Baffled by U.S. high-skill immigration policy? A report issued by the Congressional Research Service on 11 May provides a clear, concise, balanced, and brief overview of the programs and policy issues in this highly contentious area, as well as a history of the legislation affecting it. One interesting fact: about 10% of the H-1B visas issued for 2011 were for work at universities. Another fact: though a number of bills to make changes in the current situation have been introduced, none has advanced as far as to clear a committee, which is a vital step toward a bill becoming law. In other words, nothing to bring about any changes has happened yet.
A small but poignant dramatic moment occurs whenever the researcher--young or old--opens the e-mail containing a decision letter about his or her latest research article and knows the fate of it has been largely decided by the advice of anonymous reviewers. Inevitably, we bless or curse those reviewers--but I suggest that you join them and do it early in your career.
May 14, 2012
A "Passing Comment" Becomes a Scientific Opportunity
Kathleen Bongiovanni is "pretty low on the totem pole" at the Seattle Children's Research Institute and, being a program manager, is not even technically a researcher. But a "passing comment" made by a senior medical expert gave her an idea that has already merited a $100,000 research grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. It may eventually be developed into a simple test that could save the lives of millions of premature babies in poor countries, reports Tom Paulson at Humanosphere, a website that reports on global health.
Nobody believed a young program manager like Bongiovanni could win a research grant from a prestigious foundation, but she applied anyway. Now she's preparing to begin her study and is even traveling to Uganda to look into organizing a pilot project there.
Bongiovanni's brainwave occurred when, during a meeting, neonatologist Tom Hansen, MD, mentioned a test for respiratory distress that can kill premature babies that was used early in his career, but which has now been superseded in the United States by high-tech monitoring methods. In the "old days," Hansen said, doctors tested babies for the conditions by mixing alcohol with fluid obtained by amniocentesis. If the mixture was bubbly, the baby's lungs were healthy. If not, the baby was in respiratory distress.
"My idea was to revamp the old test so that it can be used with oral fluid from a newborn's mouth," the article quotes Bongiovanni. "I thought to myself that this could be really useful in poor countries." Thanks to her gumption in applying for a Gates Grand Challenges grant, she now has the chance to find out. And if she's right, countless babies may survive infancy who otherwise wouldn't.
It's wonderful that something so cheap and simple might do so much good. And it's possibly even more wonderful that someone of low academic status, whose colleagues "expressed doubt" (to put it mildly, I'll bet) that she could succeed in attracting funding, will actually have the chance to put her elegant insight to the test. Who knows what brilliant ideas are hatching among people "not qualified" to receive funding? Here's hoping that Bongiovanni was right; not only about her chances of winning the grant, but about saving babies as well.
Nobody believed a young program manager like Bongiovanni could win a research grant from a prestigious foundation, but she applied anyway. Now she's preparing to begin her study and is even traveling to Uganda to look into organizing a pilot project there.
Bongiovanni's brainwave occurred when, during a meeting, neonatologist Tom Hansen, MD, mentioned a test for respiratory distress that can kill premature babies that was used early in his career, but which has now been superseded in the United States by high-tech monitoring methods. In the "old days," Hansen said, doctors tested babies for the conditions by mixing alcohol with fluid obtained by amniocentesis. If the mixture was bubbly, the baby's lungs were healthy. If not, the baby was in respiratory distress.
"My idea was to revamp the old test so that it can be used with oral fluid from a newborn's mouth," the article quotes Bongiovanni. "I thought to myself that this could be really useful in poor countries." Thanks to her gumption in applying for a Gates Grand Challenges grant, she now has the chance to find out. And if she's right, countless babies may survive infancy who otherwise wouldn't.
It's wonderful that something so cheap and simple might do so much good. And it's possibly even more wonderful that someone of low academic status, whose colleagues "expressed doubt" (to put it mildly, I'll bet) that she could succeed in attracting funding, will actually have the chance to put her elegant insight to the test. Who knows what brilliant ideas are hatching among people "not qualified" to receive funding? Here's hoping that Bongiovanni was right; not only about her chances of winning the grant, but about saving babies as well.
