Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects • Hacker News Board

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

#281

Post by sevensor » Fri, Oct 27, 2017, 12:36 PM UTC

anjc wrote: post #275

julian_1 wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do undergraduate fees contribute to a faculty's research funding? And if not why are student fees so high, if there is such a low (albeit understandable) emphasis on undergraduate teaching?

In my country (and all of Europe) no. The fees are a nominal administration fee, which admittedly is crawling higher each year. The government, and the EU, then funds each student, and yeah that money would help with research. I'd suggest that faculty don't want there to be a low emphasis on teaching, it's just that there aren't enough resources to do the critical tasks first. This is bearing in mind that teaching du…

I think our difference in perspective is a result of our experience with different systems. I've met a number of professors who expressed contempt toward the undergraduate population at the Big State U where I did my graduate studies. It's not that they're reluctantly doing a bad job at teaching, they're doing a bad job and they really don't care.

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

#282

Post by gtt » Fri, Oct 27, 2017, 2:05 PM UTC

jjoonathan wrote: post #263

tertius wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Grants are extremely difficult to come by these days Only because of competition. It's still vastly better in the U.S. than any other country. Competition is good.

Turn the competition knob to 0, everybody slacks. Turn it to 11, everybody cheats. It's at 10. We're hearing more and more about large cheating scandals. I wonder, what could possibly be wrong with the system?

I don't think slacking in science is a bad thing. Less papers means less noise and if people are not sufficiently motivated by their ideas themselves may be it is best for everyone they are not publishing.

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

#283

Post by Analog24 » Fri, Oct 27, 2017, 4:06 PM UTC

Halladie7 wrote: post #269

Analog24 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some of the larger tech companies the salaries for scientists/researchers is usually higher than for engineers specifically because of the extra educational requirements. Where I work there are actually on two separate pay scales to account for this. I can't say this is true everywhere but there are definitely cases where you could have made more had you stayed in industry (emphasis on "could", it's not guaranteed…

There's definitely variation from company to company, but the gap isn't huge. Let's say the private research role got me $30k more than engineering. It would take at least 16 years to make up for the 5-6 I spend for a phd. Lots of variables though. I made the right choice for myself.

People usually work for 30 years... Grad school is definitely a long term investment but it's not always the best choice. As you said, in the end you have to do what's right for you.

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

#284

Post by neuromantik8086 » Fri, Oct 27, 2017, 6:41 PM UTC

chriskanan wrote: post #8

chriskanan wrote: post #6

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…

If anyone is interested, here are my old blog posts on the requirements for getting an interview for a professorship at a top-50 school: [1] http://www.chriskanan.com/planning-for-life-after-your-phd/ [2] http://www.chriskanan.com/statistics-on-computer-science-pro... [3] http://www.chriskanan.com/statistics-on-ucsds-computer-scien...

Paul Litvak has also written a few interesting posts, both about moving into industry from academia and about the current academic job market:

[1] http://www.paullitvak.com/2013/05/16/why-social-science-grad... [2] http://www.paullitvak.com/2013/02/18/simgradschool-a-study-i...

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

#285

Post by jogundas » Sat, Oct 28, 2017, 5:41 AM UTC

hycaria wrote: post #55

hobofan wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 peo…

That's higher than I thought, but I guess that's US numbers. Are they starting it way later (and if so what are they doing in between) ? Or is it simply a long time spent in PhD ?

Europe Physics adds up as follows: finish school at 18 + 4 BSc + 2 MSc + 4 PhD = 28

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

#286

Post by hyperbovine » Sat, Oct 28, 2017, 8:51 AM UTC

daemonk wrote: post #209

hyperbovine wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... you work 80 hours per week and make less than ... I've read so many comments like yours, on HN and elsewhere, and invariably the argument hinges on some variation of the above sentiment. I've come to believe I just have fundamentally different values than the vast majority of people who work in industry. To answer your (friends') question, because the work is more interesting and I make plenty of money as it st…

Because not all work in academia is interesting. I don't know about your field but academic research is more about doing what your funding bodies want you to do or following the latest trend to get funding. Publishing can be a political game where institution and contacts matter more than merit. Advancement in your career can be the same. I don't want to make a blanket statement for everyone because I am sure there a…

Well, that wasn't the claim, that all work in science is interesting. It was that mine is. And it very clearly is about values. Your hypothetical job in industry that's 3/4 uninteresting sounds awful to me. I'd never want that. For any (realistic) amount of money.

