May 30th, 2008
I should have known that some astronomer would have already tackled, quantitatively, some aspects of what I discussed as an “Academic Ponzi Scheme” a few weeks ago. Travis Metcalfe wrote a paper last year which is publically available here. Here’s the title and abstract:
(Submitted on 17 Dec 2007 (v1), last revised 19 Dec 2007 (this version, v2))
Abstract: In an effort to encourage self-regulation of the astronomy job market, I examine the supply of, and demand for, astronomers over time. On the supply side, I document the production rate of Ph.D. astronomers from 1970 to 2006 using the UMI Dissertation Abstracts database, along with data from other independent sources. I compare the long-term trends in Ph.D. production with federal astronomy research funding over the same time period, and I demonstrate that additional funding is correlated with higher subsequent Ph.D. production. On the demand side, I monitor the changing patterns of employment using statistics about the number and types of jobs advertised in the AAS Job Register from 1984 to 2006. Finally, I assess the sustainability of the job market by normalizing this demand by the annual Ph.D. production. The most recent data suggest that there are now annual advertisements for about one postdoctoral job, half a faculty job, and half a research/support position for every new domestic Ph.D. recipient in astronomy and astrophysics. The average new astronomer might expect to hold up to 3 jobs before finding a steady position.
Basically, he’s putting hard numbers on my qualitative discussion. Check it out.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
[…] the increasingly elusive permanent job and actually do science every day. With the problems of the academic ponzi scheme, getting that permanent job can be really […]