demoralized

I am still currently in the program, but have not reached any final decisions yet. I'm trying my best to finish at least until the end of the semester before making any decisions. I can't say that anything else has gotten better or changed though since the time that I have posted.

I'm just wondering what kind of masters I would be getting? I already have a masters in accounting. Also, how long do you normally stay in business PhD programs in order to get a masters? I assume you have to stay at least two years and pass comps (which I don't think I'd be willing to do if that was the case)? And I don't want an MBA from this school because although their PhD program is very reputable, I know I could get into a better MBA program than the one at this school.

I'm actually American

I'm not sure if it's the theoretical background that I lack as much as it is my inability to follow the methodology used in most papers, even though they are all practically using similar methodology. Last semester my professor actually frequently mentioned during our research classes that my comments were often the most insightful, and this semester I have been contributing good arguments in class discussion as well. I think I am able to easily tear apart a lot of papers based on problems with the theory, but have absolutely nothing when it comes to methodology and econometrics. Also it just takes me 10 times as long as other students to get through a paper and I go into a panicked, blanked out, state when cold called on..

Some faculty have called me out during classes, and after not being able to answer several times they will say "look, you need to read the material over more carefully" or "you need to pay attention". The problem is I'm already spending 2 days reading each paper (with limited retention), and am spending almost no time on my econ courses at this point. Currently we are only reading 2-3 papers a week, so I'm not sure what will happen when I have to read 10-15 papers a week next year. My classmates have been trying to be supportive by trying to give me tips on how to get through the papers faster. I'm probably visibly distraught so a number of my classmates have told me not to get discouraged. I know they are just trying to be supportive, but it hasn't helped the underlying problems. Also that is an interesting story regarding the presenter, haha. I honestly have a hard time staying awake during most of the seminars. Yes the economics coursework is not really that relevant for accounting research, but as I mentioned before, I'm aware of that. My big concern was that my accounting research courses are also a huge struggle for me (both in terms of my ability as well in my level of interest).

As I've mentioned, everyone probably has a different personality that is suited for different things. Hell, I even know some (weird) people who actually greatly enjoy public accounting and can't imagine doing anything else. Even though I hated it, my public accounting experience was also not as bad as you've described (i.e., partners knew staff by name down to the first years, and *seemed* to care, most managers and partners were at least a little mindful of hours that they were working staff, etc), but then I worked in a mid-sized office. Similarly, my life in corporate was a lot better than you've described, but it could also be due to the fact that I am not easily bored in the office. I surf the net frequently in my free time at home anyway, so doing it at work was just great for me, and I was never bored during slower times. So again, different things for different people I guess. And anything can be really great or really bad, depending on your attitude, and personality. Academia comes with plenty of negatives (and positives) as well, but I won't bother going into that since they are well documented elsewhere. Regarding culture of the PhD program, each program is different, so I would ask the PhD students at any programs you are considering.

Removed, sorry don't know

Here is the paper International Accounting Standards and Accounting Quality by Mary Barth, Wayne Landsman, Mark Lang :: SSRN

This is the paper. International Accounting Standards and Accounting Quality by Mary Barth, Wayne Landsman, Mark Lang :: SSRN

Does your work experience in industry help much once your in the program or is it not really that useful? Marginally useful. You would be better off having a masters in economics than accounting experience. Some of our very best students were actually economics PhDs who switched over to accounting after passing econ comps. However, I think that industry experience might have some advantages when it comes to generating relevant and interesting research questions. I'm not at this stage really, so I cannot comment much on it. But I do think it's fairly ridiculous that some of my peers, who barely know the difference between a debit or a credit, are going to be teaching accounting to MBAs (many of which who probably already know a lot more about "real" accounting than my peers ever will) one day. There are several professors at my university who don't know a great deal about real world accounting, so they actually like to have those PhD students with real accounting experience to read over their research papers and exams to ensure that they aren't writing something that is totally off the wall. Was your decision to accept admissions at your current school driven largely by rankings? How much did you have to 'sell' yourself to the program to gain admission? Yes, I was enticed into my current program by it's ranking. However, I was also accepted into many other top programs, so I also chose it based on the fact that I thought it would be a good fit in terms of culture, research interests, location, etc. Do you think that if you had gone to a less prestigious school the outcome may have been different? Maybe, but then again maybe not. Like I said, it might be the research itself that I don't enjoy, which is not going to change at some other school. This is something I'm still not really sure about though.. Maybe not feeling like the dumbest person in the room will help my enjoyment of the subject, haha.. but then again maybe not. How much pressure is there on you to place at another top research school after completion of the PhD? Does the option to place at a lower ranked school or a more teaching oriented school exist or is the faculty strongly opposed to this given their high caliber status in academia? I think this will really depend on which professor you talk to, but I think the pressure is not that high here. I've heard some professors here say that you have to do whatever you feel is best, including quitting the program, placing at a teaching school, etc. Whether I totally believe that they really mean that... I'm not sure.. However, historically our placements have been at top-tier universities.

