Number Of Postdocs Research Articles

How Postdocs Identifying as White U.S. Citizens Can Support Undocumented Students

Research on attitudes within higher education toward undocumented students has overlooked the views of postdoctoral scholars (postdocs). With the number of postdocs in the United States on the rise, this highly trained group matters for future leadership inside and outside of higher education. Since previous research has shown that individuals of minoritized races/ethnicities and non-U.S. citizens exhibit greater support for undocumented students (Garibay et al., 2016; Jach & Gloeckner, 2020), this study conducted individual interviews with 10 postdocs who identified as White U.S. citizens. Findings indicated postdocs with a personal or professional connection to undocumented students exhibited greater levels of support toward undocumented students. Those lacking these connections exhibited greater levels of White immunity (Cabrera, 2017) and what this study terms citizenship immunity. Postdocs also expressed a need for adult education to better support undocumented students yet articulated possible strategies for engaging in allyship, suggesting postdocs have the power to counteract negative rhetoric and work toward a more inclusive policy for undocumented students.

Research on the Influence of Early Experience on the Growth Rate of Science and Engineering Graduate Supervisors

This research is based on three northeastern double first-class polytechnic universities. A total of 1628 science and engineering graduate supervisors’ resumes were referred to from an official website by the random sampling method, of which only 500 supervisors were included in consideration of complete information, key events, and time in terms of the educational background (undergraduate school, graduate school, doctoral school, number of masters, number for Dr.), early work background (number of postdocs, number of overseas visits, numbers of research work), and the growth rate (period from graduation to associate professor title). The higher education background and early work background were defined as early experience, and the database of these 500 science and engineering graduate supervisors with complete resume information from three double first-class universities in northeastern China was established. In this study, the growth rate of the growth period was divided into two at the critical period: the growth rate of the graduate supervisor to associate professors. Through stepwise multiple regression analysis, it was found that higher education background (undergraduate schools, graduate schools, doctoral schools, as well as the number of master’s and doctorate degrees) as well as early work background (number of postdoctoral work, research work, and overseas visits) have a significant impact on the growth rate of graduate supervisors to associate professors.

Denisa Wagner.

Denisa Wagner.

Helmuth Möhwald (1946-2018).

Helmuth Möhwald, Founding Director of the Max Planck Institute for Colloids and Interfaces, Potsdam-Golm, passed away on March 27, 2018, at the age of 72. Möhwald's scientific achievements included the development of the layer-by-layer (LbL) technique to prepare ultrathin organized organic films, and its application in the coating of colloidal particles.

A Note on PhD Population Growth in Biomedical Sciences.

The explosive increase in the number of postdocs in biomedical fields is puzzling for many science policymakers. We use our previously introduced parameter in this journal, the basic reproductive number in academia (R0 ), to make sense of PhD population growth in biomedical fields. Our analysis shows how R0 in biomedical fields has increased over time, and we estimate that there is approximately only one tenure-track position in the US for every 6.3 PhD graduates, which means the rest need to get jobs outside academia or stay in lower-paid temporary positions. We elaborate on the structural reasons and systemic flaws of science workforce development by discussing feedback loops, especially vicious cycles, which contribute to over-production of PhDs. We argue that the current system is unstable but with no easy solution. A way to mitigate the effects of strong reinforcing loops is full disclosure of the risks of getting PhD.

Academic in-sourcing: international postdoctoral employment and new modes of academic production

International postdoctoral researchers are growing in number and importance in academic research around the world. This is contextualised by a shift to international and enterprise modes of academic production. Through a multiple case study, this paper analyses the role of international postdoctoral employment in life sciences and engineering fields at universities in the United States and the United Kingdom. In doing so particular attention is given to understanding why there are increasing numbers of postdocs from abroad working in these fields and countries, and the ways in which international postdoctorates are incorporated into research laboratories and projects. International postdoctoral employment appears driven by the same factors in the US and UK but is related to different modes of academic production. The findings of this study have implications for research on academic labour, and the organisation of academic production.

Eric Olson

In his classic fable, The Gnat and the Bull , Aesop (620 BC–560 BC)—that astute observer of human nature—teaches us the sad reality that the smaller the mind, the greater the conceit. One of the things I like about Eric Olson is that he embodies the notion that a truly great mind is free of conceit. Although he is one of the most successful scientists of our time and despite his extraordinary accomplishments and recognitions, Eric has managed to keep a simple, warm, genuine, down-to-earth style. I find this to be overwhelmingly refreshing, and almost as admirable as his scientific prowess. I hope the readers will enjoy this foray into the human dimension of Eric’s rich and well-rounded personality—his life-long passion for science, his work ethics, his love of music, his views on science and faith, his concern for those who entrust their career to him, and his total lack of arrogance. Eric is one of the best role models for young investigators to emulate, not only from a scientific but also from a human standpoint. Although now he is a veritable icon in cardiovascular research, he tells us that it was not easy to get to that point. This should be a good lesson for others. Indeed, it is never easy in science, for anybody. I hope that those who are at the inception of their careers will be inspired by reading how Eric overcame initial challenges and developed a stunning upward trajectory using the old-fashioned (and irreplaceable) virtues of hard work and perseverance. — —Roberto Bolli Eric Olson, Professor of Molecular Biology at the University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Tex, knows how to build muscle. Indeed, he has been studying muscle development since he landed his first faculty position in the mid 1980s. Since that time, Olson and …