May 11, 2012
Making Safety Progress at UCLA
As the academic science world awaits the next development in the case against UCLA and Patrick Harran over the death of Sheri Sangji, chemical safety expert Russ Phifer has been looking at the efforts UCLA has been making to improve safety in its labs. Writing at Chemical & Engineering News, he reviews the work of the University of California's Center for Laboratory Safety, founded in the wake of the catastrophe. He also introduces Petros Yiannikouros, UCLA's new chemical hygeine officer, whose hiring, Phifer said, is part of UCLA's effort "to fundamentally change its safety culture."
After spending "a number of hours" with Yiannikouros, Phifer finds him not only technically well qualified but also "engaging, communicative, and fun to talk with"--all qualities needed to help him convince errant lab chiefs to change their ways. "It is clearly a challenge to get principal investigators to 'buy in' to structured safety behavior," Phifer writes, "but it looks like Yannikouros has the tools to do that at UCLA."
That's good news, and also ought to be an example to other institutions.
After spending "a number of hours" with Yiannikouros, Phifer finds him not only technically well qualified but also "engaging, communicative, and fun to talk with"--all qualities needed to help him convince errant lab chiefs to change their ways. "It is clearly a challenge to get principal investigators to 'buy in' to structured safety behavior," Phifer writes, "but it looks like Yannikouros has the tools to do that at UCLA."
That's good news, and also ought to be an example to other institutions.
Continue reading: Making Safety Progress at UCLA.
May 8, 2012
Finding Freedom and Resources in Federal Service
Where can a scientist in his early 30s make major advances in a cutting-edge field while enjoying stimulating colleagues, intellectual freedom, and the resources to take risks? According to a short article in the print Metro section of today's Washington Post, as well as a longer online piece, the answer is the federal government, specifically the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Gaithersburg, Maryland.
Continue reading: Finding Freedom and Resources in Federal Service.
Building a successful, lifelong career in a technical field requires the strategic development of a range of skills, a resilient network, and a solid professional reputation, John Meredith, former president of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA (IEEE-USA), advised on 5 May at the IEEE-USA annual conference in Cincinnati, Ohio. Meredith described how these principles helped him build his own successful, 40-year career with a number of prominent companies. While Meredith went through times of economic upheaval in specific industries, he has never been laid off, he said.
Now retired from a career that included work in nuclear energy and integrated circuits, Meredith remains an active volunteer at IEEE and a member of the board of the IEEE Foundation. His presentation was aimed at engineers but the ideas he outlined will serve anyone with advanced scientific or technical training who seeks a successful industrial career.
Now retired from a career that included work in nuclear energy and integrated circuits, Meredith remains an active volunteer at IEEE and a member of the board of the IEEE Foundation. His presentation was aimed at engineers but the ideas he outlined will serve anyone with advanced scientific or technical training who seeks a successful industrial career.
Continue reading: Building Lifelong Employability in an Uncertain Economy.
Richard Din, A 25-year-old research associate working in a San Francisco, California, Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center lab, died 28 April apparently due to a bacterial infection contracted at the lab. Details about the death were released last week and our sister publication, Science Insider, has full coverage.
Din was working with the bacterium Neisseria meningiditis, a biosafety level 2 pathogen that can trigger fatal meningococcal disease. It's not clear yet how Din became infected with N. meningiditis, nor is it known whether appropriate safety measures were in place and being followed. A preliminary internal investigation found no problems with the biosafety hood under which Din was studying the bacterium.
The lab remains closed while local and federal investigators from the VA, the Department of Public Health, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration carry out further inspections. Stay tuned for more details as they come available.
Din was working with the bacterium Neisseria meningiditis, a biosafety level 2 pathogen that can trigger fatal meningococcal disease. It's not clear yet how Din became infected with N. meningiditis, nor is it known whether appropriate safety measures were in place and being followed. A preliminary internal investigation found no problems with the biosafety hood under which Din was studying the bacterium.
The lab remains closed while local and federal investigators from the VA, the Department of Public Health, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration carry out further inspections. Stay tuned for more details as they come available.