How strong was your math and econ background when you entered to the program? My math background was 2 calculus courses and 1 linear algebra course.. I received A+s in all of these. I think my biggest weakness in terms of preparation was perhaps econometrics. I strongly recommend applicants to take at least 1 or 2 econometrics courses (at the undergraduate level) prior to starting the program. You certainly won't be learning much of ANYTHING in your PhD econometrics courses that will be beneficial to understanding or conducting research (at least if your program is anything like mine). I would rank econometrics as more important than calculus 2 or linear algebra, although ideally you would have all of these courses and more. However, with my background, most programs were telling me that my math background was "perfect" for an accounting PhD which I think is BS... either that or the program I am currently in destroys you relatively more than other programs (which I suspect might be the case..). I have heard that at most schools it is practically impossible to fail coursework, but here the economics department will regularly fail the business phd students who are relatively weaker quant-wise. You referenced having worked in industry prior to commencing the PhD program. Were you working in the public accounting field before you entered the PhD program (i.e. as a CPA)? If so, you actually strongly enjoyed that more than the PhD program!? I have both public accounting and experience working in private industry (i.e., at a fortune 100). I agree that public accounting kind of sucks, but private industry accounting is life at the beach. Easily 100k-150k salary at the manager level (not to mention bonuses and stock options), 40-50 hours a week (and on some days a lot of this time is surfing the net), and generally not too much stress (this depends on company, your boss, specific accounting function), but I'm sure you already knew all that if you're in accounting as well. But if you have all kinds of accounting work experience (public and private) and you really hate it and know it's not what you want to do, you could give research a try.. you only live once.. but know that there are also other alternatives, such as management consulting, finance, even joining the FBI as a special agent, etc.. an accounting degree is versatile. How much time and thought did you put into applying before you actually applied? Did you have any formal experience conducting academic research before you started the program? I'll answer these next two together since they are somewhat related. I spent a lot of time thinking about this before going for it actually. I spent a lot of time prepping prior to the program as well, and gave up a lot of money at my company (both in terms of salary and forfeited options) to pursue this. I read some accounting research to try to be more informed as I entered the programs, but even then I felt that it was quite boring. However, I chalked it up to lack of understanding of the papers, as well as not reading them seriously enough since I wasn't in the program yet (and hence not of the right studious mindset). I think the problem is I did not have much experience conducting academic research before starting the program. I think it would be extremely beneficial for any interested applicants to either have conducted research in the past or have a pretty good idea as to what it entails. I thought that I was interested in it because I had read some research back when I was an undergraduate, but back then you only read things superficially. Like I said, I don't mind reading things like the introduction, but when I have to read the methodology, results tables, etc, my eyes glaze over pretty fast. It's even worse when you are expected to memorize all the minor details in the paper, and you start going through the papers with a fine toothed comb. I would recommend anyone applying to the programs to actually read through several papers, from beginning to end, and be totally honest with yourself as to whether or not you find it interesting. And in general, don't think that you will be any more prepared to digest the papers once you are in the program (at least probably not in the first year). So read several now, and be honest with yourself. Are your classmates in the seminars seem like geniuses, like when they read a paper they just 'get it' on the first pass? They don't all necessarily seem like geniuses, although still probably superior to me when it comes to this stuff (but perhaps not in other things). Well, I really can't tell if they are really bright or if I'm just dull. Like I mentioned in my original post, I've never seen myself as that smart, not even average, but have always gotten by working much harder than everyone else. I have been told by many that my work ethic is uncomparable. However, at the PhD level this is not possible because everyone works pretty damn hard, in addition to being pretty bright, and even they struggle with some courses (just not nearly as much as I do).

I am in accounting, why?

