I came across this blog post on twitter a few days ago titled "What Does It Mean to Be a Successful Academic? And How Not to Suck at Achieving It". Sounds great, and as a junior academic crawling to the end of my PhD looking (and hoping) for that elusive postdoc position, it felt like a timely read. The post has been shared a bit and does have some positive messages that I agree with. I confess however, the more I read the more the post failed to resonate with me, so here goes with trying to reconcile that. Note: I am trying to be balanced, but these issues are hitting home.
The first message is to enjoy the work, which I wholeheartedly agree with. The example of slaving away 80-90 hours a week to get that perfect paper or self-nominated award, etc, sounds extremely unappealing. I also like the mindset that what defines success is a personal thing and driving to be "the best" in a field isn't necessarily healthy (nor conducive to good science, which is the marker of success that I would like to drive towards).
The question, is it worth it? is raised and it is an important side of the coin to balance. While not mentioned explicitly, the theme of life first and academic achievement second agrees with my mindset. One Postdoc in my research lab is honest about this and conveys the refreshing attitude that while she loves her job and research, if and when necessary she will leave academia she will do so and be happy about it. Life first, academia second. I think that this is the way it should be.
Where I think that the message of the post was derailed for me is the mention of one of the benefits of tenure as not having to worry about having the most publications or highest impact factor etc. This is perhaps where the idea of personal achievement comes in. My idea of achievement at this stage is to do enough to stay in academia without an employment gap once my studentship funding runs dry. This introduces the thing that the post fails to capture, competition. At the early researcher stage, you are fighting for these positions tooth and nail. That means if you can get an extra publication, publish in higher impact journals (which I realise is nearly entirely BS, but is still sadly important), acquire research funding, and so on, then you pretty much have to play that game just to get the position. As a junior academic you are also susceptible to Departmental/University procedures which can leave you at a disadvantage (or at least not receiving full credit for grant applications due to being too junior, as I found to my own dismay recently). When competition and a lack of positions drives what is the most basic aspect to being an academic, having an academic position, the whole notion of the post fails. We junior academics cannot not worry about it and be content with a reasonable amount of output but not enough to stand out from the crowd. This left me with a take home message (completely unintended by the author I am sure), that having tenure means that you can stop worrying and enjoy life. But, what about everybody else?
Recently we had a discussion with our director of graduate studies who gave the average completion time of PhDs in our department at 44 months. For those like me lucky enough to have funding, it will run out after 3 years. So in terms of being successful and not sucking at achieving it, the best case scenario is that PhD candidates are finding extra funding to finish their PhDs. Realistically, they are likely being strategic and submitting their theses at a later date in order to get out those few extra papers and to get the extra time a few years later when applying for fellowships. Worst case scenario, it means that too many PhD candidates are paying their way through the latter stages in order to be competitive in this under-funded environment.
I'll try to bring this full circle and my apologies for the rant. Again, given present worries about employment, the post hit home. The importance of personal context, desired quality of life, and definition of success are stressed as key factors to balance in this equation. I agree that these are factors to balance in order to have a fulfilling life. However, when your definition of success is actually being able to stay in academia (or get into academia in the first place) then the milestone moves too far away from that set in that particular post. It all comes down to personal circumstance, goals, and life balance. In my case, without the benefit of tenure, the achievements that may be seen as arbitrary may also be the very ones that enable me to do what I love and stay in research.
No comments:
Post a Comment