5 ms·

>Maybe a handful, I said. And then I realized that there was no way I could work on that problem. Success in academia is measured in the number of citations you

by navait 12y ago

>Maybe a handful, I said. And then I realized that there was no way I could work on that problem. Success in academia is measured in the number of citations your paper receives. What point is there in writing a paper that is only interesting to such a small audience? I wanted to say at first that if he was in it for the sake of being a successful, high-impact researcher, he was in science for the wrong reasons. But really, unless you are one of those high-impact people, you aren't getting tenure. I don't feel like tenure is asking for much if you're a hard worker who's produced some novel results. I get that science is supposed to be about passion, but you can't support a family on passion alone. > A career in academia would just require even more proving my worthiness...I'd constantly be evaluated. That's not what I was looking for. He's in for a rude awakening. You're only as good as your last envelope.

noobermin 12y ago
A much more accurate statement is you might not get tenure if you're not high-impact, but you certainly won't if you aren't. Also, of course you are evaluated in anything in life, from the desk to the friendly get-together. The issue with academia has always been its ROI. You invest a lot into the academic life, your time, your youth, your energy, your mental state, all to graduate close to 30 make a salary some of the people you tutor make fresh out of college? All while working 50-60 hour weeks...it isn't quite the life. Perhaps being in a start-up requires such dedication too, but that can be seen a risk that can yield a great reward. For academe, there is no reward, save the "academic points." This [1] says it well. At least if you work hard and stress and have no life in the "real world", you'd have the chance of monetary compensation. Really, in academia, unless you are lucky enough to become a tenure prof, all you have is your pride that you understand something no else cares to. That, and the occasional free pizza and beer. [1] http://100rsns.blogspot.com/2010/10/25-academe-is-built-on-pride.html http://100rsns.blogspot.com/2010/10/25-academe-is-built-on-p...
- NotOscarWilde 12y ago
  > For academe, there is no reward, save the "academic points." I disagree. First of all, there is a rather high place in the societal ladder. A university professor is still somebody who induces awe, plus the job has this "uncorrupted by money" vibe which you cannot get as a manager/entrepreneur. Furthermore, you have an extremely high position in the local society, i.e. at the university. But I think the real reward is not vain or materialistic -- the reward is doing something you adore, and something you find a lot of meaning in. Both teaching and research are extremely fulfilling for me (as a PhD student). Personally, I can think of other jobs in compsci/programming that would be fulfilling, but they are likely as unavailable as the university position.
  - noobermin 12y ago
    I say in the second sentence in that paragraph that it is unless you become a tenured professor that you have nothing but your pride. I recall a study once that indentified a university, tenured professor as the lowest stress to pay ratio job in existence. Of course, few in the academy can reach tenure-ship given the over-supply, so you most likely will toil as a post-doc for a long time in academia. And no, the jobs you are thinking of are certainly not just as unavailable. For fuck's sake man, the number of university positions in the US for my field, physics, is in the single thousands...universities themselves have 3000 jobs in total[0]. That's total number...and this is with 1700 PhD's awarded per year[1]. It looks a little better for you in compsci [2],[3], so may be you have a right to be more optimistic than me. Perhaps an important thing here is the area of study. Physics, IMO, is pretty bleak, especially for theorists. [0] http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes192012.htm http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes192012.htm [1] http://www.aip.org/sites/default/files/statistics/rosters/physrost134.pdf http://www.aip.org/sites/default/files/statistics/rosters/ph... [2] http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_611300.htm#15-0000 http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_611300.htm#15-0000 [3] http://cra.org/uploads/documents/resources/crndocs/2013-Taulbee-Survey.pdf http://cra.org/uploads/documents/resources/crndocs/2013-Taul...
    - NotOscarWilde 12y ago
      > And no, the jobs you are thinking of are certainly not just as unavailable. It really depends on what you can see yourself doing. My closest compsci friends are all employed by either big companies working on their backend or by "young hip" companies doing web solutions for the local tobacco companies and the like. Anything that I would like to do would have to (subjectively) help humanity as much as research/teaching; and getting jobs like these either requires a whole lot of dedication (leaving your family behind, moving to Asia/Africa) or a lot of connections (governmental public good jobs are rare for compsci people).
_delirium 12y ago
But really, unless you are one of those high-impact people, you aren't getting tenure. This really depends on where you are looking for tenure. If you're at, say, a top-30 research-focused institution, then yes, that's what they angle for: big grants and "high-impact research". But if you enjoy and/or are good at teaching (obviously not all researchers do or are), there are a lot of places where getting tenure is more a matter of doing some interesting research, combined with teaching at least fairly well, and being perceived as an asset to your department/university's community (ideally excelling in one of those three areas, but not necessarily all three). To pick some examples: tenure at, say, UT-Dallas, Cal Poly, or Occidental College is totally different from tenure at Stanford, UIUC, or MIT.