Continue reading: Another Lab Death, This Time Due To Bacterial Infection.
May 4, 2012
Better Living Through Chemical Safety?
Actually, that headline is a take-off on the long-time Dupont slogan, but it encapsulates the possible result of a pilot program announced 31 April by the Dow chemical company and the University of Minnesota to improve safety in the university's chemistry and chemical engineering labs. As Jyllian Kemsley reports at Chemical & Engineering News, the program will focus on "building and sustaining a good safety culture," although "neither Down nor UMN comes to the program with the expectation that the university will duplicate Dow's safety program."
"This unique safety partnership"--in the words of a university release--will extend to through the summer and will try to address, among other issues, the training problems caused by the high rate of arrivals and departures in academic labs. The program will also involve a "Joint Safety Team" composed of safety officers from every chemical engineering and chemical research group on the campus and will expose university people to Dow's best practices, with the goal of adapting them to academic research.
With industry widely recognized as enforcing much higher lab safety standards than academic institutions, this effort appears to hold real promise for improving safety practices at UMN, and perhaps even as a model for other institutions. We will never how many hideous incidents the program may prevent, but the students, postdocs, and researchers who improve their practices because of it might wish to consider a paraphrase of another advertising slogan long popular in days gone by: The lives they save may be their own.
"This unique safety partnership"--in the words of a university release--will extend to through the summer and will try to address, among other issues, the training problems caused by the high rate of arrivals and departures in academic labs. The program will also involve a "Joint Safety Team" composed of safety officers from every chemical engineering and chemical research group on the campus and will expose university people to Dow's best practices, with the goal of adapting them to academic research.
With industry widely recognized as enforcing much higher lab safety standards than academic institutions, this effort appears to hold real promise for improving safety practices at UMN, and perhaps even as a model for other institutions. We will never how many hideous incidents the program may prevent, but the students, postdocs, and researchers who improve their practices because of it might wish to consider a paraphrase of another advertising slogan long popular in days gone by: The lives they save may be their own.
Continue reading: Better Living Through Chemical Safety?.
May 2, 2012
New Study: The Longer You're in a Ph.D. Program, the More You Look Outside Academia for Work
This blog post was edited on 7 May.
"We always assume that people want to get academic positions and not many get them, and so we think, 'Oh, they all want it and there's a big imbalance,' " says Henry Sauermann, a behavioral economist at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. "But maybe nobody really wants them. Maybe those people, when they've watched their advisers, have realized that it's a really tough job, not much time for research, a lot of time spent writing grants and so on. It could go either way. We don't really know what these preferences look like."
In a paper out today in the Public Library of Science ONE, Sauermann and his colleague Michael Roach, a decision scientist at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, weigh in with some findings that could be important for framing future discussions: As students progress through their doctoral programs, they become less and less likely to want an academic job after they graduate.
To find that out, the researchers surveyed 4109 Ph.D. students across 39 tier-one U.S. research universities on their career preferences and how attractive they viewed academic, industry, government, and other career options. The students were enrolled in the life sciences (59% of those surveyed), physics (23%), or chemistry (18%).
Sauermann and Roach found that, on average, students in the later stage of their Ph.D. programs (defined as those actively looking for a job or planning to do so within the next year), held less favorable views of faculty teaching and research jobs than did students in earlier stages. While faculty research was rated the overall most attractive career path for all respondents in both the life sciences and physics, the percentage of life sciences students who rated faculty-research positions as either "attractive" or "extremely attractive" fell from 78% in early-stage students to 67% in later-stage students. In physics, those numbers fell from 81% to 72%. In chemistry, where the majority of students rated industry jobs as "most attractive," those who rated faculty-research jobs as "attractive" or "extremely attractive" fell from 62% to 47%, while those who preferred a job in industry jumped from 70% in early-stage students to 76% in late-stage students.
Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology announced today at a joint press conference in Cambridge, Massachusetts, the launch of edX, a system of online courses that will be available to learners worldwide. MIT's previously announced MITx program has been folded into the new program, which will use an open-source platform and may eventually also carry courses from other institutions.
