Leaky Pipes

The analogy of leaky pipes is often used to describe the career path of scientists away from academics. It's also used to describe the loss of women from academic science. I read a blog this morning wondering where in the world grad students and postdocs are going. There have a been a slew of blog posts like this recently and as one drop in the leak, I figured I'd address it here.

Warning: for the non-science, non-academics out there, this may be boring.

1. I have some issues with the phrase "leaky pipe" and all variants thereof being used to describe some sort of fictional mass exodus of scientists away from science. First, this analogy assumes that there is only one valid end point, Academia. This, in and of itself is ridiculous since more graduate students are accepted into PhD programs than faculty positions exist. Additionally, it assumes that no science is done anywhere other than in the hallowed halls of the university, which is also false. I say this as someone who used to believe the line about academic research being somehow inherently better than non-academic research.

2. Not all scientists who leave academics leave science. A good number stay in science in some capacity. The high tech and biotech industries seem to take a good number of my peers. Others go for community college teaching and lecturing gigs. This also is not leaving science, since educating others to "do" science is still science. I've seen some people go the patent law route and again, still science, just another way in which to be involved with science. We need to stop preaching that all science is done at the university.

3. Several blogs recently have asked about the resources available to graduate students and postdocs for finding "non-science" (non-academic) positions. I would say that this varies widely from university to university. I've been at 3 universities now and saw one with few if any resources, one where companies send representatives to the department and one where the faculty knew their students were heading for industry and forged many personal relationships with industry that their students could take advantage of. None of these models really seem to work as they are intended and they all seem to leave out all of the practical aspects of finding a non-academic job. I had to learn how to write a resume, where to look for jobs (PhD jobs are not posted on monster) and companies that may have hidden positions and all of this sort of thing on my own. Sure, the internet was useful and friends were (slightly less) useful, but more seminars on how to write a science resume and cover letter would have been more than helpful. A one quarter class called "how to find a job" taught as a seminar class where passing was based solely on attendance would be great (as would making all science geeks take some technical writing, but that's another story).

4. The blog-o-sphere seems to be concerned about keeping scientists in the pipeline. This is a problematic concern since there aren't as many "end of the pipe" academic jobs as there are science PhDs. I think this question is poorly asked. Even if someone does truly leave science (as defined by me in point 1, plus lots of other options I haven't put down for the sake of brevity), why is this problematic. A PhD in the sciences is really just a certificate to solve problems in a VERY systematic way. Pose a problem to your favorite science PhD or almost PhD and then pose the same problem to a non-scientist. Make it something simple, like how best to get a list of things done in 2 hours or how to organize the closet. Now compare the answers. They won't be the same. This level of analytical reasoning has a place outside of science and yet, with rare exception, it's not taught or learned outside of science. We see the world very differently... through Asperger tinted lenses if you will. Our solutions to non-science problems can be pretty darn creative and pretty darn cool. Why is this an invalid use of our social disorders... I mean skills?


So, Aspeger's joke aside, what are your thoughts? Is there a mass exodus of scientists from science? Where are we going? Can you think of a better analogy than a leaky damn pipe, cause that one is annoying?

For now, we will completely ignore all the problems with academic science. This is not a post pointing out that the Ivory Tower has some structural engineering issues. Perhaps if I remember, I'll post on that too. Also, this isn't a post bashing academia either, so save that for some other post's comments.