Seeking University Jobs in Mathematics?

NegativeK asks: "I'm currently a high school student, soaking up all of the math I can. Via a state program, the education department pays for my enrollment in a semi-local university, which is allowing me to take four mathematics courses at a time. My question is this: am I chasing a white-elephant? How much does it take to get a job in theoretical mathematics? What does it require to get a stable job in a university to do math research? This also applies to other theoretical positions; how competitive is the workplace in a research university?"

Comments

Very Competitive

[AYEq]

Well I am a junior math major at a not so pristegious university and I would say that I am in the same boat. I posted a topic similar to this on the alt.math newsgroup and I got about 50/50 = "go for it" / "Stick w/ computers and keep math as a hobby"

If I were you I would take a few more classes until I make a lifelong commitment. Math is one of those subjects where the upper division work differs greatly from most of what you see in ugrad/hs.If that hasn't scared you enough then try the AMS Job Search just to see what type of positions seem to be open in your state.

Also (although you seem quite gung ho about theoretical research) keep your mind open about other subjects for your graduate degree. Bioinformatics departments seem to want mathematicians at least here at UCLA. Not to mention if you read in last months issue of AMS's "Notices" (would link but unless you are behind a a school's firewall you can't view it) they have an article about the shortage of Phd's in Math Ed. (which is more cognitive science than math). So, I know where you are comming from. Pure Mathematics is quite a leap of faith but it's one that I am {smart|stupid} enough to take.

Soak it all up

[alanjstr]

You said yourself you're trying to soak it all up. So why are you asking about how you can limit yourself?

Roman Locomotives

[Perdo]

Archimedes prophetically predicted the fall of the roman empire because they only funded practical mathematics research. The Romans, lacking any theoretical mathematics to base new ideas on, did in fact decline. Their technology had hit a wall, much the same way that we have with unification. The mathematical underpinnings of chaos theory languished as an oddity 50 years after being discovered in a dead mathematician's mother's attic, before being used.

If you think about it, the romans had everything they needed to build steam locomotives. They had advanced road building, knowledge of steam dynamics, the ability to forge pressure vessels and an unrivaled industrial base. What they lacked was vision and the will to do anything that might seem impractical.

Hats off to you and godspeed.

It's tough

[one-egg]

I'm really the wrong guy to answer this (the right ones work down the hall from me), but given the dearth of responses I thought I'd take a stab at it. Our math department is carrying out a faculty search right now. IIRC, they are expecting 200-300 applications for the job. Purely on statistics, it beats the hell out of the lottery but you shouldn't quit your day job.

However, the statistics are a bit pessimistic. About 50% of the applications are pretty wildly unqualified (the extreme example being MS holders applying for a Ph.D. position). If the search is looking for particular expertise and you have it, another 50% of the survivors will get tossed out. Obviously, it's still tough, but not impossible -- especially if (a) you're good at what you do and (b) you persevere.

You can also do research outside universities. In fact, if you don't have a desire to teach, it can be better to avoid academia. Some industrial research labs want mathematicians. There are also pure industry spots: for example, I think Wall Street is quite fond of math right now (though a lot of it might not be research, depending on how you define "research").

A lot of the above applies to other "paper and pencil" disciplines, such as CS theory.

An upcoming bright spot is biology. After centuries of trying to get a handle on a complex topic, the bio folks have finally started to develop models that are tractable with the help of computers. If you develop an interest in that particular sort of math, you might discover that there is huge demand by the time you graduate. The field is hot enough that we've added a new bio/math major.

Above all, though, my advice to all people seeking a career is the same: follow your heart. You're going to be doing it for 40 years or so, and that's a lot easier if you're having fun. Also, getting from high school to a math Ph.D. is going to take around 8 years, maybe more (I took 13, not counting time spent working, but I'm in a time-consuming field). Who knows what the job situation is goinig to look like 8 years from now? Maybe Enron Jr. will be hiring all the mathematicians it can get its hands on to develop models of how to scam the energy market. :-)

Re:It's tough

[scruffy]

I agree that landing a Math faculty position is very tough. Currently, a CS faculty position is much, much easier. Many universities have had open CS positions go unfilled for years due to the dot-com madness, while the Math positions get 100s of applicants.

That said, you should work on what interests you the most. It is very difficult to put a lot effort into a subject that is not interesting to you.

About CS

[Anonymous Coward]

I think CS could have been great, but the cheaters completely destroyed it for me.

Lots of jobs

[cperciva]

Most universities expanded dramatically in the 60s... that faculty is retiring over the next five years. Many mathematics departments are losing 40% of their faculty within a five year window.

Jobs are going to be available.

Re:X^n + Y^n = Z^n

[lastninja]

I have a beautiful proof but it will not fit in this comment.

Very

[Ratbert42]

When I was working on my PhD in Computer Science, one faculty opening at a smaller state school had 70 applicants. A faculty opening at our large state research school had over 300 applicants. The market is tough, but it can be done. If you want to go to a research school, it's all about publications and grant possibilities.