I thank everyone for their encouraging comments, although I am slightly surprised at how many people here are encouraging me to continue onward. I'm encouraged by this but I thought I'd add some more information as well to see whether anyone's opinion changes.. I apologize in advance for the length.. I am not sure about everyone elses' backgrounds here, but I had worked in industry for about 5 years prior to starting the PhD program, and I enjoyed my work there (40 hours a week, generally low stress, 6 figures). Although the intellectual challenge was not as high, I don't necessarily think I'm the kind of person that requires that (as funny as it sounds, one of my favorite things to do at work was simply photocopying documents, organizing files--basically secretary type work--because it was low stress and easy). And although the salary is not as high as the amounts I might get as a professor, it was already more than enough for a comfortable life. Bottom line is I was fine with what I was doing. I came back for the PhD because it was something I had always thought of doing, and I always excelled in school in the past (probably because most of school was multiple choice, no real thinking required type of work... and most undergrads tend to be lazy). I really knew little of research, which is probably somewhat common among PhD applicants from industry. I understand that my initial post may seem to focus a bit on my being under-prepared for the quantitative aspects of the program, but that was not really my intent. As some people have mentioned, all I have to do is get through those courses and I'll never have to worry about it again. Therefore those courses aren't really a big concern to me in the grand scheme of things, other than having to pass them. As I've mentioned, what I am really worried about is the fact that I am struggling in my research seminars, which is the only thing that truly matters. It's been a year in the program, but it is still taking me just as long to get through a paper as it did on day 1, and even after two days reading a paper I still don't fully understand what is going on in the paper, much less retain the information for class discussion. During class, my professors cold call on students, and many times when I'm cold called to answer something, either I go blank, or I simply don't know the answer, much to my professors' displeasure. None of the other students are having these difficulties because they are able to answer all of the questions when cold-called upon. When I ask other students in my classes how long it takes them to read the paper, they say about 3-5 hours. Even a student who is just taking the class for fun (i.e., he is a masters student from a department outside of business), said he spends 3 hours max on a paper, and has total understanding of the paper (though I think this guy is a genius or something). When I talked to an upper year (who is also auditing my course) in my department about this, he told me I am spending waaay too much time on a paper, and how the heck am I even finding time for my other 2 economics classes?--Answer: I'm not. In fact, just about everyone I've mentioned about how long it takes me to read a paper to has given me a weird look or awkward silence as if to say "wow, are you retarded or something?" especially given the fact that I can't even answer questions when cold called on. Like I said, I have spoken to others about my difficulties, and I'm not ashamed to admit I'm struggling to my classmates, but the response has generally either been that of surprise (that it's so hard for me) or saying that it might get better after a while (but I'm not sure if they're really being genuine or just trying to say anything to encourage me). Also, while some of the papers are interesting to me, the only reason I am reading them is because I have to read them for the class. I would never read them just out of curiousity or for leisure. And I am far interested in reading just the introduction or conclusion of the paper than I am reading the rest of the paper. Just based on reading posts on this forum, it seems that many people do genuinely enjoy research and what they are doing, and that is great. But to me it's really somewhat of a chore to go through these papers, and I'd much rather read something else, such as the newpaper, businessweek, etc, or do something else such as building a computer, playing video games, volunteering, learning new skills, etc. For those people who say that reading papers will become better over time, at what point does comprehension and speed of reading papers generally improve? I'm sure that this would be different for everyone, but what is it generally, even for the slowest learners? Also, I know that many people have advised me that one year is too short for determining whether this is right or wrong for me, but is it? Will my mind really change if I stay with it a bit longer? If so, how much longer would I stay with it before I can say definitively that this is not right for me? It's just that it hasn't felt right for me since the beginning, whether we are talking about the econ courses or the core discipline courses. The other reason that I am thinking of leaving earlier, rather than later, is that I am considering doing an MBA if the PhD doesn't work out. The longer I spend in the PhD program, the worse I will probably look to MBA programs because I'll probably have to submit my PhD grades, which were better than expected first semester, but will probably be worse this semester. This is because in the first semester, my PhD director mercifully allowed me to take masters-level Micro (which I still got a B on, after getting less than half of the class AVERAGE score, and after working my butt off that semester) instead of PhD-level micro (I am however taking the second micro course at the PhD level this semester). Also, I got through PhD metrics because there was a "team" project worth a huge part of the grade that my partner basically completed by himself, and I just signed my name to it (I tried to understand the assignment too but was really of no use to my partner.. and in fact I would have never been able to complete that assignment on my own). I'm thinking if it doesn't work out later, and I decide quitting is the best thing to do anyway, I'll look worse to MBA programs because my PhD grades will look horrible (possible course fails if I don't drop / withdraw this semester), I'll have more years away from relevant work experience, my GMAT scores may expire (I got a 750 on the GMATs but it took me a year of constant preparation and the final score was probably a fluke because I was scoring nowhere near that high on the practice exams), etc. In the end I know that this is a choice that I alone can make. But like some people have mentioned, I'm not sure if I'm just being too hard on myself, or if academia is really not the right choice for me.. I honestly don't know if throwing more time into it is magically going to make everything better either, although I am really hoping that is the case.. Also, although I am well aware that it is extremely common to have feelings of doubt when in a PhD program, I wonder if I am really a case where the doubt is really warranted.. both in terms of ability and in terms of whether a PhD is what I really want for my life.

