phd student working hours

Caught between academic calling and academic pressure? Working time characteristics, time pressure and time sovereignty predict PhD students’ research engagement

• Open access
• Published: 08 September 2023

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Theun Pieter van Tienoven   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1532-254X 1 ,
• Anaïs Glorieux   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8127-792X 1 ,
• Joeri Minnen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7494-2004 1 &
• Bram Spruyt   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0573-724X 1  

1852 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

PhD students come to work in academic environments that are characterized by long working hours and work done on non-standard hours due to increasing job demands and metric evaluation systems. Yet their long working hours and work at non-standard hours are often seen as a logical consequence of their intellectual quest and academic calling and may even serve as a proxy for their research engagement. Against that background, quantitative data from 514 PhD students were used to unravel the complex relationships between different aspects of time use and PhD students’ work engagement. While the results support the academia as a calling thesis to some extent, they also show that the relationships between long and non-standard working hours and research engagement are partly negated by the fact that the same working time characteristics lead to perceived time pressure and lack of time sovereignty, which in turn negatively affects their engagement. Moreover, the mechanism behind this negation varies across scientific disciplines. These subjective working time characteristics are the same alarm signals that are flagged as risk factors in academic staff for occupational stress, burnout, and work-life imbalance and thus cannot be ignored.

Similar content being viewed by others

Work-Life Balance: Exploring the Myths and Realities of Family, Home, Work, and Life Pressures for Early Career Academics

Academic Work, Working Conditions and Job Satisfaction

Maritime education factors and presenteeism: a comparative quantitative study

Virginia R. Ferritto

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Occupational stress in (early career) academics as a result of long working hours, non-standard work, the managerialism of work, and stressors outside the workplace is well documented in the academic literature (Lee et al., 2022 ; Sabagh et al., 2018 ; Watts and Robertson, 2011 ). PhD students, however, are hardly included in the occupational group of academics, presumably due to the lack of clarity about their employment situation (Flora, 2007 ). PhD scholarships are often fiscally exempted. Consequently, PhD students with university, external, or personal funds, or when hired as graduate teaching assistants, sign scholarship agreements which are not fully comparable to an employment contract. As a result, PhD students are much more often evaluated in terms of their motivation to pursue a PhD (Naylor et al., 2016 ; Skakni, 2018 ) and the obstacles, challenges, and hurdles they encounter on their ‘perilous journey’ (Woolston, 2019 , 2022 ). Similar, the assessment of their workload is often made in terms of combining a teaching assignment with doctoral research (Borrego et al., 2021 ; Muzaka, 2009 ) or being used as cheap labour for several research tasks (Zhao et al., 2007 ). The most specific hard numbers regarding PhD students’ time use and occupational stress come from the 2022 Nature Graduate Survey in which 43.1% of PhD students worldwide report working on average 50 h per week or more. Around 40% is not or not at all satisfied with their working hours, and almost half mentions their work/life balance in the top three of the most challenging issues when conducting PhD research (Nature Research, 2022 ). To the best of our knowledge, working hours of PhD students are seldom evaluated beyond these proxies. This is a knowledge gap: time use is a multidimensional phenomenon including more than how long PhD students work (i.e. duration), but also when they work (i.e. timing of work) or how work is embedded in their daily lives (i.e. sequence of work and other activities) (Zerubavel, 1985 ). Moreover, these temporal aspects of working time can give rise to experiences such as time pressure or time sovereignty. Such experiences result from the combination of objective characteristics of time use and the expectations regarding these characteristics. Only by documenting these different aspects of time use and subsequently unravelling their mutual relationships with regard to outcomes can scientists get a deep understanding of the relevance of working time characteristics for PhD students. This contribution aims to address this lacune in scientific knowledge by assessing objective and subjective working time characteristics and associating them with PhD students’ engagement in their PhD research.

This paper focusses on PhD students. However, due to the lack of thorough studies on working hours specific to PhD students, we first describe the characteristics of the working environment (i.e. academia) in which they conduct their research. This gives us a better grasp of the relevant aspects of working time characteristics and their association with work engagement.

Long working hours and weekend work in academia result from high academic job demands (Anderson, 2006 ; Kinman and Jones, 2008 ). Several challenges have been reported to contribute to increasing job demands. The need to balance teaching demands and research workload is a considerable challenge that can lead to role conflict (Sabagh et al., 2018 ) and time conflict (Tham and Holland, 2018 ). This is further aggravated by ‘corporatisation’ (Holmwood, 2014 ) or the ‘managerialism phenomenon’ (Erickson et al., 2021 ; Lee et al., 2022 ) which signifies universities’ high performance-based management focussed on high academic productivity and metric-driven performance markers. Consequently, academics report an increasing workload as well as an increase in the need to work outside contractual hours to meet work requirements (Fetherston et al., 2021 ; Houston et al., 2006 ; Kinman and Jones, 2008 ).

The excess working hours result in a ‘work-life merge’ which, according to a study by Fetherston et al. ( 2021 ), is largely considered necessary by academics to meet increasing job demands in the first place and a major cause of time pressure (Watts and Robertson, 2011 ). This undermines the idea of flexible working hours which has been suggested to be helpful to academic parents (Jakubiec, 2015 ). It also conflicts with the idea of the ‘academic calling’, i.e. academia being a vital part of who one is, where long working days are not experienced as such (Fetherston et al., 2021 ). In fact, high job demands, increasing workload, and work-life merge contribute to occupational stress (Lee et al., 2022 ), burnout (Sabagh et al., 2018 ), and severe disruption of work-life balance (Ashencaen Crabtree et al., 2021 ; Kinman and Jones, 2008 ). On the contrary, a well-balanced teaching load and research time are associated with significantly lower levels of emotional exhaustion (Gonzalez and Bernard, 2006 ). Similarly, a review by Sabagh et al. ( 2018 ) finds that engagement—the energetic and effective connection with one’s work (Schaufeli et al., 2006a )—can serve as buffer for the negative consequences of the increasing academic job demands. The above arguments further underscore that if we study the relevance of time allocation in academia, we should not only focus on its objective characteristics (e.g. number of hours) but also how these are experienced.

• PhD students

PhD students represent a particular and vulnerable academic group, not only because they are the lowest in the academic hierarchy, but also because their status as employee is not always clear (Flora, 2007 ). Their scholarships are often fiscally exempted, and scholarship agreements do not always fully correspond to the rights and benefits of employment contracts. More importantly, their progress and successful completion are highly dependent on the support they receive from their supervisor (Heath, 2002 ; Lee, 2008 ). Research shows that ultimately supervisors’ support is more important than their academic qualities in achieving a PhD (Dericks et al., 2019 ). However, it is precisely these academic qualities that supervisors are (increasingly) judged on in metric output-oriented academia (e.g. citation score, number of publications, amount and type of project funding, number of MA and PhD students under their supervision). There is ample reason to belief that the above-mentioned increasing job demands are reflected upon PhD students as well.

The existing research supports the latter assumption. PhD students across all scientific disciplines sometimes come into contact with exploitative supervisor behaviour (Zhao et al., 2007 ). This seems particularly true for graduate teaching assistants. Their increasing teaching load shifts the balance between teaching duties and research time even further resulting in substantial time pressure and a low expectation of obtaining their PhD at all (Glorieux et al., forthcoming ). In contexts where the teaching load is much more distributed amongst all PhD students, such as in the Netherlands and the UK (Park and Ramos, 2002 ; Sonneveld and Tigchelaar, 2009 ), the pressure is partly relieved for the specific group of teaching assistants. PhD students’ scholarship status, as opposed to employment status, means that completing their PhD trajectory is often studied in terms of motivational characteristics such as an intellectual quest or self-actualization (Naylor et al., 2016 ; Skakni, 2018 ). Such individualistic lens, however, neglects the relevance of the more structural characteristics of their work environment and how PhD students cope with them. As a result, not much knowledge exists on PhD students’ working hour characteristics. This contribution aims to provide an impetus to close this knowledge gap.

Additionally, it seems that working conditions of academics in (bio)medical sciences and sciences disciplines are traditionally more vocalized in scientific journals. This was once more demonstrated when discussing the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic (see discussion in Van Tienoven et al., 2022 ). Although all disciplines face increasing job demands due to metric-driven productivity evaluations, each discipline comes with its particular characteristics of doing PhD research that impact working time.

Human sciences, for example, are characterized by more individual work. PhD students in these disciplines usually have to come up with their own research project. To secure their own funding, they have to write grant proposals (Torka, 2018 ) or—more than PhD students in other disciplines—take on teaching tasks (Groenvynck et al., 2011 ). Doctoral research in the human sciences is often quite isolated, in the sense that the PhD student is the only person that is appointed to the project (Torka, 2018 ), which could increase the pressure to get everything done. In addition, participating in public debates and writing commissioned reports—more common in the human sciences—can reduce the time they can spend on their PhD research. All this makes the development of a research plan with clear milestones and deadlines all the more important, as organic teamwork usually does not occur.

This is different in the natural sciences, where PhD students are usually part of a larger research team (Larivière, 2012 ; Torka, 2018 ) and usually receive more financial support through departmental programmes (Sverdlik et al., 2018 ). These PhD students often do not have their own individual projects but are responsible for part of a collective project. For example, PhD students in the natural sciences are more dependent on external factors (e.g. the progress of other people’s work, the availability of labs and equipment). As a result, the planning of their project depends on mutual agreements, and they often have much less control over the exact timing (Torka, 2018 ).

The above-mentioned differences in experience and needs with regard to the organization of working time lead to assess the potential moderating role of the scientific discipline for the relationships that we study.

Working time indicators

From the above, it becomes clear that working time can be conceptualised based on objective and subjective indicators. Objective then relates to calculable indicators such as the number of working hours, the times worked on non-standard hours, and the composition of the workload. In this study, objective time indicators are the number of working hours, the frequency of evening and weekend work, and the balance between teaching duties and research time. Yet following the ‘academic calling’ hypothesis, long working hours or working on non-standard work as such are not necessarily an issue for academics with high engagement in their work (Sabagh et al., 2018 ). For the latter, working long hours may be a means towards self-actualization. This, again, underscores the importance of including indicators of working time which tap into how working time is experienced such as the extent to which the workload and work-life merge lead to the feeling of constantly being pressed for time (Watts and Robertson, 2011 ) or the feeling of having no control or authority over one’s own time (Ashencaen Crabtree et al., 2021 ; Kinman and Jones, 2008 ).

Time pressure does not arise solely from having too little time but is also related to the aspirations that individuals have and the normative expectations that they experience to use their time (Kleiner, 2014 ). The latter are external to the individual and arise from the normative structures of their work environment. To measure the subjective experience of being pressed for time, we use an item scale that simultaneously gauges the feeling of not having enough time, the feeling of aspiring more than can be done in the current timeframe, and the feeling that normative expectations weigh too heavy on the allocation of time.

Additionally, the use of time is not limited to the work environment. We constantly face demands from different life spheres including our work life but, for example, also our family life and social life. The extent to which we can align these demands in function of our priorities and values depends on the extent to which we experience autonomy over our own time (Southerton, 2020 ). A lack of time sovereignty hampers setting boundaries and prioritizing activities that are meaningful and, thus, might result in an unhealthy integration of different life spheres.

In this study, we not only assess the relevance of these subjective indicators of working time, but also to what extent these indicators mediate the relationship between objective characteristics of time use and the outcome.

In summary, in this contribution, we analyse the objective and subjective working time indicators of PhD students and relate these characteristics to PhD students’ engagement in their doctoral research. The latter is a well-known predictor of the journey or intellectual quest in doctoral research. We assume that the ‘academic calling’ hypothesis holds for PhD students. However, we also acknowledge that once the number of working hours, the work done on non-standard hours, and the composition of the workload take the upper hand, issues such as time pressure and lack of time sovereignty come into play. We will test the hypothesis that the positive direct effect (i.e. the academic calling) is partially offset by a negative indirect effect that runs along indicators of subjective working time. Acknowledging potential differences in scientific disciplines, we also investigate to what extent we conclude differently on the hypothesis for different scientific disciplines.

Data and method

Data come from the 2022 PhD Survey held at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) in Belgium ( n  = 836; response rate = 45.4%). This annual survey is commissioned by the Researcher Training & Development Office (RTDO) at the VUB and conducted by the Research Group TOR (Tempus Omnia Revelat) at the same university. The PhD Survey serves as a monitor instrument to evaluate the support provided to PhD students by RTDO and at the same time monitors aspects of well-being and job satisfaction of PhD students. As a result, the strength of the data lies in the heterogeneity of PhD students surveyed. PhD students across all disciplines, regardless of their teaching duties and funding nature (i.e. external scientific, internal scientific, industry, teaching assistant, personal funds, unfunded) are included.

The 2022 survey is the fifth wave of the annual PhD Survey since it piloted in 2017. All PhD students registered at VUB on the 1st of January preceding the launch of the next wave are invited. Typically, PhD students start in October or November, but it is possible to start at any time of the academic year. Doctoral research typically lasts for 4 years and ends with a successful oral defence of the thesis.

The PhD Survey exists of a single online questionnaire that is hosted on the data collection platform MOTUS and accessible through the MOTUS web application. Footnote 1 The PhD Survey takes place in the last 2 weeks of April and the whole month of May. PhD students across all faculties receive an email with login credentials to participate in the survey. Up to two reminders are sent. PhD students are explicitly asked to give their consent before starting the questionnaire. The design of the study was approved by the ethics committee of the VUB (file number ECHW_318).

Institutional context

The VUB is located in the Brussels Capital Region in Belgium. In the academic year 2020–2021, just over 20,000 students were enrolled in 172 study programmes of which almost one third is taught in English. About 10% of all students are enrolled in PhD programmes. To be admitted to these programmes, PhD students can rely on different funding opportunities, such as general or themed scholarships from (inter)national funding institutions (e.g. the National Research Council), research funding from a research project or multiple research projects in the name of the supervisor, or by combining PhD research with a position as graduate teaching assistant (GTA).

