As I mentioned in my first blog posting on this site, after finishing my PhD, I left academics. And I know I’m not the only one – I can think of a few recent PhDs grads that I know that left academics, either voluntarily or because they couldn’t find postdoc or faculty positions.
At first blush, it seems kinda crazy to spend 11 years in postsecondary education, only to leave the hunt for the job that a PhD is ostensibly preparing you for. But the job prospects in academics are, quite frankly, bleak. First of all, after spending more than a decade in post-secondary education, becoming highly skilled and educated, if you are lucky enough to find a postdoc position, you’ll get paid somewhere around $33,000 to $37,000 (before taxes), and you’ll probably have to move to someplace you aren’t necessarily interested in living. Then you’ll spend 2, 3, 4, or possibly more years as a postdoc, during which time you won’t get a raise, you may not have any benefits, and you’ll probably have to write several applications to try to maintain your salary. I know some people who had to supplement their postdoc salary by taking on college or university classes to teach which, of course, eats into the time you have available to do research, making it harder to get the grants you need do more research and, ultimately, secure a faculty position. The average age to get one’s first operating grant in the US1 is 42 years old, up from 34 years old in 19802! Even if you manage to get one of the rare tenure-track positions, for which you probably had to uproot your life and move yet again to some place you may or may not really want to live, it generally takes 7 years to get tenure, which means that by the time you have some sense of job security, you’re into your 40s. And I say job “security” lightly – you still have to apply for new grants for the rest of your career! Seriously, I’ve worked with profs in their 60s who worked countless evenings and weekends, and experienced extreme stress, trying to secure their grant. Losing a grant means not only being unable to continue your research, but also being unable to pay the salaries of your staff. It’s stressful.
It was seeing these kinds of things that prompted my decision to leave academics. When I was approaching the end of my PhD, I actually did apply for postdocs. I wasn’t 100% sure it really was the career path I wanted to follow, after having seen what the life of an average prof was like – constant stress to write research grant applications and publish papers, losing faculty positions after investing a further decade+ after their PhD in the academic career path3 – but I was willing to give it a try because there were some really cool research projects I was interested in being part of and because I’d spent six years developing the skills to be a research scientist. I was offered two postdoc positions – one at McGill and one at Stanford, the latter of which I accepted. But then, five days before my PhD defense, the funding for that postdoc position fell through. And to me, that was the straw that broke the camel’s back. It really reinforced all the things about the bleakness of the research funding and academic situation that I feared. And so I made the decision that the academic life was not the life for me.
So what does a PhD do when they decide to leave academics? I’ll be talking about that in my next posting!
For further reading:
- Real Lives and White Lies in the Funding of Scientific Research: The granting system turns young scientists into bureaucrats and then betrays them – discusses what it’s like to be a new faculty member and why some people leave science
- Leaving Academia – a blog dedicated discussing the issues of PhDs leaving the academic world
Great post Beth.
SOme more reasons for leaving academia:
the academic environment seems to breed a type of arrogance in many (obviously not all…many academics are incredibly kind, modest people and among my best friends). As one PhD I know put it, the job depends on people’s insecurities. Not a great working environment…
Another is family. As a woman, childrearing often begins at about the same time that the PhD is done, and though it is possible to have young children and be a young academic, I don’t think it is possible for MOST of us to do both well.
I think a lot of the best and brightest, most innovative, people oriented, business oriented PhDs are working elsewhere. The question is – does this matter?
I think what you wrote about is what so many PhDs struggle with….all this training, but such a bleak looking future as an academic scientist that it doesn’t seem worth it. It seems to me that other countries and some institutions (e.g.: Australia) treat post docs differently….at least, I know of a few postings that pay post docs MUCH more than in Canada, they have benefits, it’s like a real job! Why can’t Canada follow that model: pay and treat post docs for what they are – trained, talented, scientists.
Excellent points, Judy. I remember a prof when I was doing my Masters degree lamenting that so many bright scientists he’d seen leaving research for medicine/rehab/etc. because in those professions, taking 6 months to a year off to have a kid doesn’t result in you getting too far beyond your leading edge field to catch up. And your question “does it matter?” is also a good one. I certainly don’t think all PhD-trained scientists should necessarily be researchers/academics. I think the world would be better off if we had more scientists in politics/health care/education/etc. But wouldn’t it be better if people didn’t feel like they had to choose between having a family and being an academic, or feel forced out of academics because the $33K postdoc wasn’t anywhere near enough to pay off the $70K in student loans they racked up getting their education or because there just isn’t enough research money/tenure track faculty positions?
Lisa – I didn’t know that about Australia. I will have to take a closer look at that continent!
Judy… I can’t resist responding to the insecurities comment. A friend of mine forwarded me an article the other day as the “most read” article in the Journal of Cell Science entitled: “The importance of stupidity in scientific research” – it touches this issues and is something I plan to write on in a couple of weeks time.
