Re: [ECOLOG-L] job market, retirement, etc.
Seems to me that were forming a circular firing squad and attacking ourselves. We all know that there is a very tough job market, but are "dead-weight" faculty really a significant part of the problem? Seems to me more of the blame goes to the tax-cutters, legislators, and the ever-expanding corp of well-paid university administrators. Most of us work our butts off for many years to get good graduate positions, good post-doc positions, good tenure-track positions, and finally, hopefully tenure. I frankly don't blame some faculty for taking their foot off the accelerator after they finished that obstacle course and maybe shifting some of their time to the bottomless pit of university and departmental committee work. Now the message is "get out of the way"? When do we get the sweet reward of a less-stressful academic life after our years of underpaid toil? Barney Luttbeg On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Lone Ranger wrote: > At 70 years young this summer, I will retire. Looking back over my long > career, I am proud I participated as a scientist and educator in one of the > greatest universities in the country. My publication record is not as > admirable as some, I never published in Science or Nature, but I my > research regularly appeared with students in the primary journals in my > sub-discipline. But enough about me. > > In my career I cannot remember a more daunting job market than the one I > have witnessed during the past 3-4 years. Recently, I sat on a search > committee for a position in which we screened more than 250 applications. > Of these, well over a third had stellar credentials. However, I have to > ask how much a person really contributes on a manuscript to Science that > has 15-20 authors, including essentially everyone in the home lab. This > kind of publication inflation by labs who do it, is simply dishonest. But > I digress. The job market must be at a the worst state it has ever > reached. > > How others my age, with 30+ years of service and a nice retirement package > sitting in investments, the bank, or under the pillow can look at > themselves in the mirror each morning knowing that many young Ph.D.s are on > food stamps, WIC, and unemployment is difficult for me to understand. It > further mystifies me why those tenured faculty members and administrators > allow individuals who are no longer productive, and largely incompetent in > their fields, to hang around. Is allowing these sorts of parasites on > academia to continue in positions they no longer deserve to occupy? What > happened to post-tenure review? Each of us really needs to ask if we might > serve our field better by eliminating some of these warm bodies. Choosing > to retire is not an end, it is a beginning. Choosing to evict inactive and > now incompetent faculty is not a violation of tenure, it is maintaining the > sanctity of tenure. > > Yesterday, I spoke with a middle-aged Ph. D. He/She has been partially > employed for over a decade. He/She has been in and out of jobs thanks to > the financial difficulties so many institutions are faced with, combined > with the corruption at the administrative level which so many of us is very > familiar. His/Her retirement is zero, prospects are zero, and yet he/she > continues to publish without any resources. How many are there that fit > this mold? > > It is bad enough that many of our departments serve as homes for > co-workers who no longer serve our discipline in any way, having long ago > stopped publishing and now serve as little more than clogs in the system's > plumbing. There is little to nothing most of us can do about these selfish > former scientists. But the rest of us can still contribute, advise graduate > students, and publish as retirees. It might be easier without teaching and > committee responsibilities taking up our time. > > Will this email cause anyone to stop and thing? I doubt it. But, I look > forward to a productive retirement in which I continue publishing, support > our program, and the discipline knowing that having stepped aside, some > other player is getting their turn at bat. I hope he/she hits a home run. > > Sincerely, > Lone Ranger > > -- Dr. Barney Luttbeg Oklahoma State University Department of Zoology 421 Life Sciences West (405) 744-1717
Re: [ECOLOG-L] job market, retirement, etc.
