3 ms·

The problem is that there are too many scientists chasing too few dollars- something's gotta give, and on the extreme side of things you end up getting fraud /

The problem is that there are too many scientists chasing too few dollars- something's gotta give, and on the extreme side of things you end up getting fraud / faked data. This could be mitigated by open science practices and reforms to the review process to some extent, but these only address a symptom and not the root cause. The primary solutions I can see (not necessarily mutually exclusive) are to a) reduce the costs of research equipment and staff substantially so that competition for funding becomes less relevant, b) provide a larger pot of state-sponsored scientific funding (industrial science tends to favor refining research more than performing tentative research so corporate funding would be an ill-advised solution), or c) to discourage young budding potential grad students from even going into the grad school track in the first place. As an individual, option c) is something that I personally feel like I can make a difference with. Professors in undergrad can be really terrible about conveying the exact career options you can have in science without necessarily going for the PhD. Invisible support positions like HPC system administrators, research software engineers, and even to some extent hospital lab workers don't require hefty commitments to grad school but still allow one to live within the world of scientific discourse and contribute to the advancement of various fields as an enabler (perhaps less so for hospital workers). Unfortunately, the invisibility of these professions is a major problem, which is why there are organizations like UKRSE [0] that strive to generate more recognition for at least Research Software Engineering (curiously Google in the States seems to have been quick to recognize scientific programmers as distinct professionals relative to PhDs and other programmers, while academia in the US has not done so nearly as much). Also, for some support positions in IT there are non-science options that are much more lucrative. [0] https://rse.ac.uk/ https://rse.ac.uk/

s0rce 8y ago
Since the whole scientific research machine needs a large number of PhD students and postdocs to perform research cheaply I don't see fixing c) until we solve the funding issue, since the reliance on cheap student/postdoc labor is partly a symptom of lack of funding. Another point is that professors are very biased in that they successfully completed grad school, probably a postdoc if they are relatively new and then got a tenure track job. They then suggest that you follow a similar track, strong confirmation bias since you see their success and not the "failure" of the 90% who couldn't/didn't find jobs in academia.
- ISL 8y ago
  I routinely advise students to carefully consider whether or not grad school is for them. The simple fact that each professor advises >10 grad students in their career is generally sufficient to open an undergraduate's eyes to reality. Do it for love, not for money, and do it only with the recognition of the fiscal/life sacrifice that a Ph.D entails.
  - Fomite 8y ago
    As do I - it's helpful to point out to students that at steady state, the replacement rate for a tenured professor is one. If the field is doubling in size over their lifetime...it's two. But I'm also in a field where "alternative" careers don't carry quite the same stigma.
- wanderfowl 8y ago
  Even having won the Tenure-Track Lotto, I don't do this. Generally speaking, a student telling me they want a Ph.D in my field gets a strong warning and a frank discussion about the nature of the job market. I'm willing to support them if they simply cannot imagine doing anything else with their lives, but the pool of students for whom getting a Ph.D is actually a good idea is a very small pool indeed.
cwyers 8y ago
> The problem is that there are too many scientists chasing too few dollars- something's gotta give In anything close to an efficient market, what gives is that you end up with fewer scientists.

s0rce 8y ago

Since the whole scientific research machine needs a large number of PhD students and postdocs to perform research cheaply I don't see fixing c) until we solve the funding issue, since the reliance on cheap student/postdoc labor is partly a symptom of lack of funding. Another point is that professors are very biased in that they successfully completed grad school, probably a postdoc if they are relatively new and then got a tenure track job. They then suggest that you follow a similar track, strong confirmation bias since you see their success and not the "failure" of the 90% who couldn't/didn't find jobs in academia.

ISL 8y ago
I routinely advise students to carefully consider whether or not grad school is for them. The simple fact that each professor advises >10 grad students in their career is generally sufficient to open an undergraduate's eyes to reality. Do it for love, not for money, and do it only with the recognition of the fiscal/life sacrifice that a Ph.D entails.
- Fomite 8y ago
  As do I - it's helpful to point out to students that at steady state, the replacement rate for a tenured professor is one. If the field is doubling in size over their lifetime...it's two. But I'm also in a field where "alternative" careers don't carry quite the same stigma.
wanderfowl 8y ago
Even having won the Tenure-Track Lotto, I don't do this. Generally speaking, a student telling me they want a Ph.D in my field gets a strong warning and a frank discussion about the nature of the job market. I'm willing to support them if they simply cannot imagine doing anything else with their lives, but the pool of students for whom getting a Ph.D is actually a good idea is a very small pool indeed.

cwyers 8y ago

> The problem is that there are too many scientists chasing too few dollars- something's gotta give In anything close to an efficient market, what gives is that you end up with fewer scientists.