Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's exactly opposite to my experience in physics. Professors teach the classes. Rarely will someone who isn't a professor actually be responsible for a class and then it's usually a postdoc. Graduate students will be TAs, grading, holding office hours, occasionally giving small review sections.
When it comes to research, undergraduates have some contact with professors. The professor will define the problem and maybe say one or two things about it, but the day to day supervision will be from a graduate student or postdoc. Professors at research universities don't really have time to directly supervise undergraduates. I knew some professors with groups so big they didn't really have time to supervise their graduate students, either.
Of course there are professors who work closely with undergraduates, but in my experience that was the exception.
I didn't mean to imply that professors never teach classes. Even in my experience, the professor almost always taught classes.
However, the research work typically gets you a lot of face time with the professors. I find it strange that you got none.
I didn't mean to imply that professors never teach classes. Even in my experience, the professor almost always taught classes.
However, the research work typically gets you a lot of face time with the professors. I find it strange that you got none.
That's not what I was trying to say. It definitely gets you in front of the professor more, but most of the research instruction is done by graduate students and postdocs. Which is probably fine, because tenured professors often forget a lot of the boring minutiae that make experiments run smoothly (
I did a couple of research projects as an undergraduate. The professor "hired" me, talked to me about the project (in both cases), and then all the work was done with one of the postdocs. The professor both wrote great recommendation letters for grad school. I worked with a couple of undergraduates as a grad student and the experience was similar. I was the direct supervisor of the work but the professor was involved at a higher level. As a graduate student I interacted quite a bit with both of my professors, which was a great experience.
There are certain "famous" groups in my field, however, that are just huge (40+ people) and theirinteraction with the PI is infrequent. There's a story of a graduate colloquium where one of these professors talks to the speaker and says something like, "that's really great work. who is your adviser?" to which the student presenter said, "you are".
Once upon a time, I wanted to be a professor. I went to a college where only PhDs taught - none of that TAs teaching the class nonsense. And every single professor I shared my dream of higher academic research with advised against it unless my family could support me long-term (nope). It's a shame. Now, I have several friends - including a man I'm seeing (history) and my former roommate (physics) - who either are working on or newly minted PhDs. Adjuncting is tough - but adjuncting in New England where jobs are plentiful but the cost of living is sky high is absolute misery.
Unfortunately, that PhD makes you very academically qualified but not so professionally qualified. After a few internships in undergrad, many PhDs throw themselves into research (as they should!) and come out in their late 20s with little professional skills. If finding a professor position doesn't work out, they have little other options.
I work on the administrative side of higher ed. That pays next to nothing as well, with many of my colleagues those wannabe professors who ended up working in a low level position in the registrar's office or elsewhere outside the academy. I was recently at a higher ed content strategy conference and met several PhD candidates who came to learn about the digital humanities and department website content in a desperate attempt to make themselves relevant. The history PhD who taught himself GIS and HTML, the math PhD who spends hours making math related GIFs for a Tumblr that has been coopted by his institution... Lots of thinking outside the box, hoping for the best, and planning for the worst.
It does seem odd that Math and Physics PhD programs attract such really smart people, but then the academic salaries in those fields are not that high. Also surprising that despite the current belief that we need more people in STEM, many science fields like biology don't pay well at all. THis all has something to do with supply and demand and particularly the availability of well paid jobs outside of academia that could help push market salaries up. PhD economists tend to do well salary-wise in part due to the well-paid job options outside of academia. In some other well-paid academic fields like finance and accounting, departments seem to limit the number of new PhD students they enroll.
It does seem odd that Math and Physics PhD programs attract such really smart people, but then the academic salaries in those fields are not that high. Also surprising that despite the current belief that we need more people in STEM, many science fields like biology don't pay well at all. THis all has something to do with supply and demand and particularly the availability of well paid jobs outside of academia that could help push market salaries up. PhD economists tend to do well salary-wise in part due to the well-paid job options outside of academia. In some other well-paid academic fields like finance and accounting, departments seem to limit the number of new PhD students they enroll.
Our governments lack of support for the sciences is party to blame. Grands and other funds are just not available like they were and it doesn't look good for the future. Very short sighted in my opinion.
I'd like to know what makes profs think they can go on a "sabbatical," whereas most private sector workers would just be flat fired for trying that.
You have to understand that university professors normally spend 70-80% of their time doing research and 20-30% doing teaching or related work. All a sabbatical means is they now spend 100% of their time doing research. It's easy to stereotype sabbaticals as some kind of extended vacation but it isn't what they are.
I'd like to know what makes profs think they can go on a "sabbatical," whereas most private sector workers would just be flat fired for trying that.
Maybe you should consider that private sector workers shouldn't be "fired" for wandering off the plantation, instead of speaking as the proverbial crab in the bucket.
I'd like to know what makes profs think they can go on a "sabbatical," whereas most private sector workers would just be flat fired for trying that.
Professors can't just take a sabbatical. There are requirements that need to be met prior. Typically, the professor needs to have worked for X amount of years and in many cases, attained tenure.
This is similar to the private sector. My previous employer allowed 2 years of sabbatical for every 7 years of work after the first 10 years of work (so after 10 years of work, you can take 2 years; after 14 years, another 2 years, etc.). My current employer has similar rules but I don't recall.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
