A very drawn-out bet
I’m very happy about the results of my job search. Fortunately, I have offers from universities that I would be happy to work at, located in places I would be happy to live. For years I have wondered whether this would be possible. Maybe you think I’m an overly anxious person and should have known I would do fine. But I don’t think so. I feel like it’s kind of a miracle to get an academic job at all. In previous years, I’ve watched people around me go through the job search for tenure track positions at research universities. They ended up with all sorts of different outcomes, for example:
- A few seemingly brilliant individuals with groundbreaking contributions to the field got interviews at Top-5 schools, got one or more offers, and accepted one. I know at least 4 of these people! Lucky them.
- A few people I know chose a very small number of universities that matched their interests, got interviews, and then offers.
- A few people got interviews at semi-random collection of good schools, got a few offers, which may or may not have been in locations they liked, and picked one. In a few cases, they ended up going back to their home countries, where the location options were more to their liking.
- A few people interviewed at a handful of Top-40 schools but got no offers, and then repeated the process a few years in a row without luck, or accepted a job they weren’t thrilled about, or ended up in an uncertain, soft-money position.
- A few people sent out lots and lots of applications but got no interviews at all.
So how are you supposed to know ahead of time which category you fall into? Sure, there are certain factors that increase your success, and you can work on strengthening your background and application in those areas. But I think that if your goal is to get a tenure-track job at a research university in a place you want to live, it’s hard to know your chance of success much in advance. Many smart people with excellent records do not get jobs. Which is too bad, since it can take 5-10 years just to get ready to apply– counting the time you spend in a PhD and a postdoc. And how are you supposed to predict your chances then– when you are starting grad school? Meanwhile, the nature of the training makes it very hard to keep your options open– a PhD plus a postdoc is, in many fields, not the ideal preparation for jobs in industry.
Do you think I am being too negative? What’s your perspective, particularly those of you who are professors and have had students yourselves? How should I think about recruiting graduate students, when I am encouraging them to pursue an uncertain career path?
Trackback.
Comment by Bill — July 4, 2007 @ 8:45 am
Dr. Shellie,
I was a software developer for 12+ years. I never finished my BS when I was younger. After over a decade of chasing the all-mighty buck, I decided to return to academia. I didn’t come back for the money - I came back for the ideas. I finished my BS in 2004, my MS in 2006 and am now pursuing a PhD.
My inspiration to continue on this track is a faculty member at the school where I did my undergrad work. He just retired after 43 years teaching at the school. He drove a motorcycle 90 miles each way to the school every day (unless it was raining). In addition to subjects like Invertebrate Zoology and GIS, he taught SCUBA. If, at 73, I’m half as active as he is, I’ll be thrilled with life.
I can tell you that there is no certain career path in the “real world”. I’ve had more jobs than I care to say. Some I left. Some got yanked out from under me.
As Bill (http://www.sennoma.net/main/archives/2007/07/is_it_ethical_to_encourage_stu.php) states, it’s OK to encourage academic pursuit as long as you don’t actively discourage other pursuits. Not all of your grad students need to follow your path into research. Maybe they want to be educators. Maybe they want to be administrators! Maybe they want to just be a bartender!
Does the PhD+postdoc prepare one for “real world jobs” - not particularly. But I have found that what I’ve gained pursuing my PhD has enriched my life significantly.
Comment by Eric Wolf — July 5, 2007 @ 4:54 pm
Dr. Shellie - your post is right on the money! The problem of uncertainty (which category will I fall into?) is what drove me totally crazy throughout my postdoc years. With the recent talk about healthcare (Moore’s “Sicko” movie) there is some discussion about whether medical doctors are compensated fairly, or if they are overcompensated. But at least a vast majority of them are employed in the field they trained for many years, and make comfortable living at that.
There’s no easy solutions. Training for career in industry makes sense for *some* specialties, but as you say, a lot of sub-fields are purely academic. Even when industrial/applied option is on the table, one often has to decide early on whether they want their research career to be tailored for industry or academia - and once the decision is made, it’s hard to change it.