If you can show a breadth of research in your field, you'll boost your chances. I saw the review process when we hired faculty. Most applicants had one research idea, which had been fed to them by their advisor. The best applicants had several viable (fundable) research ideas to pursue.

Grants and Pubs

[Red_Winestain]

The way to get an academic job in Math is the same as in most other scientific fields.

1. High School: Very high GPA, Very high SATs, Very good letters of recommendation, so that you can...
2. Get into a college/university with an excellent undergraduate math program. Then, get very high GPA, Very high GREs, and three letters of recommendation from faculty with PhDs, so that you can...
3. Get into a university with an excellent graduate math program. Ignore the university's overall reputation; go solely with the department's reputation. Math isn't my area, so I can't give a recommendation. However, some departments in the really prestigious schools suck. Some departments in somewhat obscure state schools trounce the Ivies. Get solid advice. Then, get publications. The more pubs the better. Do an outstanding dissertation in a reasonable amount of time. Get excellent letters. Then...
4. Get a job. I like to tell our recent PhDs that once they get a job, all they have to do to keep it is to do 2 dissertations per year plus bring in money plus teach! There will be several hundred applicants for each job. Post doc experience can help. Then publish, publish, publish, get grants, get grants, get grants. Teaching is secondary. In many places, reverse the order: grants count more than pubs. Some places are even specifying how much in grant money you must bring in.
5. Get tenure. Tenure is all or none: if you get it, life is good and it is why people put up with all the crap above and the below-industry salary and the outdated infrastructure and the administration. If you don't get it, you are a failure and will find it hard to get any other job in academia.

If you like doing your own research, you cannot beat a tenured faculty position. If you don't mind someone else telling you the general research area, then go into industry.

Right path but , too early for your question.

[tshoppa]

You're going along the right path: following what you're interested in. That's wonderful. I'm sure you find it challenging and interesting.

But you're just a high-school student. I don't mean to belittle you with that, but to devote your career to academics at this point is a bit early. Certainly, get your degree in math if that's what you love. Go to grad school in math and then you'll start to get the flavor of what life is like in academics. You'll also (hopefully) learn about the job market there.

Yes, you probably can stay in academics all your life. You might not like it, though. You might have to do research in areas you aren't interested in; for part of your career you might have very little time to do anything but teach (while at the same time you really also have to be publishing!). You'll almost certainly be looking at moving around a lot, first to grad school, then to a series of postdocs at different institutions, then start moving up the ranks towards tenure (which often involves moving sideways to other institutions, too.) If you love travel and not settling down, it's great. If you're looking for stability, it may not be for you.

You'll also be able to go into many industries or branch out into some other area. Mathematicians are in demand in a number of different areas (some of which you may not enjoy, though.)

Don't box yourself in at this point. In fact, it's hard to box yourself in until grad school. So do what you enjoy, discover new things, have fun!

My 2 cents

[Lictor]

I figured I'd chime in with my two cents worth since not too long ago I found myself in exactly the same spot as you. I loved mathematics but was very skeptical about being able to make a living doing pure math. Heres what I did:

As an undergraduate I double-majored in pure math and computer science. I took every theoretical computer science course I could get my hands on and by my 3rd/4th year of undergrad I was pretty much doing exclusively math. Yes, 2nd year specifically involved suffering through many 'coding' courses, but in the long run this isn't such a bad thing. A computer is a wonderful tool for a mathematician and knowing how to program one well is actually a very desirable skill (note, I still hated the programming classes ;) ). I enjoyed TCS so much, in fact, that I ended up doing my Ph.D. in computer science and not mathematics.

Don't let anyone fool you... theoretical computer science *is* math; and to be honest, its math that I found more interesting than any of my 'pure math' courses. As far as courses, on the math side I took as many abstract algebra courses as I could and on the CS side I focused on automata theory and formal languages (with a good helping of recursive function theory and semantics).

There were a number of posters above who mentioned mathematical biology and bioinformatics. For me, anyway, this was bang on the target. There is a huge need for competent mathematicians who are willing to learn a little bit about biology. We are at the point where biology is beginning the transition from a qualitative to a quantative science and we *need* good models.

Again, don't be fooled into thinking you have to do applied math. Sure, coming up with a model is 'applied' in some sense, but once you have the model you get to investigate it and try to prove properties that you think it has (e.g. recent work involved showing that the gene-descrambling process in hyptochious ciliates is computationally universal. Proving that is fun mathematics).

And of course, once you get a job and a grant, theres nothing preventing you from also researching other topics too (my 'academic hobby' is foundations of mathematics... but you don't get too many grants for that ;) ).

Job prospects in Computer Science (academically speaking) are good right now; though its certainly tougher as a theoretician than, say, a software engineer. But, if you can market yourself correctly, I think its easier than pure math.

I hope that stream-of-conciousness rambling was of some value to you.