Ryan has many good points.  There are certainly roles for faculty, students, 
and groups of each.  My comments are on some low hanging fruit concerning 
graduate student training.


Recognizing the mentioned employment trends, highly motivated/passionate (grad) 
student groups should identify opportunities to have speakers from varied 
careers provide not only scientific talks but separate short talks on their 
careers.  Any school with a seminar series could easily increase their 
students' exposure to varied careers by 1) promoting career diversity among the 
roster of speakers and 2) asking relevant speakers to add content (5-10 min of 
their 45 min talk) on career/jobs stuff [or provide a separate mini-talk on 
their career as X working for Y to the student group].

I know of one large biology department that has acknowledged the cited 
employment trends and funded an annual roundtable organized by their students.  
The goal appears to be to empower students to organize a workshop and expose 
their students to varied career opportunities.  The professionals (6-12) were 
all non-academics and were pressed to talk about their unique career paths.  
ESA has done similar things.

Kurt
___________________________________________
Kurt Reinhart, Experimental Plant Ecologist
USDA-Agricultural Research Service
Fort Keogh Livestock & Range Research Laboratory
243 Fort Keogh Rd.
Miles City, MT 59301
Ph: (406) 874-8211
Lab website


-----Original Message-----
From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ryan McEwan
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 6:01 AM
Subject: 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, “the Master's degree 
is functionless”, "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


​Increasingly, tenure-track​​ 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,"​ 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,
​Ryan

--
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




This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for 
the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the 
use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and 
subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email 
immediately.

Reply via email to