My response is colored by this morning reading an excellent article about why academics put up with working so hard (and by having to go to work on Monday despite it being a snow day because of non-research parts of the job). The expectation of "no relief" plays right into the hands of university administrators. Quoting this recent article: 4) Work that is "fun" is often not perceived as *real* work. Academics may be busy, but, hey, we're *doing what we love*, so we can't really complain, right? We can and we should. As Miya Tokumitsu recently wrote, the "Do What You Love" mantra "may be the most elegant anti-worker ideology around," and it's particularly pervasive in academe: *Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. This intense identification partly explains why so many proudly left-leaning faculty remain oddly silent about the working conditions of their peers. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.* As she says, "Nothing makes exploitation go down easier than convincing workers that they are doing what they love." Indeed, the "Do What You Love" philosophy's ability to refashion academic labor as a form of leisure contributes to the unrelenting sense of busy-ness. We work because we love it. Or because we think we *should* love it. Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2014/03/03/essay-why-faculty-members-work-so-much#ixzz2v7eVgkAf Inside Higher Ed Best regards, Barney On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Lone Ranger wrote: > Circular firing squad? > > Productive people have nothing to fear. > Relief should not be the goal of a Ph.D. > > > On Wednesday, March 5, 2014 12:45 PM, Barney Luttbeg < > lutt...@okstate.edu> wrote: > Seems to me that were forming a circular firing squad and attacking > ourselves. We all know that there is a very tough job market, but are > "dead-weight" faculty really a significant part of the problem? Seems to me > more of the blame goes to the tax-cutters, legislators, and the > ever-expanding corp of well-paid university administrators. > > Most of us work our butts off for many years to get good graduate > positions, good post-doc positions, good tenure-track positions, and > finally, hopefully tenure. I frankly don't blame some faculty for taking > their foot off the accelerator after they finished that obstacle course and > maybe shifting some of their time to the bottomless pit of university and > departmental committee work. Now the message is "get out of the way"? When > do we get the sweet reward of a less-stressful academic life after our > years of underpaid toil? > > Barney Luttbeg > > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Lone Ranger >wrote: > > > At 70 years young this summer, I will retire. Looking back over my long > > career, I am proud I participated as a scientist and educator in one of > the > > greatest universities in the country. My publication record is not as > > admirable as some, I never published in Science or Nature, but I my > > research regularly appeared with students in the primary journals in my > > sub-discipline. But enough about me. > > > > In my career I cannot remember a more daunting job market than the one I > > have witnessed during the past 3-4 years. Recently, I sat on a search > > committee for a position in which we screened more than 250 applications. > > Of these, well over a third had stellar credentials. However, I have to > > ask how much a person really contributes on a manuscript to Science that > > has 15-20 authors, including essentially everyone in the home lab. This > > kind of publication inflation by labs who do it, is simply dishonest. > But > > I digress. The job market must be at a the worst state it has ever > > reached. > > > > How others my age, with 30+ years of service and a nice retirement > package > > sitting in investments, the bank, or under the pillow can look at > > themselves in the mirror each morning knowing that many young Ph.D.s are > on > > food stamps, WIC, and unemployment is difficult for me to understand. It > > further mystifies me why those tenured faculty members and administrators > > allow individuals who are no longer productive, and largely incompetent > in > > their fields, to hang around. Is allowing these sorts of parasites on > > academia to continue in positions they no longer deserve to occupy? What > > happened to post-tenure review? Each of us really needs to ask if we > might > > serve our field better by eliminating some of these warm bodies. > Choosing > > to retire is not an end, it is a beginning. Choosing to evict inactive > and > > now incompetent faculty is not a violation of tenure, it is maintaining > the > > sanctity of tenure. > > > > Yesterday, I spoke with a middle-aged Ph. D. He/She has been partially > > employed for over a decade. He/She has been in
Re: [ECOLOG-L] job market, retirement, etc.
