Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Academia Is Eating Its Young

pressbuttongoboink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 112 posts

Re: Academia Is Eating Its Young

#101

Post by impendia »

tsotha wrote: post #78
impendia wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Option b) is the path the universities took You're sort of right, but we aren't deliberately weeding out people. This year, I was on the hiring committee for a tenure-track mathematics hire in my academic department. The job market is extraordinarily competitive this year, and sucks rocks for candidates. It follows that we were able to hire somebody truly outstanding.

My question is what did you pay him? If the job market is really such a buyers market, instead of hiring one guy at $100k/yr, why not hire two at $50k/yr?

I'm not sure, probably 75-80k, for the most part pay is very inelastic.

Whether fairly or not, I anticipate that any university attempting to pay below 50% the going rate would quickly get a very bad reputation. I would probably take a 50% pay cut to work at my dream institution, but I'm definitely in the minority (and also I don't have kids).

Re: Academia Is Eating Its Young

#102

Post by bokonist »

vwinsyee wrote: post #91
bokonist wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, thank you for sharing. I think it's a major problem that there is no external accountability. The grants are scored by peer professors, based on publications (which again requires approval by peers). This creates a bunch of problems 1) it's very easy for entire field or subfield to go down the wrong track, and have no way of getting out of that track because the professors controlling grants and publicat…

Addressing #1: Most academic research the government funds is in basic science in expert domains, e.g. intercellular communication, neural firing patterns, etc, and much of this basic science is exploratory. For most projects, it would be difficult for everyone to agree on the goal and metrics of a competition. Sure, this might work for high-profile projects, e.g. establish a map of some organism's genome or connecto…

#1 I agree that prize-based research only works in certain areas. That is why I would make it only one of the three ways to fund research. I think that any competition should be judged by outsiders, if the competition cannot be accurately judged by outsiders then it is not a good competition. For instance, a self driving car race can be judged by outsiders.

For #3 the accountability comes from the board of directors. Right now the highest ranking professors are basically accountable to no one. If a field starts to stagnate, get to esoteric, or close off to new ideas, there is no one with the power to get it unstuck. The top professors do not have an incentive to get it unstuck, because they are the most successful in the status quo, their status is directly linked to the current direction of the field. An independent board of directors has no such perverse incentive. Also, each institution would be actually independent, unlike with the grant system in which grants are centrally allocated by a network of the existing professors. So if one institution goes the wrong direction, another institution might try and make its name by trying out a novel area of research.

Re: Academia Is Eating Its Young

#103

Post by impendia »

richardjordan wrote: post #79

This is part of a broader problem in society with baby boomers not retiring or stepping aside for the next generation as has always happened before and it has broken many systems. Is this because boomers consistently voted for tax via over safety net and then squandered that money so cannot afford to retire? Maybe. Is it because they're healthier than prior generations at the same age and the size of their demographi…

> This is part of a broader problem in society with baby boomers not retiring or stepping aside for the next generation as has always happened before and it has broken many systems.

-1. If a 60-year-old is doing good, productive work, enjoys it, and wishes to continue it, why should he or she retire?

Your argument, at least in the broader sense, seems to rely on the fallacy that there are a fixed number of jobs, and an older worker who chooses to continue working is "taking the place" of someone younger.

In more restricted contexts, such as academia, this is more or less true, and the tenure system does allow for older professors to stop pulling their weight if they choose. (Most of them don't do so.)

But are you prepared to demand of older, productive workers that they quit simply because you would like to take their place? I find such a sentiment to be profoundly selfish.

Re: Academia Is Eating Its Young

#104

Post by richardjordan »

impendia wrote: post #103
richardjordan wrote: post #79

This is part of a broader problem in society with baby boomers not retiring or stepping aside for the next generation as has always happened before and it has broken many systems. Is this because boomers consistently voted for tax via over safety net and then squandered that money so cannot afford to retire? Maybe. Is it because they're healthier than prior generations at the same age and the size of their demographi…

> This is part of a broader problem in society with baby boomers not retiring or stepping aside for the next generation as has always happened before and it has broken many systems. -1. If a 60-year-old is doing good, productive work, enjoys it, and wishes to continue it, why should he or she retire? Your argument, at least in the broader sense, seems to rely on the fallacy that there are a fixed number of jobs, and…

I didn't say they should. You're raising a straw man. I merely said this is the traditional structure on which our society has been working and it is now broken and having all sorts of repercussions.

