Academia reboot

 Source: .Rmd/.md


We need to reboot academia, at least for graduate training. I am speaking from the point of view of ecology/evolution (EEB). Why you ask? Because of the following line of reasoning:

What do we do?

To address the supply/demand issue, I think we need fewer graduate students, period. I think this will work for a few reasons. If there are fewer graduate students, those that get in will be of higher quality because profs can be more selective, they may get payed more (hopefully) since there are few students, and they should in theory get more attention from their advisers (if they want it). In addition, there would be less competition for the very few grants out there for grad students. This would then lead to fewer postdocs, and less competition for faculty positions. I think the supply/demand issue in EEB is particularly problematic. That is, in EEB there doesn’t seem to be the large quantity of private sector jobs as there is for Ph.D. graduates in engineering, physics, etc.

The funding situation is beyond me, but definitely makes me want to leave academia. Crowdfunding, especially #SciFund, is an option for scientists, but mostly only on a small financial scale. Any thoughts?

The skills issue will likely be addressed in time, and vary among schools for sure. Some schools will focus on natural history, which is good (that’s where I did my undergrad and it was great), and some schools will incorporate more of these science 2.0 skills (advanced stats, better math training, and computer science).


Get the .Rmd file used to create this post at my github account - or .md file.

Written in Markdown, with help from knitr, and knitcitations.


Matthews KRW, Calhoun KM, lo N, ho V and Germano G (2011). “The Aging of Biomedical Research in The United States.” Plos One, 6.

comments powered by Disqus