Interested parties may want to read an article published in Conservation Biology on the topic of whether/how low or unpaid "internships" exploit people entering the field.
Whitaker, D. M. (2003), The Use of Full-Time Volunteers and Interns by Natural-Resource Professionals. Conservation Biology, 17: 330–333. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01503.x Not to set aside the importance of the question of ensuring that our profession does not exploit our youth and deny opportunity to those with economic constraints, I do want to respond to the point of the original post--"will I benefit from an internship?" As a professor who makes decisions to accept students for graduate school and decisions to hire employees, I will say that I do not evaluate paid work as superior to unpaid work, I just look at what experiences the student have gained. For graduate school or paid positions, I look for folks who have demonstrated that they have (or can learn) the particular skills I need, can work outside in all weather, work well with others (often living in close quarters) over a sustained period of time, can carefully record and manage data, and are curious and able to generate interesting (and answerable) questions. In general, when students do a study abroad trip or pay to participate in an ongoing field project, I take that a little less seriously as I assume the initial selection process was not as strict as a hiring process. But even in those situations someone who could stick out a project living several months in another country/field camp/etc. still has demonstrated a fortitude that is superior to someone who has only attended classes on a university campus. As a financial aid student myself, I could not afford to spend my summers in unpaid internships, but took a paid position assisting in a secretarial pool in a state natural resources agency with a supportive boss who gave me opportunities to do field work and report writing on the side. I tell my own undergraduate students that gaining field experience is absolutely critical, and that they may need to be creative to find ways to do it. If you have parents who will support you or you can otherwise afford to take advantage of some of these unpaid (or tuition-charging) field adventures, have fun and enjoy it. But don't go into debt or create financial hardship for yourself (or your family) thinking you NEED to do this to gain experience. You could work in a gas station near a game department office or university and volunteer on weekends at a game check station, or volunteer early mornings to help with bird counts, or whatever, and begin to gain experience that way. The success of our professions depends on the dedication and enthusiasm of new people entering the field and Whitaker's exhortation to do a better job of supporting those young professionals is a valuable read. Carola A. Haas Professor, Wildlife Ecology Associate Editor, Journal of Wildlife Mgmt Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Conservation 112 Cheatham Hall MC 0321 Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061 [email protected] 540-231-9269 http://www.fishwild.vt.edu/faculty/haas.htm On Aug 17, 2013, at 2:56 PM, Robert Gundy wrote: > Let me preface with the fact that this is my first time posting to the > listserv after having watched for a couple months, mostly scanning for jobs. > This is not the ideal first post but it is something I feel strongly about. > To answer the question in the subject line, I think "internships" can > provide excellent, relevant experience that future employers do find > impactful. Like many have said in much more detail, you just need to look > for the right factors in each internship. > > On a related side topic, I have a pet peeve with the use of 'internship' > within the biology job sector, particularly the field jobs I seek. If you > look up definitions for internship they all tend to focus around a central > idea: one party receives on the job training to gain new skills in exchange > for work utilizing these new skills. Pay is never really mentioned in any > definitions. The misuse/abuse of the word internship is a phenomenon that is > not isolated to the biology community but it is prolific here. Internships > by social and technical definitions are meant to provide training in new > skills that an intern can then use in future positions. What goes on in our > job community is often something different. The typical internship notice > asks interns to already be proficient in the skills for the job required, > have a 4-year degree, advanced degree preferred and accept one of three > commonly available pay scales: > 1) get paid a wage not considered legal by any state or federal labor law > that is in fact below the national poverty line and not considered a living > wage > 2) volunteer = work for free > 3) abuse the word volunteer/intern and really mean "pay to work" > > In less than 1% (mental estimate) of the "internships" I have seen available > in the last 3 years has there been a stated opportunity to gain employment > thereafter. Internships that lead to jobs are the industry standard in every > other industry. > Here is the reality of what happens with so many of these internships. The > intern is worked hard and in hard physical and mental conditions, not paid a > living wage/not paid/paying to work, gains no new skills because experience > was required and does not have a strong job prospect with the employer > afterward. > > Even for the paid positions pay scale #1 is the highest available option. > Entry-level positions are nearly monopolized by field techs/assistants > positions for academic research. Consider how much money is really offered > to field techs and assistants. Nobody without specialized skills would sit > down in an air conditioned room and work 40-70 hours a week for pay below > the poverty line. Why should people with education, specialized skills, and > prior work experience have to work outdoors in quite literally dangerous > environments for that kind of pay in the name of biology? One poster > mentioned the semantics employed. The words "volunteer" and "intern" are > thrown around without regard to their actual meaning. Normally I would not > argue about semantics because a situation is what it is despite a given > label but, these semantics do have a negative mental effect on young > graduates looking for work. I understand many arguments to condone this > financial mistreatment will jump to blaming funding sources. Most job > sources will be funded by grants in this field. It is common knowledge in > this community that grants are limited and very finite. However, I think > most of the subscribers are privy to the abuse that goes on in the academic > community with grant money. Grant winners pay themselves huge gross sums on > top of their salaries, penny pinch through the research as much as possible > and, right before the date comes up, splurge on as much equipment as > possible with whatever money is left over. I'm not saying this with any > absolutes that everybody does this but it's no secret that each of these > things happens to some degree or another with regularity. I know I have > heard of certain professors paying themselves up to $80,0000 from a single > grant. Here comes a bit of rhetorical satire: Imagine the day when grant > money is re-prioritized and hard-working, upcoming biologists with degrees > can go stomping through the forests, deserts, jungles, marshes, tundras or > oceans of the planet while evading the dangers of venomous animals, large > carnivores and severe weather conditions and while doing overall good for > the world so they can bring home an honest paycheck that amounts to minimum > wage. That's all I'm saying should happen. > I truly hope that last sentence was a little jarring and that it provokes > some thought in how we are currently mistreating each other. It's a shame > that in a community where people are almost never motivated by greed, rather > by passion, and we ourselves are taking advantage of this by paying honest, > hard-working people a wage that can be easily surpassed by asking "would you > like fries with that" for the same number of hours. > I have spent several hours reading and revising this message. I tried to > remove any opinions or assumptions, and I know I did not succeed entirely. > As another poster said earlier, this opinion that I share is a majority > opinion within the young biologist community that is never spoken of. So > many are afraid to speak up for themselves to just earn minimum wage in fear > of being on some "blacklist" in the wildlife biology community. I'm not one > of those people. > > If you took the time to read this whole thing, thank you. > Robert Gundy