MITx made big news and launched much speculation and rumination earlier this year when it announced that it would allow online students to earn certificates for courses they successfully complete online through the program, after paying a small fee. Many observers have wondered what this new credential might do to the value of taking on-campus courses at MIT and other institutions around the world. In response to an question posed online by this reporter (and maybe others), MIT's Anant Agarwal, who will direct edX, said that the first MITx course, which is currently ongoing, allows students to earn grades and a completion certificate. He implied, but did not state outright, that the same would be true for edX courses.
A major theme of today's news conference was that edX will provide researchers the opportunity to study the mechanism of learning in order to strengthen education for students on the two Cambridge campuses. Speakers also noted that many details still need to be worked out, including a financing model for the non-profit undertaking.
MITx made big news and launched much speculation and rumination earlier this year when it announced that it would allow online students to earn certificates for courses they successfully complete online through the program, after paying a small fee. Many observers have wondered what this new credential might do to the value of taking on-campus courses at MIT and other institutions around the world. In response to an question posed online by this reporter (and maybe others), MIT's Anant Agarwal, who will direct edX, said that the first MITx course, which is currently ongoing, allows students to earn grades and a completion certificate. He implied, but did not state outright, that the same would be true for edX courses.
A major theme of today's news conference was that edX will provide researchers the opportunity to study the mechanism of learning in order to strengthen education for students on the two Cambridge campuses. Speakers also noted that many details still need to be worked out, including a financing model for the non-profit undertaking.
There will be a lot more to learn as this project unfolds, so stay tuned.
May 1, 2012
Keck Graduate Institute to Manage Affiliation Process for Professional Science Masters Programs
Beginning July 1, the Keck Graduate Institute (KGI) of Claremont, California, will house the office that manages review of graduate programs for official recognition and affiliation as Professional Science Masters (PSM) programs, gathers information about programs and their graduates, and controls use of the registered PSM logo. KGI won the contract to run the office handling these functions, which have until now been carried out by the Council of Graduate Schools (CGS).
As James Sterling of KGI, and Carol Lynch and Sally Francis of CGS, explain in an article in the May issue of the CGS Grad Edge newsletter, affiliation with the PSM program does not constitute accreditation of curricula and programs, but rather recognition that they comply with a set of formal guidelines that have been developed by CGS.
Full-scale, separate accreditation of PSM programs, apart from the overall accreditation of the their home institutions, is not necessary, the article asserts. "The PSM is a professional degree but there is no single clearly-identified profession that graduates enter, and there is no single profession whose interests warrant licensure of PSM graduates or accreditation of this degree. Therefore, in contrast to many professions, there is no need for an independent accreditation organization. Similarly, there is no single type of risk that is presented to the customers of the employers of PSM graduates that could lead to a specific form of malpractice, the need for licensing, or the need for specific continuing education requirements for PSM graduates."
There does exist, however, "a perceived need to ensure that a new program [calling itself a PSM program] meets [the official guidelines] and that some form of re-affiliation review system be in place" to guarantee that existing programs continue to meet them as well. The new office at KGI will carry out these functions. It will also manage the www.sciencemasters.com website used as the central repository for information about PSM programs.
Hallmarks of PSM programs, which generally run two years, include close cooperation with advisers from industry, extensive mentored experience for students in industrial settings, and a curriculum that combines study of both a scientific discipline with study of business, management, regulatory affairs, or other topics relevant to a specific science-based industry. About 250 PSMs currently exist, up from 80 in 2006. In the academic year 2010-2011, 173 graduates received PSM degrees, and about 5500 students were enrolled in programs at the beginning of the current academic year.
In addition, the new office at KGI will continue efforts to increase awareness of the PSM degree and its benefits among both potential students and company human resources officials nationally, KGI president Sheldon Schuster told Science Careers in an interview.
As James Sterling of KGI, and Carol Lynch and Sally Francis of CGS, explain in an article in the May issue of the CGS Grad Edge newsletter, affiliation with the PSM program does not constitute accreditation of curricula and programs, but rather recognition that they comply with a set of formal guidelines that have been developed by CGS.
