Aaron,
While it is obvious that you believe you have had a horrible and unfair
academic experience at the hands of your academic "bosses" and the
institutions that support them, perhaps it is somewhat past time to point
out a couple of salient facts. The most important of these is that you
spent your PhD and 4 years of post doc at the same University, in the same
Department, perhaps even in the same lab (it is difficult to tell from
your CV), within a College of Medicine. While there are undoubtedly
issues in academia that need to be addressed (and I agree with Tom that
the most critical is the continued abdication of responsibility for
education at all levels by State governments), and occasionally you do
strike upon a good point, it is ludicrous to suggest that your horrible
personal experience, again, limited to one Department in one University,
in a College of Medicine, is even remotely representative of the
conditions experienced, or likely to be experienced, by most of the 14k
subscribers to Ecolog, or even representative of those experienced at your
institution. It is important to note in this context that
Schools/Colleges of Medicine are a whole different academic beast from
your average Biology, or Ecology and Evolution Department, and I think it
displays a level of hubris to think that this significantly less than vast
experience, largely gained outside the community which Ecolog serves,
somehow gives you insight into the workings of the whole of academia, or
even of the Ecological (writ large) academic community. No one can deny
your feelings in these matters, and your case may serve as a good abject
lesson, but I would argue that any positive points you might make in this
context are made moot by the sheer volume of hyperbole in which you
consistently engage.
Bill
William J. Resetarits, Jr
Professor
Department of Biological Sciences
Texas Tech University
Lubbock, Texas 79409-3131
Phone: (806) 742-2710, ext.300
Fax (806) 742-2963
On 10/21/12 12:37 PM, "Aaron T. Dossey" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Mentoring is a verb, an action verb. For the "hands-off" approach, I
>submit that programs need to offer Ph.D. experiences without assigned
>faculty bosses. If a student, or especially a postdoc (you know,
>someone 30 years old with an advanced degree who has been studying 10+
>years already) is self-motivated and capable of working independently,
>they have no need for a faculty "advisor". They should be able to come
>to the program, conduct their study, write it up to the satisfaction of
>a committee and leave. In the "hands-off mentoring" system, it is
>literally an indentured servitude for only the benefit of the faculty
>boss in the form of cheap labor and some free intellectual property.
>
>Why not have a system of advisory committees in graduate school rather
>than students being tied to (the property of?) an individual faculty
>boss? Wouldn't this be much more robust of an educational experience?
>Of course the federal funding structure would need to change, but it's
>high time for that on many levels.
>
>Hopefully soon it will become clear that there is both a need and a
>tremendous pent-up potential benefit for institutions to start doing
>this sort of thing for postdocs. The first institutions that allow a
>space, facility access and a small fund to half or more of their
>postdocs to come for a short time to establish their own research
>programs will have an advantage head and shoulders above those who are
>still back on the old pyramid scheme.
>
>"Hands-off mentoring" is primarily just a copout for opportunists to
>use. Maybe in rare cases, a faculty boss has a genuine interest to work
>with their students and postdocs but sees the need to let them run free
>for periods of time - but in my experience that is rare. I say this
>because I have seen many students (including myself when I was one) and
>postdocs (not me) who floundered and were indesperate need of guidence
>in their research for months at a time and the bosses were nowhere to be
>found. However, I have seen those same bosses, and others, be gone for
>similar periods and learn of a side project the student/postdoc was
>doing (you know - when I did what the boss said and it didn't work, I
>have to look out for my own career, so it's incumbent on me to do
>something successful even if I have to create it on my own).... then the
>boss says "be sure to put my name on that"..... In some cases, all the
>while (in both of the mentioned circumstances above) those bosses have
>outside-of-the-lab "collaborations" where they are proofreading papers
>from other labs and getting their names tacked on - while the lab
>research suffers somehow these faculty bosses still look "productive".
>I submit that this is a all too common tragedy that calls for major
>reform.
