Many Junior Scientists Need To Take a Hard Look at Their Job Prospects (nature.com)

In its careers section this week, science journal Nature surveyed more than 5,700 early-career scientists worldwide who are working on PhDs. Three-quarters of them, they told the journal, think it's likely that they will pursue an academic career when they graduate. How many of them will succeed? The editorial board of the journal wrote in a column published on Wednesday. Most PhD students will have to look beyond academia for a career, the editorial board added. From the article: Statistics say these young researchers will have a better chance of pursuing their chosen job than the young footballers. But not by much. Global figures are hard to come by, but only three or four in every hundred PhD students in the United Kingdom will land a permanent staff position at a university. It's only a little better in the United States. Simply put, most PhD students need to make plans for a life outside academic science. And more universities and PhD supervisors must make this clear. That might sound like an alarmist and negative attitude for the International Weekly Journal of Science. But it has been evident for years that international science is training many more PhD students than the academic system can support. Most of the keen and talented young scientists who responded to our survey will probably never get a foot in the door. Of those who do, a sizeable number are likely to drift from short-term contract to short-term contract until they become disillusioned and look elsewhere.

Comments

Yeah, been through that

[swan5566]

But in my experience it was a blessing. Academia is so political now - not just to get in, but to stay in (tenure). Also they expect you to work yourself to death until you get tenure. Otherwise, your just a permanent postdoc wondering why you spent so long and so much to get the pay you're getting.

We need to take a look at our politics

[rsilvergun]

the drugs that kept a family member of mine alive were made in Europe at public Universities. Most drugs are (and then they're packaged up my big Pharma into profits). The computer I'm typing on wouldn't exist without massive public spending.

We're cutting all this back so we can give more and more money to the elites. Let's stop that. I get it, everybody's afraid of tax raises because even at $250k/yr a lot of us are paycheck to paycheck (60-80% depending on how you run the numbers). But here's a crazy idea: We can raise taxes on the wealthy elite without raising taxes on the workers? I know, crazy right? All it takes is to stop voting for your friendly neighborhood right winger. Oh, and make sure you show up at your Primaries so they don't sneak an economic right winger in because they're socially left wing.

Assume you will be average

[Steve1952]

Having gone through all this myself, my advice would be: "assume you will be average". Will this particular career let you have a decent life if you end up being about average in your field? If not, consider something else.

The Science Career System is Broken

[Yergle143]

The science job system is broken. The main problem is the federal subsidy of Graduate Student Stipends and Postdoctoral Fellowship salaries from grants. This has led to the situation of an oversupply of bright people in what amount to full time jobs with no benefits with little chance to achieve a rare faculty post. The fix is to stop the subsidy. Institutions need to take on fewer graduate students, pay them more and train them fully. Bolster the Master's degree for the less committed. The Postdoc should be eliminated and replaced with the term Contract Researcher which should be treated like a job. These people should be paid market rates so they can move to whomever is smart enough to get a grant.
For the kids out there, the current system is a sort of feudal concoction built to maximize imperious egos and is fundamentally exploitive.
Advise: go into science if you have the desire. Go to a good undergraduate school but if you do not get into one of the best institutions for grad school DO NOT GO.
It's that bad out there and it's winner take all.
Science is a rewarding profession but the hardest thing to understand is that even if you do everything right your career can still fail so you have to be brave. You also have to have GENERAL/VERSATILE knowledge to adapt with the times.
The parent article is predicated on the assumption that Science equates with dollars for science. Once basic science in an area is well formed it becomes technology and society has no compelling reason to keep paying for it. Tenured faculty who continue to burn out grad students working on subjects "understood" decades ago are part of the problem here.
Finally: biology is a vast frontier but the NIH wants cures. You don't have to fully understand cancer to kill it.