At the start, PhD students enroll in the compulsory Doctoral Training Programme which facilitates PhD students with the possibility to develop their (research) skills through, for example, courses, seminars, workshops, and career coaching. There are three different doctoral schools under which all faculties are divided. The Doctoral School of Natural Sciences and (Bioscience) Engineering (NSE) includes the Faculty of Engineering Sciences and the Faculty of Sciences and Biosciences Engineering. The Doctoral School of Human Sciences (DSh) includes the Faculty of Social Sciences and Solvay Business School, the Faculty of Arts and Philosophy, the Faculty of Psychology and Educational Science, and the Faculty of Law and Criminology. The Doctoral School of Life Science and Medicine (LSM) includes the Faculty of Medical Sciences and Pharmacy and the Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy.

All PhD students are expected to engage in teaching for at most 20% of their time, except GTAs, who are expected to engage in teaching for at most 40% of their time. PhD students, including GTAs, are expected to use the remaining time for their research aimed at obtaining their PhD. Their doctoral research typically lasts for 4 years, or 6 years in case of GTAs, and ends with a successful oral defence of the thesis. Within Flanders, the Dutch-speaking community in Belgium and responsible for Dutch-language education, education is fairly equal. This also applies to the doctoral training. Universities apply equal admission conditions, and prestige differences between universities are much smaller than those known from Anglo-Saxon countries. Most doctoral students receive a similar salary. The universities in Flanders work in roughly the same way, which means that our findings can be extended to the Flemish context.

Explanatory variables

For the explanatory variables, we distinguish between objective and subjective indicators of working time. Objective means here that characteristics of the working time are questioned based on commonly shared and recognizable time indicators (e.g. the number of working hours, worked/not worked between 8 pm and 12 am). The answers to these questions remain the respondents’ estimates. Subjective means here that it concerns experienced characteristics of working time (e.g. experienced time pressure). They include a clear level of appreciation and result from the confrontation of the expected aspects of working time and its actual characteristics. The objective time indicators are the following.

Total working time. Estimated total working time in hours per week (scaled).

Share of non-research time . Expressed as a percentage and calculated as one minus the estimated time spent on research over the estimated total working time in hours per week. Outliers for time estimates are set at mean ± 1.5 times the interquartile range.

Non-standard working hours. A summation scale (ranging from 0 to 10) of the items ‘Work in evening (after 6 pm)’, ‘Work at night (after midnight)’, ‘Work on Saturday)’, and ‘Work on Sunday’ that were answered using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = never to 5 = always. A principal component analysis revealed one component with Eigenvalue = 2.494 and 62.3% of variance explained. Cronbach’s alpha equals 0.796, and the correlation between the factor score and summation score equals r  > 0.99.

The subjective time indicators are the following.

Experienced time pressure . Experienced time pressure is measured by a summation scale (ranging from 0 to 10) of the items ‘Too much is expected of me’, ‘I never catch up with my work’, ‘I never have time for myself’, ‘There are not enough hours in the day for me’, ‘I frequently have to cancel arrangements I have made’, ‘I have to do more than I want to do’, ‘I have no time to do the things I have to do’, and ‘More is expected from me than I can handle’ using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = totally agree (Van Tienoven et al., 2017 ). A principal component analysis revealed one component with Eigenvalue = 4.661 and 58.3% of variance explained. Cronbach’s alpha equals 0.895, and the correlation between the factor score and summation score equals r  > 0.99.

Experienced lack of time sovereignty. Experienced lack of time sovereignty is measured by an inverted summation scale (ranging from 0 to 10) of the items ‘I have enough influence on my working hours’, ‘I can adjust my working time to my family life’, ‘I have ample opportunities to take time off whenever that suits me’, and ‘The VUB/my supervisor offers sufficient opportunities for employees to adjust their tasks depending on their private situation’ that were answered using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = totally agree. A principal component analysis revealed one component with Eigenvalue = 2.577 and 64.4% of variance explained. Cronbach’s alpha equals 0.814, and the correlation between the factor score and summation score equals r  > 0.99.

Dependent variable

Most PhD students receive a grant, which means that their employment status is not always clear (Flora, 2007 ). Nevertheless, they end up in a professional work environment with job demands and responsibilities expected of an employee; the most important of which is conducting research. To measure the extent of engagement in PhD research , we therefore use the validated 9-item Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) in combination with three items that measure intrinsic motivation, which is also specific to the scholarship status of PhD students (Skakni, 2018 ). The UWES-9 measures vigour, dedication, and absorption based on three items per aspect of work engagement (Schaufeli et al., 2006b ). The items are the following: ‘At my job, I feel like bursting with energy’, ‘At my job, I feel strong and vigorous’, and ‘When I get up in the morning, I feel like going to work’ for vigour; ‘I am immersed in my work’, ‘I get carried away when I’m working’, ‘I am happy when I’m working intensely’ for absorption; and ‘I am enthusiastic about my job’, ‘I am proud of the work that I do’, ‘My job inspires me’ for dedication. The UWES-9 scale has demonstrated high internal consistency and validity (Schaufeli et al., 2006a ). Previous work with this scale revealed that people who score high on the work engagement scale, score lower on aspects of burnout, report lower levels of depression and distress, and score higher on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. High scores on the work engagement scale also correlate positively with job characteristics such as autonomy, performance feedback, and task variety (for a discussion, see Saks and Gruman, 2014 ).

Unlike most paid work, the PhD track has a clear finality that is motivated professionally, intellectually, or by a desire for self-actualization (Skakni, 2018 ). In social cognitive theory, this intrinsic motivation reflects the willingness and interest to pursue efforts and thus engage oneself in PhD research (Gu et al., 2017 ). To measure the specificity of engagement in PhD research in a more meaningful and relevant way, we therefore add three additional items that explicitly measure the intrinsic motivation to pursue a PhD. At the same time, this brings the construct of engagement more in line with the idea of an academic calling. The added items are the following: ‘I can make the world a better place with the work that I do’, ‘I’m helping science move forward with the work that I do’, and ‘I improve things with the work that I do’. All items were answered using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 = I never have this feeling to 4 = I always have this feeling. Engagement is then measured based on a summation scale (ranging from 0 to10). A principal component analysis revealed one component with Eigenvalue = 6.076 and 50.6% of variance explained. Cronbach’s alpha equals 0.908, and the correlation between the factor score and summation score equals r  > 0.99.

Control variables

Given that the work-life merge is of much more concern for female academics (Toffoletti and Starr, 2016 ) and female academics are reported to be more vulnerable to the negative consequences of increasing job demands than male academics (Watts and Robertson, 2011 ), we control for sex using a dummy for female. Due to small numbers, PhD students that identify themselves as non-binary are omitted from the data ( n  = 3).

Where in Anglo-Saxon countries, the form of funding (e.g. fellowship, research assistant, teaching assistant) influences the amount of time available for research (Grote et al., 2021 ), the allocation of PhD students’ time over teaching and research is much more formally arranged in northwestern continental Europe. Acknowledging that research skills might be enhanced by teaching experience (Jucks and Hillbrink, 2017 ) and protecting PhD students from becoming means to mitigate increasing teaching demands, contracts in Belgium stipulate that PhD students are not expected to spend more than 20% of their time on teaching (e.g. guest lectures, grading, BA or MA thesis supervision). For GTAs, this is 40%. However, both regular PhD students and GTAs often indicate that when they also include preparation for teaching, they often spend much more time on it than expected (Machette, 2021 ). This applies in particular to younger PhD students. Since PhD students, regardless of their funding type, are expected to teach, we use a dummy variable to control for whether teaching exceeds contractual hours . PhD students estimated their weekly time spent on teaching activities in the PhD Survey. Outliers were set at over 38 h per week (i.e. the equivalent of a fulltime workweek). If the ratio time spent teaching over total working time exceeded 20% (or 40% in case of GTAs), PhD students are considered to teach more than contractually stipulated.

Analysis plan

We apply structural equation modelling in R with the lavaan package (Rosseel, 2012 ) to investigate whether and how objective and subjective indicators of working time associate with engagement in PhD research. First, an overall path model is fitted for the entire sample. Next, we aim to explore whether these associations vary by scientific discipline. Therefore, we stratify the models by doctoral schools at the VUB.

Model fit will be determined based on Chi-square, CFI, RMSEA, and SRMR. Cut-off points for fit measures are set following Hu and Bentler ( 1999 ): CFI > 0.90, RMSEA < 0.07, and SRMS < 0.05. The model fit statistics assess to what extent the patterns identified in this sample can be generalized to the underlying population. As the PhD survey is an annual survey, an alternative and arguably stricter test regarding the stability and generality of our models entails that we re-estimate our model on different samples. Therefore, in the Supplementary Material Appendix, Table A1, we provide the results for the data from the 2021 and 2020 edition of the PhD survey. These analyses confirmed the substantive conclusions derived from the analysis of the 2022 data. We test the equality of regression coefficients using Wald’s z -test (Paternoster et al., 1998 ). Table 1 shows the characteristics for the total sample and stratified by doctoral schools.

PhD students score 6.3 on 10 for their engagement in their PhD research, and this does not vary across doctoral schools nor does their score for working on non-standard hours (3.6 on 10). PhD students spend on average a third of their time on other tasks than their PhD research. In the doctoral school of NSE, this share is substantially lower. PhD students across all doctoral schools say to work just over 40 h per week. Experienced time pressure tends to be higher, and experienced time sovereignty tends to be lower in the doctoral school of LSM. Albeit the sample exists of equal shares of female and male PhD students, female PhD students are significantly underrepresented in the doctoral school of NSE. Finally, just under one in five PhD students report that their teaching exceeds contractual hours.

Working time experience and engagement in PhD research

Figure 1 shows the overall path model with standardized regression coefficients. The model fit indices show a good fit (chi-square = 11.323, CFI = 0.997, RMSEA = 0.016, SRMR = 0.024). Additionally, the overall path models for earlier waves of the PhD Survey (2021 and 2020) show that results are replicable (see Supplementary Material Appendix A, Table A1).

Path model (wave = 2022, n  = 514), *** p ≤ 0.001, ** p ≤ 0.01, * p ≤ 0.05, (*) p ≤ 0.10

The variables that control the objective time indicators show that the hypothesized associations between sex and working on non-standard hours or total working time are not significant (see Table 2 ). Working on non-standard hours (β = 0.088), the share of total working time not spent on research (β = 0.334), and total working time (β = 0.168) significantly increase when teaching exceeds the number of hours stipulated in the contract. Total working hours (β = 0.162) and the extent of non-standard working hours (β = 0.211) are significantly and positively associated with the engagement in PhD research. All three objective indicators of working time associate significantly positively with subjective indicators of working time and, in turn, these subjective indicators associate significantly negatively with engagement in PhD research. The feeling of being pressed for time significantly increases with a larger share of total working time not spent on research (β = 0.222), with more work being done on non-standard hours (β = 0.190) and with total working time (β = 0.135). Similarly, the feeling of lacking control over one’s working time in function of other responsibilities also increases with more working time not spent on research (β = 0.135) or done on non-standard hours (β = 0.157) and with longer working weeks (β = 0.231). In turn, the more time pressure one experiences (β =  − 0.243) and the more lack of time sovereignty one experiences (β =  − 0.135), the lower one’s engagement in PhD research.

Table 3 shows that the total effect of working on non-standard hours on engagement in PhD research is β = 0.144, because the direct positive effect of working on non-standard hours (β = 0.211) is offset by the indirect negative effect of working on non-standard hours that runs along experienced time pressure (β =  − 0.046) and along experienced lack of time sovereignty (β =  − 0.021). Similarly, the total effect of total working time on engagement in PhD research is β = 0.098 because the direct effect (β = 0.162) is offset by negative indirect effects that run along experienced time pressure (β =  − 0.033) and experienced lack of time sovereignty (β =  − 0.031). The university-wide results confirm our hypothesis. Indeed, the positive direct effect parameter of working long and non-standard hours on engagement in PhD research is partially offset by a negative indirect relationship that runs along indicators of experienced time pressure and lack of time sovereignty.

Differences by doctoral schools

Table 4 shows the standardized regression coefficients of the path model stratified by doctoral schools. When we first look at the control variables, we see that there are no differences between female and male PhD students when it comes to working on non-standard working hours. Only in the DSh do female PhD students report lower total working time than their male peers (β =  − 0.157). In all doctoral schools, PhD students report higher total working hours and a higher share of working time not spent on research when their teaching exceeds the contractual hours. The pairwise comparison of regression coefficients shows that the size of the effects is not significantly different between doctoral schools. Only PhD students in the doctoral school of NSE score significantly higher on the scale of non-standard working hours when their teaching exceeds the contractual hours (β = 0.127).

Direct effects are found in all doctoral schools, except for the association between total working time and engagement in PhD research in the doctoral school of LSM. The pairwise comparison of regression coefficients shows no differences in effect sizes across all doctoral schools.

Before concluding on the indirect effects, we look at the separate effects between objective and subjective indicators on the one hand and subjective indicators and engagement on the other. We start with experienced time pressure. In the doctoral school of DSh, all three objective indicators of working time associate significantly positively with experienced time pressure. In the doctoral school of LSM, feelings of time pressure only significantly increase when the share of non-research time increases. The same holds for the doctoral school of NSE. However, here, the degree of working non-standard hours also leads to more perceived time pressure. Although feelings of time pressure are affected by objective working time indicators differently across the doctoral schools, it remains that time pressure reduces PhD students’ engagement in their research across all doctoral schools. The pairwise comparison of regression coefficients also shows that effect sizes are equal in all doctoral schools.

