<p>From the Chronicle of Higher Education, a new study by UC Berkeley finds increasing numbers of grad students setting their sights on jobs in the private sector or government instead of academia, largely because only 29% of women and 46% of men perceive research universities to be "family friendly workplaces" for tenure-track professors. Although by a wide margin the grad students surveyed thought LACs and other "teaching-intensive" schools were more "family friendly," many found government or industry more attractive because they perceived the teaching-intensive schools to be a "lower rung" on the academic ladder.</p>
<p>Many complained that the "all-or-nothing" pressures of the tenure process would place extraordinary demands on their time, nullifying the benefits of nominally "baby-friendly" parental leave policies. These trends were most pronounced among women in the sciences, with only 20% of women grad students in the sciences saying they wanted to pursue careers at research universities.</p>
<p>Let me give them another reason: academia is one of the nastiest, most petty and back-stabbing work environments. My personal pet theory: too many high achievers going after too little money. It turns them vicious ;)</p>
<p>Katliamom, Quite true about the scheming festivals in academe. At times the tweed jacket set can make Machiavelli look like Mr. Rogers. </p>
<p>Another factors is grad students can often see what happens to their compatriots who do go into academe and don't manage to get the FT position. It does tend to make a very strong point about the whole situation when these students have been taught by a fair number of part time adjuncts. </p>
<p>And as the economy worsens the old line people are retiring in lesser numbers. So it's part time or less for many who do aspire to academe. </p>
<p>Plus at many schools even the full time profs make less than their colleagues in the private sector. And its hard to maintain a sense of noblisse oblige when confronted with the debts incurred getting the alphabet soup needed to become a prof...</p>
<p>I have such a different experience. But alas, I'm in a business school and $$ make a huge difference (I don't make what my counterparts on Wall Street make, mind you, but 300k a year is fine by me). Schools want to save money? Cut back on some faculty salaries in the business school!</p>
<p>Every research school I've taught at provides a parental leave (stopping one's tenure clock for a year, whether mom or dad)- that isn't just in the business school mind you. And post-tenure, it's hard to see how teaching 3 courses a year, just one term or quarter per year, isn't family friendly. I publish a lot, serve on committees, and teach my load, but throughout my children's elementary school years, I was always home by 3. Flexibility is the key to family friendly. Its a reason I would be happy if my D went into academics. </p>
<p>I counsel my graduate students who seem misguided in assuming 'teaching schools' are somehow more lax and laid back. The requirements are simply different but the workload the same. At teaching schools you teach a LOT more, and still have to publish (but less). At research schools, the balance is the other way around. Both require as much as any profession (at least pre-tenure). But post-tenure it's a ridiculously good deal (and stats show the vast majority of faculty across disciplines end up with tenure somewhere).</p>
<p>Interesting, very interesting. I am a college student, strongly headed in the direction of academics...and always perceived an academic life to be ideal for both a good family life and career satisfaction. At least for those who manage tenure at a good university. </p>
<p>I am honestly surprised. Is this by any chance not applicable to tenured professors, and only for the postdoc stage? I mean, I don't want academia consuming my life beyond a certain point, though I think I'm quite a good fit for it in terms of intellectual preference...</p>
<p>Also, in terms of lifestyle and finances, how do those working for the smaller, more teaching-intensive areas fare? Someone who is tenured, that is.</p>
<p>As for including finances there...I want a good lifestyle, not to be affluent. I would head into academia because it's a good fit only. But I wanted to contrast the situation at small schools, as mentioned by articles - if it offers better family life opportunities, but is lower in the "raw prestige" factor, what about plain old lifestyle and finances.</p>
<p>I've always heard that the politics are so vicious on campus because the stakes are so very low. </p>
<p>Having said that, my niece is nearing the end of her undergrad years and has decided to go straight through to a PhD so she can become a professor. I think it's a good choice for her. A year ago it might have seemed a little risky but with this economy? I have friends getting laid of in just about every industry imaginable. Why not go for what you love, be as cautious as you can about money and hope for the best?</p>
