4 ms·

To me it's less about visas and more about jobs. Why aren't their more research jobs? Why isn't the govt doing more to bolster research and create opportunity

To me it's less about visas and more about jobs. Why aren't their more research jobs? Why isn't the govt doing more to bolster research and create opportunity for talented minds?

oh_sigh 9y ago
Perhaps the right value proposition hasn't been made. It the ones that have been made have been made with poor arguments. "Research" in itself is neither inherently good not bad...just asking for more of it doesn't make sense...just like asking for more water doesn't make sense unless you know the context is you're dying of thirst and not pumping out your flooded basement.
ptero 9y ago
Government funding for research is important, especially for the pure science, but government should not blindly increase funding because some people are not finding academic jobs. With the (IMO pretty broken) tenure system in the US, research-track academic jobs can be very lucrative and with many researchers un-fireable regardless of what they do academically makes research both more expensive (folks goofing off) and less valuable (sharp researchers cannot find positions) for the society that it can be. I think we need to tune the system before we talk about more funding as a solution
- ylem 9y ago
  I'm curious, what makes you think that people are goofing off? I suffer from selection bias, but most of the tenured faculty (in the sciences) that I know are extremely driven people who work nights and weekends...Have you seen any studies that would suggest otherwise? As for lucrative, I'm still biased, but I would say that academic jobs can be comfortable financially, especially given the stability of tenure, but outside of superstars, I wouldn't say that they are outside the range of say a software engineer...
  - ptero 9y ago
    Mostly my observations when I was doing my PhD at one of the pretty good schools (one that considers itself in the top 20, but may actually be in the top 50). I might be suffering from the selection bias as well (as I decided not to pursue an academic career), but I did see professors who had no Ph.D. students, did not publish or present and just took it easy with a minimum teaching load. I do not doubt their teaching skill, but they were doing the job of, say, a senior lecturer at 2-3 times the salary and half the workload. There were not many (maybe 10-15%), but not a single case either. My experience was on a "pure science" / paper and pencil side. Maybe it was the fact that one does not need grants for labs, etc. that takes pressure off as well. Among the grads (at least in physics) the split between experimentals and pure would be crystal clear any weekend: the first were in the lab, second played warcraft :).

To me it's less about visas and more about jobs. Why aren't their more research jobs? Why isn't the govt doing more to bolster research and create opportunity for talented minds?

oh_sigh 9y ago

Perhaps the right value proposition hasn't been made. It the ones that have been made have been made with poor arguments. "Research" in itself is neither inherently good not bad...just asking for more of it doesn't make sense...just like asking for more water doesn't make sense unless you know the context is you're dying of thirst and not pumping out your flooded basement.

ptero 9y ago

Government funding for research is important, especially for the pure science, but government should not blindly increase funding because some people are not finding academic jobs. With the (IMO pretty broken) tenure system in the US, research-track academic jobs can be very lucrative and with many researchers un-fireable regardless of what they do academically makes research both more expensive (folks goofing off) and less valuable (sharp researchers cannot find positions) for the society that it can be. I think we need to tune the system before we talk about more funding as a solution

ylem 9y ago
I'm curious, what makes you think that people are goofing off? I suffer from selection bias, but most of the tenured faculty (in the sciences) that I know are extremely driven people who work nights and weekends...Have you seen any studies that would suggest otherwise? As for lucrative, I'm still biased, but I would say that academic jobs can be comfortable financially, especially given the stability of tenure, but outside of superstars, I wouldn't say that they are outside the range of say a software engineer...
- ptero 9y ago
  Mostly my observations when I was doing my PhD at one of the pretty good schools (one that considers itself in the top 20, but may actually be in the top 50). I might be suffering from the selection bias as well (as I decided not to pursue an academic career), but I did see professors who had no Ph.D. students, did not publish or present and just took it easy with a minimum teaching load. I do not doubt their teaching skill, but they were doing the job of, say, a senior lecturer at 2-3 times the salary and half the workload. There were not many (maybe 10-15%), but not a single case either. My experience was on a "pure science" / paper and pencil side. Maybe it was the fact that one does not need grants for labs, etc. that takes pressure off as well. Among the grads (at least in physics) the split between experimentals and pure would be crystal clear any weekend: the first were in the lab, second played warcraft :).