I am thinking of quitting my phd program and was wondering if anyone had any insights as to how this should be approached. I have mentioned to several people in my program (although mainly just classmates) that I have been struggling greatly with the program, but I have never mentioned anything about any feelings of quitting. Therefore, I think it would come off as a bit of a surprise. Currently, I think I should at least let my phd director know that I am having these thoughts, and/or perhaps just quit outright? Would this be a good idea? And if I did this, what exactly should I be telling him? Should I be 100% honest (i.e., basically tell him what I've said here) or should I limit what I tell him? I do feel a great deal of shame in admitting that I want to quit, and also fear that I will be a huge disappointment to the faculty here, who have generally been very supportive and friendly with me. Here is some more background if interested... I'm currently in my first year, second semester in a top business phd program, and I'm thinking of quitting. The program has basically been a struggle for me since day 1 (i.e., since math camp), and has not gotten better over time. It really feels like I'm falling short on all fronts. I was extremely under-prepared for the quantitative nature of the coursework, and am not that proficient with quantitative material, so the economics coursework has been a huge struggle to say the least. As it stands right now, I'm uncertain as to whether I will be able pass either one or both of my economics courses. But what's more discouraging is that I'm finding that I'm not too great when it comes to reading research either.. for example, it takes usually takes me 1 day to have a first pass at a paper, and 2 days to gain a good understanding of it. And once I've read it, I often times cannot retain much of the information in the papers even after spending considerable time on it. I've never been a really smart guy or anything, but have been generally successful through really hard work. This has worked well in industry because most people value work-life balance and stop working after a certain number of hours a day, but in academia, I lose this advantage (and do way worse) since most people are basically workaholics, really smart, or most likely both. The other thing that makes me consider quitting is that I am not enjoying the coursework that much, including the coursework in my discipline. Although the papers can be interesting at times, it isn't exactly something that I would do for fun. Most of the time, I somewhat dread reading the papers because I know it is going to take me 2 days to complete it when it takes my classmates a fraction of that time, and I also know I'm going to have a struggle just to understand what is going on in the papers. I miss having carefree nights after work to do whatever I please, as well as the weekends. I'm the kind of person where if I'm in an academic setting, has a hard time relaxing because every minute spent relaxing could be spent on research or school work.. and that never ends. There's always a feeling of guilt and it's impossible for me to control. Also, the whole process of spending years trying to publish papers that no one, except a handful of individuals are ever going to look at is somewhat difficult for me. Finally, I have to admit that I miss working with people and the camaraderie of the work place whereas academia seems to be somewhat solitary. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- UPDATED POST IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS: I thank everyone for their encouraging comments, although I am slightly surprised at how many people here are encouraging me to continue onward. I'm encouraged by this but I thought I'd add some more information as well to see whether anyone's opinion changes.. I apologize in advance for the length.. I am not sure about everyone elses' backgrounds here, but I had worked in industry for about 5 years prior to starting the PhD program, and I enjoyed my work there (40 hours a week, generally low stress, 6 figures). Although the intellectual challenge was not as high, I don't necessarily think I'm the kind of person that requires that (as funny as it sounds, one of my favorite things to do at work was simply photocopying documents, organizing files--basically secretary type work--because it was low stress and easy). And although the salary is not as high as the amounts I might get as a professor, it was already more than enough for a comfortable life. Bottom line is I was fine with what I was doing. I came back for the PhD because it was something I had always thought of doing, and I always excelled in school in the past (probably because most of school was multiple choice, no real thinking required type of work... and most undergrads tend to be lazy). I really knew little of research, which is probably somewhat common among PhD applicants from industry. I understand that my initial post may seem to focus a bit on my being under-prepared for the quantitative aspects of the program, but that was not really my intent. As some people have mentioned, all I have to do is get through those courses and I'll never have to worry about it again. Therefore those courses aren't really a big concern to me in the grand scheme of things, other than having to pass them. As I've mentioned, what I am really worried about is the fact that I am struggling in my research seminars, which is the only thing that truly matters. It's been a year in the program, but it is still taking me just as long to get through a paper as it did on day 1, and even after two days reading a paper I still don't fully understand what is going on in the