Rising PhDs, No Jobs: Why PhD Students Are Struggling After Graduation

Rising PhDs, No Jobs: Why PhD Students Are Struggling After Graduation

KAKALI DAS

India is producing more PhD scholars than ever before. Over the past decade, doctoral education has expanded rapidly, with more students entering PhD programmes and more universities offering research degrees. But behind these numbers is a question that is becoming increasingly important – what happens after the PhD?

Consider the case of a 25-year-old student from Assam who joined the University of Delhi to pursue a PhD in English in 2020. A doctorate was not always part of her plan. Like many of his peers, she had initially imagined completing a master’s degree in business management and joining a multinational company. During her master’s degree in commerce, however, she developed an interest in academia and research and eventually chose the PhD route.

She says the experience has been rewarding. Yet she is not certain that he wants to become a teacher. Her bigger concern is what comes next. Academic opportunities, she says, are limited, and many teaching positions available to young researchers are contractual rather than permanent. Her uncertainty reflects a larger problem facingIndia’s higher education system. The country has been expanding its capacity to produce researchers, but employment opportunities for those researchers have not expanded at the same pace.

Government data shows how sharply India’s doctoral population has grown. According to the All India Survey on Higher Education, PhD enrolment increased from about 1.17 lakh in 2014-15 to around 3.44 lakh in 2023-24. That is almost a threefold increase in a decade. The numbers include students enrolled in both government and private institutions.The number of PhDs awarded has also increased, although more slowly. India awarded about 21,830 PhDs in 2014-15, while the number had risen to more than 37,000 by 2023-24. Over the decade, around 3.16 lakh PhDs were awarded.

These numbers should not, however, be interpreted as evidence that India has either too many or too few PhD scholars. A doctoral programme can take several years to complete, so enrolment and degrees awarded in the same year cannot be directly compared. The number of doctoral students also has to be understood in the context of India’s enormous higher education system. In 2023-24, PhD students represented less than one per cent of total higher education enrolment.

The more important questions are about quality, supervision, funding, completion rates, research infrastructure and, most importantly, what happens to students after they receive their degrees.

One reason for the growth is the expansion of higher education itself. More universities and university-level institutions now offer research programmes, while governments and research agencies have increased their emphasis on research and fellowships. Financial support can make several years of doctoral research possible for students who might otherwise be unable to afford it.

For academically inclined students, particularly in smaller cities, the choice can sometimes be practical as well as intellectual. After a master’s degree, well-paying jobs may not always be available in their preferred field. A fellowship can provide an alternative: several years in which they can study, conduct research and develop specialised knowledge.

The discontinuation of the MPhil has also changed the academic pathway. The National Education Policy 2020 recommended discontinuing the programme, and the UGC’s 2022 regulations state that higher education institutions shall not offer an MPhil degree. The MPhil had earlier served as an intermediate research qualification for some students. Its removal has made the transition from a master’s degree to a PhD more direct for those seeking research careers.

Women, too, now constitute a much larger share of India’s doctoral population. Government data shows that female PhD enrolment rose from roughly 47,700 in 2014-15 to around 1.71 lakh in 2023-24. This represents an increase of more than 250 per cent.For some women, a PhD can offer a period of academic independence at a time when social expectations around marriage, family and settling down may become stronger. At the same time, limited employment opportunities after a master’s degree can make further study one of the few available options for those who want to remain connected to academia.

But the real difficulty often begins after the doctorate.A PhD is a qualification for advanced research. It does not, by itself, guarantee a permanent academic position. The gap between obtaining a doctorate and finding a stable research career is becoming increasingly visible.NITI Aayog has identified a weak postdoctoral ecosystem, limited fellowships, delays in recruitment and unfilled research and faculty positions as problems affecting India’s research system. It has also noted that career pathways after a PhD remain uncertain, particularly in emerging areas such as artificial intelligence, semiconductors and biotechnology, where private-sector salaries can be more attractive.

The situation can be seen in the kind of teaching positions available to young scholars. Delhi University colleges, for example, continue to advertise guest faculty positions. One such advertisement offered guest faculty an honorarium of ₹1,500 per lecture, subject to a maximum of ₹50,000 a month. The qualifications were the same as those prescribed for regular assistant professors.

There is an important distinction here. A vacancy for guest faculty is not the same as a permanent academic position. A person may spend years completing a master’s degree, qualifying examinations, conducting research and completing a PhD, only to enter a teaching market where employment can still be temporary or uncertain.This creates a difficult choice. Some researchers remain in academia because they value teaching and research. Others move into industry, government, consulting, policy, think tanks or startups. Some leave India altogether in search of better-funded research environments and clearer career pathways.

NITI Aayog has itself pointed to the need for stronger postdoctoral opportunities and more attractive research careers. Its recent recommendations include increasing the number of postdoctoral fellowships and creating a more unified fellowship system. It has also highlighted the importance of stronger links between universities, research institutions and industry.This is where India’s understanding of a PhD needs to change. A doctorate should not be treated simply as a qualification for becoming an assistant professor. A PhD trains a person to work on difficult problems, examine evidence, analyse information and develop new knowledge. Those skills can be valuable in government, industry, public research institutions, policy organisations and startups.

The challenge is that India’s employment system has not yet created enough visible pathways for these skills.The problem becomes even clearer when we look at India’s research capacity. NITI Aayog has noted that India has a large pool of young talent but a relatively weak postdoctoral ecosystem and difficulties in attracting and retaining researchers. It also points to vacancies in research institutions and uncertain career paths as factors discouraging young people from choosing long-term research careers.