>
>http://allthingsbugs.com/about/people/
>
>
>
>
>On 10/21/2012 10:42 AM, Resetarits, William wrote:
>> Well said on all counts (note I am a couple of posts behind already! -
>> this is in response to Tom's original post).
>>
>> The advisor-advisee relationship is like most others, it is about "fit."
>> One size does not fit all, which is why it is difficult for Universities
>> to "screen" advisors a priori, as has been suggested. What works for
>>one
>> student does not necessarily work for another, so one person's lousy
>> advisor may provide just what another needs. Students needs vary, as do
>> professors capacities. There are undoubtedly professors out there that
>> should not take on students, but there has been good advice on how to
>> prescreen for that, and, yes, Universities can be lax in recognizing
>>such
>> situations. But, it is equally important to keep in mind the overall
>> environment of the "lab" and the program. While the choice of advisor
>>may
>> be the most critical decision, often this larger environment provides as
>> much support as the advisor and students often learn as much (or more)
>> from the larger environment created within a "lab", or among a set of
>> interacting "labs," as they do directly from their advisor or from
>> structured learning. Look for an environment where students are
>>genuinely
>> excited about what they are doing, and can tell you about their own work
>> with clarity and enthusiasm. What made a great graduate student
>>experience
>> for me was being surrounded by bright, energetic people who were
>> interested in the same things (writ large) as I was.
>>
>> Tom's second point was right on the mark as well. No degree,
>> undergraduate or graduate, is a guarantee of a job in that field. It
>> comes down to performance. It is extremely competitive out there,
>> especially for academic jobs. One reason for care in picking an
>> advisor/program is to have a good graduate student experience, the other
>> (and more critical) is to allow you to get the best out of yourself and
>> make yourself competitive for the kind of job you envision as your
>>life's
>> work. It is the same whether you are a sculptor, architect, musician,
>>or
>> scientist - you have to strive to be the best at what you do. Then,
>>even
>> if you fall short of you loftiest goals, you still have created many
>>more
>> options for yourself.
>>
>> And on the general subject of academia. As Malcolm pointed out, most
>>grad
>> students don't have a clue as to all that is involved in being an
>>academic
>> (or they might not consider it at all!). And to quote my own advisor
>>"not
>> all graduate students are larval professors." Nor should they be; there
>> are lots of options out there. But despite the thousand daily
>> frustrations of academia and all the things that get between you and
>>what
>> you really got into this for, that is to do science and convey that
>> excitement to students, I, for one, can't imagine doing anything else.
>>
>> William J. Resetarits, Jr
>> Professor
>> Department of Biological Sciences
>> Texas Tech University
>> Lubbock, Texas 79409-3131
>> Phone: (806) 742-2710, ext.300
>> Fax (806) 742-2963
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/18/12 9:03 PM, "Thomas J. Givnish" <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> I'm very sorry to see that a few folks have had bad experiences in grad
>>> school. Many of us had very happy and productive times as graduate
>>> students. But I've seen enough over the years to recognize that faults
>>>in
>>> advisors, or in advisees, or both can result in mediocre to bad
>>>outcomes
>>> most often for the advisee, but sometimes for the advisor as well.
>>>
>>> I did, however, want to comment on the statement that
>>>
>>> "When we graduate, we have more or less the same credentials as
>>>everyone
>>> else (with) a degree."
>>>
>>>
>>> If you intend to pursue an academic career in research, nothing could
>>>be
>>> further than the truth. In cases where large numbers of recently minted
>>> Ph.D.'s or post-docs apply for several jobs in the same field, often
>>>the
>>> same, relatively few individuals get to short lists and are interviewed
>>> across the country. Applicants whose Ph.D. research (and subsequent
>>>work)
>>> are perceived to have significant, novel implications and be scalable
>>> to future endeavors, and fundable by NSF or other agencies or
>>>foundations
>>> are much more likely to be interviewed and offered jobs. That is what
>>> search committees look for. Not that search committees never make
>>> mistakes; they do, sometimes egregiously. A Ph.D. gets you in the door
>>>to
>>> submit an application, but you need excellent research, combined with
>>> strong writing and oral presentation skills, ability to think on your
>>> feet, and empathy to interact well with students and colleagues, to
>>>have
>>> a real chance of success at landing a job at first- or second-tier
>>> universities.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thomas J. Givnish
>>> Henry Allan Gleason Professor of Botany
>>> University of Wisconsin
>>>
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://botany.wisc.edu/givnish/Givnish/Welcome.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/18/12, brandi gartland wrote:
>>>> As I am currently deciding on whether to enter a PhD program vs.
