3 ms·
It's even worse than that. You'll find tons of grants--and even jobs--that are time-gated: you must be within k years of your PhD, where k is pretty small (1,2
by mattkrause 5y ago
It's even worse than that.
You'll find tons of grants--and even jobs--that are time-gated: you must be within k years of your PhD, where k is pretty small (1,2, maybe 5). Annoyingly, these apply to some faculty-level things (e.g., ESI status for NIH grants), so if you start on the back foot, it's hard to catch up.
This is bad for a lot of reasons. It's discriminatory (and arguably illegal, since it must have a "disparate impact" on people over 40). It also shapes the sort of research people do. It encourages trainees to work on established projects in established labs, which promotes orthdoxy and thwarts the idea of training people for careers as independent investigators. It rewards choosing techniques that are "safe" and fast-moving.
- btrettel 5y ago> You'll find tons of grants--and even jobs--that are time-gated: you must be within k years of your PhD, where k is pretty small (1, 2, maybe 5). I finished my PhD in 2020. The research job market was terrible back then, and I'm getting close to the 2 year mark where I'll age out of a lot of opportunities. These rules are going to prevent a lot of people from getting a job in science, and there's nothing they can do about it. Fortunately, in the case of many jobs, I think the time-since-PhD requirement is often boilerplate that is not enforced.
- a_bonobo 5y agoIn many places the time-since-PhD is also relevant to opportunity, so if you are 5 years post-PhD but you were unemployed for 2 years or outside academia, you count as 3 years post-PhD.