Full-scale, separate accreditation of PSM programs, apart from the overall accreditation of the their home institutions, is not necessary, the article asserts. "The PSM is a professional degree but there is no single clearly-identified profession that graduates enter, and there is no single profession whose interests warrant licensure of PSM graduates or accreditation of this degree. Therefore, in contrast to many professions, there is no need for an independent accreditation organization. Similarly, there is no single type of risk that is presented to the customers of the employers of PSM graduates that could lead to a specific form of malpractice, the need for licensing, or the need for specific continuing education requirements for PSM graduates."
There does exist, however, "a perceived need to ensure that a new program [calling itself a PSM program] meets [the official guidelines] and that some form of re-affiliation review system be in place" to guarantee that existing programs continue to meet them as well. The new office at KGI will carry out these functions. It will also manage the www.sciencemasters.com website used as the central repository for information about PSM programs.
Hallmarks of PSM programs, which generally run two years, include close cooperation with advisers from industry, extensive mentored experience for students in industrial settings, and a curriculum that combines study of both a scientific discipline with study of business, management, regulatory affairs, or other topics relevant to a specific science-based industry. About 250 PSMs currently exist, up from 80 in 2006. In the academic year 2010-2011, 173 graduates received PSM degrees, and about 5500 students were enrolled in programs at the beginning of the current academic year.
In addition, the new office at KGI will continue efforts to increase awareness of the PSM degree and its benefits among both potential students and company human resources officials nationally, KGI president Sheldon Schuster told Science Careers in an interview.
May 1, 2012
Penn Closes the Postdoc Salary Gap
Like many upstanding universities, the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia has long aspired to take good care of its postdocs. That includes paying them decently. But, also like other universities, it had a ways to go to achieve that objective.
Penn's stated goal has been to close the gap between the stipends that National Institutes of Health (NIH) NRSA postdoctoral fellows receive and what employee postdocs--most of whom are paid from research grants--receive.
According to a post by Steven J. Fluharty, Penn's Senior Vice Provost for Research, the university's minimum postdoctoral stipend from 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013 will be exactly the same as current NRSA stipend levels.
It must be mentioned that these stipends remain absurdly low relative to postdocs' skills and training. That's evidence of postdocs' commitment to science, and of a glut of expert labor that threatens to turn science into a low-wage profession: a dangerous and scary possibility. But it still represents significant progress.
Yet, it's troubling to note that despite their sacrifices--which most make in anticipation of an academic career--only a minority of these postdocs will ever attain a tenure-track faculty post at a college or university.
Penn's stated goal has been to close the gap between the stipends that National Institutes of Health (NIH) NRSA postdoctoral fellows receive and what employee postdocs--most of whom are paid from research grants--receive.
According to a post by Steven J. Fluharty, Penn's Senior Vice Provost for Research, the university's minimum postdoctoral stipend from 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013 will be exactly the same as current NRSA stipend levels.
It must be mentioned that these stipends remain absurdly low relative to postdocs' skills and training. That's evidence of postdocs' commitment to science, and of a glut of expert labor that threatens to turn science into a low-wage profession: a dangerous and scary possibility. But it still represents significant progress.
Yet, it's troubling to note that despite their sacrifices--which most make in anticipation of an academic career--only a minority of these postdocs will ever attain a tenure-track faculty post at a college or university.
May 1, 2012
How to Craft a Winning Application
How can you make your application for that grant, fellowship, job, or award stand out from the great pile of other applications the judges will read? Hester Blum of Penn State University has read more than (gasp!) 740 such documents in the past year, and she offers some sage, judge's-eye-view advice on how to catch her attention at Inside Higher Ed.
Some major points:
But don't take it from me. Read her own specific and detailed advice here.
Some major points:
- Be specific and give examples. How, exactly, will you use the money or equipment or whatever? Clearly the judges already know you believe you're qualified and deserving, but exactly why should they agree?