>>>> consulting work/career position, I am finding this feed quite
>>>> informative and wanted to respond to:
>>>>
>>>> "When we graduate, we have more or less the same credentials as
>>>> everyone else a degree. There are many successful scientists without
>>>> Ph.D.'s but many more with Ph.D.'s who are unemployed."
>>>>
>>>> I immediately thought of sharing this documentary, as it illustrates
>>>> this very point as well as other ideas:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>http://www.knowledgeoftoday.org/2012/02/education-college-conspiracy-ex
>>>>po
>>>> sed.html
>>>>
>>>> -It illustrates how the U.S. educational system is not what it used to
>>>> be and "exposes the facts and truth about America's college education
>>>> system. It was was produced over a six-month period by NIA's team of
>>>> expert Austrian economists with the help of thousands of NIA members
>>>>who
>>>> contributed their ideas and personal stories for the film. NIA
>>>>believes
>>>> the U.S. college education system is a scam that turns vulnerable
>>>>young
>>>> Americans into debt slaves for life."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes for us all in life, love, work, and happiness.
>>>>
>>>> Brandi
>>>> M.S. Candidate Avian Sciences
>>>> University of California, Davis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 10:29:21 -0700
>>>>> From: [email protected]
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] "The Audacity of Graduate School"
>>>>> To: [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 6:40 AM, Aaron T. Dossey <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> When we graduate, we have more or less the same credentials as
>>>> everyone else
>>>>>> - a degree. There are many successful scientists without Ph.D.'s
>>>> but many
>>>>>> more with Ph.D.'s who are unemployed.
>>>>> Can you make a rough estimate of the relative frequencies of each.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, to emphasize how little we get out of
>>>>>> a Ph.D. (a lot is stolen from us), we don't get credit for our work
>>>> or
>>>>>> publications because the professor always gets credit for
>>>> everything we do
>>>>>> while in their lab as a student or postdoc (which is something I am
>>>> fighting
>>>>>> on other fronts - I call it institutionalized intellectual property
>>>> theft).
>>>>> Isn't that taken care of by the first author/last author distinction?
>>>>> A PI may get some undeserved credit, but that's different from the
>>>>> student not getting credit. The paper is still cited as Student et
>>>>>al.
>>>>> Or are you talking about taking the student's idea outright?
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, if you believe that grad students are employees to the point of
>>>>> needing a union and thinking of their advisor as their boss, I would
>>>>> point out that people who do creative work as employees rarely keep
>>>>> the rights to their work. Typically, the intellectual property
>>>>>belongs
>>>>> to their employer ("work done for hire"). Isn't it better to say that
>>>>> grad students are not employees?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -------------
>>>>> Jane Shevtsov, Ph.D.
>>>>> Mathematical Biology Curriculum Writer, UCLA
>>>>> co-founder, www.worldbeyondborders.org
>>>>>
>>>>> ³Those who say it cannot be done should not interfere with those who
>>>>> are doing it.² --attributed to Robert Heinlein, George Bernard Shaw
>>>>> and others
>>> --
>
>
>--
>Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D.
>Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
>Founder/Owner: All Things Bugs
>Capitalizing on Low-Crawling Fruit from Insect-Based Innovation
>http://allthingsbugs.com/about/people/
>http://www.facebook.com/Allthingsbugs
>1-352-281-3643
>