Thank you, Barney, for your thoughts, and for sharing that article from Inside Higher Ed. It really is insidious how the culture of academe has come to value “productivity” and the appearance of being “busy” all the time so much that it is sucking its own very soul - the creative capacity of the scholars (tenure track, adjunct, postdocs, grad students…) that make any university a university. […he types this and wonders if he really should put the laptop down and get some sleep since it is 1AM, and the morrow will bring more exciting toil… but there are papers to read… and emails to write… and discussion threads to catch… and…] Madhu ~ Dr. Madhusudan Katti Associate Professor, Department of Biology, M/S SB73 California State University, Fresno 2555 E San Ramon AVe Fresno, CA 93740 http://about.me/mkatti On Mar 5, 2014, at 1:06 PM, Barney Luttbeg wrote: > My response is colored by this morning reading an excellent article about > why academics put up with working so hard (and by having to go to work on > Monday despite it being a snow day because of non-research parts of the > job). The expectation of "no relief" plays right into the hands of > university administrators. > > Quoting this recent article: > > 4) Work that is "fun" is often not perceived as *real* work. Academics may > be busy, but, hey, we're *doing what we love*, so we can't really complain, > right? We can and we should. As Miya Tokumitsu recently wrote, the "Do What > You Love" mantra "may be the most elegant anti-worker ideology around," and > it's particularly pervasive in academe: > > *Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so > intimately with the work output. This intense identification partly > explains why so many proudly left-leaning faculty remain oddly silent about > the working conditions of their peers. Because academic research should be > done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this > labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.* > > As she says, "Nothing makes exploitation go down easier than convincing > workers that they are doing what they love." Indeed, the "Do What You Love" > philosophy's ability to refashion academic labor as a form of leisure > contributes to the unrelenting sense of busy-ness. We work because we love > it. Or because we think we *should* love it. > > Read more: > http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2014/03/03/essay-why-faculty-members-work-so-much#ixzz2v7eVgkAf > Inside Higher Ed > > Best regards, > Barney > > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Lone Ranger > wrote: > >> Circular firing squad? >> >> Productive people have nothing to fear. >> Relief should not be the goal of a Ph.D. >> >> >> On Wednesday, March 5, 2014 12:45 PM, Barney Luttbeg < >> lutt...@okstate.edu> wrote: >> Seems to me that were forming a circular firing squad and attacking >> ourselves. We all know that there is a very tough job market, but are >> "dead-weight" faculty really a significant part of the problem? Seems to me >> more of the blame goes to the tax-cutters, legislators, and the >> ever-expanding corp of well-paid university administrators. >> >> Most of us work our butts off for many years to get good graduate >> positions, good post-doc positions, good tenure-track positions, and >> finally, hopefully tenure. I frankly don't blame some faculty for taking >> their foot off the accelerator after they finished that obstacle course and >> maybe shifting some of their time to the bottomless pit of university and >> departmental committee work. Now the message is "get out of the way"? When >> do we get the sweet reward of a less-stressful academic life after our >> years of underpaid toil? >> >> Barney Luttbeg >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Lone Ranger >> wrote: >> >>> At 70 years young this summer, I will retire. Looking back over my long >>> career, I am proud I participated as a scientist and educator in one of >> the >>> greatest universities in the country. My publication record is not as >>> admirable as some, I never published in Science or Nature, but I my >>> research regularly appeared with students in the primary journals in my >>> sub-discipline. But enough about me. >>> >>> In my career I cannot remember a more daunting job market than the one I >>> have witnessed during the past 3-4 years. Recently, I sat on a search >>> committee for a position in which we screened more than 250 applications. >>> Of these, well over a third had stellar credentials. However, I have to >>> ask how much a person really contributes on a manuscript to Science that >>> has 15-20 authors, including essentially everyone in the home lab. This >>> kind of publication inflation by labs who do it, is simply dishonest. >> But >>> I digress. The job market must be at a the worst state it has ever >>> reached. >>> >>> How others my age, with 30+ years of service and a nice retirement >> package >>> sitting in
Re: [ECOLOG-L] job market, retirement, etc.