Next, we look at the lack of time sovereignty. The extent of work done on non-standard hours significantly increases the lack of time sovereignty for PhD students in the doctoral schools of DSh and NSE. The effect parameter for the doctoral school of DSh (β = 0.287) is the largest and significantly larger than for the doctoral school of LSM (Δβ = 0.311). In both the doctoral school of DSh and LSM does an increased share of non-research time significantly increase the lack of time sovereignty. Again, the effect parameter is the largest for the doctoral school of DSh (β = 0.248). Finally, the total working time only associates positively with lack of time sovereignty in the doctoral schools of LSM and NSE. For both doctoral schools, the effect parameters (β = 0.296 and β = 0.322, respectively) are significantly larger than in the doctoral school of DSh (Δβ = 0.260 and Δβ = 0.286, respectively). Albeit the difference between regression coefficients across doctoral schools is not different from zero, we only find that an increase in the experience of lack of time sovereignty reduces PhD students’ engagement in their research in the doctoral school of NSE.

To test our hypothesis, Table 5 decomposes the total effect of working on non-standard hours and total working time into its direct and its indirect effects. The positive, direct effects are as reported in Table 4 . The negative, indirect effect of non-standard work that runs along experienced time pressure is only significant in the doctoral school of DSh and the doctoral school of NSE (β =  − 0.070 and β =  − 0.032). The indirect effect of non-standard work that runs along experienced lack of time sovereignty is only significant in the doctoral school of NSE (β =  − 0.029). No indirect effects of working on non-standard hours are found for the doctoral school of LSM. The result is that the total effect of non-standard hours on engagement in PhD research is significant for the doctoral school of DSh and NSE (β = 0.134 and β = 0.142, respectively) but not for LSM.

The indirect effect of total working time that runs along experienced time pressure is only significant for the doctoral school of DSh (β =  − 0.054) whereas the negative indirect effect that runs along experienced lack of time sovereignty is only significant for the doctoral school of NSE (β =  − 0.064). Again, the doctoral school of LSM reports no significant indirect effects. As a result, the total effect of total working time on engagement in PhD research is not significant for the doctoral school of LSM. The significant direct effect of total working time in the doctoral school of DSh is offset by the indirect negative effect of total working time such that the overall effect is insignificant. Only for the doctoral of NSE we found an overall positive effect on engagement in PhD research (β = 0.131).

The stratification of the analysis by disciplines leads us to partially confirm our hypothesis. The next section will discuss the meaning hereof in more detail.

Large-scale comparative research indicates that a substantial share of PhD students is unsatisfied with their long working hours and has experienced trouble with their work-life balance (Nature Research, 2022 ). Yet, PhD students are seldom evaluated in terms of their working hours. The focus lies much more on the perilous journey they embark on, and the extent to which their intrinsic motivation can overcome barriers during their intellectual quest (Naylor et al., 2016 ; Skakni, 2018 ; Woolston, 2022 ). At the same time, though, PhD students are employed in an environment that is highly susceptible to occupational stress and reduced well-being because of the working hours’ characteristics (Lee et al., 2022 ; Sabagh et al., 2018 ; Watts & Robertson, 2011 ). It is therefore remarkable that PhD students are rarely studied in terms of their working time distribution and, if they are, rarely looked at beyond the number of hours worked. It is reasonable to assume that, as with academic staff, other characteristics of working time, such as non-standard work or subjective experiences such as the work-life merge, also play a role for PhD students.

This contribution aims to shed light on the working time characteristics of PhD students and the extent to which they impact their engagement with their PhD research. It contributes to the existing knowledge on working conditions and the well-being of PhD students in three ways. Firstly, it looks beyond the idea that PhD students embark on a journey with all its (intellectual) challenges (Naylor et al., 2016 ; Skakni, 2018 ) and views PhD students as employees entering an academic work environment that, due to its high job demands and metric-based assessment criteria, may well cause occupational stress and a work-life merge (Fetherston et al., 2021 ). We, thus, assume that working time characteristics of PhD students, both in objective terms such as non-standard hours and long working days as well as in subjective terms such as time pressure and lack of time sovereignty, affect their engagement in their PhD research. Secondly, rather than using a single measure of (the amount of) working time, our study acknowledges the multidimensionality of the allocation of working time. By distinguishing different dimensions and using structural equation modelling to unravel their mutual relationships and predictive power regarding our outcome, we offer a much more nuanced view on PhD students’ time use. Thirdly, we use a university-wide sample of PhD students. This allows us to investigate potential differences in the association between working time characteristics and engagement in PhD research across scientific disciplines under similar institutional conditions.

In this contribution, we showed that, in general, working non-standard hours and working long hours impact engagement in PhD research both directly and indirectly. The direct effects are positive, meaning that working long and non-standard hours are associated with higher engagement in PhD research. This concurs with the idea of PhD research being an academic calling (Sabagh et al., 2018 ). It signifies a certain degree of motivation and commitment which in turn may of course also feed the number of working hours. However, this academic calling (and the possible mutually reinforcing dynamic between academic calling and the number of working hours) has a downside. There are also indirect effects of working non-standard hours and working long hours which run along experienced time pressure and experienced lack of time sovereignty that negatively associate with engagement in PhD research. In other words, and this is a crucial insight, the expected positive direct relationship for engaged PhD students might be offset by the negative indirect effects of long working days and non-standard work. Albeit the total effect remains positive, we, thus, must be aware that when it comes to working time characteristics two opposite mechanisms are at play. Long working hours and atypical work characterize committed PhD students, but at the same time, they can cause negative work experiences such as time pressure and lack of time sovereignty, which actually reduce their commitment. This finding raises some important questions for future exploration. Is there a threshold at which the negative experiences of long and non-standard hours overtake the positive impact of seeing one’s research as an academic calling (Conway et al., 2017 )? Or is the downside of an academic calling that PhD students work long hours and are very engaged in their research, but as a result of which setbacks in their research or personal life have a much greater impact (Sonnentag et al., 2008 )?

There are some outstanding differences, however, when looking at different scientific disciplines. We used the university’s doctoral schools as proxies for scientific disciplines: human sciences, sciences and engineering, and life sciences and medicine. Remarkably, we did not find any significant direct or indirect effect parameter of long working hours on engagement in PhD research for PhD students in life sciences and medicine. We did find a direct effect parameter of non-standard working hours on their engagement in PhD research but that was offset by the indirect effects completely rendering the total effect statistically insignificant. Working hour characteristics, therefore, seem to affect engagement in PhD research the least in the life sciences and medicine. Possible explanations are that PhD students combine their PhD research with already less regular schedules of specialist training in the hospital. Especially in medicine, irregular and long working hours are part of the job and possibly already expected and anticipated by PhD students based on their BA and MA experiences.

The opposite is found for PhD students in sciences and engineering. Although working non-standard hours and long working days positively affect their engagement in PhD research, the effect parameters of both indictors are offset by negative indirect effects that run along experienced lack of time sovereignty. Additionally, the effect parameter of working non-standard hours is offset by the negative indirect effect that runs along experienced time pressure. Compared to the other disciplines, the indirect effect that runs along the experienced lack of time sovereignty is the largest for this discipline. Possible explanations are that PhD students in sciences and technology are often part of larger projects in which they carry out partial research. Moreover, they are much more dependent than other disciplines on fixed time slots for technical machines, devices, and laboratory settings for conducting experiments. The resulting time constraints and the fact that their research results serve a greater research project may diminish their control over their own time to a greater extent and impose a degree of time pressure.

When it comes to time pressure, the largest indirect effects are reported for PhD students in human sciences. The positive direct effect of long working hours on their engagement in their PhD research is offset by the negative indirect effect that runs along experienced time pressure, rendering the total effect of long working hours insignificant. Although the total effect of working non-standard hours remains positively significant, the direct effect is offset by a third by the indirect effect that runs along time pressure. Possible explanations are that the human sciences, more than other scientific disciplines, are in much more direct and much more contact with their stakeholders in society. PhD students in the human sciences are usually more involved in pure activism and social impact initiatives. Moreover, it is a branch of science that receives a lot of resources from research projects commissioned by governments or interest groups (e.g. on education, culture, media, politics). PhD students who are funded through such projects spend a lot of time on stakeholder and science communication. All these extra tasks may lead to more perceived time pressure to get everything done.

This contribution is not without its limitations. This survey uses self-reported estimates of working hour characteristics. It is known that time diary methodology is more reliable. However, it is also known to require longer fieldwork periods and more effort from respondents. As such, it is not in line with the current study design but worth considering in future iterations to get a more reliable grasp of the temporal characteristics of doing PhD research. In its current form, not much is known about attrition of the sample. PhD students that faced a severe impact from working hours characteristics on their work-life or well-being might have dropped out. In that case, we may be underestimating the problem. Linking future research with the university’s administrative data would provide more information about attrition due to drop-out.

PhD students come to work in academic environments that are characterized by long working hours and work done on non-standard hours due to increasing job demands and metric evaluation systems. They are motivated by an intellectual quest and an academic calling that makes them put up with long working days and non-standard work which signifies their engagement in their PhD research. However, there is a downside that needs attention. The same working hour characteristics could indirectly affect their engagement negatively because they result in experiencing time pressure and lack of time sovereignty. These are the same alarm signals that are flagged as risk factors in academic staff for occupational stress, burnout, and work-life imbalance.

Data Availability

Raw data cannot be shared publicly because of the institution’s privacy regulations. Data code necessary to replicate results are available from the Vrije Universiteit Brussel’s Institutional Data Access (contact via [email protected]) for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data.

MOTUS research platform 2016–2022. Available from:  https://www.motusresearch.io/en .

Anderson, G. (2006). Carving out time and space in the managerial university. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 19 (5), 578–592.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ashencaen Crabtree, S., Esteves, L., & Hemingway, A. (2021). A ‘new (ab) normal’?: Scrutinising the work-life balance of academics under lockdown. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45 (9), 1177–1191.

Borrego, M., Choe, N. H., Nguyen, K., & Knight, D. B. (2021). STEM doctoral student agency regarding funding. Studies in Higher Education, 46 (4), 737–749.

Conway, S. H., Pompeii, L. A., Ruiz, G., de Porras, D., Follis, J. L., & Roberts, R. E. (2017). The identification of a threshold of long work hours for predicting elevated risks of adverse health outcomes. American Journal of Epidemiology, 186 (2), 173–183.

Dericks, G., Thompson, E., Roberts, M., & Phua, F. (2019). Determinants of PhD student satisfaction: the roles of supervisor, department, and peer qualities. Assessment & evaluation in higher education, 44 (7), 1053–1068.

Erickson, M., Hanna, P., & Walker, C. (2021). The UK higher education senior management survey: A statactivist response to managerialist governance. Studies in Higher Education, 46 (11), 2134–2151.

Fetherston, C., Fetherston, A., Batt, S., Sully, M., & Wei, R. (2021). Wellbeing and work-life merge in Australian and UK academics. Studies in Higher Education, 46 (12), 2774–2788.

Flora, B. H. (2007). Graduate assistants: Students or staff, policy or practice? The current legal employment status of graduate assistants. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 29 (3), 315–322.

Glorieux, A., Spruyt, B., Te Braak, P., Minnen, J., & van Tienoven, T. P. (forthcoming). When the student becomes the teacher: Determinants of self-estimated successful PhD completion among graduate teaching assistants.

Gonzalez, S., & Bernard, H. (2006). Academic workload typologies and burnout among faculty in seventh-day adventist colleges and universities in North America. Journal of Research on Christian Education, 15 (1), 13–37.

Groenvynck, H., Vandeveld, K., Van Rossem, R., Leyman, A., De Grande, H., Derycke, H., & De Boyser, K. (2011). Doctoraatstrajecten in Vlaanderen. 20 jaar investeren in kennispotentieel. Een analyse op basis van de HRRF-databank (1990–2009). Leuven: Academia Press.

Grote, D., Patrick, A., Lyles, C., Knight, D., Borrego, M., & Alsharif, A. (2021). STEM doctoral students’ skill development: Does funding mechanism matter? International Journal of STEM Education, 8 , 1–19.

Gu, J., He, C., & Liu, H. (2017). Supervisory styles and graduate student creativity: the mediating roles of creative self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation. Studies in Higher Education, 42 (4), 721–742.

Google Scholar  

Heath, T. (2002). A quantitative analysis of PhD students’ views of supervision. Higher Education Research & Development, 21 (1), 41–53.

Holmwood, J. (2014). From social rights to the market: Neoliberalism and the knowledge economy. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 33 (1), 62–76.

Houston, D., Meyer, L. H., & Paewai, S. (2006). Academic staff workloads and job satisfaction: Expectations and values in academe. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28 (1), 17–30.

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6 (1), 1–55.

Jakubiec, B. A. E. (2015). Academic Motherhood:" Silver Linings and Clouds". Antistasis, 5 (2), 42–49.

Jucks, R., & Hillbrink, A. (2017). Perspective on research and teaching in psychology: Enrichment or burden? Psychology Learning & Teaching, 16 (3), 306–322.

Kinman, G., & Jones, F. (2008). A life beyond work? Job demands, work-life balance, and wellbeing in UK academics. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 17 (1–2), 41–60.

Kleiner, S. (2014). Subjective time pressure: General or domain specific? Social Science Research, 47 , 108–120.

Larivière, V. (2012). On the shoulders of students? The contribution of PhD students to the advancement of knowledge. Scientometrics, 90 , 463–481.

Lee, A. (2008). How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 33 (3), 267–281.

Lee, M., Coutts, R., Fielden, J., Hutchinson, M., Lakeman, R., Mathisen, B., Nasrawi, D., & Phillips, N. (2022). Occupational stress in university academics in Australia and New Zealand. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 44 (1), 57–71.

Machette, A. T. (2021). Dialectical tensions of graduate teaching assistants. Texas Speech Communication Journal, 45 , 13–28.

