full insurance!) for the last three years, I'm not all that keen on going back to that Spartan existence if it won't necessarily benefit me in the long term. If I ever want to teach I know that a PhD is a requisite, but given the state of the humanities in higher education these days, as well as the gradual dissolution of tenure-track positions, I'm not particularly interested in going that route at this time.

What are your thoughts on the significance of a PhD to your professional success? Having heard primarily from the academic side, I'm interested to hear from more museum professionals, since that is the field I'm in these days. For those of you who have your PhD, have you found it beneficial? For those who don't, do you wish you had gotten it, or have you done just fine without it? So far I've been doing fine with a Master's alone, but I'm wondering I'm limiting my prospects by not going further as far as the degrees are concerned. Either way I know it's not a question to take likely, hence my post on this board.

Thanks for your input! I appreciate all of your perspectives.

Hi all,

I completed my Master's in art history in 2010, and have been working in the museum field for the past six years. I had originally intended to take a year or two off and then go back to grad school for a PhD, but obviously things haven't worked out that way. I've been a curator at the Roswell Museum and Art Center for the last three years, and plan on staying another two in order to finish a couple of large-scale exhibitions and catalogues. In the meantime, I've been debating what to do next. I like the job I have now, but I don't want to work in a small, perpetually cash-strapped museum forever if I can help it. I like museum work, but I wouldn't mind being at a larger institution with more resources. 

My professors from grad school expect me to go back for the PhD, but I'm debating whether I should. On the one hand, most of the positions I'm interested in include "PhD strongly preferred" in their job descriptions, so I feel that having only a Master's puts me at a disadvantage. On the other hand, by mid-2018 I'll have 8 years' worth of curatorial experience, 5 of which will have been spent as a full curator, as well as an assistant to the interim director during the 2015-2016 year, so in my opinion that experience has to be worth something. Though I'd like to return to academia and spend several years dedicating myself to studying and writing again, I haven't forgotten what a stressful experience it was the first time around. Moreover, having had a comfortable salary (and full insurance!) for the last three years, I'm not all that keen on going back to that Spartan existence if it won't necessarily benefit me in the long term. If I ever want to teach I know that a PhD is a requisite, but given the state of the humanities in higher education these days, as well as the gradual dissolution of tenure-track positions, I'm not particularly interested in going that route at this time.

What are your thoughts on the significance of a PhD to your professional success? Having heard primarily from the academic side, I'm interested to hear from more museum professionals, since that is the field I'm in these days. For those of you who have your PhD, have you found it beneficial? For those who don't, do you wish you had gotten it, or have you done just fine without it? So far I've been doing fine with a Master's alone, but I'm wondering I'm limiting my prospects by not going further as far as the degrees are concerned. Either way I know it's not a question to take likely, hence my post on this board.

Thanks for your input! I appreciate all of your perspectives.

Hi all,

I completed my Master's in art history in 2010, and have been working in the museum field for the past six years. I had originally intended to take a year or two off and then go back to grad school for a PhD, but obviously things haven't worked out that way. I've been a curator at the Roswell Museum and Art Center for the last three years, and plan on staying another two in order to finish a couple of large-scale exhibitions and catalogues. In the meantime, I've been debating what to do next. I like the job I have now, but I don't want to work in a small, perpetually cash-strapped museum forever if I can help it. I like museum work, but I wouldn't mind being at a larger institution with more resources. 

My professors from grad school expect me to go back for the PhD, but I'm debating whether I should. On the one hand, most of the positions I'm interested in include "PhD strongly preferred" in their job descriptions, so I feel that having only a Master's puts me at a disadvantage. On the other hand, by mid-2018 I'll have 8 years' worth of curatorial experience, 5 of which will have been spent as a full curator, as well as an assistant to the interim director during the 2015-2016 year, so in my opinion that experience has to be worth something. Though I'd like to return to academia and spend several years dedicating myself to studying and writing again, I haven't forgotten what a stressful experience it was the first time around. Moreover, having had a comfortable salary (and full insurance!) for the last three years, I'm not all that keen on going back to that Spartan existence if it won't necessarily benefit me in the long term. If I ever want to teach I know that a PhD is a requisite, but given the state of the humanities in higher education these days, as well as the gradual dissolution of tenure-track positions, I'm not particularly interested in going that route at this time.

What are your thoughts on the significance of a PhD to your professional success? Having heard primarily from the academic side, I'm interested to hear from more museum professionals, since that is the field I'm in these days. For those of you who have your PhD, have you found it beneficial? For those who don't, do you wish you had gotten it, or have you done just fine without it? So far I've been doing fine with a Master's alone, but I'm wondering I'm limiting my prospects by not going further as far as the degrees are concerned. Either way I know it's not a question to take likely, hence my post on this board.

Thanks for your input! I appreciate all of your perspectives.

Hi all,

I completed my Master's in art history in 2010, and have been working in the museum field for the past six years. I had originally intended to take a year or two off and then go back to grad school for a PhD, but obviously things haven't worked out that way. I've been a curator at the Roswell Museum and Art Center for the last three years, and plan on staying another two in order to finish a couple of large-scale exhibitions and catalogues. In the meantime, I've been debating what to do next. I like the job I have now, but I don't want to work in a small, perpetually cash-strapped museum forever if I can help it. I like museum work, but I wouldn't mind being at a larger institution with more resources. 

