5 ms·

The author of the article never mentions what faculty or program they're in, or references any of their work. No doubt this is a real problem, but in this parti

The author of the article never mentions what faculty or program they're in, or references any of their work. No doubt this is a real problem, but in this particular case they could just be a lousy researcher in a faculty that doesn't have a high demand for new professors. IOW the "psychology" / "liberal arts" over population. I'm not trying to knock any of those studies, but there is a large excess where I'm from.

mjevans 10y ago
Yet those programs would happily take on more than their replacement rate, while at the same time not being upfront about the actual chances of getting a job.
- ptero 10y ago
  In general, though, I think most grad programs should take more than their replacement rate. There should be a (sizeable) outflow to non-academic jobs in a healthy system. This also requires not having an institutional "tenure or failure" mentality, which is, sadly, not uncommon in many science grad schools.
  - pmiller2 10y ago
    Yes, there should be a sizable outflow to non-academic jobs, but that implies that the demand is there, and that the jobs hey sufficiently well to make up for the opportunity cost of not earning for eight years or more. These conditions do not really exist for a lot of fields. How many jobs outside academia are there where a PhD in medieval history is an advantage?
    - disgruntledphd2 10y ago
      It's those transferrable skills, yo. In general, a liberal arts PhD will be able to work independently with little supervision, plan a course of work and make headway without much feedback. In general, they can also communicate effectively through text. I totally get that people don't want to leave their speciality, but the PhD will normally give students a bunch of skills that are hard (but not impossible) to get elsewhere. I have a psychology PhD, and now work at a tech company (I always loved stats, and discovered coding during the PhD due to laziness, so may not be a typical case).
KingMob 10y ago
As a former neuroscientist, that's somewhat true, but it's pretty bad all across academia. Every department takes on more grad students than can possibly fill academic offices.
hooloovoo_zoo 10y ago
The author seems to think writing a book is necessary for tenure, so he isn't in a STEM field (obviously many STEM professors write books but the vast majority of STEM professors who receive tenure have not written a book).
- mturmon 10y ago
  A history grad student I knew (I was in STEM) remarked that if he couldn't get an adaptation of his dissertation published somewhere in book form, it would be a major career setback. Having graduated in 1992 with his PhD, his book came out in 1998, as he moved through a series of temporary positions. He's tenured at a major university now, but he does have to live in an out of the way and rather drab college town. It's no picnic.
pmiller2 10y ago
There's an overpopulation in virtually every field. Any graduate student can look to his or her left and right in class and realize that those people are his or her competition for a job that only one of them is going to get. The situation is only somewhat better in STEM fields, because there's more industry demand (where you can get paid more and have better mobility, but get looked down on by your academic brethren.)
- maverick_iceman 10y ago
  > where you can get paid more and have better mobility, but get looked down on by your academic brethren And then 2 years later they will be asking you to find them a job. :)

mjevans 10y ago

Yet those programs would happily take on more than their replacement rate, while at the same time not being upfront about the actual chances of getting a job.

ptero 10y ago
In general, though, I think most grad programs should take more than their replacement rate. There should be a (sizeable) outflow to non-academic jobs in a healthy system. This also requires not having an institutional "tenure or failure" mentality, which is, sadly, not uncommon in many science grad schools.
- pmiller2 10y ago
  Yes, there should be a sizable outflow to non-academic jobs, but that implies that the demand is there, and that the jobs hey sufficiently well to make up for the opportunity cost of not earning for eight years or more. These conditions do not really exist for a lot of fields. How many jobs outside academia are there where a PhD in medieval history is an advantage?
  - disgruntledphd2 10y ago
    It's those transferrable skills, yo. In general, a liberal arts PhD will be able to work independently with little supervision, plan a course of work and make headway without much feedback. In general, they can also communicate effectively through text. I totally get that people don't want to leave their speciality, but the PhD will normally give students a bunch of skills that are hard (but not impossible) to get elsewhere. I have a psychology PhD, and now work at a tech company (I always loved stats, and discovered coding during the PhD due to laziness, so may not be a typical case).

KingMob 10y ago

As a former neuroscientist, that's somewhat true, but it's pretty bad all across academia. Every department takes on more grad students than can possibly fill academic offices.

hooloovoo_zoo 10y ago

The author seems to think writing a book is necessary for tenure, so he isn't in a STEM field (obviously many STEM professors write books but the vast majority of STEM professors who receive tenure have not written a book).

mturmon 10y ago
A history grad student I knew (I was in STEM) remarked that if he couldn't get an adaptation of his dissertation published somewhere in book form, it would be a major career setback. Having graduated in 1992 with his PhD, his book came out in 1998, as he moved through a series of temporary positions. He's tenured at a major university now, but he does have to live in an out of the way and rather drab college town. It's no picnic.

pmiller2 10y ago

There's an overpopulation in virtually every field. Any graduate student can look to his or her left and right in class and realize that those people are his or her competition for a job that only one of them is going to get. The situation is only somewhat better in STEM fields, because there's more industry demand (where you can get paid more and have better mobility, but get looked down on by your academic brethren.)

maverick_iceman 10y ago
> where you can get paid more and have better mobility, but get looked down on by your academic brethren And then 2 years later they will be asking you to find them a job. :)