Coalition to Provide Prospective Scientists with Early Career Information

Welcome to the newly redesigned Science Careers Forum. Please bookmark this site now for future reference. If you've previously posted to the forum, your current username and password will remain the same in the new system. If you've never posted or are new to the forum, you will need to create a new account.

The new forum is designed with some features to improve the user experience. Upgrades include:
- easy-to-read, threaded discussions
- ability to follow discussions and receive notifications of updates
- private messaging to other SC Forum members
- fully searchable database of posts
- ability to quote in your response
- basic HTML formatting available

Moderator: Dave Jensen
Advisors:   Ana, PG, Rich Lemert, Dick Woodward, Dave Walker
Meet the Moderator/Advisors

Coalition to Provide Prospective Scientists with Early Career Information

Postby Dave Jensen » Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:41 am

Newswise — Nine U.S. research universities and a major cancer institute today announced plans to give would-be life scientists clear, standardized data on graduate school admissions, education and training opportunities, and career prospects.

The institutions formed the Coalition for Next Generation Life Science in response to the focus of many new Ph.D.s. solely on a limited number of traditional faculty positions and to the lack of good marketplace information on training and career options for talented life scientists.

The presidents and chancellors of the founding institutions announced the initiative in a joint article published in the Dec. 15 issue of the journal Science. They said they would begin posting informative new standardized data on institutional websites in February 2018 and add additional categories of information over the following 18 months.

“In the absence of such information, students are prevented from making informed choices about their pre- and postdoctoral training activities, and universities from preparing trainees for a full range of careers,” the presidents and chancellors wrote in the Science article.

The authors of the piece are Martha E. Pollack, president, Cornell University; Vincent Price, president, Duke University; Gary Gilliland, president, the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; Ronald J. Daniels, president, the Johns Hopkins University; L. Rafael Reif, president, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Samuel Hawgood, chancellor, the University of California, San Francisco; Freeman A. Hrabowski, president, the University of Maryland, Baltimore County; Mark S. Schlissel, president, the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Amy Gutmann, president, the University of Pennsylvania; and Rebecca Blank, chancellor, the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Their article cited studies showing that only about 10 percent of U.S. biomedical scientists land tenure-track faculty positions at U.S. institutions within five years of their Ph.D. graduation. Among the constraints on the academic job market, the article said, are a nearly 20 percent decline in inflation-adjusted federal research funding from 2003 to 2016. That decline limits hiring by universities and other nonprofit research institutions that receive federal research support.

The coalition members will issue statistical reports with information on:

--Admission to and enrollment in doctoral programs in the life sciences,
--The median time spent in graduate school before earning a doctorate,
--The demographics of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows by gender, underrepresented minority status and citizenship,
--The median time spent in postdoctoral fellowships (the apprenticeships many scientists serve immediately after graduate school but before landing a permanent position), and
--The jobs held by an institution’s former graduate students and postdoctoral fellows.

The dearth of faculty positions in the life sciences is no secret and many postdoctoral trainees are aware of the odds against them when they search for traditional university jobs, the Science article said. The co-authors wrote, however, that students and trainees would benefit from appreciating the odds much sooner. They also would be helped by knowing more about the range of options for trained life scientists, such as careers in industry, entrepreneurship, government and science communication.

“The majority of trainees will eventually choose to pursue those careers, but only after having made irreversible investments in what is often more than a decade in training for academic jobs that do not exist,” the presidents and chancellors wrote. “And at least some of this training activity may be unnecessary for their eventual career choices.”

Some relevant data are available now, but for a small number of institutions and in formats that do not allow for easy comparison. Comprehensive data in a form standardized across institutions should be a major help, the presidents and chancellors wrote.

“Open data will allow students and postdoctoral fellows to understand fully the range of likely outcomes of their eventual training and career choices,” they wrote. “It will help universities to better target their programs to actual career outcomes. … And it can help to hold universities and other research institutions to account for their success in training and placing graduate students.

“Each of these measures,” the co-authors wrote, “is directed at the cardinal goal of making advanced training in the life sciences more efficient and humane.”

Each coalition member, the writers said, has also agreed to help graduate students and fellows better explore alternative career paths, improve mentoring, and work to improve diversity in the life sciences workforce. They said they hope other institutions will join the original 10 in the movement for transparency in biomedical career data.

The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and an anonymous donor are helping to fund the coalition. Leading the group’s work are two faculty members, Elizabeth Watkins, dean of the Graduate Division and vice chancellor for student academic affairs at the University of California, San Francisco, and Peter Espenshade, associate dean for graduate biomedical education at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

The presidents and chancellors said they chose to begin their transparency initiative with life science because of considerable national concern about the field. They added, however, that “the logic of our initiative extends to other scholarly disciplines.” The coalition’s work could extend in the future to graduate education and training in the natural and physical sciences, engineering, the social sciences and the humanities.
“There is no such thing as work-life balance. Everything worth fighting for unbalances your life.”- Alain de Botton
User avatar
Dave Jensen
Site Moderator
Posts: 7959
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 11:28 pm

Re: Coalition to Provide Prospective Scientists with Early Career Information

Postby Caroline Ritchie » Fri Dec 15, 2017 5:20 pm

This sounds like a starting point for a great initiative, but what is the ultimate goal? Is it to dissuade talented students from enrolling in graduate programs to reduce competition for faculty positions or is it to prepare students for the many non-academic career options for which a PhD will benefit them? It is great to provide this transparency, but I think this entire discussion is always so negative. Instead of "only 10% of PhD graduates land tenure-track positions", why not focus on all of the other amazing career opportunities (and not as a back-up for a tenure-track position)?

The article states that this initiative will aim to hold universities accountable for placing graduate students, but I feel like there has not been enough done so far to do this. If these universities are now collecting this type of data on its graduates, why not take it a step further and identify alumni interested in mentoring current students?
More universities need to develop mentorship programs and establish relationships between themselves and corporations for both networking and career exploration. I hope this initiative eventually leads to more innovative solutions for preparing graduate students for the real world outside of the lab.
Caroline M. Ritchie, PhD
Caroline Ritchie
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:07 am
Location: Boston

Re: Coalition to Provide Prospective Scientists with Early Career Information

Postby Ken » Sun Dec 31, 2017 7:07 pm

This is a nice start, and in honesty, should be a requirement for a PhD granting institution. I distinctly recall during my graduate school interviews being told that the average time to degree was 5 years. When the 5 year mark passed and not a single person had graduated, it became clear that this number was not based on anything at all. It was all based on "truthiness".

I don't know if that would have made a difference to me, but it did feel particularly dishonest at the time and certainly leaves a bad taste in my mouth about the experience.
Posts: 509
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 11:28 pm

Return to Science Careers Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bill L., David Lathbury and 20 guests