It’s not hopeless though folks, in fact, it’s the way it’s supposed to be… the fact is, your PI should only be training 1-2 “replacements” over their entire career – everyone elese should be doing something else – this is one of the key issues that our group (and this blog) will touch on. Why are we all being prepared to engage a career path that only ~10% of us will actually take up? Everyone who leaves is seen as a failure, and while that is true in some cases, the vast majority of motivated and clever people that don’t do the PI thing, find themselves in extremely challenging and rewarding careers. Did they see it coming though?? Not with the current state of training….
Stay tuned – and keep these comments coming!
Pingback: Dave Riddell (pathways) 's status on Friday, 13-Nov-09 13:39:29 UTC - Identi.ca
Tt’s a shame that even though most trainees don’t become PIs they are deemed failures. This change in careers has been going on for a while, why are supervisors still surprised when it happens to them? Wouldn’t it be great if we could all be honest with each other in the lab. “I don’t think you’ll make a good PI” said the lab head. “That’s ok, I’ve decided it’s not for me anyways” replied the student.
For those people who still see some hope in academia here is a good article about how to succeed in science (esp. good to forward to happy, newbie grads).
http://www.nature.com/nrm/journal/v9/n5/abs/nrm2389.html
p.s. Dave, love the stupidity article
Please get a life and do something you enjoy doing ! Everyone realize that you don’t go into science expecting to be rich and most PhDs do not become PIs. A PhD is a wondeful degree that can open many doors, some will be PIs (maybe 20%), some will be teaching undergrads, some will go into biotech, join the civil service, start their own business or become clinician-researchers. And there will be many who would choose to be a research associate witha nother PI (an altogether respectable but under-appreciated option). As a postdoctoral researcher in teh biomedical field, I am just highlighting the amny career choices of fellow PhD students that I have interacted with over all tehse years. Grad students should not believe that each and every one of them is destined to become a PI. I think there is a mismatch between reality and expectations here which needs to be cleared up. Science is a multi-faceted trans-disciplinary field, we have to find our own niche and make the most of it. Academia is not the only way, and there is nothing shameful in admitting this.
PS- Most postdos in the biomedical field seem to earn around ~40K (that is the CIHR recommended amount), so, if you are getting 33K, maybe it is time for a chat with your PI.
I think you’ve hit on something really important here, Agatha & SubC. As Dave mentioned in one of his postings, a PI really only needs to train 1-2 PhDs who will go onto be PIs, so the rest of us will go on to other careers – yet there is this belief that we are “failures” for doing so. I’ve had people say that to me in so many words. So while I am perfectly happy with the choice I’ve made, I think there are a lot of people out there who don’t know what their options other than being a PI are or are miserable, doing multiple postdocs while trying to get a faculty position for fear of being a “failure” if they choose to do otherwise.
Please get a life and do something you enjoy doing !… an odd comment given that this is precisely why people chose to do a PhD and then consider doing a postdoc
Everyone realize that you don’t go into science expecting to be rich… there’s a difference between being rich and having a reasonable wage relative to years of education and experience in a chosen profession
and most PhDs do not become PIs… correct, that’s what PhD students/postdocs are talking about
A PhD is a wondeful degree that can open many doors, some will be PIs (maybe 20%), some will be teaching undergrads, some will go into biotech, join the civil service, start their own business or become clinician-researchers. And there will be many who would choose to be a research associate witha nother PI (an altogether respectable but under-appreciated option). As a postdoctoral researcher in teh biomedical field, I am just highlighting the amny career choices of fellow PhD students that I have interacted with over all tehse years. Grad students should not believe that each and every one of them is destined to become a PI. I think there is a mismatch between reality and expectations here which needs to be cleared up. Science is a multi-faceted trans-disciplinary field, we have to find our own niche and make the most of it. Academia is not the only way, and there is nothing shameful in admitting this… a nice statement of what the current PhD/postdoc training environment SHOULD be but isn’t. Under the current environment your PhD coursework is oriented towards becoming an academic/technical expert in your chosen field with little to no ability for taking subjects that would widen the applicability/experience of a PhD graduate for society’s benefit. Similar for postdocs who are expected to set up systems, get data, publish papers, repeat with little to no opportunity to expand their thinking/experience into non-academic areas.
PS- Most postdos in the biomedical field seem to earn around ~40K (that is the CIHR recommended amount), so, if you are getting 33K, maybe it is time for a chat with your PI… there is no enforcement for PIs to pay CIHR recommended wages so some don’t. And chatting with them about a pay increase often doesn’t achieve much. There needs to be a transparent system for ensuring a fair wages with appropriate pay increases.
In short, the PhD/postdoc system needs to be updated to ensure appropriate wages with at least cost-of-living increases (preferably increases relating to experience too). The education framework has to change also to reflect what WE ALL KNOW about the likelihood of becoming a PI… e.g. the option during a PhD or postdoc to obtain experience outside the lab to better contribute/compete when undertaking non-academic positions. The trouble is, this would take time away from generating papers and that doesn’t fly as things stand now.