Not such a spartan existence

Gaining a postgraduate qualification means financial sacrifice - but research councils are now offering students more cash. Emma Haughton reports

A PhD is a major undertaking on any level, but for most postgraduates it also means accepting a far from lavish lifestyle for three years. "If you're going straight from a first degree and are of a mind to continue living like an undergraduate, or if you're single and living in shared accommodation, then the PhD stipend represents a significant increase," says James Groves, the general secretary of the representative body for UK postgraduates, the National Postgraduate Committee. "But if you have family commitments and a mortgage, then it's rather more difficult. If you've been earning at any rate at all, you're talking about taking a sizeable pay cut."

Given this kind of stark choice, it's not surprising that many prospective PhDs are voting with their feet. According to Set for Success, the recently published report by Sir Gareth Roberts on the supply of science and engineering skills in the UK, postgraduate stipends are becoming increasingly uncompetitive with graduate salaries, particularly for high flyers in science, maths, engineering and computer science.

In the 20 years from 1971, the PhD stipend fell by 4.5 per cent in real terms, while starting salaries for graduates with a 2:1 and above rose by 42 per cent. PhDs currently get the rough equivalent of the lowest incomes for full-time employment, condemning students to what Sir Gareth describes as a "rather spartan existence".

It's simply no longer tenable to offer low stipends, says Mr Groves. "Not that long ago we had a position where prospective PhD students were being offered £6,800 for three years to do a PhD, or they could go straight into industry for £20,000." And the physical sciences are often hit hardest, he says. "Engineering graduates can always go off into the private sector, whereas if you want to do classics, it's university or nowhere, really."

The increase in the amount of undergraduate student debt – it's not uncommon to have amassed debts of £10,000 or more – has worsened an already difficult situation. Even though postgraduates do not usually have to start paying off loans until they have finished their studies, graduates seem anxious to get into employment and back into the black. In a 2001 survey of postgraduate study in Sheffield, 65 per cent of all graduates who had decided against further study cited debt as a determining factor, while three-quarters of those interested in staying on were concerned about debt.

Thankfully, the Government and the Research Councils, which fund most postgraduates, have taken note, and are gradually raising the level of postgraduate awards. Stipends rose to £7,500 in the last academic year, and are set to go up again to £8,000 in October and to £9,000 in the autumn of 2003.

"It's a significant rise, and it's getting the slope in the right direction," says Iain Cameron, who is the head of postgraduate policy and support at the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), the largest of the seven Research Councils. "Hopefully it will help in problem areas such as engineering, where universities are having trouble attracting enough students and there's not a lot of competition for some places." Postgraduates, he points out, can also boost their income by about £1,800 a year with teaching and laboratory demonstrating.

Is this rise enough to ensure that the quality of postgraduates, particularly in science and engineering, does not continue to decline? Sir Gareth doesn't think so. Deeming it vital that PhD stipends keep pace with graduates' salary expectations, he recommends a raise in the grant, to come into effect by 2004, to just over £12,000 – roughly the tax-free equivalent of the average graduate starting salary. He also wants to see more variation in size of awards to encourage recruitment in shortage areas.

But getting the formula right is not easy, as Mr Groves readily acknowledges. "The problem is: do you want to fund lots of people with not much or a few people with a lot? You could give everyone the average wage, but would have to cut the total number of people being funded for a PhD. By and large, it's probably better to have a significant number of people getting £9,500 than half getting £19,000."

education@independent.co.uk