At the same time, India continues to speak about the demographic dividend. Millions of young Indians are entering higher education and the workforce. But a demographic dividend is not created simply because a country has a large young population. It depends on whether that population has access to education, skills, security and meaningful opportunities.

This brings us to another development visible across India’s universities: student protests.Across campuses, students have been protesting over very different issues. In some cases, the trigger has been a serious allegation or an incident involving student safety. In others, it has been a death, a demand for accountability, academic grievances, administrative decisions or concerns about university management. The immediate causes may differ, but the protests often reveal a similar underlying problem: students feel that their grievances are not being addressed quickly or clearly enough.

A peaceful protest is a legitimate form of democratic expression. Students have the right to raise concerns, question decisions and demand accountability. At the same time, universities have a responsibility to maintain academic continuity and protect students, faculty and staff. When protests become disruptive or violent, the consequences spread beyond the original grievance.

Students can lose classes, examinations can be postponed and academic schedules can be disrupted. Universities may have to spend more on security and administration. Faculty members face interruptions to teaching and research. Parents may have to deal with uncertainty, travel and additional expenses. If a campus situation becomes a law-and-order issue, the police and wider administration also become involved.

The important point is that these protests cannot all be reduced to one explanation. Social media can accelerate mobilisation, but it does not create every grievance. An allegation can spread rapidly online before it has been verified, but the speed of social media is only one part of the problem. The institutional response matters too.When students do not receive timely information, a vacuum is created. That vacuum can be filled by rumours, speculation and misinformation. A university that communicates clearly and responds quickly may prevent a relatively small grievance from becoming a larger crisis. A delayed or unclear response can have the opposite effect.

This is why student protests should not be understood only as disruptions. They can also be signals about the condition of an institution.If students repeatedly feel that they have to protest to be heard, the question is not only why they are protesting. It is also whether ordinary grievance-redress mechanisms are working.This question of institutional trust extends beyond university campuses. Democratic institutions depend not only on formal rules but also on public confidence in the way those rules are applied. When citizens believe that institutions are not listening, responding or explaining their decisions adequately, distrust grows.

Recent debates around electoral institutions in India have demonstrated how important this principle is. Questions surrounding electoral rolls, the Special Intensive Revision process and the functioning of the Election Commission have generated political and public debate. Different political actors and commentators have made different claims about these developments, but the underlying democratic issue is straightforward: institutions exercising public authority need to be transparent, accountable and capable of explaining consequential decisions.

Technology makes this even more important. Digital systems can make administration faster and more efficient, but technology cannot replace due process. Nor should it become a substitute for human accountability. When technology is used in governance, citizens need to understand how decisions are made, what safeguards exist and where they can raise objections.

The same principle applies to universities. A student portal can record a complaint, but it cannot replace an institution that listens. A research database can store thousands of papers, but it cannot create a research ecosystem by itself. A university can produce more PhDs, but degrees alone cannot create careers.

India’s challenge, therefore, is not simply to produce more highly educated young people. It is to build institutions capable of absorbing their knowledge and ambition.That means expanding postdoctoral fellowships, speeding up recruitment, improving research funding and creating stronger links between universities and industry. It also means developing research careers outside the traditional university system. Industry-sponsored PhDs, industrial postdoctoral programmes, joint laboratories, public policy research positions and research roles in startups can all provide alternative pathways.Some institutions are already experimenting with ways to strengthen the transition between doctoral research and academic careers. But such opportunities need to become part of a larger system rather than isolated examples.

The same applies to student welfare. Universities need functioning grievance-redress mechanisms, transparent communication, adequate campus security and clear procedures for dealing with allegations and emergencies. Students should not have to choose between remaining silent and taking their grievances to the streets.

The larger question is what India wants its universities to produce.If the answer is only degrees, then rising PhD numbers may look like success. If the answer is researchers, innovators, teachers, entrepreneurs, policymakers and skilled professionals, then the measure of success has to be much broader.A PhD scholar should not have to reach the end of several years of research before discovering that there is no clear career pathway ahead. A student should not have to protest repeatedly before an institution takes a grievance seriously. And citizens should not have to depend on speculation when public institutions make important decisions.

MAHABAHU MIRROR

CLICK THE ABOVE LINK

India has expanded higher education considerably over the past decade. It has produced more doctoral scholars, increased women’s participation in research and created a much larger pool of highly educated young people. The next stage is harder. The country now has to build the institutions, jobs and research ecosystem needed to make use of that talent.

The question is no longer simply how many PhDs India can produce. It is whether India can create enough meaningful opportunities for the people who earn them.And that question goes beyond universities. It is ultimately a question about the country’s young people, its institutions and its ability to turn education into opportunity.A demographic dividend cannot be sustained by numbers alone. It requires trust, functioning institutions, meaningful employment and the freedom to question decisions without having to fight simply to be heard.

India’s young people are studying longer, researching deeper and asking more questions. The responsibility now lies with the institutions around them to ensure that there is something meaningful waiting for them when the degree is finally complete.

Mahabahu.com is an Online Magazine with collection of premium Assamese and English articles and posts with cultural base and modern thinking.  You can send your articles to editor@mahabahu.com / editor@mahabahoo.com (For Assamese article, Unicode font is necessary) Images from different sources.