My professors from grad school expect me to go back for the PhD, but I'm debating whether I should. On the one hand, most of the positions I'm interested in include "PhD strongly preferred" in their job descriptions, so I feel that having only a Master's puts me at a disadvantage. On the other hand, by mid-2018 I'll have 8 years' worth of curatorial experience, 5 of which will have been spent as a full curator, as well as an assistant to the interim director during the 2015-2016 year, so in my opinion that experience has to be worth something. Though I'd like to return to academia and spend several years dedicating myself to studying and writing again, I haven't forgotten what a stressful experience it was the first time around. Moreover, having had a comfortable salary (and full insurance!) for the last three years, I'm not all that keen on going back to that Spartan existence if it won't necessarily benefit me in the long term. If I ever want to teach I know that a PhD is a requisite, but given the state of the humanities in higher education these days, as well as the gradual dissolution of tenure-track positions, I'm not particularly interested in going that route at this time.

What are your thoughts on the significance of a PhD to your professional success? Having heard primarily from the academic side, I'm interested to hear from more museum professionals, since that is the field I'm in these days. For those of you who have your PhD, have you found it beneficial? For those who don't, do you wish you had gotten it, or have you done just fine without it? So far I've been doing fine with a Master's alone, but I'm wondering I'm limiting my prospects by not going further as far as the degrees are concerned. Either way I know it's not a question to take likely, hence my post on this board.

Thanks for your input! I appreciate all of your perspectives.

Hi all,

I completed my Master's in art history in 2010, and have been working in the museum field for the past six years. I had originally intended to take a year or two off and then go back to grad school for a PhD, but obviously things haven't worked out that way. I've been a curator at the Roswell Museum and Art Center for the last three years, and plan on staying another two in order to finish a couple of large-scale exhibitions and catalogues. In the meantime, I've been debating what to do next. I like the job I have now, but I don't want to work in a small, perpetually cash-strapped museum forever if I can help it. I like museum work, but I wouldn't mind being at a larger institution with more resources. 

My professors from grad school expect me to go back for the PhD, but I'm debating whether I should. On the one hand, most of the positions I'm interested in include "PhD strongly preferred" in their job descriptions, so I feel that having only a Master's puts me at a disadvantage. On the other hand, by mid-2018 I'll have 8 years' worth of curatorial experience, 5 of which will have been spent as a full curator, as well as an assistant to the interim director during the 2015-2016 year, so in my opinion that experience has to be worth something. Though I'd like to return to academia and spend several years dedicating myself to studying and writing again, I haven't forgotten what a stressful experience it was the first time around. Moreover, having had a comfortable salary (and full insurance!) for the last three years, I'm not all that keen on going back to that Spartan existence if it won't necessarily benefit me in the long term. If I ever want to teach I know that a PhD is a requisite, but given the state of the humanities in higher education these days, as well as the gradual dissolution of tenure-track positions, I'm not particularly interested in going that route at this time.

What are your thoughts on the significance of a PhD to your professional success? Having heard primarily from the academic side, I'm interested to hear from more museum professionals, since that is the field I'm in these days. For those of you who have your PhD, have you found it beneficial? For those who don't, do you wish you had gotten it, or have you done just fine without it? So far I've been doing fine with a Master's alone, but I'm wondering I'm limiting my prospects by not going further as far as the degrees are concerned. Either way I know it's not a question to take likely, hence my post on this board.

Thanks for your input! I appreciate all of your perspectives.

Hi all,

I completed my Master's in art history in 2010, and have been working in the museum field for the past six years. I had originally intended to take a year or two off and then go back to grad school for a PhD, but obviously things haven't worked out that way. I've been a curator at the Roswell Museum and Art Center for the last three years, and plan on staying another two in order to finish a couple of large-scale exhibitions and catalogues. In the meantime, I've been debating what to do next. I like the job I have now, but I don't want to work in a small, perpetually cash-strapped museum forever if I can help it. I like museum work, but I wouldn't mind being at a larger institution with more resources. 

My professors from grad school expect me to go back for the PhD, but I'm debating whether I should. On the one hand, most of the positions I'm interested in include "PhD strongly preferred" in their job descriptions, so I feel that having only a Master's puts me at a disadvantage. On the other hand, by mid-2018 I'll have 8 years' worth of curatorial experience, 5 of which will have been spent as a full curator, as well as an assistant to the interim director during the 2015-2016 year, so in my opinion that experience has to be worth something. Though I'd like to return to academia and spend several years dedicating myself to studying and writing again, I haven't forgotten what a stressful experience it was the first time around. Moreover, having had a comfortable salary (and full insurance!) for the last three years, I'm not all that keen on going back to that Spartan existence if it won't necessarily benefit me in the long term. If I ever want to teach I know that a PhD is a requisite, but given the state of the humanities in higher education these days, as well as the gradual dissolution of tenure-track positions, I'm not particularly interested in going that route at this time.

What are your thoughts on the significance of a PhD to your professional success? Having heard primarily from the academic side, I'm interested to hear from more museum professionals, since that is the field I'm in these days. For those of you who have your PhD, have you found it beneficial? For those who don't, do you wish you had gotten it, or have you done just fine without it? So far I've been doing fine with a Master's alone, but I'm wondering I'm limiting my prospects by not going further as far as the degrees are concerned. Either way I know it's not a question to take likely, hence my post on this board.

Thanks for your input! I appreciate all of your perspectives.