by navait 12y ago

noobermin 12y ago

A much more accurate statement is you might not get tenure if you're not high-impact, but you certainly won't if you aren't. Also, of course you are evaluated in anything in life, from the desk to the friendly get-together. The issue with academia has always been its ROI. You invest a lot into the academic life, your time, your youth, your energy, your mental state, all to graduate close to 30 make a salary some of the people you tutor make fresh out of college? All while working 50-60 hour weeks...it isn't quite the life. Perhaps being in a start-up requires such dedication too, but that can be seen a risk that can yield a great reward. For academe, there is no reward, save the "academic points." This [1] says it well. At least if you work hard and stress and have no life in the "real world", you'd have the chance of monetary compensation. Really, in academia, unless you are lucky enough to become a tenure prof, all you have is your pride that you understand something no else cares to. That, and the occasional free pizza and beer. [1] http://100rsns.blogspot.com/2010/10/25-academe-is-built-on-pride.html http://100rsns.blogspot.com/2010/10/25-academe-is-built-on-p...

NotOscarWilde 12y ago
> For academe, there is no reward, save the "academic points." I disagree. First of all, there is a rather high place in the societal ladder. A university professor is still somebody who induces awe, plus the job has this "uncorrupted by money" vibe which you cannot get as a manager/entrepreneur. Furthermore, you have an extremely high position in the local society, i.e. at the university. But I think the real reward is not vain or materialistic -- the reward is doing something you adore, and something you find a lot of meaning in. Both teaching and research are extremely fulfilling for me (as a PhD student). Personally, I can think of other jobs in compsci/programming that would be fulfilling, but they are likely as unavailable as the university position.
- noobermin 12y ago
  I say in the second sentence in that paragraph that it is unless you become a tenured professor that you have nothing but your pride. I recall a study once that indentified a university, tenured professor as the lowest stress to pay ratio job in existence. Of course, few in the academy can reach tenure-ship given the over-supply, so you most likely will toil as a post-doc for a long time in academia. And no, the jobs you are thinking of are certainly not just as unavailable. For fuck's sake man, the number of university positions in the US for my field, physics, is in the single thousands...universities themselves have 3000 jobs in total[0]. That's total number...and this is with 1700 PhD's awarded per year[1]. It looks a little better for you in compsci [2],[3], so may be you have a right to be more optimistic than me. Perhaps an important thing here is the area of study. Physics, IMO, is pretty bleak, especially for theorists. [0] http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes192012.htm http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes192012.htm [1] http://www.aip.org/sites/default/files/statistics/rosters/physrost134.pdf http://www.aip.org/sites/default/files/statistics/rosters/ph... [2] http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_611300.htm#15-0000 http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_611300.htm#15-0000 [3] http://cra.org/uploads/documents/resources/crndocs/2013-Taulbee-Survey.pdf http://cra.org/uploads/documents/resources/crndocs/2013-Taul...
  - NotOscarWilde 12y ago
    > And no, the jobs you are thinking of are certainly not just as unavailable. It really depends on what you can see yourself doing. My closest compsci friends are all employed by either big companies working on their backend or by "young hip" companies doing web solutions for the local tobacco companies and the like. Anything that I would like to do would have to (subjectively) help humanity as much as research/teaching; and getting jobs like these either requires a whole lot of dedication (leaving your family behind, moving to Asia/Africa) or a lot of connections (governmental public good jobs are rare for compsci people).

_delirium 12y ago

But really, unless you are one of those high-impact people, you aren't getting tenure. This really depends on where you are looking for tenure. If you're at, say, a top-30 research-focused institution, then yes, that's what they angle for: big grants and "high-impact research". But if you enjoy and/or are good at teaching (obviously not all researchers do or are), there are a lot of places where getting tenure is more a matter of doing some interesting research, combined with teaching at least fairly well, and being perceived as an asset to your department/university's community (ideally excelling in one of those three areas, but not necessarily all three). To pick some examples: tenure at, say, UT-Dallas, Cal Poly, or Occidental College is totally different from tenure at Stanford, UIUC, or MIT.