Live data from Hacker News

Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

nature.com

31–40 of 292 posts

Re: Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

#31
post #21

How are these odds compared to other similar ventures full of uncertainty, such as start ups ? And if the odds are comparable then why is our culture viewing start ups positively but PhD negatively ?

Where are you getting the belief that PhD's are viewed negatively by our culture? Or that startups are viewed positively for that matter? A quick google search and you'll find hundreds of articles warning about joining startups and bashing startup culture.

Re: Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

#32

The longer students stay in a PhD program, the less likely they want to be professors. Typically many first year students say this, but the numbers quickly drop off in later years. When I was a PhD student, I gave a few talks and blogged about this issue. I would present all these statistics in my talks about what they needed to do to be competitive, and people just absolutely hated me for it. One person said she wan…

When you become a tenured professor, the amount of work you do is far less than the vast majority of other jobs with a similar salary. The only real commitments are the classes you have to teach and if you minimize the amount of teaching you do, you'll barely be working at all. I knew a history professor that would come into the university for his 1 or 2 classes per week and then would go home for the rest of the day…

From that POV tenure could be considered deferred compensation, but it is more likely that it is a sinecure.

Re: Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

#33
post #25

I always tell students in my field (molecular biology) to at the very least learn to code at a reasonable level and pick up some data science skills. Something transferable. At any given time in my department, there'd be five times the amount of post-grad students to full-time staff. Maybe more. It has to be obvious that there likely isn't a job at any level at the end of it. Not just high-flying jobs on the path to…

> The key time for scoring a good number of first author papers in the very best journals is late 20s and early 30s in their post-doc positions.

I think it's really a black mark on the system that it should be OK for researchers to still not have a permanent position in their early 30s ten years after completing their undergraduate degree.

Re: Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

#34
post #2

> Permanent jobs in academia are scarce, and someone needs to let PhD students know. If you are studying on a PhD level and have not figured that out already, that's kinda on you.

Someone posts this glib comment every time academic careers are discussed. It's true, and yet harder than you'd think. Suppose you know that only 1 in 10 PhDs in your field end up in a tenure track job. A decent fraction of your classmates are interested in industry--or never want to see the inside of a lab again. Maybe this reduces the competition down to one in six or seven. You're in a pretty good program, definit…

>but more senior scientists also have a responsibility to provide mentorship and frank assesments.

And they won't do it because they are a) biased due to survivorship bias, and b) they are disincentivized to do so as that would scare away their cheap labor.

Re: Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

#35
post #21

How are these odds compared to other similar ventures full of uncertainty, such as start ups ? And if the odds are comparable then why is our culture viewing start ups positively but PhD negatively ?

Because when you "win" at a PhD you (eventually) get tenure, which these days mean lifetime position of high stress and low salary.

Re: Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

#36
post #3

The hard truth. I wonder if a new scheme of collaborative research (to share costs) out of academia can possibly pop out. But this is hardly possible given the high costs of equipment and consumables, especially in the natural and technical sciences. Bygone are the days (in the 18th-19th century) when a single brilliant scientist could singe-handedly revolutionize his field in his home lab (the "garage" of the day).

If you are ever in Bath check out the Herschel museum. He was the guy who discovered Uranus, various comets, and other feats of astronomy. Music teacher by day, self-taught astronomer by night, including making the telescopes he needed, by hand, in the back room of his house.

Fast forward to today and you need a multi-billion-dollar orbital telescope or a massive array of radio telescopes to do new work...

Re: Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

#37
Sad but true.

I once had dreams of a career in academia and research. I'm a molecular biologist turned computer scientist turned software engineer in industry. I now have a very good salary, interesting challenges, plenty of work-life balance and good prospects for the future, and that's pretty much directly out of university.

In my opinion, I would have to give up on all of the aforementioned benefits (sans interesting challenges) for at least the next 10 years if I wanted to stay in academia, and on top of that, add the nice non-zero chance of just getting stuck and be forced out of the academic "track".

All my advisors told me it's a pretty bad time to go into academia, and I doubt it will get better, sadly, I might add.

Re: Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

#38
post #22

Academia nowadays is a high-tech bureaucracy; you are forced to churn out documents (papers) that need to cite other documents, and you're evaluated based on your position in the inter-document citation network. Then you have to write other documents (grant proposals) to grab money to write more documents (papers) by gaming the inner mechanics of some comittee. If partner-track investment bankers are overworked, depr…

This is essentially exactly why I have not chosen to do a PhD, but go into industry. The bureaucracy is intense in academia and you can in some places spend far too long brown-nosing upper-positions to get anywhere at all.

Some of the horror stories I've heard from older people who have done a PhD are awful. For example, apparently, it's quite often that there will be a collection of people gossiping when a particular upper senior will retire or die so that they can all compete for the opened slot. It's quite terrible and grimy when you get past the good PR angle that the Universities and mass media portray. Just like any bureaucracy.

Re: Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

#39

The longer students stay in a PhD program, the less likely they want to be professors. Typically many first year students say this, but the numbers quickly drop off in later years. When I was a PhD student, I gave a few talks and blogged about this issue. I would present all these statistics in my talks about what they needed to do to be competitive, and people just absolutely hated me for it. One person said she wan…

When you become a tenured professor, the amount of work you do is far less than the vast majority of other jobs with a similar salary. The only real commitments are the classes you have to teach and if you minimize the amount of teaching you do, you'll barely be working at all. I knew a history professor that would come into the university for his 1 or 2 classes per week and then would go home for the rest of the day…

I'm going to disagree with this for science and engineering. All of my tenured colleagues work very hard. You have to if you want to keep running a lab, which is the main reason why people choose to become professors. If you stop working hard, you will stop getting funding and PhD students. The department will make you teach more and can make your life difficult if you are being a drag on the department, even if they can't fire you.

That said, for the liberal arts, history, etc., things may be different. They don't tend to have large labs and their goals are different. I honestly don't know.

Re: Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects

#40
post #2

> Permanent jobs in academia are scarce, and someone needs to let PhD students know. If you are studying on a PhD level and have not figured that out already, that's kinda on you.

Someone posts this glib comment every time academic careers are discussed. It's true, and yet harder than you'd think. Suppose you know that only 1 in 10 PhDs in your field end up in a tenure track job. A decent fraction of your classmates are interested in industry--or never want to see the inside of a lab again. Maybe this reduces the competition down to one in six or seven. You're in a pretty good program, definit…

The average age of a PhD student is 33 years and even at normal speed, no breaks/hurdles and starting right out of high-school, you are 25(?). Something about applying this babysitting attitude of "somebody needs to tell them" to highly educated individuals of that age just doesn't sit right with me.

If I were a PhD supervisor, I would probably find it ridiculous that one of my responsibilities would be "pointing people to the universities careers service". I'm also not sure why you would expect a supervisor to be able to give good career advice when some of them have only ever experienced academia themselves.

Post reply on HN