 |
First, the majority of PhD-level academic mentors have a negative stereotype toward alternative careers that don't involve bench research; many of these careers are often viewed as "merely clerical" in nature. Academic mentors are trained to cultivate future academic researchers and mentors. Thus, some mentors feel that it is a waste of time to provide research and PhD training to individuals who will choose to pursue an alternative career, and thus, mentors may not support a transition away from the bench. Despite this, it is possible. After searching for over two years, I obtained a science writing and editing position with the Markey Cancer Center at the University of Kentucky.
We need to change how we perceive alternative careers. There are simply not enough academic jobs for all the scientists being trained, and PhDs can make significant contributions to positions outside of the laboratory setting. If appropriately credentialed, an individual should not be discouraged from pursuing any career. Those of us who are fortunate enough to have gained alternative career employment will lead the way in changing the misconception that life science-trained PhDs cannot adequately perform, for example, a job in the business sector.
The second major barrier to obtaining an alternative career position is the conventional PhD program, which does not address -- and certainly does not directly prepare students for -- opting out of academia. While PhDs may acquire translatable skills, such as problem solving, project management, and written and oral communication skills, they receive no formal training in prospective alternative career fields. This puts us at a disadvantage when searching for alternative careers. I received excellent training as a biochemistry graduate student, but little to none of that training directly dealt with obtaining and succeeding in science writing and editing.
An easy solution to this problem would be to begin obtaining the necessary education and training for your dream job before finishing your PhD. This is often easier said than done as many alternative career-seekers, like me, do not realize an interest in a non-research position early on. While I never considered becoming an academic researcher, it wasn't until my last year in graduate school that I decided to pursue a career in administration -- one that would allow me to apply my science background. However, at that point, writing my dissertation and completing my degree dominated my time.
Fortunately, unique educational/training opportunities are beginning to emerge to address the rising interest in alternative life science careers. Professional Science Master's (PSM) programs, for example, are being established throughout the US. PSM programs, similar to Master of Business Administration programs but fashioned for those who are educated in the sciences, prepare graduates for positions as science/research administrators in the biotechnology or healthcare industry and other business-related science careers.
Laboratory research is not for everyone with a passion for science. Attitudes toward alternative careers will likely change over time, and it will become easier to obtain additional education/training that will allow for a smoother transition. However, for now, the fact remains that many interested in pursuing alternative careers are at a disadvantage. For these individuals, identifying an area of interest, gaining hands-on experience, networking, and good old-fashioned hard work, determination, and perseverance remain the best method for landing their dream job.
Nathan L. Vanderford earned a PhD in biochemistry from the University of Kentucky, completed a one-year postdoctoral fellowship at Vanderbilt University, and is now pursuing a career in administration.
Related stories:
[1st August 2005]
[1st February 1999]
[9th November 1998]
[Comment posted 2010-04-20 10:18:59]
[Comment posted 2010-03-23 02:20:41]
There are many fallacies here. It is written primarily by an evangelist who opted out of bench work (he is certainly entitled to) who is trying to say that it is a logical thing to do. There can be no objection to the individual choice. What he missed out was on the personal nature of the decision. There is an in-built complaint that such transitions are neither anticipated nor encouraged in the original working (training/mentoring) environment. Why should they be? What is special about graduate level as opposed to say earlier Bachelor or Masters levels? Many have shown transitions. At each and every stage.
In the academia as well as in arts, a person has to find his place with some sense of devotion and take the risk. So many opt for a theatrical career and few end up with some level of significance. What are to be respected are the initial drive and its sustenance against odds. If many end up as waiters, there is no need to talk of there being honour in being a waiter. I am not preaching bigotry. A given profession cannot preach alternatives. It is the individual who looks for the alternatives.
Any one who has taught for a significant number of years knows how little comes of education and guidance. What I taught is unimportant compared to the fact that I taught. Many years and many changes later in ones career, a few come back to meet you and reflect on what difference that past contact has made in their lives. The operative word is ? a few?. That they do itself makes the effort worth its while. What is more important is that they do very little with what you taught or mentored but they have found the free spirit helpful in their own endeavors. That is a blessed mentor. The mentees found their own thing.
A lot of this has to do with how you execute your job, in research, at bench or wherever. Do the people around you and their opinions matter? It is a hard job to be able to switch between your own passion and that of the doubting Thomases who are actually, or hopefully, in search of their own.
[Comment posted 2010-03-18 17:50:02]
[Comment posted 2010-03-18 16:56:34]
[Comment posted 2010-03-18 14:36:57]
[Comment posted 2010-03-18 14:10:05]
I challenge the second assertion of this statement. I see little evidence that PhDs in any discipline, much less in science, are trained to mentor at all, much less cultivate future mentors (which would mean, mentoring future mentors so that they can be good mentors). There are a few institutions who provide mentoring training. Perhaps psychiatry and clinical psychology are exceptions, because of the nature of their work. For most, "mentoring" is more-or-less equivalent to "role modeling"- just do whatever you see me do, or what I tell you to do. Of course there is some "coaching" for specific bench procedures or perhaps for public presentations. For the most part, scientists are not taught how to teach, and merely do to/for their students what was done unto them.
-John Rodgers jrodgers@bcm.tmc.edu
[Comment posted 2010-03-18 08:06:29]
[Comment posted 2010-03-17 13:50:57]
[Comment posted 2010-03-17 13:48:58]
When, during my postdoctoral training, a group of us approached faculty members to "lobby" for tuition reimbursment so we could take formal courses in fields other than science, we were told that we are already educated enough. While I do agree that spending 5 1/2 years on average for grad school and about as much for postdoc training is enough, it is important to recognize that not everyone will be impressed that you can run gels. I know that at least some of the NIH Institutes do provide additional training to their fellows.
Mentors want to clone themselves and that is why they are not open to talking about careers different from the one they are having. But a good mentor should also recognize that sometimes seeds grow best when not in the shadow of the parent tree.
[Comment posted 2010-03-17 12:09:52]
[Comment posted 2010-03-17 11:09:45]