- Make sure the people who write your recommendations actually know your work, not just your personality. The judges are sure you're a swell person, but that isn't why they're giving the award.
- Only list things on your CV that have actually happened. That paper under consideration at the International Journal of Really Prestigious Research might never see print or pixels.
But don't take it from me. Read her own specific and detailed advice here.
April 30, 2012
Even More on Women (and Men) Opting Out of Academic Science
Women scientists in the United Kingdom find academic careers far less attractive than do their male counterparts, according to a report, 'The chemistry PhD: The impact on women's retention', that was issued jointly by the UK Resource Centre for Women in Science, Engineering and Technology (UKRC) and the Royal Society of Chemistry in 2008. No surprise there for people who have been following the research into the experiences and aspirations of women scientists on this side of the Pond. A peripheral comment Curt Rice, vice president for research at the University of Tromsø in Norway, recently made on the report at Inside Higher Ed, however, brought the document to my attention.
The British study arrived at the same conclusions as the researchers whom I quoted on the subject elsewhere on Science Careers this very month: many women qualified for careers in academic science decide against them because of the conflict they see between pursuing a faculty position and having a family. There's at least one difference between the American and British findings, though: 'The chemistry PhD' uses the term "repellant" to describe how some women chemists perceive the "'all-consuming' nature of a career in academia." The American researchers used milder terms to convey the distaste that many of their female subjects expressed at the prospect of competing for a faculty post and for tenure.
Rice is particularly concerned about another of the British report's findings, which he finds "alarming": Early in their Ph.D. education, over 70% of women and over 60% of men hope for research careers, whether in academe or industry. By the time they are nearing the end of their Ph.D. programs, those hoping for academic research careers amount to 12% of the women and 21% of the men.
I can certainly understand his dismay at the gender gap in the percentage of new Ph.D.s wanting to persevere into academic careers. But from another standpoint, these figures look like good news.
The figures are still way above the percentage of new Ph.D.s who have any realistic chance of landing a job on the tenure track (at least in the United States). Thinking about the welfare of the young scientists who have devoted many years to preparing for their careers and are about to begin them, it does not appear "alarming" to me that they have traded in their formerly unrealistic notion about the possibility of landing an academic post.
Rice finds the situation "alarming", he explains, because he fears that "universities will not survive as research institutions...because we have no reason to believe we are attracting the best and the brightest." Rice puts a great emphasis on the necessity to improve the experience of Ph.D. students and recognizes young scientists' concerns about having to go through a string of postdoc positions and face competitiveness in this stage of their careers. But did he miss the part of the report that mentions the "fierce competition to secure a permanent post" in academe? Or the passage that explains that this level of competition exists because "there are many more PhD students and post-docs than there are permanent [faculty] posts"? Isn't it the universities themselves that admit students in numbers they know far exceed the academic career opportunities available to their alumni?
So why shouldn't we cheer the fact that young people appear to realize that they should adjust their aspirations to the reality of the circumstances they will face? Isn't it the responsibility of universities to prepare their students for the world that they will find rather than one that their professors wish existed?
The fact that the majority of Ph.D. students understand that they will not make their careers as faculty researchers-despite the prevalent pro-academe bias in so many university departments-doesn't strike me as "alarming" but as encouraging, even a sign of progress. It means that these soon-to-be Ph.D.s can devote their energies not to pursuing a goal that will only end in frustration and disappointment but to making the informed plans that will, one hopes, lead them to careers and lives that they find satisfying and fulfilling.
The British study arrived at the same conclusions as the researchers whom I quoted on the subject elsewhere on Science Careers this very month: many women qualified for careers in academic science decide against them because of the conflict they see between pursuing a faculty position and having a family. There's at least one difference between the American and British findings, though: 'The chemistry PhD' uses the term "repellant" to describe how some women chemists perceive the "'all-consuming' nature of a career in academia." The American researchers used milder terms to convey the distaste that many of their female subjects expressed at the prospect of competing for a faculty post and for tenure.