<p>Bus. school tenure-track profs start with six figures, but the rest depends on private vs. public, research vs. teaching school, one's discipline (finance pays the best), one's rank and if they have an endowed chair or not. Most senior colleagues find that consulting gigs and executive education can be a substantial boost. I know colleagues at an Ivy who earn $10k a day talking to executives. </p>
<p>Funny thing is I never went into this for the money at all-- didn't have a clue until I got into a PhD program. Sheer luck because I could have gone into several different disciplines that may have not had tenure-track jobs at all, let alone pay well. And in fact I left a more high pressured but famous school for less money, but a much more relaxed environment. I couldn't care less about prestige; so long as I'm supported to do the research I do, I keep my recognition and enjoy my career.</p>
<p>But money aside, it's the best job on earth, especially for parents (even pre-tenure!). I get to work with intellectually curious people from all over the world. Extremely flexible hours. Job security. I get paid to learn and study what I choose. Everyday is different and mostly what I make it to be. I can do research. I can consult. I can write a book. I can teach or develop a new course or a program. I can talk to the media about various world events. I get inside interesting organizations. I get to travel a lot on grants. I get to teach what I love, and choose my own days to do that. I get a paid year long sabbatical after every four years (most schools its after 6). </p>
<p>What's not to like about this job? And I simply fail to see how it's not family-friendly; where would it be moreso?</p>
<p>I am currently on track to head to a Ph.D. program after my undergrad. What I do after I get a Ph.D., I don't know, but with lots of self-reflection, I can say I am more certain I want a Ph.D. than I can that I want academia for sure...the idea of academia is ideal, but don't know about the reality.</p>
<p>Sheesh, why so inactive! I'm really interested in what the experienced ones have to say about this topic.</p>
<p>I believe academia has a more profound effect on women than men. Women are now realizing that the ivory tower isn't as family-friendly as it appears to be, especially if you plan to raise more than one child in graduate school and tenure-track positions. If you end up as an "permanent" adjunct, that's even worse.</p>
<p>Well, having bashed academia a bit I do have to say it IS more family-friendly than many (if not most) big corporations. I work for one where the max vacation you can accrue is 3 weeks, where you're expected to stay late with no notice, and where medical/retirement benefits get trimmed back on an annual basis Don't even ask about maternity benefits or even mention sabbatical :)</p>
<p>As a tenured professor, whose students and fellows have gone onto academia and industry, I must say that academia is by far more family friendly than industry. This especially holds true as one advances up the ladder in both forums. In addition, industry positions are very far from secure even after more than a decade at a company!</p>
<p>Lastly, desirable jobs in industry are just as difficult (if not more) to land than desirable jobs in academia. Too many students are looking for an easy route to support a desired lifestyle without having a realistic idea of how much work it takes to advance to leadership levels in any field!</p>
<p>So would you all disagree with the article? I.e. the OP's first post. </p>
<p>I too was a bit surprised that people could perceive academia as so unfriendly to family life. It seems to the contrary. I have felt that the hard part is <em>getting</em> tenure.</p>
<p>Matthboy academe can be family friendly insofar as during certain times of the year there is a fair amount of autonomy in the use of job related time.
And except for the adjuncts, the sharecroppers of academe, working conditions can be quite tolerable insofar as one is allowed a fair amount of latitude insofar as how one does their given discipline. </p>
<p>On the tenure issue there are substantial problems. First is that many colleges prefer to use the adjuncts as they are cheaper and often have quite good credentials. Another is that from an institutional perspective tenure is coming close to being a financially unsustainable state because of the aforementioned trend. Also there is a substantial amount of conceptual disconnect between the older profs who are tenured and those of a newer generation who know they are likely to remain on yearly contracts, or gods help them continue on adjunct contracts. The disconnect is largely because one generation is not willing to admit they are a fading possibility and the other generation is having to admit they bought into it all.</p>