In my last post, I mentioned the article published in the Globe & Mail this past Monday on the dismal academic job market. Not surprisingly, the economic downfall is hitting universities hard. In higher ed one of the most common strategies to weather this storm seems to be to implement hiring freezes. A gloomy prospect for PhDs waiting to land their first position.

The article is quick to assure readers that this can’t last forever, and such “setbacks” can be excellent opportunities to strengthen CVs through postdocs and publishing. All relatively true. Although I can’t help wonder at this rate how soon it will be until having books in print will be the industry standard for new faculty.

Historically, this is just the latest of a seemingly endless stream of events that have derailed the long-held prediction that a critical need for massive numbers of faculty is just around the corner. By now, this is beginning to take on the aura of apocrypha,which has been used to divert two generations of our brightest students towards academic careers that never materialized.

The fact is, the majority of PhDs who have graduated in the past 20 years have not landed up in tenured positions. Most have not ended up in academe at all. The Globe article is hardly “news.” It merely reiterates that things are  not going to improve anytime soon.

Yes there was that happy blip in Ontario when the double cohort of two graduating high school classes went through the system, amidst much political hoopla and well-publicized funding increases. In fact, the echo of that surge in enrollment is partly motivating the sudden interest in the opening of new spots in graduate programs.

In all fairness, many of today’s realities – the economic downturn, the reluctance of increasing numbers of senior faculty to retire, the systemic shift to replacing retiring faculty with contract workers – were not anticipated in the the late seventies and early eighties when the legend of an impending academic renaissance began to emerge. But since then, universities have retold the tale to each new graduating class, in spite of no evidence that the situation was really about to change.

It’s important that universities are up front with students they recruit into doctoral programs. A life in academe is not the likely outcome of this level of education. For many, that’s not a problem, they have their sights set elsewhere anyways, and, I want to emphasize, tend to do very well in the private sector when they have time and motivation to prepare in advance of graduation. But many would at least think twice about pursuing a PhD if they didn’t believe that there was a good chance they would land a tenure track position.

Only when the realities of the academic market are acknowledged, can its potential be truly realized. Only then will universities, governments and employers recognize that there is a growing pool of highly trained, extremely competent graduates who represent one of Canada’s largest untapped resources.

Right now the onus is almost entirely on individual grad students to figure out how their abilities might fit into the workforce. It doesn’t have to be this hard. Canadian universities provide a huge array of services, support, information and events to help our undergraduates transition successfully into society. It’s time now, especially now, to do the same for our graduate students.

If you didn't believe there was a good chance you would land a tenure track position, would you still pursue a doctoral degree?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
(3) Leave a comment | Permalink | E-mail post | Share

Comments

3 Responses to “Hiring freezes raise issues for PhDs in the job market”

  1. Andreas says:
    March 26, 2009 at 11:05 am

    Thanks for the article. For those who haven’t had the chance to read it yet, I’d also recommend the two installments of “Graduates School in the Humanities: Just Don’t Go.” I agree that only after acknowledging how tough the situation is, the student will be able to realize his/her potential

    http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2009/01/2009013001c.htm

    http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2009/03/2009031301c.htm

  2. Nancy Stevens says:
    March 27, 2009 at 3:32 pm

    Thanks so much for writing your article. I am currently a PhD candidate (still wondering if I’ll survive with head still attached at the end of it all!!) in a non-mainstream program. I entered the program believing that my doctoral work was not intended to land me in the academy, but would rather enhance my work in the community. (I may prove myself wrong yet!) Interestingly, it was a number of the faculty in the program who seem fixated on the idea that one works through a PhD only for the purpose of entering into the ranks of the academy. Somewhat ironic, I think, given competition for faculty positions is high at the best of times.

  3. Sam Ladner says:
    March 30, 2009 at 12:36 pm

    Thanks for writing this blog and this particular post. I was one of the many duped doctoral students who “did the math” and believed that I was in a good position to enter the academy. I and my colleagues are now piecing together as many course contracts as we can get, wondering how long we can hold out with precarious sessional work.

    I am angry at times but also pragmatic. I believe the academy will be like the federal government soon and realize that they’ve missed an entire generation of hiring. The middle level that shoulders most of the burden of teaching, research and service will be wiped out, and all that is left is the very green entry level and the very long-in-the-tooth senior professors. In the meantime, however, I advise people to leave the academy. There is no future in it for many.

Leave a comment