THE KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION FUNCTION FOR UNIVERSITY PATENTING

We estimate a knowledge production function for university patenting using an individual effects negative binomial model. We control for Research and Development expenditures, research field, and the presence of a Technology Transfer Office. We distinguish between three kinds of researchers: faculty, postdoctoral scholars (postdocs), and PhD students. For the latter two, we also distinguish by visa status. We find patent counts to relate positively and significantly to the number of PhD students and number of postdocs. Our results also suggest that not all graduate students and postdocs contribute equally to patenting but that contribution is mediated by citizenship and visa status. (JEL C25, O31, O32, O34, O38)

Chewing the fat with Mitchell A. Lazar

Chewing the fat with Mitchell A. Lazar

Scientists to spare

After boosting its number of postdocs by thousands, Japan is dealing with a major researcher glut. Heidi Ledford reports.

The Knowledge Production Function for University Patenting

We estimate a knowledge production function for university patenting using an individual effects negative binomial model. We control for R&D expenditures, research field and the presence of a TTO office. We distinguish between three kinds of researchers who staff labs: faculty, postdoctoral students and PhD students. We also examine whether PhDs and postdoctoral scholars contribute equally to patent activity or whether there is a differential effect depending upon visa status. We find patent counts relate positively and significantly to the number of faculty, number of PhD students and number of postdocs. Our results also suggest that not all graduate students and postdocs contribute equally to patenting but that contribution is mediated by visa status.

Victims of success.

The doubling of public funds for life-science research in the United States has increased the number of postdocs, but it has yet to create significantly more permanent academic positions, says Eugene Russo.

Changes to NIH graduate student and postdoc positions

The NIH has responded to concerns regarding the training of biomedical scientists in the USA by announcing a dramatic and sustained increase in postdoc stipends. National Research Service Award stipends are to rise to $25 000 for graduate students and $45 000 for new postdocs. This represents a massive increase on the current levels of $16 500 and $28 260, respectively. The NIH also said that federal funding should not exceed a total of six years for graduate students and five years for postdocs. A need for an investigation into the impact of such measures before their introduction was also noted. Curbing the tenure of postdocs in this way is seen as a method for combating the much higher numbers of postdocs than available faculty places in the USA. The NIH also said that they do not intend to reduce the number of PhDs in training in the USA in order not to disrupt current research progress. The package of measures comes in response to a report from the National Academy of Sciences published last year, ‘Addressing the Nation's Changing Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral Scientists’. See: http://grants.nih.gov/training/nas_report/NIHResponse.htm. DS

The World of Postdocs

Daniel Gilman, the first president of Johns Hopkins University, was looking for a way that his new research university could compete with the scientific powerhouses of Europe. He came up with the novel idea of offering $500 fellowships to a select group of 20 graduates interested in “further studies … of literature or science.” Among that first class of 1876 were four men with doctoral degrees—in effect, the first postdocs. A 1946 history of Hopkins boasts that “probably no expenditure of $10,000 in American education has ever had so large and so enduring a return on investment.” A century and a quarter after Gilman's bold move to bolster U.S. research, the United States leads the world in scientific productivity—and in the number of postdocs, now nearing 40,000. Many would say that the two measures are closely related. Indeed, several English-speaking countries have embraced the American passion for postdocs and used their labor to build up their own research enterprises. And much of the rest of the scientific world, including Japan and many European countries, is moving quickly to set up or expand its use of postdocs in hopes of rejuvenating antiquated systems and ensuring a steady flow of new ideas. In spite of its success, however, the postdoc system is under stress. Although most postdocs say they recognize the value of extended training beyond graduate school, many feel that their contributions to this scientific success story have not been sufficiently recognized and rewarded. They are in a kind of limbo between student and independent researcher, without the status that their peers in other professions enjoy. And it can be a long apprenticeship: In today's tight job market, it is not unusual for young scientists in some fields to do two or three stints as a postdoc before landing their first academic post. Many are frustrated and annoyed at being asked to support a system that seems increasingly unable to generate secure, well-paying jobs. They complain that employers and funders, typically universities and the federal government, don't understand the pressures they face or, worse, think that the status quo should be preserved. Their unhappiness has fueled the growth of postdoctoral associations and spurred universities to create offices and policies that address their plight. This special report examines life as a postdoc in all its rich variety—the ups and downs, the ins and outs, the whys and wherefores. It looks at the system not only in the United States, but in Japan and Europe as well. An accompanying [Viewpoint][1] contains a report by the authors of a major study that tracked young scientists for 10 years after they earned their Ph.D. degrees, and a guest [editorial][2] examines how Japan is trying to avoid the worst aspects of the U.S. system as it adjusts to a growing pool of postdocs. We recognize, however, that there are viewpoints and experiences that are not covered. To include them, Science's Next Wave, the electronic network for young scientists, is hosting a forum on the issues raised in this special report with invited perspectives from experts in the field at [nextwave.org/feature/postdocforum.shtml][3]. We urge you to participate. [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.285.5433.1533 [2]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.285.5433.1487 [3]: http://nextwave.org/feature/postdocforum.shtml