Muzaka, V. (2009). The niche of graduate teaching assistants (GTAs): Perceptions and reflections. Teaching in Higher Education, 14 (1), 1–12.

Naylor, R., Chakravarti, S., & Baik, C. (2016). Differing motivations and requirements in PhD student cohorts: A case study. Issues Educ Res, 26 (2), 351–367.

Nature Research. (2022). Nature Careers Graduate Survey 2022. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.21277575.v3

Park, C., & Ramos, M. (2002). The donkey in the department? Insights into the graduate teaching assistant (GTA) experience in the UK. Journal of Graduate Education, 3 (2), 47–53.

Paternoster, R., Brame, R., Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36 (4), 859–866.

Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48 , 1–36.

Sabagh, Z., Hall, N. C., & Saroyan, A. (2018). Antecedents, correlates and consequences of faculty burnout. Educational Research, 60 (2), 131–156.

Saks, A. M., & Gruman, J. A. (2014). What do we really know about employee engagement? Human Resource Development Quarterly, 25 (2), 155–182.

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006a). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66 (4), 701–716.

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006b). Utrecht work engagement scale-9 (UWES-9). APA PsycTests . https://doi.org/10.1037/t05561-000

Skakni, I. (2018). Reasons, motives and motivations for completing a PhD: A typology of doctoral studies as a quest. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, 9 (2), 197–212.

Sonnentag, S., Mojza, E. J., Binnewies, C., & Scholl, A. (2008). Being engaged at work and detached at home: A week-level study on work engagement, psychological detachment, and affect. Work & Stress, 22 (3), 257–276.

Sonneveld, H., & Tigchelaar, A. (2009). Promovendi en het Onderwijs [PhD Students and Education] . http://www.phdcentre.eu/inhoud/uploads/2018/02/Promovendienhetonderwijs.pdf

Southerton, D. (2020). Time scarcity: Work, home and personal lives. In D. Southerton (Ed.), Time, consumption and the coordination of everyday life (pp. 43–67). Palgrave Macmillan.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Sverdlik, A., Hall, N. C., McAlpine, L., & Hubbard, K. (2018). The PhD experience: A review of the factors influencing doctoral students’ completion, achievement, and well-being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13 , 361–388.

Tham, T. L., & Holland, P. (2018). What do business school academics want? Reflections from the national survey on workplace climate and well-being: Australia and New Zealand. Journal of Management & Organization, 24 (4), 492–499.

Toffoletti, K., & Starr, K. (2016). Women academics and work–life balance: Gendered discourses of work and care. Gender, Work & Organization, 23 (5), 489–504.

Torka, M. (2018). Projectification of doctoral training? How research fields respond to a new funding regime. Minerva, 56 (1), 59–83.

van Tienoven, T. P., Minnen, J., & Glorieux, I. (2017). The statistics of the time pressure scale . Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Research Group TOR.

van Tienoven, T. P., Glorieux, A., Minnen, J., Te Braak, P., & Spruyt, B. (2022). Graduate students locked down? PhD students’ satisfaction with supervision during the first and second COVID-19 lockdown in Belgium. PLoS ONE, 17 (5), e0268923.

Watts, J., & Robertson, N. (2011). Burnout in university teaching staff: A systematic literature review. Educational Research, 53 (1), 33–50.

Woolston, C. (2019). PhD poll reveals fear and joy, contentment and anguish. Nature, 575 , 403–406.

Woolston, C. (2022). Stress and uncertainty drag down graduate students’ satisfaction. Nature, 610 (7933), 805–808.

Zerubavel, E. (1985). Hidden rhythms: Schedules and calendars in social life . Berkeley: Univ of California Press.

Zhao, C. M., Golde, C. M., & McCormick, A. C. (2007). More than a signature: How advisor choice and advisor behaviour affect doctoral student satisfaction. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31 (3), 263–281.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the members of the project steering committee for their constructive feedback on the ideas that led to this contribution. The responsibility for the content and any remaining errors remain exclusively with the authors.

This research is part of the project VUB PhD Survey funded by the Research Council of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Sociology Department, Research Group TOR, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussels, Belgium

Theun Pieter van Tienoven, Anaïs Glorieux, Joeri Minnen & Bram Spruyt

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Theun Pieter van Tienoven .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 97.3 KB)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

van Tienoven, T.P., Glorieux, A., Minnen, J. et al. Caught between academic calling and academic pressure? Working time characteristics, time pressure and time sovereignty predict PhD students’ research engagement. High Educ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01096-8

Download citation

Accepted : 13 August 2023

Published : 08 September 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01096-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Working hours
• Time pressure
• Time sovereignty
• Research engagement
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government.

Here’s how you know

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Misclassification
• Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
• Pump at Work
• Maternal Health
• Retaliation
• Government Contracts
• Immigration
• Child Labor
• Agricultural Employment
• Subminimum Wage
• Employment of Workers With Disabilities
• Lie Detector Tests
• Davis Bacon Prevailing Wage Survey
• WORKER RIGHTS
• Resources For Employers
• Regulatory Library
• Interpretive Guidance
• Industry-Specific Resources
• Compliance Assistance
• elaws Advisors
• Fact Sheets
• New and Small Businesses Resources
• Presentations
• External User Portal (EUP)
• Compliance Assistance Toolkits
• New and Small Business Resources
• Publications By Language
• FLSA Compliance Videos
• Know Your Rights Video Series
• Employer.gov
• DOL Enforcement Database
• Workers Owed Wages
• Order Publications
• Laws and Regulations
• Field Handbook
• Administrator Interpretations, Opinion and Ruling Letters
• Field Bulletins
• State Minimum Wage Laws
• State Labor Law Topics
• State Labor Offices
• Resources for State and Local Governments
• NEWS RELEASES

WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Fact Sheet #17S: Higher Education Institutions and Overtime Pay Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)

Revised September 2019

NOTICE: On August 30, 2023, the Department of Labor (Department) announced issuance of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), Defining and Delimiting the Exemptions for Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Sales, and Computer Employees . The NPRM proposes to update and revise the regulations issued under section 13(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act implementing the exemption from minimum wage and overtime pay requirements for executive, administrative, and professional employees. Proposed revisions include increasing the standard salary level and the highly compensated employee total annual compensation threshold, as well as providing an automatic updating mechanism that would allow for the timely and efficient updating of all the thresholds to reflect current earnings data.

This fact sheet provides information on the exemption from minimum wage and overtime pay provided by Sections 13(a)(1) of the  FLSA  as defined by Regulations,  29 C.F.R. Part 541  and discusses the applicability of such exemptions to employees in jobs that are common in higher education institutions.

The FLSA requires that most employees in the United States be paid at least the  federal minimum wage  for all hours worked and  overtime pay  at not less than time and one-half the regular rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 hours in a workweek.

However, Section 13(a)(1) of the FLSA provides an exemption from both  minimum wage  and  overtime pay  for employees employed as bona fide  executive ,  administrative ,  professional  and  outside sales  employees. Section 13(a)(1) and Section 13(a)(17) also exempts certain  computer  employees. These exemptions are often called the “white-collar” exemptions.

General Requirements for Exemptions

To qualify for a white-collar exemption, an employee must generally satisfy three tests:

• The employee must be paid on a salary basis that is not subject to reduction based on the quality or quantity of work (the “ salary basis test ”), rather than, for example, on an hourly basis;
• The employee must receive a salary at a rate not less than $684 *  per week (the “ salary level test ”); and
• The employee’s primary duty must involve the kind of work associated with the exempt status sought, such as executive, administrative, or professional work (the “ duties test ”).

Additional information concerning these exemptions is available in Fact Sheets 17A-G.  See

• https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/regs/compliance/whdcomp .

Exemptions for Common Higher Education Jobs

A teacher is exempt if his or her primary duty is teaching, tutoring, instructing, or lecturing to impart knowledge, and if he or she is performing that duty as an employee of an educational establishment.  See   29 C.F.R. § 541.303 . Educational establishments include elementary school systems, secondary school systems, institutions of higher education, and other educational institutions.  See   29 C.F.R. § 541.204(b) . If a bona fide teacher meets this duty requirement, the salary level and salary basis tests do not apply.  See   29 C.F.R. §§ 541.303(d) ,  541.600(e) . Given these standards, professors, instructors, and adjunct professors typically qualify for this exemption.

A faculty member who teaches online or remotely also may qualify for this exemption. The regulations do not restrict where bona fide teaching may take place, to whom the knowledge can be imparted, or how many hours a teacher must work per week to qualify for the exemption. The exemption would therefore ordinarily apply, for example, to a part-time faculty member of an educational establishment whose primary duty is to provide instruction through online courses to remote non-credit learners. The exemption could likewise apply, for example, to an agricultural extension agent who is employed by an educational establishment to travel and provide instruction to farmers, if the agent’s primary duty is teaching, instructing, or lecturing to impart knowledge. To determine a teacher’s primary duty, the relevant inquiry in all cases is the teacher’s actual job duties. Job titles or full/part-time status alone do not determine exempt status.

A teacher does not become nonexempt merely because he or she spends a considerable amount of time in extracurricular activities (such as coaching athletic teams or supervising student clubs), provided the teacher’s primary duty is teaching.

Athletic coaches employed by higher education institutions may qualify for the teacher exemption. After all, teaching may include instructing student-athletes in how to perform their sport. But a coach will not qualify for the exemption if his or her primary duties are recruiting students to play sports or visiting high schools and athletic camps to conduct student interviews. The amount of time the coach spends instructing student-athletes in a team sport is relevant, but not the exclusive factor, in determining the coach’s exempt status.

Professional Employees

The FLSA provides for several kinds of exempt professional employees—such as learned professionals, creative professionals, teachers, and employees practicing law or medicine. In higher education, employees eligible for the professional exemption are often either teachers (as discussed above) or learned professionals (as described below). To qualify as a learned professional, the employee must satisfy three requirements:

• The employee’s primary duty must be the performance of work requiring advanced knowledge;
• The advanced knowledge must be in a field of science or learning; and
• The advanced knowledge must be customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction.

See   29 C.F.R. § 541.301 . Unless the employee is a teacher or practicing law or medicine, he or she must also satisfy the above-referenced salary basis and salary level tests to be an exempt professional.

In higher education, examples of exempt non-teacher learned professionals generally include certified public accountants, psychologists, certified athletic trainers, and librarians. Postdoctoral fellows, who conduct research at a higher education institution after completing their doctoral studies, likewise generally meet the duties requirements of the learned professional exemption, and they may additionally qualify for the teacher exemption if teaching is their primary duty. Of course, an employee’s qualification for the exemption depends on his or her actual job duties and education. Job titles alone are not sufficient for determining whether an employee satisfies the duties test.

Administrative Employees

Various employees at higher educational institutions may qualify as exempt administrative employees. The administrative exemption applies when the following requirements are met:

• The employee’s compensation must satisfy the above-referenced salary basis and salary level tests;
• The employee’s primary duty must be the performance of office or non-manual work directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer or the employer’s customers; and
• The employee’s primary duty must include the exercise of discretion and independent judgment with respect to matters of significance.

See   29 C.F.R. § 541.200 . Such administrative employees in higher education might include, for example, admissions counselors or student financial aid officers. An employee’s qualification for the exemption depends on his or her actual job duties; job titles alone are not sufficient for determining whether an employee satisfies the duties test.

Notably, there are specific regulatory provisions for certain administrative employees—known as “academic administrative employees”—whose primary duty is performing administrative functions directly related to academic instruction or training in an educational establishment. To be exempt as an academic administrative professional:

• The employee must satisfy the above-referenced salary basis and salary level tests or receive a salary of at least the entrance salary for teachers in the same educational establishment; and
• The employee’s primary duty must be to perform administrative functions directly related to academic instruction or training in an educational establishment.

See   29 C.F.R. § 541.204 . Employees who work in higher education but whose work does not relate to the educational field (such as work in general business operations) do not qualify as exempt academic administrative employees.  See  id.

In higher education institutions, exempt academic administrative personnel generally include department heads, intervention specialists who are available to respond to student academic issues, and other employees with similar responsibilities. Exempt administrative personnel would likewise generally include academic counselors who administer school testing programs, assist students with academic problems, and advise students concerning degree requirements. Again, whether an employee satisfies the duties test for these exemptions depends on the employee’s actual job duties, not just the employee’s job title.

Executive Employees

To qualify for the executive exemption, an employee must satisfy the following tests:

• The employee must receive compensation that satisfies the above-referenced salary basis and salary level tests;
• The employee’s primary duty must be managing the enterprise or a customarily recognized department or subdivision thereof;
• The employee must customarily and regularly direct the work of at least two or more other full-time employees or their equivalent (for example, one full-time and two half-time employees); and
• The employee must have the authority to hire or fire other employees, or in the alternative, the employee’s suggestions and recommendations as to the hiring, firing, advancement, promotion, or any other change of status of other employees must be given particular weight.

See   29 C.F.R. § 541.100 . Various positions in higher education institutions might qualify for the executive exemption, including deans, department heads, directors, and any other manager or supervisor whose job duties and compensation satisfy the above criteria.

Student-Employees

As a general matter, most students who work for their college or university are hourly non-exempt workers and do not work more than 40 hours per week. The following, however, are examples of students who often receive a salary or other non-hourly compensation:

• Graduate Teaching Assistants.  Graduate teaching assistants whose primary duty is teaching are exempt. Because they qualify for the teacher exemption, they are not subject to the salary basis and salary level tests.
• Research Assistants.  Generally, an educational relationship exists when a graduate or undergraduate student performs research under a faculty member’s supervision while obtaining a degree. Under these circumstances, the Department would not assert that an employment relationship exists with either the school or any grantor funding the student’s research. This is true even though the student may receive a stipend for performing the research.
• Student Residential Assistants.  Students enrolled in bona fide educational programs who are residential assistants and receive reduced room or board charges or tuition credits are not generally considered employees under the FLSA. They therefore are not entitled to minimum wages and overtime under the FLSA.

