Academia options as an autodidact?

Question

I've been spending the past three years as an autodidact for computer science and physics, in lieu of a degree. Main reason for this being that high school classes bored me, so I did poorly in them, and there were no CS classes available at the time. I decided at the age of seventeen to begin learning CS and pursue an equivalency instead, which I have.

However, now I am starting to see that I'd like to branch into observatory astronomy and integrate my data-science knowledge, as I notice an ever increasing necessity for people with both these skills. However, the space community seems to feel a lot more strongly about having a degree, more specifically a PhD (which I personally disagree with but that's getting off topic).

My question is, what possible options do I have? Should I continue being an autodidact and try to prove myself without a degree? Or suck it up and pursue one? If lack of a doctorate is out of the question, what's the most efficient track to a university with the competency level appropriate for me? My biggest problem is time. I want to do as little side tracking as possible, and stay on track with my current competency level.

what possible options do I have? — Option 1: Get a PhD. Option 2: Don't work in astronomy. — JeffE, Jul 02 '16 at 22:50
Suck it up and pursue a degree. You may not agree with the current status quo, but on that same token, you will not be able to single-handedly change all of academia by yourself. — J. Roibal - BlockchainEng, Jul 02 '16 at 23:12
Where are you living? Do you have the resources to pursue your education in a different country? — Patricia Shanahan, Jul 02 '16 at 23:21
@Patricia Shanahan, I am an American. Studying abroad would probably be incredibly difficult. — Neuromeda, Jul 02 '16 at 23:30
Option 3: earn a giant fortune doing something else so you can build and buy your own astronomy research center and possibly your own radio telescope array in Chile. — virmaior, Jul 03 '16 at 01:40
You haven't said what it is you want to do with astronomy. If you want to do citizen science for fun, you don't need any degree. If you want someone to pay your for your work, you need to identify what the typical requirements are for the specific job that you want. We certainly can't tell you about the requirements of a job when you haven't even said what job you want... — ff524, Jul 03 '16 at 02:57
@virmaior I have to buy an entire observatory to search for extra terrestrials? I wonder if the aliens are laughing at us for taking so long to find them. — Neuromeda, Jul 03 '16 at 03:01
@ff524 I guess Data Science doesn't narrow it down a whole lot. search for habitable planets I suppose. Though it seems very black and white in regards to requiring a PhD or not regardless of what I do with it. Didn't think what I'd do with it would matter if one would be required. Are there astronomy fields that do not require one? Having astronomy as a hobby is starting to seem more viable to me. However my question leans more towards If I must obtain one, what is the most efficient track to achieve it with my current situation. — Neuromeda, Jul 03 '16 at 03:11
I don't mean "what field of astronomy", I mean "what job title." You might be able to e.g. get a job as a lab tech without a PhD, but you won't be doing terribly interesting work. You should [edit] your post to explain what kind of career you are looking for. — ff524, Jul 03 '16 at 03:12
related: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/69746/do-i-have-to-have-a-phd-to-get-a-post-doc-position/69749#69749 — Fábio Dias, Jul 03 '16 at 03:25
also related: http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/46890/19607 — Kimball, Jul 03 '16 at 12:54
Do you have an undergrad degree? From what I can see, the standard career path of a researcher (I mean someone who is paid salary to do research) requires obtaining first a BSc dergree (then maybe an MSc) and then an PhD. This is included in the standard hiring procedures, where you'd be expected to have some degree certificate (e.g., BSc or MSc to get accepted as a PhD student) and a couple of academic references. There do exist some vacancies for people with BSc/MSc, but without a PhD, but there are not too many. — Alexey B., Jul 03 '16 at 13:36
You are seriously handicapping yourself by not earning (at least) a BSc degree. A simple look on your SO profile (something that most employers do anyway), shows only elementary understanding of Java. That reveals three unfortunate things a) that you are very far from having the knowledge of a mediocre CS BSc degree holder b) that you do not have the necessary tools / preparation to deal with data science (even average CS BSc holders do not) and c) you are vastly overestimating your own abilities (a common issue for autodidacts). Please, for your sake, get a degree to advance your career. — Alexandros, Jul 03 '16 at 15:36
@Alexandros My ability to obtain a career in programming is not in question, it is my ability to gain one in the physical sciences, more particularly Astronomy. — Neuromeda, Jul 03 '16 at 17:26
@Alexandros I am not sure you can judge computer science knowledge that way. I've asked some basic questions when learning a programming language, even with decades of experience and a computer science PhD. — Patricia Shanahan, Jul 03 '16 at 21:09
@PatriciaShanahan I will have to disagree. Every recent average CS graduate is capable of doing a "hello world" app in Java. Not knowing basic Java and expecting to excel in data science (we are not talking theoretical CS) where you may need to know R, python, Matlab, Hadoop, Java and etc. is not really an option. — Alexandros, Jul 04 '16 at 07:36
@Alexandros I agree with you, but you have missed that knowing OOP, C++ and Java is sufficient background level for anyone with a BSc to pursue anything related to programming, e.g. web programming, design, job related, big data,...since most programming languages are only non-trivial extensions. — Nikey Mike, Jul 04 '16 at 15:30
@Alexandros I am not a CS 'graduate' I am three years in, and those questions are based off my intuition from a year ago. I've hardly touched Java or asked an SO question since then. Your argument is like telling a third year student they cannot expect to obtain a BSc, because of the intelligence level they had as a first year student. — Neuromeda, Jul 04 '16 at 16:33