Japanese Jump on Postdoc Bandwagon

JAPANOvercoming the stigma of temporary workers, postdocs have become an integral part of science in Japan, largely through a 1995 initiative under which the government raised the total number of postdocs to 10,000 by this year. But there's a price to pay for their popularity: The new talent pool is beginning to face a problem plaguing the nearly 40,000 postdoctoral fellows in the century-old U.S. system, namely a dearth of academic jobs.

Japanese Science Funding

Japan's recent plan to dramatically increase government research funding may appear unusual in light of other countries' efforts to reduce such funding and in light of the large financial deficit faced by the Japanese government. However, the plan merely calls for an increase in government expenditures for science and technology research to a level comparable to that in Western countries [up to about 1 percent of gross domestic product (GDP)] from the current low level of 0.5 to 0.6 percent of GDP. At this low government funding level, the vast majority of Japanese scientists, especially those in the basic sciences, have not had the opportunity to participate in rapid developments in science research. The lack of funding has also resulted in a weak domestic groundwork for international collaboration. The substantial increase in Japanese government research funding during the past couple of years is encouraging. We are proud of the Japanese government's recent initiatives to support international research funding through the Human Frontier Science Program and other international endeavors such as CERN, but we must frankly recognize that Japanese science as a whole is still far from the standard achieved in Western countries. In addition to the increase in research funding, the so-called 5-year Basic Plan on Science and Technology adopted by the Japanese government in July 1996 proposes actions for strengthening research systems, such as the establishment of mechanisms for evaluating research, an increase in the number of postdocs, an end to stipulations making it difficult to hire lab technicians, and improvement in cooperation among universities, research institutes, and industry. The plan also emphasizes the importance of distributed megascience. In contrast to concentrated megascience, which involves the use of specific facilities to study such fields as nuclear physics or space exploration, distributed megascience involves the study of life science, information science, and environmental science in a network of many laboratories working on diverse topics. These fields are rapidly growing and are full of potential for contributions to social and global development, but research will be hampered without close collaboration between university faculties and government departments. In this general climate, several developments have converged to make brain research the prototype for future efforts by Japan to bring its funding of science in line with that of Western nations. An ad hoc group of neuroscientists has been promoting the “Century of the Brain” campaign since 1992. This campaign corresponds to the “Decade of the Brain” initiated in the United States in 1990, and to a similar campaign initiated in Europe in 1991. In April 1996, the Science Council of Japan formally requested that the government promote brain research, and in June 1996, an ad hoc committee of the Science and Technology Agency (STA) proposed a large-scale research program entitled “The Age of Brain Science” with a 20-year strategic timetable. In August 1996, STA, the Ministry of International Trade and Industry, the Ministry of Health and Welfare, and other ministries included brain research programs in their budget requests for 1997, and in December 1996, funding for these programs was incorporated into the 1997 national budget plan in the form of a distinct fund for a new strategic category equivalent to $125 million. In March 1997, the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture (Monbusho) received from its own science council a report urging promotion and support of brain research in university laboratories. In January, Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto stated in his speech to parliament: “To make Japan a science and technology-based creative nation … I shall make efforts … to promote science and technology, such as by expanding brain science and genetic research.” A new Brain Science Institute in charge of three major fields of brain science [to understand, to protect, and to create (model) the brain] will be set up this October in the Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (RIKEN) ( Science , 14 March 1997, p. 156). The facility will be open to researchers around the world. A number of distinct grants designated for brain science are now available to researchers at universities and national institutes. And finally, to coordinate diverse activities all over Japan in the context of the worldwide promotion of brain science, a central organization called the Brain Science Committee was set up in April as part of the Prime Minister's Council for Science and Technology.