An employment relationship will generally exist when a student receives compensation and his or her duties are not part of an overall education program. For example, students who work at food service counters, sell programs or usher at events, or wash dishes in dining halls and anticipate some compensation (for example, money or meals) are generally considered employees entitled to minimum wage and overtime compensation.

Compensatory Time at Public Universities

Public universities or colleges that qualify as a “public agency” under the FLSA may compensate nonexempt employees with compensatory time off (or “comp time”) in lieu of overtime pay. A college or university is a public agency under the FLSA if it is a political subdivision of a State. When determining whether a college or university is a “political subdivision,” the Department considers whether (1) the State directly created the entity, or (2) individuals administering the entity are responsible to public officials or the general electorate.

If the public university or college qualifies as a public agency, nonexempt employees generally may not accrue more than 240 hours of comp time. However, employees engaged to work in a public safety activity, an emergency response activity, or a seasonal activity may accrue as much as 480 hours of comp time. See 29 U.S.C. 207(o)(3)(A). Private higher education institutions may not pay employees comp time in lieu of overtime pay.

Where to Obtain Additional Information

For additional information, visit our Wage and Hour Division Website: http://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd and/or call our toll-free information and helpline, available 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. in your time zone, 1-866-4USWAGE (1-866-487-9243).

This publication is for general information and is not to be considered in the same light as official statements of position contained in the regulations.

The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. This document is intended only to provide clarity to the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies.

Want to Get your Dissertation Accepted?

Discover how we've helped doctoral students complete their dissertations and advance their academic careers!

Join 200+ Graduated Students

Get Your Dissertation Accepted On Your Next Submission

Get customized coaching for:.

• Crafting your proposal,
• Collecting and analyzing your data, or
• Preparing your defense.

Trapped in dissertation revisions?

What is the life of a phd student really like, published by steve tippins on june 9, 2020 june 9, 2020.

Last Updated on: 2nd February 2024, 05:11 am

Life of a PhD student? Hell. That about sums it up.

Okay, that’s not a very satisfying answer. Nor is it completely true. Life as a PhD student doesn’t always feel like hell. It does sometimes, but it’s also an exhilarating and rewarding time to explore your area of interest and grow into a true scholar. So what does the life of a PhD student really look like?

The life of a PhD student is somewhat varied depending on the field you’re going into. Generally speaking, no matter what program you’re in, it has two phases: coursework and dissertation.

Coursework Phase

Doctoral-level are courses that are a lot harder than undergraduate or even Master’s courses , but they are similar in structure: there’s a syllabus, due dates, other students in the class, etc. There are definitive semesters, quarters, or terms. In between terms, there’s really not much work to do. 

Of course, there are different expectations for PhD students than for undergrads. They are held to a far more rigorous standard in the work that they do. Class sizes are much smaller, and students are expected to participate in nuanced discussions. There is no sliding by unnoticed in a PhD program.

All that said, the coursework phase of the life of a PhD student is not altogether different than their previous educational experience, besides being more rigorous. It’s like school on steroids. 

Depending on the school, there may be a transition from classwork: comprehensive exams. This is basically, “study everything you’ve learned so that you can be ready for any question.” 

Dissertation Phase

The dissertation phase is a world in which there’s no syllabus, no classmates, and no real structure. You have your Chairperson and Committee to keep happy, but they’re not pushing you forward or expecting you to turn things in by a certain date. They’re just waiting for you to do what you have to do. 

Once you get to the dissertation stage, the concept of semesters and quarters goes away, and you’re working on your topic all the time.

Over 50% of doctoral candidates don’t finish their dissertations.

Many students find that not having due dates can make it difficult to work efficiently and make real progress on their dissertation . I speak more about how to effectively navigate this later on in this article.

I f you go into a program that has a large number of doctoral students, you’ll still be alone when you get to the dissertation stage, but you’ll have other people a similar stage. If you’re in a smaller program (for example, I was the only person in my PhD program), you may be all alone during the dissertation phase.

You’ll have to be able to move from the structured format of classes to the dissertation stage, where there’s very little structure and it can be lonely.

How Many Hours do PhD Students Work?

How many hours do PhD students work? Many PhD students have about 40 hours a week of reading and classwork, plus around 20 hours a week of assistantship or lab time. And that’s minimum. You may also be teaching while you’re doing your dissertation. I had two classes a semester, which ended up being 6 hours a week of class time, plus preparation and grading.   It’s easy to have a 60-80 hour week. In the life of a PhD student, the concept of “weekends” does not exist.

When you get to your dissertation, it’s easy to say “Oh, thank god I don’t have to do that anymore” and just stop. But don’t. You’ll need to put in the same hours on your dissertation if you want to finish within a reasonable timeframe (unless you’re deliberately making a choice to finish over a longer period of time).

Life of a PhD Student

Here, I’ll describe some of the common themes of the life of a PhD student, regardless of discipline. If you’re not yet enrolled in a PhD program, I highly recommend reading this to get an idea of the realities of what doctoral-level work looks like. If you’re already living the life of a PhD student, you will find some indispensable hints and advice for getting through with your mental health intact.

Being a Doctoral Student Is Not Like Being an Undergrad

Life as a PhD student is not the same as life as an undergrad. You’re there for the academic experience, not for anything else. Don’t expect to be able to join clubs and have time to socialize or go to football games. You may even find yourself feeling jealous of undergrads. 

But you’re there for a completely different purpose. You are the reason that the library is open twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. You are training to join the ranks of the world’s elite minds. 

You Can’t “Just Get By”

On the same note, the academic standards to which you’ll have to hold yourself change. As an undergraduate, you can get by easily with “what do I need to know,” and as a PhD student you ask, “what more can I learn?”

If you have the mentality of asking “what do I need to get by?” you shouldn’t be in a doctoral program. Because if you’re in a doctoral program, you’re going to end up as an expert. If your specific topic comes up in important policy decisions, you may be asked to be on an advisory panel. At some point, you will probably be asked to be an expert somewhere, and the advice you give will influence people’s lives. Society depends on you doing a good job in order to function well.

Doctoral programs are rigorous for a reason: only those who have a true passion and care for their subject area are afforded the power that a doctorate gives.

Writing a Dissertation Takes Over Your Life

Writing a dissertation is an immersive experience. It’s so much a part of the life of a PhD student that it’s hard to differentiate between when you’re working and not working. 

You also have to do things besides actually writing, and these things sometimes take a frustratingly long time. For example, making calls to institutions you are gathering data from, figuring out how to access or use software programs, or transcribing interviews. 

It doesn’t feel like you’re making progress on your dissertation because you haven’t written anything, so it can be easy to get discouraged. It’s important to account for the time spent doing this kind of thing so that you don’t feel like you’re failing when you have to spend entire days on it rather than writing.

I had a friend who spent an entire weekend trying to de-bug a program, and the problem ended up being a zero that had been replaced by an O. That kind of stuff happens all the time, and it’s often when students quit. Account for this ahead of time so that it’s just part of the deal.

It is hard to communicate to friends and family members about what you’re going through in this process. They may expect you to be the same person you were before you entered the program and have the same flexibility. This can put a lot of pressure on friendships and relationships.  

You see all these other people who seem like they’re doing amazing things. Going on vacation, having children, advancing their careers. It may feel like you’re missing out. The life of a PhD student is also extremely isolating. Your family may not understand what you’re going through. It’s important to take care of your mental and emotional health so that this doesn’t lead you to drop out.

No Time for Anything

Those people who go into a doctoral program and continue a job and have families have to understand that they’re going to have very little time for anything other than those three things during the program. There is often not even enough time for all three of those. Understand that your faculty will have expectations of you and rarely considers outside commitments or desires when evaluating whether you’ve met those expectations.

Much of the life of a PhD student is actually deferring life–or at least all of the facets of life outside of academia. It means following everybody else’s requirements until you graduate. 

Revisions, Revisions, Revisions

Being a PhD student means constant revising. That’s one of the reasons that people quit, because they don’t realize how much revising will be necessary. When students get a draft of their proposal back for revisions a fifth time, many consider that a failure, but that’s simply the nature of writing a dissertation.

People get angry because they think they’re failing or they think that professors are being hard on them. But having to do multiple revisions is the norm. You’re learning a new language (academic writing), and you’re conducting an extremely rigorous project.

In classes, professors may let things slide. But any professor worth their salt won’t let things slide in your dissertation. It’s a good place for a perfectionist.

Here are some common reasons why students struggle with the type of academic writing required in a dissertation:

• You feel like you’re repeating yourself a lot
• You have to make your argument very clear and slow
• You can’t assume any knowledge
• You have to be extraordinarily specific
• You have to be extremely consistent

A Warning for Doctoral Students

There are stories of faculty members who take advantage of doctoral students to pick up laundry, babysit children, or worse. However power can be abused, some people in positions of power will try to do it. While hopefully there has been enough conversation about this that it is declining, it is something to be aware of. Listen to other people and be careful. 

The academic system is set up for an uneven balance of power–even before you account for our societal power dynamics of gender and race.

While there is a worthy tradition of “paying your dues” in academia, this means paying your dues to the profession–through teaching, learning, and research–not paying dues to members of the profession.

All this said, there are times when it isn’t inappropriate for faculty members may ask you to do things outside of the realm of academia (you can feel free to accept or decline as you wish). When I was in my graduate program a faculty member asked if I could help him move one weekend. I helped him for an hour and a half, and he gave me $100. 

He was trying to be nice to me, and he certainly didn’t take advantage of the power dynamic. However, I was working as an assistant on a research project and getting paid $12/hr, and I jokingly chided him for paying me more for my brawn than my brains.

Final Thoughts

The life of a PhD student is not easy, but it is rewarding. Time and time again, I’ve seen the difference between students who complete their doctoral programs and those who don’t is whether they’re able to get enough support.

That’s why I started offering Dissertation Coaching Services . I help PhD students get through the dissertation phase of their doctoral programs, successfully defend them, and graduate with their degrees.

If you are interested in receiving support from a Dissertation Chair through weekly coaching sessions, feedback on your work, and accountability tools, book a free 30-minute consultation . As of this writing, I am nearing capacity, so please do so soon if you would like to participate.

Steve Tippins

Steve Tippins, PhD, has thrived in academia for over thirty years. He continues to love teaching in addition to coaching recent PhD graduates as well as students writing their dissertations. Learn more about his dissertation coaching and career coaching services. Book a Free Consultation with Steve Tippins

Related Posts

Dissertation

What makes a good research question.

Creating a good research question is vital to successfully completing your dissertation. Here are some tips that will help you formulate a good research question.  What Makes a Good Research Question? These are the three Read more…

Dissertation Structure

When it comes to writing a dissertation, one of the most fraught questions asked by graduate students is about dissertation structure. A dissertation is the lengthiest writing project that many graduate students ever undertake, and Read more…

Choosing a Dissertation Chair

Choosing your dissertation chair is one of the most important decisions that you’ll make in graduate school. Your dissertation chair will in many ways shape your experience as you undergo the most rigorous intellectual challenge Read more…

Make This Your Last Round of Dissertation Revision.

Learn How to Get Your Dissertation Accepted .

Discover the 5-Step Process in this Free Webinar .

Almost there!

Please verify your email address by clicking the link in the email message we just sent to your address.

If you don't see the message within the next five minutes, be sure to check your spam folder :).

Hack Your Dissertation

5-Day Mini Course: How to Finish Faster With Less Stress

Interested in more helpful tips about improving your dissertation experience? Join our 5-day mini course by email!

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• 26 October 2022

Grad students’ long overtime , and more — this week’s best science graphics

Graduate students work long hours

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-03419-8

Reprints and permissions

Related Articles

• Computer science

India is booming — but there are worries ahead for basic science

News 10 APR 24

How to break big tech’s stranglehold on AI in academia

Correspondence 09 APR 24

Brazil’s postgraduate funding model is about rectifying past inequalities

High-threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory

Article 27 MAR 24

Three reasons why AI doesn’t model human language

Correspondence 19 MAR 24

So … you’ve been hacked

Technology Feature 19 MAR 24

How I harnessed media engagement to supercharge my research career

Career Column 09 APR 24

Ready or not, AI is coming to science education — and students have opinions

Career Feature 08 APR 24

How we landed job interviews for professorships straight out of our PhD programmes

Career Column 08 APR 24

Husbandry Technician I

Memphis, Tennessee

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital (St. Jude)

Lead Researcher – Department of Bone Marrow Transplantation & Cellular Therapy

Researcher in the center for in vivo imaging and therapy, scientist or lead researcher (protein engineering, hematology, shengdar q. tsai lab), lead or senior researcher - flow cytometry.

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Student Work Hours for Employment at Boston University Policy

Student workers may not work during their scheduled class times, and Massachusetts state law requires that an unpaid break of at least 30 minutes be taken after six consecutive hours of work.

The Policy on Student Work Hours for Employment at Boston University applies to all student employees regardless of program, wage funding source, citizenship status or method of payment, who are employed by Boston University. It does not apply to employment outside of Boston University. International students must also adhere to all limitations and requirements relating to on-campus student employment required by their particular immigration status and obtain ISSO work authorization if required.

Faculty and staff cannot be paid as student employees.

For All Boston University Students:

Students may not exceed a total of 1500 hours of University employment in a fiscal year (July 1 through June 30).

A student on a leave of absence or in a non-credit certificate or exchange program cannot be paid as a student employee, but can be hired as a temporary employee/staff/faculty through Human Resources. Students working more than one job should not exceed the hours for all jobs combined, as specified below.

For Undergraduate Students and All Part-Time Students:

Boston University undergraduate students and all part-time students enrolled in a program should not work more than 20 hours per week while attending classes.