And even if one were able to look into the future and tell people what category they belong to (probably impossible - I didn’t think I would ever become faculty until I was in the middle of my postdoc), knowing ahead of time would make the entire academic pyramid scheme collapse like a house made of cards. If one was able to learn only research skills that will be useful later, the herds of “cheap labor” would be reduced by an order of magnitude.
Comment by Ponderer of Things — July 6, 2007 @ 2:51 am
The uncertainty depends on institutional factors, I expect. In my old Ph.D. program at the University of Pennsylvania, which was pretty dysfunctional, my cohort of graduate students dwindled to 3 of 15 admitted before graduation. One has a tenure-track position, 11 years along. One taught briefly in an adjunct position. The other one who graduated (not me) went into industry and disappeared into a cubicle or a boardroom or something. And the rest of us quit or were dispensed with.
In a healthy department in a relatively healthy school, the prospects seem much better. As far as I can tell, all graduating Ph.D. students from my U-M department have been placed, for years, in either high-end nontenure positions or tenure-track. Retention’s high. But the discipline may be affecting this outcome: a lot of other schools are dishearteningly unhealthy by comparison, and that must come across in job talks and interviews.
But as I’ve said to all my peers (and employees, between Ph.D. programs) for years: if you don’t know the person who’s going to hire you when you graduate by the time you’re one year in, you won’t get a job. Neither of you may know or even suspect you’ll be working together… but you need to know each other.
That’s my experience, at least.
Comment by Bill Tozier — July 7, 2007 @ 11:25 pm
As a fifteen year faculty member, I can empathize with the feelings, but think things are a bit more complex. I have trained nearly twenty five students and postdocs. Those who have finished have taken on a variety of jobs, from tenure track positions at Research I univeristies to similar positions at undergraduate institutions to non-tenure track academic positions to a variety of jobs in industry. In most of the cases, I think the person found a job that fit their abilities and that has the potential to be a “good” job, and I think most of them are reasonably content with thier choices.
My job is not a good fit for everyone who gets a Ph.D. I would argue that from my Department a majority of those well suited for this job (scientifically, in terms of organizational and supervisory skills) actually ended up with jobs like mine. I disagree that “Many smart people with excellent records do not get jobs.”. I know very few unemployed Ph.D.s in my field. I would acknowledge that not all “smart people” get tenure track faculty jobs, but being “smart” is only part of the package. In my own lab, I think people have largely self-sorted prior to looking for positions, seeking a job that fits their skills and desires. We need to be open to many different career tracks.
I also think we all (myself included) tend to have a “grass is always greener” view of other careeers. As a Ph.D. student you learn about ALL of the good and bad things about a faculty job, but often have a rosy view of other careers. For example, I know many physicians and that career has many challenges. I certainly think tenure track faculty are, on the whole, at least as happy as “real doctors”. All jobs have their pluses and minuses.
Finally, I agree with Eric above that one should only pursue a PhD if you love it–following the same muse that makes one an artist or muscician. A PhD has its own benefits that extend far beyond employability, and these need to be the driving force or you’ll not be very happy. I thus am happy to encourage folks to go to grad school if that’s what they love!
Comment by Mark Peifer — July 9, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
Thanks, Mark. I’m happy to hear your more positive perspective. Your attitude sounds key for creating the kind of healthy environment Bill describes.
Comment by drshellie — July 9, 2007 @ 7:42 pm
You’ve been tagged to comment on the state of the NIH.
Comment by Drugmonkey — July 9, 2007 @ 8:40 pm
I can’t even think about it yet, not from the perpective of end-of-PhD-student. I know I ought to but I feel like if I think too much I will get an ulcer and it won’t make a difference, anyway. I’m hoping if I swim along and keep my eyes open for opportunities it’ll work out. No idea whether this is a bad plan, but my sanity is so tenuous it’s the only one I can manage right now.
Comment by Joolya — July 13, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
I stumbled upon this blog while searching the words “am I too old for a PHD” -Well, I am 43 and have decided that I want to go back to school for my phd in Art History. I just finished my Masters. I currently work as a real estate agent! I am not sure if I will ever make a career change with the Phd, but want to do it anyway
Comment by John Kobeck — September 20, 2007 @ 3:31 am