Barney and all, Thank you for posting that article as a good reminder.I feel that one of the big problems is lack of communication. In my previous career, I always found it best to be straight with my clients when there were problems and to provide possible solutions. I did the same in college and discussed my concerns/needs with my advisor. I have never regretted it and found that keeping communication open was mutually beneficial. I've often noticed that younger students (late teens/early 20's) are afraid to speak up. It seems students are taught how important it is to communicate clearly as scientists but not as humans. Professors, advisors, and even us "non-traditional students" should be setting an example for more open communication and a work-life balance. To be productive and healthy we all need time to maintain relationships and ourselves. Cheers, Cynthia Ross On Mar 6, 2014, at 3:11 AM, Madhusudan Katti wrote: > Thank you, Barney, for your thoughts, and for sharing that article from > Inside Higher Ed. It really is insidious how the culture of academe has come > to value “productivity” and the appearance of being “busy” all the time so > much that it is sucking its own very soul - the creative capacity of the > scholars (tenure track, adjunct, postdocs, grad students…) that make any > university a university. > > […he types this and wonders if he really should put the laptop down and get > some sleep since it is 1AM, and the morrow will bring more exciting toil… but > there are papers to read… and emails to write… and discussion threads to > catch… and…] > > Madhu > ~ > Dr. Madhusudan Katti > Associate Professor, > Department of Biology, M/S SB73 > California State University, Fresno > 2555 E San Ramon AVe > Fresno, CA 93740 > > http://about.me/mkatti > > On Mar 5, 2014, at 1:06 PM, Barney Luttbeg wrote: > >> My response is colored by this morning reading an excellent article about >> why academics put up with working so hard (and by having to go to work on >> Monday despite it being a snow day because of non-research parts of the >> job). The expectation of "no relief" plays right into the hands of >> university administrators. >> >> Quoting this recent article: >> >> 4) Work that is "fun" is often not perceived as *real* work. Academics may >> be busy, but, hey, we're *doing what we love*, so we can't really complain, >> right? We can and we should. As Miya Tokumitsu recently wrote, the "Do What >> You Love" mantra "may be the most elegant anti-worker ideology around," and >> it's particularly pervasive in academe: >> >> *Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so >> intimately with the work output. This intense identification partly >> explains why so many proudly left-leaning faculty remain oddly silent about >> the working conditions of their peers. Because academic research should be >> done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this >> labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.* >> >> As she says, "Nothing makes exploitation go down easier than convincing >> workers that they are doing what they love." Indeed, the "Do What You Love" >> philosophy's ability to refashion academic labor as a form of leisure >> contributes to the unrelenting sense of busy-ness. We work because we love >> it. Or because we think we *should* love it. >> >> Read more: >> http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2014/03/03/essay-why-faculty-members-work-so-much#ixzz2v7eVgkAf >> Inside Higher Ed >> >> Best regards, >> Barney >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Lone Ranger >> wrote: >> >>> Circular firing squad? >>> >>> Productive people have nothing to fear. >>> Relief should not be the goal of a Ph.D. >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday, March 5, 2014 12:45 PM, Barney Luttbeg < >>> lutt...@okstate.edu> wrote: >>> Seems to me that were forming a circular firing squad and attacking >>> ourselves. We all know that there is a very tough job market, but are >>> "dead-weight" faculty really a significant part of the problem? Seems to me >>> more of the blame goes to the tax-cutters, legislators, and the >>> ever-expanding corp of well-paid university administrators. >>> >>> Most of us work our butts off for many years to get good graduate >>> positions, good post-doc positions, good tenure-track positions, and >>> finally, hopefully tenure. I frankly don't blame some faculty for taking >>> their foot off the accelerator after they finished that obstacle course and >>> maybe shifting some of their time to the bottomless pit of university and >>> departmental committee work. Now the message is "get out of the way"? When >>> do we get the sweet reward of a less-stressful academic life after our >>> years of underpaid toil? >>> >>> Barney Luttbeg >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Lone Ranger >>> wrote: >>> At 70 years young this summer, I will retire. Looking
Re: [ECOLOG-L] job market, retirement, etc.
