Why should some ecologists look down their noses at other ecologists when we already have the molecular biologists looking down their noses at all of us?
> To adapt a well-known aphorism, ALL ECOLOGY IS LOCAL. That is, the outcome > of all ecological interactions â and thus, the abundance of individual > species, the composition and structure of communities, and the nature of > energy and nutrient flows in ecosystems â is context-dependent. Any > theoretical ecologist worth her/his salt must recognize that fact. The > idea that working on a particular set of organisms, or in a particular > geographic area would be viewed as "provincial" is therefore deplorable. > Theoretical generalities are either built from empirical findings in a > wide variety of specific settings, or must be tested in such settings. > > > But I must confess that â while recently working with a certain > slumgullion editor at a journal well known to all of us, and while > presenting evidence for the operation of an entirely novel ecological > mechanism structuring Midwestern prairies â my student and I had this > same ridiculous criticism hurled at us. And this despite the fact that my > lab is viewed as innovating at the interface between theoretical and > empirical ecology. So there is an attitude, lamentably, among at least > some ecologists that support Kenneth Brown's experience. > > > Such people deserve as much discomfort and illumination as we can provide > them! > > > Cheers, Tom > > Thomas J. Givnish > Henry Allan Gleason Professor of Botany > University of Wisconsin > > [email protected] > http://botany.wisc.edu/givnish/Givnish/Welcome.html > > > On 08/26/14, Kenneth M Brown wrote: >> A good point which brings up a larger question. I know colleagues who >> only value basic ecological research and testing theory. Applied ecology >> and working in a particular geographic area or on particular organisms >> is considered provincial. Do we as professional ecologists need to >> rethink our own hiring priorities as well as graduate education >> philosophy? >> >> ************************** >> >> Dr. Kenneth M. Brown >> Emeritus Professor of Biological Sciences >> Louisiana State University >> Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 70803 >> 225-578-1740 >> [email protected] >> >> ************************** >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news >> <[email protected]> on behalf of Mitchell, Kendra >> <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 3:08 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Some ideas for advancing grad education in the >> face of scarcity >> >> The idea that an academic position is "winning", that it is the only >> worthwhile endeavour for scientists to undertake, is one of the biggest >> problems in ecological education today. This is the reason that many PhD >> students don't talk to advisers about non-academic careers; suggesting >> that we don't want to follow in your footsteps moves us into the loser >> category. Becoming an expert in an ecological field has many important >> applications beyond training more experts. Only accepting students that >> say they want to follow the academic track is not the way to advance >> ecological education, its the continuation of the status quo and a good >> way to ensure that ecology is seen as a vanity science rather than >> essential for managing our society and world. >> >> >> -- >> Kendra Maas, Ph.D. >> Post Doctoral Research Fellow >> University of British Columbia >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news >> [[email protected]] on behalf of Ryan McEwan >> [[email protected]] >> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 5:00 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Some ideas for advancing grad education in the face >> of scarcity >> >> As the semester kicks off, I wanted to share some thoughts I had over >> the >> summer on graduate eduction: >> --- >> >> August 25, 2014 >> >> >> >> Some ideas for advancing graduate education in ecology in a time of >> scarcity >> The science of Ecology, like most scientific disciplines, is in the >> midst >> of a crisis of sorts stemming from at least two underlying factors. >> First, >> funding for science at a national level is stable or in decline, while >> the >> number of labs that need funding to persist is rising sharply. Second, >> the >> number of PhDs being granted is vastly outpacing the job market. >> According >> to some analyses the percentage of newly granted PhDs that got a job as >> a >> tenure track academic in the 1970s was nearly 50%, while that number >> today >> is less than 10% >> <http://www.ascb.org/ascbpost/index.php/compass-points/item/285-where-will-a-biology-phd-take-you> >> . >> In the face of this gloomy picture, action is required and I believe >> there >> are some clear steps we can take. In my view, lobbying for more federal >> money, tweaking how funds are distributed, working toward some >> supplements >> to federal funds (e.g., crowdsourceing..like this >> <https://www.kickstarter.com/> and that <https://experiment.com/>) are >> good >> things to fight for. Those are "supply side" issues...I would like to >> also >> propose some practices in graduate training that may be helpful: >> (a) revive and respect the Master's degree. >> >> In