paper, much less retain the information for class discussion. During class, my professors cold call on students, and many times when I'm cold called to answer something, either I go blank, or I simply don't know the answer, much to my professors' displeasure. None of the other students are having these difficulties because they are able to answer all of the questions when cold-called upon. When I ask other students in my classes how long it takes them to read the paper, they say about 3-5 hours. Even a student who is just taking the class for fun (i.e., he is a masters student from a department outside of business), said he spends 3 hours max on a paper, and has total understanding of the paper (though I think this guy is a genius or something). When I talked to an upper year (who is also auditing my course) in my department about this, he told me I am spending waaay too much time on a paper, and how the heck am I even finding time for my other 2 economics classes?--Answer: I'm not. In fact, just about everyone I've mentioned about how long it takes me to read a paper to has given me a weird look or awkward silence as if to say "wow, are you retarded or something?" especially given the fact that I can't even answer questions when cold called on. Like I said, I have spoken to others about my difficulties, and I'm not ashamed to admit I'm struggling to my classmates, but the response has generally either been that of surprise (that it's so hard for me) or saying that it might get better after a while (but I'm not sure if they're really being genuine or just trying to say anything to encourage me). Also, while some of the papers are interesting to me, the only reason I am reading them is because I have to read them for the class. I would never read them just out of curiousity or for leisure. And I am far interested in reading just the introduction or conclusion of the paper than I am reading the rest of the paper. Just based on reading posts on this forum, it seems that many people do genuinely enjoy research and what they are doing, and that is great. But to me it's really somewhat of a chore to go through these papers, and I'd much rather read something else, such as the newpaper, businessweek, etc, or do something else such as building a computer, playing video games, volunteering, learning new skills, etc. For those people who say that reading papers will become better over time, at what point does comprehension and speed of reading papers generally improve? I'm sure that this would be different for everyone, but what is it generally, even for the slowest learners? Also, I know that many people have advised me that one year is too short for determining whether this is right or wrong for me, but is it? Will my mind really change if I stay with it a bit longer? If so, how much longer would I stay with it before I can say definitively that this is not right for me? It's just that it hasn't felt right for me since the beginning, whether we are talking about the econ courses or the core discipline courses. The other reason that I am thinking of leaving earlier, rather than later, is that I am considering doing an MBA if the PhD doesn't work out. The longer I spend in the PhD program, the worse I will probably look to MBA programs because I'll probably have to submit my PhD grades, which were better than expected first semester, but will probably be worse this semester. This is because in the first semester, my PhD director mercifully allowed me to take masters-level Micro (which I still got a B on, after getting less than half of the class AVERAGE score, and after working my butt off that semester) instead of PhD-level micro (I am however taking the second micro course at the PhD level this semester). Also, I got through PhD metrics because there was a "team" project worth a huge part of the grade that my partner basically completed by himself, and I just signed my name to it (I tried to understand the assignment too but was really of no use to my partner.. and in fact I would have never been able to complete that assignment on my own). I'm thinking if it doesn't work out later, and I decide quitting is the best thing to do anyway, I'll look worse to MBA programs because my PhD grades will look horrible (possible course fails if I don't drop / withdraw this semester), I'll have more years away from relevant work experience, my GMAT scores may expire (I got a 750 on the GMATs but it took me a year of constant preparation and the final score was probably a fluke because I was scoring nowhere near that high on the practice exams), etc. In the end I know that this is a choice that I alone can make. But like some people have mentioned, I'm not sure if I'm just being too hard on myself, or if academia is really not the right choice for me.. I honestly don't know if throwing more time into it is magically going to make everything better either, although I am really hoping that is the case.. Also, although I am well aware that it is extremely common to have feelings of doubt when in a PhD program, I wonder if I am really a case where the doubt is really warranted.. both in terms of ability and in terms of whether a PhD is what I really want for my life.

I am a current accounting PhD student at a school where they really kill you with the economics courses. Of course I recommend all of the items on your universally recommended list. After that I recommend econometrics, probability theory, and intermediate micro (if you have never taken this before). I wouldn't really bother with anything else on your list. If you have spare time, I would read some survey papers in accounting research to get familiarized with that rather than taking more math related stuff.