Abstract

The publication in September of a report from the US National Research Council, Trends in the Early Careers of Life Scientists, posed a question in my mind, as I'm sure it did in the minds of the many graduate students and postdoes already contemplating their futures as scientists with fearful anxiety. What is the value of a PhD in biological science if you can't be a biologist? The report (available at http://www2/nas.edu/whatsnew/292e.html) summarizes what many already intuitively felt to be true — that the number of available academic, industrial, or government jobs in the life sciences is not keeping pace with the ever-increasing numbers of life science PhDs. Certainly, anyone who has recently served on a faculty search committee (or who knows someone who has) will know of the hundreds of applications that pour in for any advertised junior faculty position. Perhaps an even more unnerving finding in the report is that science-related jobs, such as those in law, business or journalism, are also few and far between. This is dismaying to the many young scientists in training who, disillusioned by the remote possibility of obtaining research positions in academia or industry, decide that they will pursue the ‘unusual’ approach of using their scientific training as patent lawyers, science writers of consultants. As the coordinator for a program that fosters active partnerships between science teachers and research scientists. I regularly meet young scientists who yearn for these alternative science careers. It will be up to current university faculty and administrators as well as funding agencies such as the National Institutes of Health to determine how best to stem the flow of life science PhDs so that supply doesn't continue to exceed demand so excessively. And there is also a suggestion that the government subsidize ‘career transition’ grants, to allow postdoes to set up their own projects before they have obtained permanent posts. But in the meantime, what advice and encouragement can be given to those already pursuing their doctoral degrees or working on their postdoctoral training? At the risk of sounding like a member of a self-help program, I advise any worried young scientist to focus on the transferable strengths and skills they've developed during their scientific training. It's all too easy for young scientists who think of leaving the research environment to feel they have wasted five or 10 years of their life. I know that feeling, as I spent many months a few years ago when I was a postdoc agonizing over what I was going to do with my life, given that I was skilled at nothing but plasmid preps, running gels and dissecting yeast tetrads. Although I am fortunate to have found a job that keeps me connected with science, I now realize the skills I gained in my scientific training — most of which have nothing to do with knowing how to use a micropipette or balance tubes in a centrifuge — could equally well be applied to a job outside science. My job demands that I prioritize and simultaneously manage several projects, be a clear and effective speaker, write with clarity and precision, solve problems at a moment's notice, learn new things independently and think critically — all of which should be second nature to any scientist who's earned a PhD. Perhaps the most valuable skill is simply possessing a scientist's habits of mind: thinking hard about problems, being analytical and approaching pretty much everything with a critical eye (although this last doesn't always endear you to friends and family members). Most scientists also learn the kind of dogged perseverance that only comes through having to keep worrying at a problem until you've solved it. While you're spending every day in an environment where most people have a PhD, however, it's easy to take such qualities for granted. Above all, once you're on the research career path. there's a lot of pressure to stick with it, no matter how vanishingly small the chances of getting a job. For any scientist who decides to leave the bench, it's hard to avoid feeling they've failed in the eyes of their lab colleagues and mentors. Hopefully, now that the National Research Council report has quantified the size of the problem facing young scientists, there will be more open discussion about alternative careers. This is no time for snobbery, and the scientist who decides to look outside research, could even find their labmates looking at them with envy rather than pity. Even though it demands ever more determination and commitment, it will always be possible to pursue a research career. But it's equally possible to be a scientist in any career of your choosing. B Berg, Science Education Partnership, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, Washington 98109, USA.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call