6 ms·

The grants are even crazier than that. Most of the actual work is done by trainees who are a) learning how to do <cutting-edge thing> for the first time and b)

The grants are even crazier than that. Most of the actual work is done by trainees who are a) learning how to do <cutting-edge thing> for the first time and b) may never actually do it again because they're going to move onto something else. The profs are, at best, managing them and even that's often a bit iffy. Everybody's obviously got to learn somewhere, but universities and research funders are oddly weird about experience and expertise.

ethbr0 5y ago
I remember (this would have been in the 90s) my father getting crap from his peers because he listed his grad students before himself on research papers. In his words, "Why would I not? They did most of the work."
- gwd 5y ago
  That must depend on the field. In my field (operating systems), the primary professor was always listed last; so you knew the first author was the grad student who did the most work, and the last author was the prof who oversaw the whole thing.
  - Fomite 5y ago
    This. It depends very much on field. Pretty much every paper I didn't solo write in the past three or four years has had my grad students first (Epidemiology).
beambot 5y ago
The professor job is an absurd ask: - Enterprise sales rep with a $500k-$1M annual quota (aka grants). - R&D manager of a team comprised almost entirely of junior employees - Lecturer and administration for teaching. - Administrator & volunteer within the department, chair roles for key academic conferences, and editor on major journals -- all to check the "service" box for tenure. - Because they aren't a proper CEO, they don't even have the ability to push back on obscene G&A costs (ie 50%+ of grant contracts going to university overhead!). It's a labor of love (esp in STEM!), and I feel bad that many are caught in this morass.
- ktln2 5y ago
  also - getting paid below (barely above if you are lucky) 6 figures - requires 3+ years of postdoc training which paid even worse
  - batch12 5y ago
    Yeah. 6 figures would put me back on ramen.
- Plasmoid 5y ago
  > (ie 50%+ of grant contracts going to university overhead!). This is why a lot of grants are made in-kind rather than in cash. Give the research $750K in equipment instead of $1M in cash where the university pockets $500k of it.
  - Fomite 5y ago
    As noted elsewhere, that's not how overhead works, and vanishingly few grants are in-kind. Also, expressly, large capital expenditures like equipment are exempt from indirect costs at most universities. HN's notion of how universities work is probably about as accurate as my notions of how VC funding works.
  - mattkrause 5y ago
    In-kind grants are fairly uncommon and generally aren't a "substitute" for cash: salaries, even being what they are, are a fairly major expense for most labs. In my experience, in-kind grants mostly occur when the "giver" has/gets the "gift" cheaply. For example, NVIDIA gave out tons of graphics cards, but they certainly don't pay full retail for their own product. This lets them give you a grant "worth" $5k, but costs them substantially less. Ditto pharma companies, which may not even sell the thing given. It seems clever to give the funder a shopping list, and then get an "in-kind" grant for exactly what you want. However, many places will waive/reduce indirect costs on equipment (which, per the NIH is $5000 and lasts for >1 year).
- yaur 5y ago
  the successful professors that I've seen out source everything but number 1 and get a healthy cut of number 5.

ethbr0 5y ago

I remember (this would have been in the 90s) my father getting crap from his peers because he listed his grad students before himself on research papers. In his words, "Why would I not? They did most of the work."

gwd 5y ago
That must depend on the field. In my field (operating systems), the primary professor was always listed last; so you knew the first author was the grad student who did the most work, and the last author was the prof who oversaw the whole thing.
- Fomite 5y ago
  This. It depends very much on field. Pretty much every paper I didn't solo write in the past three or four years has had my grad students first (Epidemiology).

beambot 5y ago

The professor job is an absurd ask: - Enterprise sales rep with a $500k-$1M annual quota (aka grants). - R&D manager of a team comprised almost entirely of junior employees - Lecturer and administration for teaching. - Administrator & volunteer within the department, chair roles for key academic conferences, and editor on major journals -- all to check the "service" box for tenure. - Because they aren't a proper CEO, they don't even have the ability to push back on obscene G&A costs (ie 50%+ of grant contracts going to university overhead!). It's a labor of love (esp in STEM!), and I feel bad that many are caught in this morass.

ktln2 5y ago
also - getting paid below (barely above if you are lucky) 6 figures - requires 3+ years of postdoc training which paid even worse
- batch12 5y ago
  Yeah. 6 figures would put me back on ramen.
Plasmoid 5y ago
> (ie 50%+ of grant contracts going to university overhead!). This is why a lot of grants are made in-kind rather than in cash. Give the research $750K in equipment instead of $1M in cash where the university pockets $500k of it.
- Fomite 5y ago
  As noted elsewhere, that's not how overhead works, and vanishingly few grants are in-kind. Also, expressly, large capital expenditures like equipment are exempt from indirect costs at most universities. HN's notion of how universities work is probably about as accurate as my notions of how VC funding works.
- mattkrause 5y ago
  In-kind grants are fairly uncommon and generally aren't a "substitute" for cash: salaries, even being what they are, are a fairly major expense for most labs. In my experience, in-kind grants mostly occur when the "giver" has/gets the "gift" cheaply. For example, NVIDIA gave out tons of graphics cards, but they certainly don't pay full retail for their own product. This lets them give you a grant "worth" $5k, but costs them substantially less. Ditto pharma companies, which may not even sell the thing given. It seems clever to give the funder a shopping list, and then get an "in-kind" grant for exactly what you want. However, many places will waive/reduce indirect costs on equipment (which, per the NIH is $5000 and lasts for >1 year).
yaur 5y ago
the successful professors that I've seen out source everything but number 1 and get a healthy cut of number 5.