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

#287

Post by aswanson » Sat, Oct 28, 2017, 12:58 PM UTC

hpcjoe wrote: post #254

aswanson wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was your original plan to become a professor? If so, why did you change course?

When I entered grad school it was. Then the Soviet Union died, and the market, already awash in a large number of Ph.D.s in physics suddenly transformed into something that I could not effectively compete in. To some degree, you are measured, as a student/postdoc, by the number of highly rated papers in good journals that you produce, as well as citations, invitations to speak, etc. All of this factors into how high…

Great advice. For someone regretting not taking the particle physics path that sometimes dreams 'what if...' you've offered some solace.

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

#288

Post by hpcjoe » Sat, Oct 28, 2017, 3:04 PM UTC

KKKKkkkk1 wrote: post #272

hpcjoe wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I entered grad school it was. Then the Soviet Union died, and the market, already awash in a large number of Ph.D.s in physics suddenly transformed into something that I could not effectively compete in. To some degree, you are measured, as a student/postdoc, by the number of highly rated papers in good journals that you produce, as well as citations, invitations to speak, etc. All of this factors into how high…

> My recommendation to younger versions of me, my wife (also an ex-physicist, now a math/physics teacher in a local high school) would be to look carefully at how the world is moving toward some things and away from others. Estimate where we will be in N years when you finish up, and try see if something you think you would like to do aligns with something people are willing to pay for. Make sure you are flexible eno…

Pursue what you are passionate about, but be realistic about how you are going to work and handle the real issues that come with being an adult and having a family (if this is your goal).

My daughter is pursuing a degree in Art at a good university. I gave her the same talk. As she seems to have some genetic predisposition to computers and science (and math, though if you ask her she'll claim that the tests lie), she looks like she'll be mixing computer science and/or engineering into this.

My wife and I struggled to find a solution to the two body problem [1], which is part of what informed our collective decision. As much as I wanted (at the time) to be a physics prof, I saw my contemporaries struggle for years afterwards, with low pay, long hours, while having to put up with a spouse in a different city (and often a different state/coast), as their solution to this problem. That didn't appear to me to be a solution. And in the language of theoretical physics/mathematics, this problem did not appear to admit a general closed form, simple solution.

The FSU collapsing was a large part of my (really our) choice (we got married in grad school). The lack of "secure" job until early 40s (tenure track starting around 35, decision around 40-42) caused us to rethink what was important to us.

The trajectory you take is one you should undertake with eyes clearly open, aware of all the pitfalls on the path you take to the end point. And have a few concepts in mind for plans B and C in case plan A's endpoint becomes out of reach for any reason.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-body_problem_(career)

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

#289

Post by daemonk » Sat, Oct 28, 2017, 5:26 PM UTC

hyperbovine wrote: post #286

daemonk wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because not all work in academia is interesting. I don't know about your field but academic research is more about doing what your funding bodies want you to do or following the latest trend to get funding. Publishing can be a political game where institution and contacts matter more than merit. Advancement in your career can be the same. I don't want to make a blanket statement for everyone because I am sure there a…

Well, that wasn't the claim, that all work in science is interesting. It was that mine is. And it very clearly is about values. Your hypothetical job in industry that's 3/4 uninteresting sounds awful to me. I'd never want that. For any (realistic) amount of money.

What I meant by "values" is some kind of moral superiority that seems to be espoused by a lot of people I've met in academia. That somehow not pursuing academic research is "selling out".

This idea is implicitly ingrained in a lot of graduate students when they enter the program. In my opinion, this is all to justify the shitty treatment. And I find this mentality very similar to organized religions where you are expected to make personal sacrifice in the name of some abstract notion.

Of course, this also exists in industry. Big tech companies sell their "vision" and "culture" in the same way. But at least they pay their employees relatively better.

I am glad you have a rewarding academic career and I hope you continue to enjoy it. I personally didn't find academia that enjoyable. The science was interesting, but academia is not just about science these days.

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

#290

Post by jessriedel » Sat, Oct 28, 2017, 6:38 PM UTC

s0rce wrote: post #259

jessriedel wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would we design a system where only eventual professors have PhDs?

Maybe not 100% but what fraction of PhDs are professors, maybe 3-5% at most, what about fraction of MDs working as medical doctors, I'm guessing its much much higher (with higher wages) since they limit enrollment in school and residencies (they don't rely on cheap grad student/post-doc labor).

Why would we think these fractions should be closely related?

And attending surgeons definitely rely on cheap resident labor.