During official University break periods, such as intersession, spring break and summer, these students should not work more than 40 hours per week.

For Full-Time Graduate Students:

Full-time graduate students should typically not work more than 20 hours per week during any academic period (fall semester, spring semester or either summer term) in which they are classified as full-time, either by registration or by certification.

Students may, on a case-by-case basis, request approval for exceptions to this policy. Exceptions should only be granted in cases where the additional hours of work clearly benefit the student’s academic or professional development and do not substantially slow the student’s degree progress.

Arrangements for such additional part-time service must be approved by the student’s advisor, by either the department chair or director of graduate studies, and by the appropriate associate dean in the school/ college with which the student is associated. Indication of all students afforded exception to this policy should be provided to the Associate Provost for Graduate Affairs.

During official University break periods, such as intersession and spring break, or during any academic period in which these students are not classified as full-time, either by registration or certification, students should not work more than 40 hours per week.

International students here on a student visa are limited by federal regulations to no more than 20 hours of on-campus service per week, which for purposes of the regulations includes graduate teaching fellow and research assistant appointments and any additional on-campus employment. This means that international students on a full teaching fellow or full research appointment (20 hours/week during the semester) are not eligible for additional on-campus work, even if the University employment policy would otherwise allow it.

Effective Date

The revised Policy on Student Work Hours for Employment at Boston University takes effect on 6/25/20.

Additional Resources Regarding This Policy

The original Policy on Student Work Hours for Employment at Boston University took effect September 1, 2016. The policy was revised by the University Council Committee on Graduate Academic Programs & Policies, and the revision was approved by the University Council on 6/16/20.

Is it possible to earn a PhD while working? The brutal truth

Working alongside your PhD seems like an attractive proposal until you look at all of the different commitments you need to make to actually get a PhD and submit your dissertation. Working part-time may help PhD students financially but it often comes at an academic cost.

It is possible to earn a PhD while working. However, it requires strict time management and can be very complicated. You have to balance any other significant commitments inside and outside of your PhD.

A PhD is typically the equivalent time commitment as a full-time job. The majority of the PhD students I know work at least 40 hours a week. So, trying to get a PhD while working is very time intensive – 80-hour + weeks.

Some students drop down to a part-time PhD in order to balance all of the particular commitments of a PhD program and working hours.

Whether or not you are a part-time PhD student or you are studying your PhD full-time, here are all of the aspects you should consider if you are considering working alongside your PhD research. This is what you need to know if you are considering getting your doctorate while working.

Can you work during a PhD?

Some institutions full-out ban their PhD students from working full-time alongside a full-time research commitment. They want to make sure that you’re working 100% on your PhD because balancing work isn’t easy.

Although it may not be banned in some institutions it is generally expected that students focus on their research and coursework full-time during a PhD and are therefore not typically able to hold down a full-time job.

Some programs may allow for part-time work, but it is generally not recommended as it can interfere with academic progress.

Additionally, many PhD programs offer funding in the form of stipends or fellowships which can help support students financially during their studies.

There are a few things to consider if you are thinking of working during your PhD.

The first is whether or not you will have enough time to dedicate to both your work and your studies. You don’t want your work to suffer because you are spending too much time on your PhD, or vice versa.

Another thing to consider is how working will affect your funding.

If you are receiving PhD funding or a scholarship from an external source, they may have stipulations on whether or not you can work while receiving their funding. Be sure to check with them before taking on any paid work.

Lastly, you will want to make sure that the work you are doing is related to your field of study. Working in a related field can help you with your research by giving you real-world experience that you can apply to your studies.

Even though some institutions allow you to work, should you?

Should you work during your PhD?

Some students feel that they need to work in order to support themselves during their PhD, while others feel that they can focus solely on their studies.

There are pros and cons to both approaches.

Working during your PhD can help you to cover your living expenses and may even allow you to save some money. However, it can also be a distraction from your studies and may make it more difficult to find time to do research.

I know that I wouldn’t be able to balance the pressures of a full-time job with my PhD studies and, therefore, decided to not have any jobs during my first year – this included jobs inside the University such as demonstrating in undergraduate laboratories.

Therefore, it is possible to do a PhD whilst working full-time but you really have to consider the impact of the extra pressures and commitments

. It is much easier to work alongside your PhD if you have a strong research-based masters degree and your job outside of your degree is flexible enough to allow you to attend different academic commitments such as attending seminars, meeting with advisers, and travelling to conferences.

Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to work during your PhD is up to you.

Consider your financial situation and how working would impact your studies before making a decision.

It can be difficult to juggle work and study commitments, and you may find yourself feeling overwhelmed and stressed. You may also have less time to socialize and enjoy your student life.

So, it’s important to think carefully about whether working during your PhD is right for you.

What type of work can you do during a PhD? Part time or Full time?

During your PhD there are a number of different options that you could consider if you want to (and you are allowed to) get a job.

I do not recommend working full-time alongside your PhD but, there are some options for part-time work to earn a little bit of money alongside your studies.

Full time work

My recommendation is that you do not try to fit a PhD alongside full-time work. Trying to work full time is asking for trouble.

There will be so many more pressures on you that it will not be a very enjoyable experience.

A PhD requires you to be creative.

Creativity comes from having enough mental space to allow your mind to connect new and interesting ideas together. If you are busy with work you will not have the mental capacity to be able to do this effectively.

Therefore, I recommend that you consider at least dropping down to part-time work if you are insistent on pursuing a PhD alongside employment.

I have seen PhD students complete a PhD part-time supported and partly funded by their current place of employment.

Part time work

If you want to know more about the best PhD student part-time jobs check out my full guide – click here for the full article.

There are a variety of part-time jobs that can easily supplement your income during a PhD.

The best PhD student part-time jobs will have flexible hours, provide you with a reasonable hourly rate, and not distract you from your primary goal of completing your PhD.

I have highlighted in my YouTube video, below, all of the different side hustles that PhD students can try if they need to earn a little bit more money.

The common part-time jobs for PhD students include:

• Hospitality
• Customer service
• University-based jobs – such as tutoring, marking exams, student services and working in laboratories
• Online jobs such as user testing, notetaker, and translating.
• Freelancing. Selling a skill that you have two people on services such as Upwork .

Why Should You Worry About Working During Your PhD

There are a number of reasons why you should worry about working during your PhD.

The most important is balancing workload, the fact that you were extending your time in academia by a significant amount, the increased risk of burnout, and ensuring you have enough resources to keep you going for multiple years.

A PhD is just like a full time job.

Therefore, getting a PhD while working full-time will be incredibly difficult. Both commitments will require at least 40 hours per week each.

Nonetheless, if you are able to have full flexibility on your work schedule and you are capable of distance learning for some part of your PhD it may be much more possible.

Many PhD students struggle with just the commitments of earning a doctorate. Consider working alongside your PhD very carefully.

Time it takes

A PhD will typically take between three and seven years. During this time it is extremely stressful and you need to make sure you’re capable of researching at your best for the entire time.

I have always said that a PhD is a marathon and not a sprint. Adding extra years to your PhD if you need to can be worth it. However, you must consider the amount of time it will take you to get your PhD and the potential return on that investment.

Unless you have a particular career secured or in mind for after your PhD the extra years it takes to complete a doctoral degree part-time are generally not worth it.

Burnout is a real consequence of doing a PhD.

By working alongside your PhD you’ll increase your chances of burnout significantly. This is true even if you like to study.

If you are prone to feelings of being overwhelmed I would stay away from earning a PhD whilst working full or part-time.

Slowly introduce part-time work if you need to once you have settled into the general routine of your PhD.

Tips for Earning Your PhD While Working

Here are a few general tips that may help you if you find yourself having to work alongside your PhD:

Talk to everyone involved

Everyone involved in this process needs to be on board. There will be times when you need to ask favours from your supervisor, colleagues, work supervisor or others.

Don’t be afraid to ask for help: Whether it’s from your supervisor, colleagues, or friends and family, don’t hesitate to ask for help when you need it.

This is not a sign of weakness, but simply a recognition that we all need assistance from time to time.

Stay Organized and on Track

Find a routine: Try establishing a set schedule for at least most days of the week and stick to it as much as possible. This will help you to stay focused and make the most of your limited time.

Get Involved in the Research Community

Remember to stay in touch with your research community.

Working part-time or full-time can mean that you miss out on the exciting recent advancements and collaboration with people in your field. Make an extra special effort to attend seminars, talks, and networking events to help progress your research and your academic career.

Don’t squirrel yourself away!

Work with your strengths

Know yourself: Be honest about how well you work under pressure and how much free time you realistically have.

If you know that you work better with a tight deadline, then try to structure your work schedule accordingly.

Personally, I need as much free mental space is possible to perform at my best. Just do what is best for you.

Wrapping up

This article has been through everything you need to consider if you are tempted by earning a PhD while working.

Your PhD programme may dictate whether it is possible to work alongside your PhD. Whether or not it is a good idea will be down to you and if you are able to balance an insane amount of commitments and work.

My general recommendation is that you should focus 100% on your PhD journey and although it is definitely possible you’re going to be at risk of burnout.

Combining part-time PhD’s, part-time jobs, and finding a flexible job that will help keep you focused on the primary goal of finishing your dissertation is the most sensible way of working alongside your PhD.

Dr Andrew Stapleton has a Masters and PhD in Chemistry from the UK and Australia. He has many years of research experience and has worked as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Associate at a number of Universities. Although having secured funding for his own research, he left academia to help others with his YouTube channel all about the inner workings of academia and how to make it work for you.

Thank you for visiting Academia Insider.

We are here to help you navigate Academia as painlessly as possible. We are supported by our readers and by visiting you are helping us earn a small amount through ads and affiliate revenue - Thank you!

2024 © Academia Insider

New report suggests PhD students work 50% more than undergraduates

• 25 June 2020

The Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI) has published a new report on the experience of PhD students – people who are studying for doctoral degrees.

PhD Life: The UK student experience  by Bethan Cornell uses previously unpublished data from  Nature  and the Wellcome Trust to uncover the reality of life as a PhD student.

The key findings include:

• the average PhD student works 47 hours per week, which is over 50% more than the average undergraduate and three hours less than the average academic;
• for PhD students on the basic Research Council stipend, this equates to earning less than the minimum wage;
• over three-quarters of PhD students (78%) are satisfied or highly satisfied with their degree of independence;
• 63% of PhD students see their supervisor for less than one hour per-week;
• 23% of PhD students would change their supervisor if they were starting their PhD again now;
• the majority (80%) of PhD students believe a career in research can be lonely and isolating;
• over one-third (37%) of PhD students have sought help for anxiety or depression caused by PhD study;
• one-quarter (25%) of PhD students feel they have been bullied and 47% believe they have witnessed bullying; and
• one-fifth (20%) of PhD students feel they have been discriminated against and 34% believe they have witnessed discrimination.

The report incorporates qualitative research that captures the voices of PhD students:

• ‘Due to being [funded] by a stipend and not through student finance, and not technically being employed by the university means that I am not eligible for childcare funding. The cost of childcare is around £11,000 per year, my stipend is £14,200.’
• ‘almost all the staff I meet from different universities are “pals from [insert elitist uni here]”. As such they have very little understanding of the challenges someone from a “normal” or disadvantaged background faces, especially financially, giving the overwhelming impression that your skills are secondary to your class.’ 
• ‘The higher up you go, the more male and white-dominated the environment becomes. There’s only one full female professor in my whole institute, and I have genuinely never met a black PI [Principal Investigator] or professor since starting my PhD.’

The author of the report, Bethan Cornell, who is currently studying for a PhD in Physics, said:

Despite PhD students making a valuable contribution to UK research output, there are huge variations in the way they are recruited and funded and the quality of support they receive. This makes it hard regulate their experience and means PhD students’ voices can go unheard when things go wrong.’ Where good practice exists in the UK and abroad, the sector should take note and use it to form a more cohesive and uniform approach to PhD training. This would benefit not just the students, but the quality of UK research output.

Nick Hillman, the Director of HEPI, said:

Too often, people taking PhDs are regarded as neither one thing nor the other. They are not seen as students the way undergraduates are and they are not seen as staff the way academics are. Sometimes, PhD students receive excellent support but, too often, they fall through the cracks, making them demoralised and unhappy. When that happens, we all lose because the world desperately needs people who push forward the frontiers of knowledge. We know far more about undergraduates than we used to and we now need similar levels of research on the student experience of postgraduates to help policymakers, regulators and funders improve their lives.

In the Foreword to the report, Dr Katie Wheat, Head of Engagement and Policy at Vitae, said:

This report makes an important contribution to current debates on research culture by presenting the views of doctoral researchers in the UK extracted from the recent Wellcome Trust and  Nature  reports. It highlights several areas of concern, including working conditions, wellbeing, supervision and incidents of bullying and harassment.  The findings chime with growing recognition of the need to improve research culture.

Watch and listen to a presentation on the new report by the author by clicking on the video below.

Notes for Editors

• The report is based, with permission, on data obtained by the Wellcome Trust, who surveyed 7,646 researchers over five weeks from September 2019, and  Nature , who   surveyed 6,320 current PhD students worldwide for six weeks between June and July 2019. The report combines the responses of UK-based students from both surveys, making the maximum number of respondents for any question 1,069. The confidence interval is 95% with a 5% margin of error.
• The Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI) was established in 2002 to shape the higher education policy debate through evidence. It is the United Kingdom’s only independent think tank devoted to higher education. HEPI is a non-partisan charity funded in part by organisations and universities that wish to see a vibrant higher education debate.
• In May 2020, HEPI published  Postgraduate Education in the UK  (HEPI Analytical Report 1) by Dr Ginevra House, which reviewed the state of postgraduate education since the last recession.

