{"id":2303,"date":"2008-02-26T08:00:18","date_gmt":"2008-02-26T08:00:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/scienceblogs.com\/principles\/2008\/02\/26\/academic-science-isnt-that-bad\/"},"modified":"2008-02-26T08:00:18","modified_gmt":"2008-02-26T08:00:18","slug":"academic-science-isnt-that-bad","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/2008\/02\/26\/academic-science-isnt-that-bad\/","title":{"rendered":"Academic Science Isn&#8217;t That Bad"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>For some reason, the infamous &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/wuphys.wustl.edu\/~katz\/scientist.html\">Don&#8217;t Become a Scientist<\/a>&#8221; rant by Jonathan Katz has bubbled up again, with <a href=\"http:\/\/scottaaronson.com\/blog\/?p=312\">Scott Aaronson giving his take<\/a>. I <a href=\"http:\/\/scienceblogs.com\/principles\/2006\/08\/science_is_a_scary_place_to_wo.php\">commented on this a while back<\/a>, and the intervening year and a half hasn&#8217;t really improved my opinion of the piece.<\/p>\n<p>The discussion in Scott&#8217;s comments is better than the rant really deserves, and includes a link to another piece of academic catastrophilia, Phillip Greenspun&#8217;s <a href=\"http:\/\/philip.greenspun.com\/careers\/women-in-science\">Women in Science<\/a>, which I also <a href=\"http:\/\/scienceblogs.com\/principles\/2006\/03\/better_jobs_than_science.php\">remarked on back in the day<\/a>. I didn&#8217;t make any substantial comment about his time-line then, though, and that&#8217;s what really jumped out at me:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>The average trajectory for a <em>successful<\/em> scientist is the following:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>age 18-22: paying high tuition fees at an undergraduate college<\/li>\n<li>age 22-30: graduate school, possibly with a bit of work, living on a<br \/>\nstipend of $1800 per month<\/li>\n<li>age 30-35: working as a post-doc for $30,000 to $35,000 per year<\/li>\n<li>age 36-43: professor at a good, but not great, university for<br \/>\n$65,000 per year<\/li>\n<li>age 44: with young children at home (if lucky), fired by the<br \/>\nuniversity (&#8220;denied tenure&#8221; is the more polite term for the folks that<br \/>\nuniversities discard), begins searching for a job in a market where<br \/>\nemployers primarily wish to hire folks in their early 30s<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The time spans here are a bit longer than my experience, but then, I&#8217;ve been very fortunate in my career. He also seems to have been paid better than I was as a graduate student&#8211; my stipend was more like $1,200\/month&#8211; so that&#8217;s probably a wash.<\/p>\n<p>That last step is a doozy, though. Does the <strong>average<\/strong> academic scientist really get denied tenure?<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>Well, no. At least, not as far as I can tell.<\/p>\n<p>It&#8217;s really difficult to find hard statistics on the pass rates for faculty coming up for tenure, and these vary from institution to institution, but it&#8217;s just not true that most people coming up for tenure get denied, particularly not at &#8220;good, but not great&#8221; universities. Maybe for new assistant professors in the Ivy League, but there, they know what they&#8217;re getting.<\/p>\n<p>You can get some idea of tenure rates by Googling news stories, though it can be difficult because most institutions only announce positive news&#8211; my alma mater just <a href=\"http:\/\/www.iberkshires.com\/story\/26034\/Williams-College-Announces-12-Promoted-to-Associate-Professor-with-Tenure.html\">tenured twelve professors<\/a>, for example, but they don&#8217;t say whether they denied anyone. Amherst just tenured <a href=\"http:\/\/amherststudent.amherst.edu\/current\/news\/view.php?year=2007-2008&#038;issue=15&#038;section=news&#038;article=02\">seven of eight<\/a> faculty who came up this year. Last year, my tenure cohort was ten-for-ten&#8211; everybody passed. <a href=\"http:\/\/links.jstor.org\/sici?sici=1058-7195(199107)13%3A2%3C293%3ATIAEAF%3E2.0.CO%3B2-O\">Eighty-five percent of agricultural economists<\/a> in the mid-80&#8217;s got tenure. The famous Gonzales case at Iowa State led to creationist loons pointing out that <a href=\"http:\/\/www.evolutionnews.org\/2007\/05\/tenure_statistics_contradict_i.html\">as many as 91% of faculty passed tenure review<\/a> at Iowa State. <cite>The Scientist<\/cite> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.the-scientist.com\/article\/home\/53499\/\">estimates the pass rate at 80%<\/a> nationwide.<\/p>\n<p>Now, this isn&#8217;t the whole story by any stretch&#8211; a <a href=\"http:\/\/okham.livejournal.com\/4120.html\">more detailed analysis<\/a> suggests that roughly half of faculty get tenure at the institution where they&#8217;re first hired. A fairly significant number of people just never come up for the formal tenure review, either because they voluntarily move elsewhere, or because they fail some earlier review&#8211; we have a comprehensive review in the third year here, for example, and I know that the pass rate for that review is significantly lower than for the final tenure review.<\/p>\n<p>This is a relatively minor point as far as the Greenspun article goes&#8211; his basic conclusion, that science is not a career for those who would like to make a whole bunch of money, is still sound. As much as it&#8217;s important to prevent students from traipsing off to graduate school with delusions of wealth and fame, though, we also shouldn&#8217;t over-sell the horror of the academic career track.<\/p>\n<p>(This isn&#8217;t the only piece of dubious hyperbole in the Greenspun article, either&#8230; This is just what jumped out at me when I looked at it last night.)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>For some reason, the infamous &#8220;Don&#8217;t Become a Scientist&#8221; rant by Jonathan Katz has bubbled up again, with Scott Aaronson giving his take. I commented on this a while back, and the intervening year and a half hasn&#8217;t really improved my opinion of the piece. The discussion in Scott&#8217;s comments is better than the rant&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/2008\/02\/26\/academic-science-isnt-that-bad\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Academic Science Isn&#8217;t That Bad<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"1","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2303","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-academia","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2303","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2303"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2303\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2303"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2303"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2303"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}