It seems to me that my anticipated graduation in August 2009 could not be more poorly timed. We all know that the economy is tanking and I fear post-docs will not be spared a hit. I think this will manifest in two ways.
First, I think there will be fewer positions available in the coming months. Universities are initiating hiring freezes, which means that people currently in post-docs will not be vacating them for faculty jobs. On top of that, poor funding rates mean that there may be fewer new post-doc positions created.
It's actually the latter that has me agitated and brings me to point number two. If established scientists aren't as successful at obtaining funding, then where will money for post-docs come from? I imagine that a larger proportion of new post-doc positions will be funded from start up packages. And that means that instead of getting a mentor who has decades of experience with a large network of contacts, you get one who is maybe two years ahead of you on the career path. In fact, I know of one case where someone wanted to do a second post-doc and was offered a position in a new hire's lab. Applicant and mentor got their Ph.Ds the same year. What's the point of doing a post-doc in that situation?
Physioprof wrote an excellent post at On Becoming a Domestic and Laboratory Goddess about how to find and get a post-doc. The merits of early-career vs. senior faculty advisors have been argued at length; Phsyioprof is something of an advocate for early career mentors and I can see his points. But I wonder if physiology post-doc positions tend to last longer so that new faculty have been out of grad school for longer than people in my field typically have when they start faculty jobs. Frankly, I think I prefer someone at least mid-career for a post-doc mentor (although my opinion of young vs old for PhD advisors is more flexible). I want someone with lots of experience to teach me how to write big grants, manage a lab, navigate funding agency politics, and share their network. I may not have a choice in the matter and I'm sure a successful post-doc could happen with a junior faculty mentor. But do you see where I'm coming from? Have I offended any junior faculty readers I might have?
5 comments:
I made my feelings clear over at Isis's blog. I, too, feel that the chances of having a rewarding postdoc experience are a bit better with an established lab.
However, there are merits to working under someone who is essentially your equal (e.g. the postdoc and PI who graduated in the same year). The postdoc will have an awful lot less at stake than the PI as the lab starts up. It's almost like a trial run at being a faculty member. You get to try things out as a colleague to your PI, learn from the mistakes you both will make, and this will certainly help you eventually in your own faculty position.
I don't agree with your speculation that postdoc positions will only be available with new prof start-up money. Many of these new profs will need their start-up money for other things, and a postdoc isn't always near the top of the priority list. The postdoc positions will stay where the money is, and the money is often with the established senior investigators (rightly or wrongly, not getting into that here). The big guys will still be hiring, although probably at a reduced rate due to lower turnover.
If you are a good student, you'll find a postdoc. Start looking now, it's certainly not too early.
I'm up for tenure this year, and I'm only now thinking that it would be nice to have a post-doc in the near future. I wouldn't have wanted one when I first started because there's a lot more pressure for publication for both of you, and I don't think it would have been healthy to constantly be competing with one another for first authorship. So I've gotten research assistance from grads and undergrads, which has worked out very well for now. And I think candid engineer is right--as long as there are grads to work with, a post-doc isn't essential at the early stages.
I also think that it takes a while for a new faculty member to build up the gravitas to write very strong and meaningful letters for job applications, so that might be another drawback.
I was in an early-career group for grad school, and our post-docs had it rough! You certainly would get exposure to grant writing in an early-career group, but you wouldn't want the PI to be so bogged down by grant writing that you can't get edits on your fabulous manuscripts.
GOOD LUCK!!
I wouldn't want to hire a postdoc with start-up funds. As a junior faculty member I'd prioritize funding grad students, field work, equipment etc. I also don't think it would be good to compete with a postdoc over who gets to write which papers. I'm sure a postdoc and an early career faculty member in some cases would be able to collaborate as coleagues, but it's not a situation I would have wished to be in - neither as a postdoc nor as a faculty member.
I completely understand where you're coming from too. I wound up delaying my completion date because of the economy and pulling positions off the table.
That being said, I have a "mentor" now that is junior faculty and one that is a full professor. If I had to chose which one I actually worked for /under as a post-doc I would 100% take the full professor. The junior faculty mentor is awesome and I'm learning more than I could have ever hoped, but in terms of politics, holistic thinking about grants/writing, and other nuances of academia - there is no comparison to the more experienced mentor. I'm sure there are tons of exceptions here, but that's my perception.
Post a Comment