How intelligent do you need to be to do a PhD?

[Thefifthbeatle]

I have been starting to look into the entry requirements for a PhD in history and am feeling a bit inadequate; I'm not sure whether I might make a fool of myself if I apply/if I get in.

I have a 2:1 from Oxford in history but it wasn't a great 2:1 (63). I'm ashamed to say that I didn't do a huge amount of work at law school because I was so incredibly bored, so didn't get amazing results (69), but could probably have done better if I had pulled my finger out. I don't yet have a master's, although I appreciate that I am likely to need one. I love spending my days researching; I've spent the last 15 years as a lawyer, but want to direct it into something I love, rather than the GDPR, etc. I'd be the first to confess that at 20, I probably wasn't a very original thinker. I wasn't ever going to get thrown out of college, but I was so anxious to get it "right" that my essays were probably regurgitated facts rather than ground breaking arguments. I'm not completely stupid, but I am very far from being a genius.

I don't need to worry about funding; I am lucky enough to be able to pay for this myself. I'm just worried that I'm not bright enough for this, or that even if I get accepted, it'll be miserable because I'll always feel like the most stupid person in the room. For context, I have recently been made redundant because the company is collapsing, so my confidence is pretty low right now.

Might anyone know whether it sounds as though I'd be hopelessly out of my depth? And is it the case that some universities would in practice accept less stellar candidates? Is it easier for example to get into the Open University than it is to get into Oxford?

Thank you.

Both me and my DH have PhDs....he is super, super clever ( quite literally the cleverest person I've ever met) and while I'm by no means stupid, I'm definitely not as intelligent. However, I found it easier than DH because I'm organised and disciplined where as DH is easily distracted and a last minute merchant 😂

Your grades suggest you have the intelligence but you need stamina, dedication and time - and excellent organisational skills.

Unless you are absolutely sure, don't go near a University and whisper 'self funding' - you'll find yourself in your first tutorial without realising you've enrolled.

I finished mine last year - humanities. I work in academia Clever - don't know. I must be reasonably clever I suppose. I'm OK at writing. You have to be organised and meticulous. I coundn't've imagined doing it had I not been passionate about and interested in my subject. You have to be resilient and prepared for the times when you think 'good grief why did I ever start this' - because you absolutely will. In my opinion you also need to start with a way to track reading and references. I couldn't've done mine without Endnote - I know there are other similar platforms.

I've got a PhD. In my experience, 'intelligence' isn't really the hardest bit! I never really struggled with just not understanding what I was looking at, but I did struggle with motivation, needing to be constantly focused, really caring about my subject even when it felt no one else did, keeping going when absolutely no one noticed or cared if I was slacking, and pushing my supervisor to get her to give me support.

There's a lot of additional skills required around selling yourself - applying for grants, reaching out to conference organisers or publishers to get the chance to speak or publish an article, or making contact with other people who are doing study related to you.

I think you also need pretty brutal time management skills - I could easily have either worked 24/7 on the damn thesis, or I could have finished teaching for the day and just gone 'sod it' - finding the balance can be pretty tough.

There's also an element of creativity required that I think is underplayed - I found it easy to read a bunch of other people's work and summarise it, but PhD work is expected to actually add something to the body of knowledge. Add to that, you'll really need to fight against imposter syndrome - I had a lot of days when I just felt like I wasn't smart enough to be making these statements and what the hell did I even know? I don't think I've ever felt less intelligent in my life than the day of my Viva.

On the other hand, getting the final result was amazing and it's given me a bit of a mental boost going forward - I don't let people put me down anymore and on some level I know I am competent and I can do it.

Extra warning - getting a PhD does not automatically translate to a job in academia. There's an awful bottleneck after it and I think less than half the people I know who were doing their doctorates around the same time as me (maybe a lot less) have gone on to work in academia. I managed two years of postdoc before the constant struggle to get a new contract and lack of stability got to me and I bailed. I'm not in an academic field at all now, although I do use a lot of the skills I learned every day.

Good luck!

Do any of your local universities have history schools that that academics that research what you want to? Go to talks there, try to meet people, get contacts, etc.

I am currently doing a funded PT PhD and that didn't exist in the general application process. Instead I had to email, then ring, academics that my contacts had recommended to me. I found one who could support my very outline research proposal, we developed it into a formal one together, and I'm halfway through year one.

These contacts will also know if doing a masters first is worthwhile, or if the appropriate school offers a good integrated masters and PhD. Don't assume doing a masters first is necessary until you've spoken to someone.

And my first degree (not long after yours) was a third...

I have a PhD and have supervised a few.

It's difficult to say whether you would be able to complete a PhD or would enjoy doing so at the moment. You really need to try your hand at the Masters and see what happens. The Masters is a really good stepping stone from BA to PhD in the Humanities because you have a 50:50 spread of directed studies through set courses with lectures, tutorials and set assignments, as well as a long dissertation where you have to think up a question, develop a topic, navigate the literature and say something original and critical that adds to what has been said before.

The PhD then goes on to build on that. You need to find your angle and motivate yourself to see it through over 3-4 years.

I supervised a lot of P/T PhDs, and the biggest challenge was for people who had work and family commitments to find the time to pursue the PhD without long gaps in their studies. Full time students, based at their Unis are part of the department life. They go to graduate seminars, see visiting speaker talks, organize conferences and have a social life. All this helps motivate them to continue with the thesis.

Adults returning to education are often based far away from their Unis and don't have all these benefits, so they have to self-motivate a lot more. Also people with family and work commitments often get pulled away from their thesis and then it takes a while to get back into it, e.g. you have to re-read the same materials, get yourself in the right frame of mind, remember your arguments, etc. The students who have the best chance of completing the thesis are the ones who have protected, weekly time to work on it.

