5 ms·

Even if the author realizes that, it doesn't change the fact that what they are doing is mostly admin and management, not science. I left academia--more-or-les

Even if the author realizes that, it doesn't change the fact that what they are doing is mostly admin and management, not science. I left academia--more-or-less--after doing several post-docs and taking a hard look at an employment landscape where colleagues who were at least as good as me were taking offers from second- or third-teir institutions because that was all that was available. I knew some of them were profoundly lonely and struggling in those positions, outside of the charmed circle of the top teir they had comfortably inhabited for so long. Beyond that, there was the realization that unlike the profs who trained my generation, people my age pursuing tenure were rarely getting into the lab. They couldn't afford to. They had to stay relentlessly on the track of paper and grant generation, as well as committee work, if they wanted to succeed. I would be a really bad fit in that job. I got into science because I love the hands-on act of "disturbing the universe", in Freeman Dyson's memorable phrase, and even in the improbable event that I landed a tenure-track job (improbable in part because as a post-doc I tended to work on problems that interested me, rather than ones that would lead to lots of publications) I would end up spending most of my time doing stuff I wasn't very good at and didn't much enjoy. It's one thing to say that "every job has a certain amount of work involved" (there are always less appealing things you have to do in the name of the stuff you enjoy) but when a job is mostly stuff you aren't suited for, it's not a good idea to pursue it. This is the fundamental problem of modern academia: researchers are getting shunted into managers and administrators as soon as they get on tenure track. While the age they make the transition to tenure track is going up, the length of active research careers is going down. Hands-on research scientists who are active over the full length of their career are almost always in some kind of permanent research associate position, free from the vagaries of tenure and promotion. They are the people most of us who go into the sciences want to be, but the positions available for them are few and far between. We need serious, genuine academic reform so that there are more positions available for career scientists who do science, rather than careerists who transition to managers and administrators the moment they become assistant professors.

noedig 11y ago
This captures exactly the reason I am thinking about leaving academia. I got into research because I like doing research, but you can't have a career in research anymore. After completing a PhD, the only way to have a career is to spend all your time writing grant proposals, attending workshops, organizing meetings, cultivating useless collaborations, and promoting yourself. There is no time left for research, and teaching becomes a burden to avoid at all cost. You have to get PhD students and postdocs to do all the work, and take as much credit for their ideas and efforts as you can. Academia has become a dead-end job for people who want to do research.
- sporkenfang 11y ago
  I myself am worried about this. I have worked my ass off to get into the PhD program where I'm at, but in the end, what does a PhD in CS get me (outside academia) that an MS CS will not?
  - infinite8s 11y ago
    Fist-bumps when you interview at Google.
    - sporkenfang 11y ago
      :p thanks for that, I definitely needed the laugh. This shit has me wrapped around the axle, and it shouldn't be this important.
      - infinite8s 11y ago
        Well, it is important. 3 or 4 years of opportunity cost (especially when you are young) can really add up.
  - spiritplumber 11y ago
    I think it makes the other people in the room feel less awkward. I'm often the only person in the room without a PhD when I go see a customer. They usually want me to either fix something 10 minutes ago, prototype something next week, or invent something next month. I do. There are websites around that list me as having a PhD in my specialty (I just have a four year degree). Most recently, one aerospace organization flat out refused to correct their page because it looks less professional if I'm not listed with a degree I don't have. As far as advisors taking credit instead of their students... ten years ago I saved the life of an asshole and the conscience of a friend when said friend came to recruit me to be a spotter while he attempted to kill his advisor after he'd published something my friend wrote, under the advisor's name. I talked my friend into merely destroying the prof's car. I realize that I talk about violence a lot in my posts. It happens, it is part of life, it must be dealt with even in techie or academic circles. De-escalation sometimes requires causing a small amount of damage in order to prevent much greater damage. It's like felling a few trees to build a firebreak. I don't give a damn about the advisor, other than he's a human being and has the right to live his wretched life out, but I do know that my friend would've been haunted by his conscience all his life if he actually hurt someone... and haunted by his pride just as long if he didn't exact some form of revenge, because this is what our culture demanded.
bglazer 11y ago
> I left academia--more-or-less--after doing several post-docs and taking a hard look at an employment landscape where colleagues who were at least as good as me were taking offers from second- or third-teir institutions because that was all that was available. I knew some of them were profoundly lonely and struggling in those positions, outside of the charmed circle of the top teir they had comfortably inhabited for so long. Honest question, if your colleagues were "top tier" researchers, and they ended up at "second tier" schools, does that not somehow imply that those "second tier" institutions are more prestigious than their presumed "second tier" status? They obviously are able to recruit quality. I guess the real question that I'm trying to ask is why the obsession in academia (and HN) with segmenting institutions into "tiers"? It just seems odd and contradictory that academia would be so bent on self-imposing a caste system.
- infinite8s 11y ago
  It's a funnel. You can have many top tier researchers working as postdocs for top tier labs, but when it comes time to start your own lab there aren't many openings in top tier institutes. IE over the course of an academic lifetime, most principal investigators will train 10s of doctoral and postdoctoral researchers.