Share this:

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

• Part Time PhDs – Everything You Need To Know
• Types of Doctorates

Introduction

Whilst the core activities of a part time PhD are identical of that to a full time PhD, its arrangement is different. This difference is not only in programme duration but also in fees and funding opportunities. In addition to this, part time study also has different benefits and challenges. Therefore, whilst your personal situation may not be ideal for a full time PhD, it could be perfect for a part time one. We’ve outlined these differences as well as the pros and cons of part time study to help you decide whether it’s right for you.

Why Do a Part Time PhD?

Undertaking a part time PhD can be a great option for you if you fall into one of the four categories:

• Financial – a part time PhD provides the opportunity to earn whilst you study. Although you could secure a full time studentship, the stipend it offers may not be enough in all cases, for example, if you’re financially responsible for multiple family members.
• Career – working individuals, especially those who have already advanced several stages in their career, may opt for a Professional Doctorate. A Professional Doctorate is equivalent to a part time PhD, but focuses on a specific professional practice relevant to the individual. It’s usually undertaken when you wish to apply research skills in a professional environment or become more specialised in your industry.
• Caring obligations – part time study offers a greater deal of flexibility compared to its full time equivalent. This can be desirable in situations where the individual has considerable caring obligations, such as a young family.
• Intensity – many students feel that a pursuing a research degree over a longer period of time drastically lowers the intensity of postgraduate study. Part time PhD hours per week are typically around half that of its full time equivalent. This can come with a wide range of physical and mental health benefits.

Part Time PhD Fees

The average tuition fee for part time PhD study in the UK is approximately £2,356 per academic year for home students, and between £8,000 to £12,500 for international students.

This is typically 50% of the fee charged for an equivalent full time doctorate. However, a handful of universities use a prorated fee of up to 60% so it’s important to check the individual fees for each university you are applying to. These additional costs usually cover the admin/overhead fees associated with your time at the university.

Besides the tuition fee, there are several other costs which you need to account for. You can learn about these costs in our full cost breakdown of UK PhDs .

Part Time PhD Funding and Scholarships

As a part time student, most universities will expect you to fund your own studies. This is because nearly all part-time students will work a paying job alongside their studies which can be used to support their education.

However, you may still apply to department or university funding opportunities such as subject-specific bursaries. Besides this, external bodies such as Research Councils , research charities and industrial institutions also offer grants and PhD studentships for research projects related to their field. It’s worth remembering these opportunities are usually very limited and are awarded based on a candidates strength and not their personal situation.

One benefit of selecting a research project related to your employer is that it opens an additional opportunity for funding. It’s not uncommon for an employer to contribute to an employee’s tuition fee if there is a mutual benefit to be had.

How Long Is a Part Time PhD?

The average duration of part time PhDs in the UK is between 6 to 7 years. This is double a full time doctorate.

Universities also set registration periods which limit the minimum and maximum amount of time you can be enrolled in a course. For doctorates, the minimum duration is usually 4 years and the maximum 8 years.

How Many Working Hours per Week?

You will be expected to work half the number of hours of a full time student. Although full time students are expected to work 35 hours a week, in reality, most will work closer to 40 – 45 hours. Therefore, you’ll be expected to dedicate approximately 20 hours each week towards your degree.

However, you won’t always be able to achieve this many hours due to your other commitments. Therefore, working to a frequent and consistent schedule will be more important. Working on your research in irregular intervals or whenever time permits will be an inefficient approach – it’s far better, plus psychologically easier, to commit to a consistent schedule. Though your PhD supervisor may be able to offer guidance in this regard, ultimately the PhD is yours to shape.

Most part time programmes will also have some doctoral training courses with fixed dates, especially those which are organised by industry experts or visiting lecturers. There may also be time restrictions to be aware of if you are a postgraduate researcher involved in laboratory work, particularly where special equipment is needed as this may be rented by the university research centre and only available during certain times in the year.

Part Time PhDs for International Students

If you are an international student wishing to undertake a part time PhD programme in a foreign country, you will need to meet additional requirements.

For example, to study in the UK, you will need to secure both a work visa and a stable job. This is to prove that you can support yourself throughout the full length of your course. Unfortunately, even if you’re able to secure departmental or external funding, you won’t be able to use this to prove an income. Additionally, an international PhD student in the UK will need to demonstrate English proficiency as part of the application process. These entry requirements apply whether the overseas student is pursuing a PhD part-time or for full-time studies.

Finding a PhD has never been this easy – search for a PhD by keyword, location or academic area of interest.

Challenges of a Part Time PhD

It’s generally accepted that undertaking a PhD part time is more challenging than undertaking it full time.

Age – although this shouldn’t be a factor, we know it can cause concern for some. If you have already been working for several years, you may find that some of your research colleagues or academic staff members are the same age or younger than yourself. This could cause apprehension or cultural issues if you fail to keep an open mind.

Detachment – as a research student, you’ll often doubt whether you’re working on the right thing or making sufficient progress. You can expect this feeling to be compounded if you’re studying on a part time basis. This is because you’ll have less interaction with your department, peers and supervisor given you won’t always be on campus.

Time management – juggling a career or significant family obligations with the demanding requirements of a doctoral degree can take its toll. Over the 6 to 7 years, you’ll no doubt encounter periods when your external commitments require more of your time, whether its intensive projects or the need for frequent travel associated with part time courses. During these times there is potential for your research to slip, or worse, become an unwanted burden.

Motivation – having to balance your time and focus with your other commitments can make it difficult to immerse yourself in your research. This often results in a lack of ‘momentum’, which coupled with a journey that’s twice as long, increases the risk of your passion fading out. Unfortunately, because of this, many supervisors observe the drop-out rate of part time students to be greater than that of their full time peers. This isn’t due to a lack of dedication or commitment, but due to the individual no longer being able to balance several demanding obligations without jeopardising their mental or physical well-being.

Funding opportunity availability – as mentioned earlier, since part-time applicants are able to work alongside their studies, there are fewer funding opportunities available to them.

Relevancy – as your doctoral study will take 6 to 7 years to complete, there is a risk that your research will no longer be relevant. This could be for several reasons. For example:

• An individual may be working on a research project very similar to yours. Assuming they are working full time and complete their project before you, it could render your project ‘unoriginal’ depending on the amount of overlap between your findings. It is important to discuss this with potential supervisors who may be aware of similar PhD projects being undertaken.
• New technology or knowledge may be developed which renders your original research question obsolete if the premise it was built on becomes ’outdated’.
• New observations could be made which have the potential to jeopardise your work. For example, a new study may be published which identifies significant limitations behind a method outlined in your research proposal. This would cast serious doubt into the validity of your research findings, and in some cases, may require you to start over with an alternative method.

Browse PhDs Now

Join thousands of students.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Language selection

• Français fr

Work off campus as an international student 

On this page.

• If you’re a part-time student at a DLI

If you’re on an authorized leave

If your study permit doesn’t have work conditions on it, during regular school terms/semesters, during scheduled breaks in the school year, if your study situation changes, changing the conditions on your study permit, if you already applied for a work permit, if you’re starting a new study program, working outside canada, who can work off campus.

You and your employer must make sure you can work off campus without a work permit before you start working . If you start working off campus but don’t meet the requirements, you may have to leave Canada.

You can only start working in Canada when your study program has started. You can’t work before you start your studies.

If you’re able to work during your studies, it’ll say so in the conditions on your study permit.

If you’re eligible for off-campus work, you don’t need a work permit.

Eligibility requirements

You can work off campus without a work permit if you meet  all  of these requirements:

• You’re a full-time student at a  designated learning institution (DLI)
• a post-secondary  academic ,  vocational  or  professional training  program  or
• a secondary-level vocational training program (Quebec only)
• is at least 6 months long and
• leads to a degree, diploma or certificate
• You’ve started studying
• You have a social insurance number (SIN)

If you’re a part-time student at a DLI

You can work off campus only if:

• you meet  all  of the requirements above, except the requirement to be a full-time student,
• you’re in the last semester of your study program and you don’t need a full course load to complete your program and
• you were a full-time student in your program in Canada, up until your last semester

If you’re on an  authorized leave from your studies , or you’re switching schools and you’re not studying, you  can’t  work off campus. You can only return to work once you’re back to studying.

Get a social insurance number to work in Canada

A SIN is a 9-digit number that the Government of Canada gives you. You need one to work in Canada.

To  apply for a SIN to work off campus , you must have 1 of these conditions printed on your study permit:

• may work 20 hours per week off campus or full-time during regular breaks if meeting criteria outlined in  paragraph 186(v)  of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.
• may accept employment on or off campus if meeting eligibility criteria, per  paragraph R186(f), (v) or (w)  and must cease working if no longer meeting these criteria.

You can ask to have these conditions added if you’re eligible to work off campus . There’s no fee to add these conditions to your permit.

You must request an amendment to your study permit  before you can apply to Service Canada for a SIN.

How many hours you can work off campus

You can work up to 20 hours per week . You can work more than 1 job to make up these hours as long as you continue to meet the conditions of your study permit.

Who can work more than 20 hours per week off campus

Under a temporary public policy, you may be eligible to work without a work permit for more than 20 hours per week off campus during regular academic sessions. To be eligible, you must meet the following requirements:

From November 15, 2022, to April 30, 2024, you can work more than 20 hours per week off campus if you’re in  any  of the following situations:

• You’re a study permit holder who is studying at a DLI full time (or part time if it’s your final academic semester).
• Your study permit has expired, but you have  maintained your status and are studying at a DLI full time (or part time if it’s your final academic semester).
• You’re approved for a study permit but haven’t arrived in Canada yet.

In addition, you  must  meet all of these requirements to be eligible:

• You are in Canada or have re-entered Canada by April 30, 2024.
• May work 20 hours per week off campus or full time during regular breaks if meeting criteria outlined in paragraph 186(v) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.
• May accept employment on or off campus if meeting eligibility criteria, per paragraph R186(f), (v) or (w) and must cease working if no longer meeting these criteria.

If neither of these conditions is printed on your permit,  you must request an amendment .

From January 1, 2024, to April 30, 2024, you can work more than 20 hours per week off campus if you’re in  any  of the following situations:

• Your study permit has expired, but you have maintained your status and are studying at a DLI full time (or part time if it’s your final academic semester).

In addition, you  must  also meet all of these requirements to be eligible:

• May work 20 hours per week off campus or full time during regular breaks if meeting criteria outlined in paragraph 186(v) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.
• May accept employment on or off campus if meeting eligibility criteria, but per paragraph R186(f), (v) or (w), and must cease working if no longer meeting these criteria.

If neither of the conditions above is printed on your permit,  you must request an amendment .

You need to stop working more than 20 hours per week without a work permit on the date the study permit you are applying to extend expires (either your original study permit or extension to your original study permit).

You  must  also meet all of these requirements:

• We received your study permit application (original or extension)  on or before December 7, 2023.
• May work 20 hours per week off campus or full time during regular breaks if meeting criteria outlined in paragraph 186(v) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

Note:  If you’re no longer eligible to work  more than 20 hours a week off campus, you may be able to work up to  20 hours per week under the standard eligibility requirements .

You can work full-time if you’re on a scheduled break, such as winter and summer holidays, or a fall or spring reading week. You’re free to work overtime or work 2 part-time jobs that add up to a higher than usual number of hours.

You must be a full-time student both before and after the break to work full-time.

You can’t work during a break that comes before you start your very first school semester.

How many hours count as full-time work

There is no set number of hours per week that counts as ‘full-time’ work. However, your employer(s) must follow all provincial laws on overtime pay and time between shifts.

If your program doesn’t have scheduled breaks

You can work up to 20 hours per week .

Working more than 20 hours per week is a violation of your study permit conditions. You can lose your student status for doing this, and may not be approved for a study or work permit in the future. You may also have to leave the country.

How to calculate your hours

You’re responsible for both of the following:

• Hours are defined as any time you spend earning wages or collecting a commission, even if you’re on call during these hours and not actually working.
• actively pursuing your studies
• not working more than 20 hours per week
• meeting any other conditions listed on your study permit

Self-employed students

If you’re a self-employed person, you’re also responsible for keeping track of the hours you work off campus and proving that you’re complying with the conditions of your study permit.

Hours are calculated as any time you spend doing any of the following:

• earning wages
• being paid wages for performing a service or selling a product
• collecting a commission for performing a service or selling a product

Who can’t work off campus

You  can’t  work off campus without a work permit if any of these situations apply to you:

• your study permit says you aren’t authorized to work off campus while you study
• you’re only enrolled in an English or French as a second language (ESL/FSL) program
• you’re only taking general interest courses
• you’re only taking courses required to be accepted into a full-time program
• your situation changes and you no longer meet all of the requirements to work off campus

If any of these situations apply to you, and you want to work while studying in Canada, you need to  apply for a work permit .

If you weren’t eligible to work off campus, but your study situation has now changed, you may be able to change the conditions of your study permit.

You can apply to change the conditions of your permit if:

• you’ve changed your study program to one that may allow you to work off campus  and  
• your study permit says “This permit does not permit the holder to engage in off-campus employment in Canada”
• we included a condition on your study permit that may no longer apply

Example: You have a study permit to complete prerequisite courses, such as an ESL or FSL course. You’re then accepted into a full-time study program. This would mean you could apply to have the condition (not being allowed to work off campus) removed from your study permit.

You must apply to change the conditions of your study permit. There’s a fee to make this change. You must change the conditions on your permit before you can apply for a SIN.

You’ll need to  apply for a new study permit from within Canada .

When you apply online, your personalized checklist will include the Application to Change Conditions, Extend my Stay or Remain in Canada as a Student [IMM 5709]. On that form, check the box to Apply for a study permit for the first time or extend my study permit and fill out the rest of the required fields.

Include a letter with your application explaining why you need the condition removed from your study permit.

