The Cutting Edge: COMPUTING / TECHNOLOGY / INNOVATION : The Ph.D. Glut: New Scientists Outnumber Jobs in Many Fields
He doesn’t seem like the sort of young man who would have to worry about the future. He’s bright, energetic, with a Ph.D from a major university in molecular and cell biology, a branch of science that seems to be booming. Yet, after more than a decade of advanced education and nearly three years as a postdoctoral teaching assistant at one of Southern California’s most prestigious universities, he is very worried indeed.
His concern, after all his years of hard work, is that he doesn’t have a permanent job and chances are chillingly slim that he will ever find one in his chosen field.
He is a victim of what some in education are calling the Ph.D. glut.
We will just call him John for now, so anything said here will not hurt his chances of landing a job. He’s agreed to let us look over his shoulder from time to time in the next year, to see what happens to him. His day of reckoning comes May 1, when his postdoctoral position runs out.
“Older scientists are now telling my generation to leave science because there will not be a job for most of us after the postdoc,” John said in our first meeting via e-mail.
John’s plight is all too familiar to David Goodstein, vice provost and professor of physics and applied physics at Caltech. Perhaps best known as director of the popular television program “The Mechanical Universe,” he one of the nation’s foremost experts on the sad state of affairs now faced by some of our most gifted young people--those who have chosen science for a career.
“Is it likely that a lot of people like John are not going to be able to find work in their fields?” I asked Goodstein.
“Yes,” he said, bluntly.
Goodstein had just returned from a meeting at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology with many of the leaders of American science, including three science advisers to the White House. One report discussed at the meeting, he said, concluded that of all the young Ph.D.s being cranked out by universities today, 40% to 90% will not find jobs in their fields.
Many will do as John has done: take a low-pay postdoctoral spot for three years, then perhaps another for the next three years--and perhaps emerge at the end with no better options than they have now. Goodstein describes the postdoctoral program as “a kind of holding tank for scientific talent that allowed young researchers to delay confronting reality for three to six or more years.”
John is considering taking a second postdoc, but only as a last resort.
“My main concern,” he said, “is if I take another postdoc, what do I do three years down the road? Will I be employable after that time?”
The harsh statistics suggest probably not.
How did it come to this?
The modern age of science began around 1700. Science grew at exponential rates, especially in Europe and later in the United States, as it came to be seen offering hope for solutions to many of society’s problems. That growth rate continued through the “golden age” of science, between 1950 and 1970, when young graduates could choose from a rich assortment of job opportunities.
The “beginning of the end,” as Goodstein puts it, came around 1970, when the rate of production of Ph.D.s matched the country’s needs. But as the number of scientists grew, funds became tighter. Since the end of the Cold War, opportunities for employment have been in a precipitous decline.
“The era of exponential growth in science is over,” he said, and it isn’t going to come back because most scientific disciplines--with the possible exception of the relatively new field of computer science--have reached full employment. There is still much work to be done, but the labor market is saturated.
Over the last century, the growth of just one discipline--physics--shows the scope of the problem. The nation’s first Ph.D. in physics was awarded in 1870, Goodstein said. By 1900, 10 physicists were receiving doctorates each year. The number rose to 100 a year by 1930 and to 1,000 new physicists a year by 1970, he said. The production has leveled off since 1970 because of reduced funds and the tighter job market, but the surplus continues to grow. The figures are similar in other disciplines, he said.
*
A professor of advanced science in any university in the country turns out an average of 15 Ph.D.s during his or her career, Goodstein said. “Yet the system (for absorbing new graduates) is not growing any more. That’s the crux of the problem.”
Goodstein addresses the solution two ways.
Increasing funds for basic research would open more jobs for today’s graduates, but he is well aware of the shortage of federal dollars. The most important need, he believes, is to restructure the educational system so that more talent and energy are devoted to raising the general level of scientific literacy than to churning out more and more Ph.D.s.
Neither of those solutions is likely to come in time to help people like John. Knowing that, and aware of the particularly tight market for new physicists, Goodstein pondered the question of whether he would plan for a career in physics if he were starting out today.
“I think probably not,” he said slowly.
“When you and I were young, the world was bright with promise,” he said. “Every generation did better than the previous generation. That was the American dream. Nobody believes that any more.”
Not even scientists? I asked.
“Not even scientists.”
*
Lee Dye, a former science writer for The Times, has covered a broad range of science subjects for more than two decades. He can be reached via e-mail at 72040.3515@compuserve.com.