score 13 · Accepted Answer · answered Jul 03 '16 at 13:47

The problem with academic outsiders is that you cannot judge their abilities. Having a Ph.D. does not mean that you are good, and having none does not mean that you are bad, but there is a strong correlation between degrees and competence. If you have neither a degree nor published work I have only your word that you actually know anything about CS or astronomy. At the same time for every position there are dozens of applicants with a degree, publications, and recommendations, so your chances of getting this position are practically 0.

So the first question is whether you need the income from a position, or do you have some other job providing you with a sufficient income? If you need the money, you almost certainly need a Ph.D. The only exception I could think of would be that you publish remarkable results. But then you can turn these results into a Ph.D. at no further costs anyway.

The second question is how much resources you need for your research. In mathematics and CS a lot of serious research requires nothing but a computer for typesetting. In astronomy you might be able to run over existing data or do simulations without much costs, but it is more likely that you need computation power beyond your financial means. If you need access to observatories, you run into serious trouble.

So if your planned research requires some outside input, and you do not get a degree which allows you to successfully ask for this input, you have to become known in some other way. Start with problems which require no resources, publish results, give talks at conferences, talk to people privately at conferences. Once you earned some respect, it should be a lot easier to get help with your projects.

Thank you, I appreciate some insight aside from an expensive piece of paper looking fancy. I found it odd that you could prove yourself as an autodidact programmer, but not an astronomer, but I guess the observatory point makes sense. I'll just take the PhD route and start off with a community college and work up from there. All my CS knowledge is still very much useful, so it doesn't put me behind, plus nothing is to stop me from studying the normal subjects I am currently doing anyways. — Neuromeda, Jul 03 '16 at 17:31

score 5 · Answer 2 · answered Jul 04 '16 at 14:09

There is another aspects of degrees that drives the need for a PhD. This has to do that the main property of a PhD is that it is a philosophical doctorate, it teaches you how to think and approach problems in a very particular, highly structured way. Masters and BSc degrees do this somewhat, but to a much lesser degree.

While it is reasonably easy for someone very talented to learn to think in a BSc way, it is much harder to do so independently for a doctorate. It is possible, but uncommon, and most cases involve people who dropped out rather than never started.

Note that this says nothing about subject skills. Subject skills, such as programming, can very well be self-taught, although guidance is very helpful, especially to gain more conceptual understanding faster. Data science often involves a large amount of trial and error with well-defined tools. Large aspects of that are primarily skills (but do require some degree of advanced understanding).

score 2 · Answer 3 · edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:49

I agree with the prior answer, but have some further points on the relationship between programming and astronomy, and on the community college route.

If you wanted to do paid, supported research in computer science, you would need a PhD just as much as to do paid, supported research in astronomy. A PhD is the easiest way both to learn to do research and to demonstrate that you can do research. Programming in itself is different because it is a practical skill distinct from research.

After retirement, I took a community college Latin 101 course just for fun, and I volunteer with a community college robotics group. The good news is that you will have some bright, motivated, fellow students. The bad news is that you will meet some students who are just going through the motions, and are not really trying to learn.

You may find some of the courses you have to take boring, but you are presumably more mature now than when you were in high school, so you should cope better. Aim to do work at a much higher standard than is demanded for the course. That will help you concentrate, and equip you for transfer to a four year school.

Academia options as an autodidact?

3 Answers3