Working after you complete your study program

After you complete your study program, there are 2 ways you may be able to work full-time:

• you already applied for a work permit  before  your study permit expired or
• you’re starting a new study program

You need to meet all the requirements listed below to work full-time. If we refuse your work or study permit application, you must stop working and leave Canada.

You can work full-time if you meet  all  of these requirements:

• You were already able to work off campus during your studies
• You applied for a work permit or post-graduation work permit (PGWP) before your study permit expired
• You’re waiting for a decision on your work permit application
• You were already able to work off campus during your previous studies
• You have a valid study permit or you applied to extend your study permit before it expired
• You received written confirmation from your current school that you completed your program
• You received a letter of acceptance to a new full-time study program at a  DLI
• You’ll start your new program within 150 calendar days of receiving the confirmation that you completed your previous program

You can work remotely for an employer outside Canada as long as you still meet the conditions of your study permit . This type of work doesn’t count towards your 20 hours per week off-campus work limit.

Page details

• Migration Strategy
• Before studying in Australia
• During your studies in Australia
• After studying in Australia
• State and Territory Government resources to support international students
• Australian Strategy for International Education
• International education engagement
• Data and research
• Financial assistance for international students
• Recognise overseas qualifications
• Resources to support students
• Announcements

The rights of international students at work

International students have the opportunity to work in Australia while studying. It can be a great way to experience the local culture and connect with the community.

On this page:

International students have the same workplace rights and protections as anyone else working in Australia.

Here’s what you need to know before starting to work in Australia:

• You must be paid at least the minimum wage​
• ​You must pay tax on your income
• You must receive a payslip
• From 1 July 2023, you can work up to 48 hours every fortnight during term time (unless you are a PhD and master's by research student), and unlimited hours during your holiday breaks.
• If you were already working in the aged care sector on 9 May 2023, you can continue to work unrestricted hours in the aged care sector until 31 December 2023.
• Casual work means you don’t have a fixed number of hours every week.

International students can contact the Fair Work Ombudsman for help if they’re having workplace issues, without fear of their visa being cancelled. This could be for issues such as not getting the right pay or other entitlements, like leave or notice.

Check out the video below to see how the Fair Work Ombudsman can help international students.

Download the work ready fact sheet to learn about your rights at work and help you prepare for working in Australia.

Case Study – Felipe’s story

Felipe shares his story about how the Fair Work Ombudsman helped increase his awareness of workplace rights, including busting a common workplace myth. Felipe’s story is based on a true story.

The video provides information to international students on their workplace rights and the assistance which the Fair Work Ombudsman can provide them.

Are your work rights at risk?

• ​International students have the same workplace rights and protections as anyone else working in Australia, but sometimes your work might not feel right.
• How do you know if your rights are at risk? How do you know if your rights are at risk? Download the warning signs flyer to learn about the warning signs of workplace exploitation.
• If you think you are not being treated fairly at work, talk to your boss or contact the Fair Work Ombudsman for help. There is free advice in multiple languages for anyone working in Australia. Phone - 13 13 94   Online -  Fair Work Ombudsman

Go to the following pages to see this information in other languages:

• Hindi [हिन्दी]
• Indonesian [Bahasa Indonesia]
• Portuguese [Português]​
• Simplified Chinese [简体中文]
• Traditional Chinese [繁體中文]
• Spanish [Español]
• Vietnamese [Tiếng Việt]

Please turn on JavaScript in your browser It appears your web browser is not using JavaScript. Without it, some pages won't work properly. Please adjust the settings in your browser to make sure JavaScript is turned on.

What’s the difference between part-time and full-time college students.

Senior Associate, JPMorgan Chase

If college is on your radar, you may be deciding if you want to be a part-time or a full-time student.

If you have responsibilities outside of school, such as a job or family obligations, you may be considering enrolling as a part-time student. On the flip side, if you feel that you can afford the time and monetary commitment that comes with full-time enrollment, then this may be the option that you’re leaning towards.

In this article, we’ll break down the differences between full-time and part-time student statuses, including the number of credits students can expect to take in these two statuses and how long it may take to graduate if you're a part-time or full-time student.

Also, of note, you don’t necessarily have to think of this decision as a permanent one. Some schools and programs allow students to change their enrollment status between full-time and part-time for a semester or trimester, depending on their needs. Another thing to remember as you make this choice is not all schools and programs offer the opportunity for students to enroll part-time.

What’s considered full-time college enrollment?

There are three definitions to be aware of when understanding what it means to be a full-time student – your school’s definition, the U.S. Department of Education’s definition, and the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) definition.

First, colleges and universities each have their own definitions for what’s considered full-time. To be considered full-time by a college, most colleges require students to be enrolled in a certain number of classes and credits for a semester, although the requirements may vary.

The U.S. Department of Education defines full-time student status as being enrolled in at least 12 credit hours per term. This definition is important to understand because it may relate to your eligibility for financial aid provided by the federal government.

There’s also a legal tax status in order to be considered a “full-time student” by the IRS. Having this status may enable you to take certain exemptions on your taxes. To be a full-time student as defined by the IRS, you must:

• Be a full-time student as defined by your school.
• Be a student for five calendar months of the year (these months don’t need to be consecutive).
• Be a full-time student at a school that has a regular teaching staff, course of study, and a regularly enrolled student body. A student taking a full-time, on-farm training course offered by a school, state, county, or local government agency may also qualify.

How many classes do full-time students take a semester?

There’s no set number of classes that are considered full-time across the board. However, for many schools, full-time enrollment often involves taking between three and four classes a semester, depending on how many credits each class is worth. The same is true to meet the U.S. Department of Education’s definition of being a full-time student.

Remember that all schools are not on a semester schedule, so the guidelines may differ.

How many credits do full-time students take a semester?

To meet the U.S. Department of Education’s definition of being a full-time student, students must be enrolled in at least 12 credit hours per semester. Individual schools may have different credit requirements for students to be considered full-time. As a refresher, credit hours are a measure that determines the weight of a particular class. Since all schools aren’t on a semester schedule, this may vary.

How much does college cost for a full-time student?

According to data from College Board, a nonprofit organization that helps students with college admissions, the average cost for a full-time student was $10,940 for those attending in-state public colleges and $28,240 for those attending out-of-state public colleges in the 2022-23 school year. For students who attended private schools, tuition was on average $39,400.

Remember, these numbers are averages, which means tuition varies depending on the exact school. The other thing to keep in mind is that these numbers reflect the sticker price of tuition at schools – many students ultimately pay less because of financial aid.

How long does it take to graduate from college as a full-time student?

It takes most full-time students four years to graduate from college with a bachelor’s degree. For students seeking an associate degree, it most often takes them two years to graduate.

Keep in mind, these timelines can vary. It takes some students less time to graduate with a college degree if they’re able to enter a degree program with college credits in hand, if they’re able to load up on credits during some terms, or if they take classes in summer or winter sessions (or some combination of this). On the flip side, it can take some students longer than the traditional two or four years to graduate with a college degree in some instances.

What’s considered part-time college enrollment?

A part-time student enrolls in fewer classes than a full-time student. They may have a day job or other responsibilities that they juggle in addition to classes. As a result, they may pay less in tuition per term (since they’re taking fewer classes), but it may take them more terms to graduate. They also may have less access to financial aid, including scholarships and grants.

How many classes do part-time students take a semester?

Most schools consider a student taking less than three or four classes a semester (depending on the credit hours of the class) a part-time student. This may vary depending on if a school is on a quarter or trimester schedule.

How many credits do part-time students take a semester?

A part-time student usually takes fewer than 12 credits a semester, though that may differ based on a school’s definition of what a part-time student is. Again, this may vary if a school is on a quarter or trimester schedule.

How much does college cost as a part-time student?

How much a school costs as a part-time student will depend on the school. Typically, as a full-time student, you pay by the term (quarter, trimester, or semester), but as a part-time student, you often pay by the credit hour or how many classes you enroll in for a term.

It’s important to note that even if being a part-time student is cheaper in the short term, in the long run, it may ultimately cost more to graduate as a part-time student than as a full-time student. This is because students who are enrolled part-time are often charged by the number of credit hours they’re enrolled in and also may encounter additional fees, while full-time students may be charged a flat rate for a term, enabling them to take anywhere from 12 to 18 credits a term. Full-time students who enroll in enough credits a term may ultimately see cost-savings.

You may want to speak to an academic advisor to fully determine the costs of part-time and full-time enrollment to make the best choice for your situation.

How long does it take to graduate college as a part-time student?

A 2023 study by the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, a nonprofit, found that 20% of students from the class of 2017 who were enrolled exclusively part-time graduated in six years . The same study found that 51.1% of students with mixed enrollment (a combination of part-time and full-time) graduated within six years.

How long it takes you to graduate as a part-time student will heavily depend on how many credits you ultimately end up taking each term, and your consistency in enrolling in classes each term.

Does the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA ® ) cover part-time students?

The FAFSA ® is used by students to access federal student aid including federal student loans, grants, and work-study, if they’re eligible. Part-time students may be eligible for federal financial aid if they’re enrolled in at least a half-time class load (usually around six credits per semester).

If you’re enrolled half-time as a part-time student, you apply for federal financial aid in the same way a full-time student would via the FAFSA ® .

Part-time students who are eligible for federal financial aid may receive less aid than full-time students, including a reduced Pell Grant award , because of their enrollment status.

How to decide whether to enroll as a part-time or full-time student

By looking at your immediate financial circumstances as well as the time commitment you can make to school, you may be able to get a gauge of whether you should attend college part-time or full-time.

When it comes to enrolling full-time, on the pro side, full-time students may be able to immerse themselves fully in their academic pursuits, allowing for deeper engagement with their studies and the college experience. Being enrolled full-time often leads students to graduate quicker and enables graduates to enter the workforce or pursue more advanced studies sooner. Additionally, full-time status may qualify students for more scholarships and financial aid opportunities, which may reduce the cost of obtaining a degree.

When it comes to attending college part-time, one significant advantage is the flexibility it offers, allowing students to balance their education with work, family responsibilities, and other commitments. This can make attending college more accessible, especially for those who need to maintain a job or care for family members. Part-time enrollment can provide an opportunity to gain practical work experience while in school, too.

Final thoughts

At the end of the day, your status as a part-time or full-time student may change throughout your college career. Sometimes, life happens, and you may want to change from being a full-time to a part-time student, for instance. Even if you find yourself in this situation, know that if you stay the course, you’ll still graduate with a diploma; it may just take a bit longer.

Search Postings

• On Campus 1
• Normal, Illinois 1

Graduate Student Research Assistant

Title: Graduate Student Research Assistant Employee Classification: Student Help Regular Division Name: Academic Affairs Department: Geography, Geology, and the Environment

Job Summary

This is a hourly (non-contract) student employee position for the Department of Geography, Geology, and the Environment, located in Felmley Hall. Graduate Research Assistants are hired by faculty to assist in carrying out a particular research agenda. As a research assistant, your responsibilities may include, but not be limited to, the following: - Research and collect material or data, library research, lab work, field work, or other project specific methodology. - Self-motivation to complete tasks and make significant progress without direct supervision. - Analytical and problem solving skills. - The ability to learn new software and research techniques. - The ability to commit to complex projects. - Reports on status of research activities to supervising faculty. - Strong verbal and written communication skills. - Strong computer skills. - Performs other related duties as required.

$15.00 per hour

Preferred Qualifications

Must be a current Graduate Student in the Hydrogeology program

Work hours and location will be determined by the faculty member. May require on site field work in a variety of weather conditions.

Proposed Starting Date

To be determined by the faculty member

Required Applicant Documents

Work Availability

Please Note : These documents are required to be submitted online in order to complete the application process. Please have these documents ready prior to clicking on "Apply"

Contact Information for Applicants

Laura Roethle [email protected]

Important Information for Applicants

This position is subject to a criminal background investigation and if applicable, an employment history review, based on University Policy 3.1.30 and any offer of employment is contingent upon you passing a satisfactory criminal background investigation and/or an employment history review. You may not begin work until the criminal background investigation results have been received and cleared by Human Resources.

In addition, all appointments are contingent upon proof of eligibility for employment at Illinois State University to perform the required duties described above on your scheduled start date. The Immigration and Control Act of 1986, Public Law 99-603, requires all new employees to file an I-9 in person and no later than three days from the beginning of employment. This may be accomplished within the department or through Human Resources. A list of the types of documentation you will be expected to provide is available at https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/form-i-9-acceptable-documents. Failure to comply with this law will result in cancellation of your appointment. Illinois State University, as your employer, is required by federal law to ensure proper tax withholding from wages and to ensure that the required reporting of employee wages, withholding, and employment taxes is accurate. For this reason, every employee must have a valid Social Security Number registered with the University at the time of employment and/or as soon after as possible, but no later than 45 days from the start date. Failure to comply with this law may result in cancellation of your appointment. Illinois State University student employees are restricted to no more than 28 hours per week of on-campus employment for all positions held. International students are restricted by their visa status to no more than 20 hours per week of on-campus employment when the university is in session but may work more when the university is not in session. International students should contact the Office of International Studies and Programs for guidance if they have questions concerning employment restrictions.

Illinois State University is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, disability, or status as a protected veteran.

If you are an individual with a disability and need a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or other state or federal law you may request an accommodation by contacting the Office of Equal Opportunity and Access at (309) 438-3383 . The Office of Equal Opportunity and Access will hold any confidential information you provide in confidence.

If you are having difficulty accessing the system, please call Human Resources at (309) 438-8311 .

Application Opened: 04/10/2024 10:45 AM CST Application Closes: 05/01/2024 11:55 PM CST

We will email you new jobs that match this search.

Great, we can send you jobs like this, if this is your first time signing up, please check your inbox to confirm your subscription.

The email address was invalid, please check for errors.

You must agree to the privacy statement

Current Opportunities

Powered by PageUp

University Resources