Rice is particularly concerned about another of the British report's findings, which he finds "alarming": Early in their Ph.D. education, over 70% of women and over 60% of men hope for research careers, whether in academe or industry. By the time they are nearing the end of their Ph.D. programs, those hoping for academic research careers amount to 12% of the women and 21% of the men.
I can certainly understand his dismay at the gender gap in the percentage of new Ph.D.s wanting to persevere into academic careers. But from another standpoint, these figures look like good news.
The figures are still way above the percentage of new Ph.D.s who have any realistic chance of landing a job on the tenure track (at least in the United States). Thinking about the welfare of the young scientists who have devoted many years to preparing for their careers and are about to begin them, it does not appear "alarming" to me that they have traded in their formerly unrealistic notion about the possibility of landing an academic post.
Rice finds the situation "alarming", he explains, because he fears that "universities will not survive as research institutions...because we have no reason to believe we are attracting the best and the brightest." Rice puts a great emphasis on the necessity to improve the experience of Ph.D. students and recognizes young scientists' concerns about having to go through a string of postdoc positions and face competitiveness in this stage of their careers. But did he miss the part of the report that mentions the "fierce competition to secure a permanent post" in academe? Or the passage that explains that this level of competition exists because "there are many more PhD students and post-docs than there are permanent [faculty] posts"? Isn't it the universities themselves that admit students in numbers they know far exceed the academic career opportunities available to their alumni?
So why shouldn't we cheer the fact that young people appear to realize that they should adjust their aspirations to the reality of the circumstances they will face? Isn't it the responsibility of universities to prepare their students for the world that they will find rather than one that their professors wish existed?
The fact that the majority of Ph.D. students understand that they will not make their careers as faculty researchers-despite the prevalent pro-academe bias in so many university departments-doesn't strike me as "alarming" but as encouraging, even a sign of progress. It means that these soon-to-be Ph.D.s can devote their energies not to pursuing a goal that will only end in frustration and disappointment but to making the informed plans that will, one hopes, lead them to careers and lives that they find satisfying and fulfilling.
April 30, 2012
New Award Will Egg On Federally-Funded Scientists
The late Senator William Proxmire (D-Wisconsin) used to ridicule federally-funded research he considered frivolous by periodically announcing to the media that a certain scientist had won his highly publicized--and controversial--Golden Fleece Award for wasteful government spending. Now, a trio of congressmen (Jim Cooper, D-Tennessee, Charlie Dent, R-Pennsylvania, and Robert Dold, R-Illinois) and a gaggle of high-powered organizations are offering awards to apparently quirky federally-funded research projects-but, rather than to denigrate them, this time to celebrate the handsome payoffs they produced in the long run.
The Golden Goose Award are to be presented to celebrate "the often unexpected and serendipitous nature of basic scientific research by honoring federally funded researchers whose work may once have been viewed as unusual, odd or obscure, but has produced important discoveries benefitting [sic] society in significant ways," according to a press release that was issued jointly by Cooper's office and the Association of American Universities on 25 April. "The name of the award is based on the fable about the goose that laid the golden egg," the release explains.
Know of researchers who you think fit that description? You can nominate them for the honor. Nomination forms are available by writing to info@goldengooseaward.org.
Proxmire, by the way, did relent on some of his Golden Fleece choices, acknowledging that despite their apparent obscurity and risibility, the projects did produce worthwhile outcomes, as Mitch Smith reports at Inside Higher Ed.
The Golden Goose Award are to be presented to celebrate "the often unexpected and serendipitous nature of basic scientific research by honoring federally funded researchers whose work may once have been viewed as unusual, odd or obscure, but has produced important discoveries benefitting [sic] society in significant ways," according to a press release that was issued jointly by Cooper's office and the Association of American Universities on 25 April. "The name of the award is based on the fable about the goose that laid the golden egg," the release explains.
Know of researchers who you think fit that description? You can nominate them for the honor. Nomination forms are available by writing to info@goldengooseaward.org.
Proxmire, by the way, did relent on some of his Golden Fleece choices, acknowledging that despite their apparent obscurity and risibility, the projects did produce worthwhile outcomes, as Mitch Smith reports at Inside Higher Ed.