>From the time I was an undergrad through completing my PHD I was taught that science is about research, and that it was the responsibility of a person with a Ph.D. to maintain some level of research productivity regardless of their position's expectations. I am curious if others believe this? Is this the over-whelming opinion of ecologists/PHDs, or is it just a unique view I happened to be exposed too stemming from the kinds of professors I was most in contact with throughout my studies? Since graduating, I discovered a lot of people seem to stop publishing after tenure or after final promotion. I will not kid you that I found this shocking because of how I was taught to perform. Why do people stop publishing after going through all the rigamaro to reach a professorial position and tenure? Is it that they never really liked doing it? Is it stressful? IS it just because you are so over-worked that the energy to do this is no longer available? I am really curious about this phenomena and the reasons people drop their productivity. The main situations where I have noticed people seem to drop off or cease publishing is under extreme teaching loads or burdensome responsibilities. The other time is a wind-down to retirement. Some people kind of cut down on publishing at this time. As an FYI, here is an exerpt form a study in review: "Early studies (Clark 1974, Gmelch et al. 1983) suggested the top three occupational stressors for university faculty members were (1) self-expectations, excessive time constraints, and inadequate resources. However, self doubt (Shull 1972, Hunter et al. 1980), absence or poorly defined guidelines for judging faculty performance and inadequate or lacking reward structures also were common sources of stress (Wilke 1983). More recently though, financial inadqueacy, perceived organizational practices, home-work conflicts, work overload, poor management practices, and job insecurity have risen to the top as important stressors (Leung et al. 2000; Gillespie et al. 2001). There is also evidence that occupationa stressors of university faculty are rising dramatically in recent years (Winefield et al. 2003; Gillespie et al. 2001), especially in respect to increasing administrative responsiblities and pressure to publish (Tijdink et al. 2013), obtain grant money (Gumport 1997; Santos 2007; Wimsatt et al. 2009). These problems can culminate in burnout (Sullivan and Bhagat 1992; Taris et al. 2010), which is highly correlated with large teaching loads and numbers of students, multiple demands on limited time, and reliance on numerical student evaluations (Bauer etal. 2006; Lackritz 2004)." A point that needs to be made here is that burnout is not simply a lazy person dropping the ball. It is a three-dimensional syndrome characterized by high levels of exhaustion, cynicism, and poor professional efficacy (Taris et al. 2010). It is also defined as a chronic state of extreme psychophysical and emotional exhaustion (PSenicy 2006). This disorder IS NOT DEPRESSION although it acts like it in many ways. Burnout appears to be a disorder related to chronic fatigue sysndrome (van Houdenhove et al. 2009). Further, it is a multisystem disorder with affective, cognitive and physiological manifestations (Insel and Charney 2003; Lebowitz et al. 1997). And, yes it can be life-threatening. People who have jobs that require high intellectual investment including physicians, teachers and professors are largely extremely susceptible to it. So, it is important for us, especially those like me who have had it beat into our heads otherwise, to recognize it is incredibly difficult to decipher between someone who is burned out and someone who is simply not interested. The key factor here is that burnout cases do not just cut research, they also cut aspects of teaching and service. Its just not so obvious that the other two cases are taking place. If you have someone in your department who appears burned out, it is important that they get the correct assessment and treatment. Application of Maslow's test and possibly a physiological screening for stress is very appropriate. If this review-assessment gets published, I'll be glad to forward on the entire paper to anyone who wants a copy. For now, its just in review, and a very unusual tangent from my usual area of research. I became familiar with this disorder while studying publication trends in faculty. IT enlightened me to an entire situation I had no idea existed. I hope my little except enlightens others. On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:11 AM, Madhusudan Katti wrote: > Thank you, Barney, for your thoughts, and for sharing that article from > Inside Higher Ed. It really is insidious how the culture of academe has come > to value "productivity" and the appearance of being "busy" all the time so > much that it is sucking its own very soul - the creative capacity of the > scholars (tenure track, adjunct, postdocs, grad students...) that make a