P.S. if you are aiming at an academic job it's very tough now, supply outstrips demand for academic positions and it is likely to get much much worse as a result of the pandemic economic depression.

I don’t have much experience in academia, but I am the main emotional support for someone approaching the end of one so I feel qualified to comment! I think the key thing is the ability to persevere, have the ability to think about the same (possibly quite narrow) area for a long time, huge reserves of motivation/self-drive and (thinking of your funding point) the will to do all of that if it isn’t in your exact area of interest. Funding can a bit easier to come by If you’re prepared to study something funders want to fund, but this can be tricky towards the end if you heart isn’t 100% in it.

I don't think you have to be super intelligent, I found that the best skills were tenacity and bloody mindedness. It's a hard slog and many people do drop out. So you need a iron will! That's not saying everyone with great stamina could do a PhD but the fact you have a degree from Oxford suggest that you have the intellectual ability. I think there is a slightly romanisation of doing a PhD though, you don't really just spend time researching something for the love of it - you have to really narrow your research focus and I don't know anyone who wasn't sick of their topic by the end!

There’s different types of intelligence.

My half sister has. PHD. She’s quite well known in her field of medicine.

But she couldn’t understand how if a mirror was on a TV programme that you couldn’t see yourself in it when you watched tv, didn’t understand how the pictures got on to a video cassette in a home video recorder and thought we would all have to dub over the words again because how was it possible for it to record picture and sound in sync - these were a few gems I remember from my childhood (she’s a lot older than me and was doing said PHD at the time).

For someone so clever she was thick as pigshit in everyday life

Mybrother dropped out of his. He was notably intelligent but couldn't sustain motivation.

My cousin got hers. Also highly intelligent but not as 'knock out the park' as my brother. I would say she had a fiercer work ethic and tenacity.

Mind you she then packed in academia immediately.

You don't need to be naturally brilliant, no. And actually I think your earlier degree final marks sound fine for a PhD anyway. What you do need is perseverance and the ability to deal with obstacles, face failure and setbacks with good humour, and to get back up and keep going. And the ability to sustain work on a project for a long time with little positive reinforcement. A PhD thesis is a long and somewhat unrewarding process. It's amazing to finish it, but the years in between are long and can be tedious. If you can self-fund, you'll be more likely to get a place, particularly now as universities will likely be struggling financially in the next couple years due to COVID.

What you want to do with it is more important. Is it just for your own enjoyment, or do you need it to pursue a career you really want to pursue? If there are other routes to that career besides a PhD, I would opt for those if you can. I'm an academic. I couldn't get the job I have without a PhD. My PhD was overall a really positive experience though - even if I'm glad it's done. A lot of people find the experience really personally difficult, so I think being able to take constructive criticism and maintain good mental health is really key if you want to do it.

I haven't got a PhD, but I was accepted to start one some time ago. I decided to have a life instead!

I don't consider myself to be super intelligent, but I feel like I have learned to think properly and deeply about things, and that I've learned enough about the mechanisms and purpose of research throughout my academic studies and my career so far, so I feel that I know I would be able to do it if I wanted to. I feel that if I were to put all of that work in I need to have something I really want to study rather than cobbling together a thesis just to get the PhD done.

Based on your updates though, no I don't think a PhD is probably the right route for you. I'd consider doing an master's though if you want to stretch yourself a bit. To be even at the point of considering a PhD, you need to know what you want to do, what field, and have a research question and proposal outlined. You can't be thinking amongst 10 different subjects that are interesting. Also, it's really NOT the sort of thing to do if your confidence is low and you've never felt particularly good about yourself in other course work. It's an incredibly humbling experience, you will be made to feel pretty low (sometimes intentionally so, depending on your supervisor), you'll be the lowest rung on the ladder and having to defend your ideas to people who have been studying this subject potentially longer than you've been alive. You don't have to know what you're talking about to start a PhD, but to a certain extent, you need to be able to stand in front of a room and talk like you really believe you do. It's definitely not something I'd recommend doing to prove you have confidence in yourself. But there is no reason to not go for a master's. You'll know by the end if it may be something you want to consider in the future. OU is fine, depending on the field, but for many, a proper taught face to face master's is better, particularly if you need the support from tutors and other students. Of course, who knows what will be happening at this point with face to face teaching in the coming year(s).

Thanks very much, everyone. Lots to think about there. I really appreciate the input.

Regarding the comments upthread about entry requirements. I am self-funding and still found that there was a moderately rigorous process to get a place: application form, develop a proposal and an interview where my motivations were given a bit of a grilling. Departments are judged on completion rates and they don’t want people starting a PhD then dropping out. However, now that I am in the door there is a lot of emphasis on support and working towards milestones, which I am finding helpful. Hth.

The clever bit is getting the funding so if you are going to skip that it should be easy 😅

I think you need to think about why you are doing it. It sounds like you want to prove something? That seems a poor reason. If you like doing research are there other less painful, expensive and time consuming things you could do? How about writing a book?

You don’t need to be any brighter to do a PhD than you do to do an undergrad course, IMO.

What you need is the discipline to write the bloody thing up. You either are somebody who can write on their own initiative, or you aren’t. I’m not, and I found the actual research part absolutely fine but the write up hellish. DH will happily sit down and write, and he had no trouble.

He also works from home, which is something I find impossible to do without getting distracted (so I choose to have a patient-facing job where that isn’t possible).

It’s not intelligence, like I say I found the recruitment, data collection and analysis, which in theory is the hard part, interesting and relatively easy. It is how well you can motivate yourself to write alone for weeks on end.

I don’t think something to prove is a poor reason

It just as valid perhaps more so than any other reason 🤷🏻‍♀️

I don't have a degree of PhD but based on the fact you got a 2.1 from Oxford I would say you were intelligent enough.