Balance is needed when discussing academic careers

Originally published in Nature: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-03216-3

Is the stream of negativity around academia putting people off?

It’s no secret that an academic career has many challenges, short-term contracts, low pay, long hours – as well as in the uncertain, exploratory nature of science. And they don’t go away with tenure: academic time is getting increasingly proscribed, funding is reducing, more is expected from less, management are more remote. As a principal investigator I am constantly juggling and hopping from one uncertainty to the next: yes I have a job, but I still need to find money to pursue my research and develop the careers of my team.

As with most academics, I have often considered quitting because of these challenges. The three times that I came closest were six months into my doctorate, when absolutely nothing was working, finishing/writing-up my PhD thesis, which drove me to despair, and the first big grant rejection early in my PI position. I still wonder about other/different career paths. I’ve worked in academia my whole adult life (+/- a period in the army reserves). The little voice suggesting something better definitely gets louder when I am weighed down with admin or stresses about how to keep the lab going.

The structural challenges in academia are not going away any time soon. In the UK, where I work, an increased workload, reduced pensions and destabilisation of long-term positions are making academia as a career increasingly unattractive. Recent survey data paints a picture of a substantial number of mid-career scientists who are extremely dissatisfied with their career opportunities https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01512-6.  Data from Advance HE, a British organisation that champions improvements in higher education, suggests a slight decline in postdoc numbers between 2019 and 2021 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02781-x. The net impression is that early career scientists are being deterred from academic careers.

This drift from basic science begins before students even go to university. There is a lack of understanding in schools as to what scientific careers involve. I only did a science degree because it was what I was best at, I did a PhD because I didn’t really know what to do with my life after my degree.

To improve understanding, increasing numbers of academics are doing outreach programmes in schools to describe the career and paths into science. But in my experience enthusiastic high school biologists are more interested in careers in medicine than in biological research. I can see their reasoning. A career in medicine, as a doctor or a surgeon, has a structure and a job plan that’s likely more attractive than ‘scientist’ which let’s face it is pretty nebulous even to those of us who are doing it as a career. Of course, ‘scientist’ is not the same as ‘academic’. Academia is the alternative career, with most science post-graduates employed outside of universities.

That all said, focussing solely on the negative is I think problematic, especially when people are discouraged from trying an academic career at all. We need to celebrate the good parts, and by that I mean not just successes in terms of papers or grants, but celebrating where academia brings us joy – an experiment that surprisingly worked, a colleague who helped you, a student who got you to look at a problem with a different light, a trainee who flourished.

And there are many good bits to academia. For me, it’s the science, the freedom and the people. And by freedom, I don’t just mean the freedom to research what you want, but also the freedom to choose how you spend your time be that teaching, researching, writing a book.

These good bits come with a cost, but in the end, nothing of value ever came easy. Academia is hard, there are no two ways around that, but so is working in a biotech, or a charity, or a school, or a hospital, or a publishing house. Jobs outside the academy come with their own list of challenges. These might be softened with increased pay, but the pound of flesh expected in return can be more substantial.

It comes down to making choices. And to make those choices, you need the best, most accurate information. For this I would recommend applying the same scientific method as you might to the day to day workings of your career.

1. Collect data. You don’t have to love all of the job; I think we all need to make a judgement call, are we happier more days than not and do the rewards offset the costs? Try doing this systematically – dedicate a period of time to reflecting on what you do and do not like. Or more simply just write down a score at the end of each day.
2. Expand the sample size. Who do you listen to? Social media is notoriously self-repeating, so it may be you are missing other voices and other opinions: burst your bubble. Talk to others within your department at seminars or outside of it at meetings. Ask them about both good and bad aspects.
3. Experiment. There are several schemes that can support a shorter (or longer) placement with another organisation. These may give you a chance to see if the grass really is greener. For more dyed in the wool academics, sabbaticals can perform the same role.

For those of us who are more established, to enable others to make those choices, both sides of the argument need to be presented. After schoolteachers, academics are the most visible scientists to students and trainees and therefore do have an influential voice. It needs to both bemoan the hard parts and celebrate the good. My constant moaning about paper portals needing fax numbers and the committee I am on over-running but not telling about the things that bring me joy only paints one side of the picture. As with most things, academia is a mixed bag, so let’s celebrate positives in equal measure to bemoaning the negatives.