the real science gap

[cheeze]

---

Members don't see this ad.

http://www.miller-mccune.com/science/the-real-science-gap-16191/

An article i read recently. I assume that this applies to psychology as well? I just wanted to ask if anyone is feeling the pain of a lack of opportunities after getting a Ph.D. or can share more of their experience/others' experiences that they know of.

 

[AlaskanJustin]

http://www.miller-mccune.com/science/the-real-science-gap-16191/

An article i read recently. I assume that this applies to psychology as well? I just wanted to ask if anyone is feeling the pain of a lack of opportunities after getting a Ph.D. or can share more of their experience/others' experiences that they know of.

Ah yes the dirty little secret they don't like to say when promoting "academic" students... the whole "all the academic jobs are drying up" bit... eh its been going on for years.. probably decades...

The "probably arrogant" way I see it, is its just that much more motivation to be that much better during grad school, publish more, etc etc... make myself an undeniably better candidate for an academic job.

AJ

 

[Neuropsych2be]

http://www.miller-mccune.com/science/the-real-science-gap-16191/

An article i read recently. I assume that this applies to psychology as well? I just wanted to ask if anyone is feeling the pain of a lack of opportunities after getting a Ph.D. or can share more of their experience/others' experiences that they know of.

The reality is that academic jobs will be very very hard to get. There is a huge oversupply of Ph.D.'s across all academic fields and psychology is no exception. Tenure track positions will be few and far between and every position will get hundreds of applicants. Universities have discovered that grad students make cheap labor, post-docs make cheap labor, and adjuncts make cheap labor. This economic reality is unlikely to ever really change in the future, even when the economy improves. Academe will be a dead end for most students due to economic pressures on universities. This makes the recommendations by Baker and McFall all the more puzzling since they are advocating for a decrease in clinical training and increased emphasis on the creation of "clinical scientists" without thinking about where such persons might get hired. In my opinion this is a solution appropriate for 1950 rather than the realities of the 21st century.

 

[cara susanna]

I think it's a little early for this kind of doomsday thinking. Listservs still advertise faculty positions and I know people who are hiring/getting hired.

 

[erg923]

I think Baker and McFall's point is not that we need more academics, it's that we need more science oriented clinicians.

I cant help but notice their not so subtle disdain for the practitioner part of the profession in almost all their articles. I am certainly not the only one who has made that observation either. If thats really their thrust, they need to work on how the make it.

 

[PsychBrownBag]

I think that disdain goes both directions. Probably an area where everyone could stand to improve.

 

[CharmedDiamond]

This kind of thing is what scaring me OUT of psych and into law