noedig 11y ago

This captures exactly the reason I am thinking about leaving academia. I got into research because I like doing research, but you can't have a career in research anymore. After completing a PhD, the only way to have a career is to spend all your time writing grant proposals, attending workshops, organizing meetings, cultivating useless collaborations, and promoting yourself. There is no time left for research, and teaching becomes a burden to avoid at all cost. You have to get PhD students and postdocs to do all the work, and take as much credit for their ideas and efforts as you can. Academia has become a dead-end job for people who want to do research.

sporkenfang 11y ago
I myself am worried about this. I have worked my ass off to get into the PhD program where I'm at, but in the end, what does a PhD in CS get me (outside academia) that an MS CS will not?
- infinite8s 11y ago
  Fist-bumps when you interview at Google.
  - sporkenfang 11y ago
    :p thanks for that, I definitely needed the laugh. This shit has me wrapped around the axle, and it shouldn't be this important.
    - infinite8s 11y ago
      Well, it is important. 3 or 4 years of opportunity cost (especially when you are young) can really add up.
- spiritplumber 11y ago
  I think it makes the other people in the room feel less awkward. I'm often the only person in the room without a PhD when I go see a customer. They usually want me to either fix something 10 minutes ago, prototype something next week, or invent something next month. I do. There are websites around that list me as having a PhD in my specialty (I just have a four year degree). Most recently, one aerospace organization flat out refused to correct their page because it looks less professional if I'm not listed with a degree I don't have. As far as advisors taking credit instead of their students... ten years ago I saved the life of an asshole and the conscience of a friend when said friend came to recruit me to be a spotter while he attempted to kill his advisor after he'd published something my friend wrote, under the advisor's name. I talked my friend into merely destroying the prof's car. I realize that I talk about violence a lot in my posts. It happens, it is part of life, it must be dealt with even in techie or academic circles. De-escalation sometimes requires causing a small amount of damage in order to prevent much greater damage. It's like felling a few trees to build a firebreak. I don't give a damn about the advisor, other than he's a human being and has the right to live his wretched life out, but I do know that my friend would've been haunted by his conscience all his life if he actually hurt someone... and haunted by his pride just as long if he didn't exact some form of revenge, because this is what our culture demanded.

bglazer 11y ago

> I left academia--more-or-less--after doing several post-docs and taking a hard look at an employment landscape where colleagues who were at least as good as me were taking offers from second- or third-teir institutions because that was all that was available. I knew some of them were profoundly lonely and struggling in those positions, outside of the charmed circle of the top teir they had comfortably inhabited for so long. Honest question, if your colleagues were "top tier" researchers, and they ended up at "second tier" schools, does that not somehow imply that those "second tier" institutions are more prestigious than their presumed "second tier" status? They obviously are able to recruit quality. I guess the real question that I'm trying to ask is why the obsession in academia (and HN) with segmenting institutions into "tiers"? It just seems odd and contradictory that academia would be so bent on self-imposing a caste system.

infinite8s 11y ago
It's a funnel. You can have many top tier researchers working as postdocs for top tier labs, but when it comes time to start your own lab there aren't many openings in top tier institutes. IE over the course of an academic lifetime, most principal investigators will train 10s of doctoral and postdoctoral researchers.