To your other point there absolutely are only a small number of academic jobs in relation to population size. You can't have society made up of academics. Or any jobs which require a pyramid of supporting jobs to find them and make them viable.

Re: Academia Is Eating Its Young

#105

Post by josephhardin »

w1ntermute wrote: post #87
RougeFemme wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might assume the total cost of those 2 options is equal, but when you look at the overhead/additional compensation (insurance, retirement, etc.) for each position, it might actually be cheaper to hire 1 at 100K rather than 2 at 50K.

> it might actually be cheaper to hire 1 at 100K rather than 2 at 50K You're totally missing the point. The GP was just giving an example. Adjust the numbers however you want so that the latter option is cheaper.

There is a bigger issue at work here. You can pay the one professor 100K, and have a slightly more relaxed professor that is likely to be more productive, or hire two at 50K that end up spending a large amount of their time looking for better opportunities, worrying about money, losing self esteem when comparing themselves to other professors that are making that 100K, etc. There is a threshold below which, you are just throwing away money.

Re: Academia Is Eating Its Young

#106

Post by kkwok »

michaelochurch wrote: post #35

I've been doing a lot of analysis of organizational decline over the past month, and what characterizes R&D (including academia) is extreme convexity: http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/gervais-macle... Convexity pertains to the shape of the curve for output (profits, value added, impact) per input (investment, skill, effort, and just plain luck). It pertains to desirable risk behavior (convex => seek ris…

Taking your arguments though, is it clear that the lesson is teaching cannot be commoditized. Isn't it the lack of understanding and valuing of the research component that makes them see professors as adding little value? Programmers in most tech businesses do provide clear value through their work. So if anything the lesson seems to be it's not enough to do something valuable. You have to make sure the stakeholders understand and value it as well.

And in this regard I do agree we have a huge disconnect between modern research and people. To some degree this is because of the increasing complexity of the frontiers of research, but I also feel we no longer have the public figures in the research community who act as bridges and translators between academia and the public.

Re: Academia Is Eating Its Young

#108

Post by impendia »

richardjordan wrote: post #104
impendia wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is part of a broader problem in society with baby boomers not retiring or stepping aside for the next generation as has always happened before and it has broken many systems. -1. If a 60-year-old is doing good, productive work, enjoys it, and wishes to continue it, why should he or she retire? Your argument, at least in the broader sense, seems to rely on the fallacy that there are a fixed number of jobs, and…

I didn't say they should. You're raising a straw man. I merely said this is the traditional structure on which our society has been working and it is now broken and having all sorts of repercussions. To your other point there absolutely are only a small number of academic jobs in relation to population size. You can't have society made up of academics. Or any jobs which require a pyramid of supporting jobs to find th…

> You're raising a straw man.

Perhaps I have misunderstood your point. If so, then I apologize -- and I also invite you to explain further. What exactly is broken?

Re: Academia Is Eating Its Young

#109

Post by richardjordan »

impendia wrote: post #108
richardjordan wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say they should. You're raising a straw man. I merely said this is the traditional structure on which our society has been working and it is now broken and having all sorts of repercussions. To your other point there absolutely are only a small number of academic jobs in relation to population size. You can't have society made up of academics. Or any jobs which require a pyramid of supporting jobs to find th…

> You're raising a straw man. Perhaps I have misunderstood your point. If so, then I apologize -- and I also invite you to explain further. What exactly is broken?

For generations there was a steady transition of senior roles to you get generations at a pretty regular pace. For a number of reasons this hasn't happened with the transition from the baby boomers. This has led to a bunch of problems. A backlog if talent with no career progression opportunities. Because younger generations haven't had the positions of seniority open to the same degree they haven't learned progressively how to manage that transition either. This means that when the transitions do happen people will be moving into roles both older and less well prepared. It's a big problem in all aspects of the public sector in particular.
Post reply on HN