my experience, some faculty view a Master's degree as a kind of >> failure. They tell their very best undergrads to avoid doing a Master's >> and head straight to the PhD. It is a "waste of time" they advise, >> âthe >> Master's degree is functionlessâ, "you can't do anything with that >> degree," >> etc. >> >> In fact, many, talented, intelligent, undergraduates have no business >> doing >> a PhD because they are not suited to the particulars of the academic >> enterprise. We should do our best to only bring people into PhD programs >> who are clearly dedicated to every facet of the pursuit (see below). >> >> A MS is a good option for many (most, all?) students interesting in >> career >> in ecology. A MS serves as a vital testing ground, even for students who >> feel confident they want to do a Doctorate. A MS gives the student a >> chance >> to discover if research is really an endeavor they want to dedicate >> their >> life to-- statistical analysis, writing, digging through the >> literature-- >> in addition to field work, lab work, or setting up and maintaining an >> experiment. In my experience ~50% of the undergraduates who think they >> want to do a PhD, who faculty might say "you really should do a PhD," >> will >> change their mind during a MS degree. In which case, that student can >> finish up the MS and head off to a job, instead of leaving a PhD partway >> through, which is a bad situation for both the student and the mentor. >> >> Screening students in this way will help the PhD glut we currently face, >> resulting in fewer "ABDs" in the world, fewer PhDs who leave the field, >> and >> will allow those involved with training PhD students to focus energy on >> students who are more likley to stay the course and succeed. >> >> >> (b) filter hard for students coming into our PhD programs. >> I would recommend a MS and at least one peer-reviewed article submitted, >> as >> a general qualification for admittance into a PhD program. >> >> GREs and course grades are relatively poor indicators of future success >> in >> research and they have absolutely no power to predict whether someone >> will >> have the passion for the professional grind that is needed to succeed in >> this new era of science. >> >> I would also recommend that Universities generally employ the approach >> of >> refusing to admit into a PhD program undergraduates who just graduated >> from >> that same program. >> >> With some important exceptions, that practice is built on faculty who >> don't >> want to bother with searching externally for students, and accommodates >> undergradutes who really don't know what they want to do with their >> life. >> "I dont know what to do with my life" isnt really a good qualification >> for >> launching into a PhD track, which is a training pathway that is for >> those >> who are ready to commit to research as a life-long endeavor. Overall, >> applying a fine filter on students entering our PhD programs could be a >> great help. >> >> >> (c) be terribly clear about the state of things during mentoring. >> >> We need to speak frankly, to undergrads working in our labs, to MS >> students, and especially to PhD students about the state of things in >> the >> field. Very few PhDs get academic jobs, because there are not nearly >> enough jobs to accommodate the glutted market. Some of those who get >> jobs, >> won't make Tenure because of the crisis in federal funding. We have to >> clearly and consistently tell students these things. >> >> >> (d) be open to students becoming professionals that are different than >> us >> >> >> âIncreasingly, tenure-trackââ positions are an abnormal outcome >> for a >> person with a PhD. Even for good students, landing a faculty position >> has >> become the exception, not the rule. We can and should fight this as >> individuals by pushing our students to be one of the "winners,"â but >> we >> also have to face the reality that the tenure-track is extremely hard to >> get on, and increasingly hard to stay on! As mentors we have to be open >> to >> our students taking different pathways as professionals if the pursuit >> of a >> tenure-track job does not work out. >> >> Increasingly we should be thinking about skills training and networking >> opportunities that might position our students to jump out of the >> Academy >> into other walks of life. Doing this without compromising productivity >> of >> the lab, per se, is crucial, but there may be opportunities for synergy >> wherein students get training and exposure and the lab picks up new >> tools >> or useful connections. Perhaps most important is that we as mentors >> reject >> the attitude of disdain that can sometimes hang in the air around >> non-faculty positions. >> >> >> So those are some ideas.... any comments, corrections or criticisms are >> welcomed either on-list, direct via email, or leave a reply at the blog >> post: >> >> http://mcewanenvironecolab.wordpress.com/mentoring >> >> >> Best, >> âRyan >> >> -- >> Ryan W. McEwan, PhD >> Associate Professor of Ecology >> Department of Biology >> The University of Dayton >> 300 College Park, Dayton, OH 45469-2320 >> >> Office phone: 1.937.229.2558 >> Email: [email protected] >> Lab: http://academic.udayton.edu/ryanmcewan >> Twitter: https://twitter.com/mcewanlab > > -- >
