Table of Contents

• The State of Crowdfunding Today
• Sampling Some Successful Campaigns
• Where to Go
• Picking the Best Platform
• Things to Remember

Perpetual conversations mourning the ever-tightening budgets of academic institutions sometimes seem like an apocalyptic harbinger for research. Studies and inquires meant to further human knowledge may not be on hold, but competition for grants, fellowships, awards, and other financial support escalates as resources grow scarcer. But a uniquely 21st century innovation might very well rescue the financially floundering scholar — crowdfunding.

Its premise is simple. Pitch a product. Offer some incentives at different levels. Then see which friends, family members, fellow professionals, and strangers donate money to support the project. This strategy famously helps struggling artists release their dream projects, and crowdfunded projects raked in an estimated $2.7 billion last year.

“Crowdfunding is gaining in popularity among researchers,” says Daniel D. Gutierrez, the CEO and co-founder of science-oriented crowdfunding platform FundaGeek. “The only issue is that their institutions do not understand crowdfunding and are putting up roadblocks. For example, university development departments don’t have a financial mechanism in place to accept money from a large number of small pledge donors, so there is resistance.”

He added that, though some schools are slow to adopt the format, the researchers and academics are eager to give it a try. “We’ve seen a lot of success in crowdfunding by undergrad researchers who accept the money outside of the university,” he says.

The State of Crowdfunding Today

All evidence points toward crowdfunding continuing to enjoy growth within the academic community. The sciences especially thrive, with some of the most successful projects offering compelling products and projects in biology, technology, and other disciplines.

“Scientists gravitate to crowdfunding because it provides the means to fill holes in the traditional grant process that’s become hypercompetitive and time-consuming,” Gutierrez explains. “With crowdfunding, you don’t have to write lengthy grant applications.”

He continues: “The money coming from a crowdfunding campaign can be very important in making sure important research projects keep moving forward. There is no reason why crowdfunding can’t become an integral part of the scientific community.”

In a guest blog for Scientific American, Dr. Jai Ranganathan of the #SciFund Challenge celebrates crowdfunded academic research as a solution to waning funding from the National Science Foundation, National Institute of Health, and other organizations. But its perks benefit more than just the scientists behind the projects. Opening up research engages a populace whose scientific literacy is dropping . It engages the very people who benefit from research most, allowing them to actively take part in the process by donating and following along with the progress.

The #SciFund Challenge helps ensure all participating parties, both crowdfunders and crowdfunding recipients, gain from the projects involved. So far it seems to be doing an excellent job of nurturing an appreciation of the option, if the number of projects they showcase is any indication. The challenge, should scientists choose to accept it, is to build relationships with people who benefit from their work — us.

As Ranganathan’s group points out, fewer than 20% of scientific proposals receive funding from traditional outlets. But a jokey Kickstarter campaign for a statue of Robocop surpassed its goal by 35%, and a project designed to make a movie from cult TV show Veronica Mars raised $5.7 million, almost three times its original goal. If academics could harness the same public enthusiasm for their work, they could easily address the issue of where to find the money. Recently, #SciFund Challenge began offering training courses for any scholars curious about crowdfunding.

Gutierrez also sees a positive trend incoming: “I believe the interest in academic research for crowdfunding is increasing. This year I’ve seen a lot written about the subject, and this is striking considerable curiosity in many scientific areas.” He cites the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, which has expressed a desire to use crowdfunding as an alternative means to sponsoring academics.

“I expect 2013 to become a breakout year for crowdfunding research,” he says.

Sampling Some Successful Campaigns

Both the Clouded Leopard Expedition and Orangutan Field Research were held up as examples of FundaGeek projects Gutierrez found particularly notable. While neither hit their exact goals, they did receive a generous outpouring of support . Thirty-five backers donated $1,823 to Meg Harris with the Clouded Leopard Expedition, and 29 contributed $1,311.

Because FundaGeek allows crowdfunding academics to keep the money they receive even if they fall short of their target, any project earning donations is considered successful. Any positive support received should be accepted with grace and gratitude. And, of course, a prompt delivery of any incentives.

Gutierrez also noted the currently ongoing Possum Vision as another great initiative. Run by 8th-grader Josie Baudendistel (along with her Ph.D. papa and mentor at University of Dayton), the FundaGeek campaign pays for this year’s high tech science fair project. As of this writing, she has already received $1,155 out of her $1,390 goal. Possum Vision proves that academics are not the only researchers who benefit from pursuing this option. Students unable to access funding through the traditional channels might be able to rally friends, family, and even industry professionals to pay a small price for big research returns.

NPR recently featured two innovative, high-profile Indiegogo campaigns dedicated to analyzing microbes of the human body: American Gut and uBiome. American Gut raised $338,736 out of a desired $400,000, while uBiome set its initial fundraising goal at $100,000 and wound up rewarded with $351,193.

Both projects involved similar scientific aims and offered detailed, compelling presentations with pictures, charts, media links, and explanations of the research process. They provided appropriate rewards at different levels, with some participants earning the honor of testing their own body’s microbial structure. But uBiome likely earned more than American Gut for one major reason: its minimum donation was set at $5. Nobody could donate less than $99 to American Gut. Providing more opportunities for crowdfunders of all economic backgrounds democratized uBiome’s structure and accepted a wider range of interested participants.

Both uBiome and American Gut can be considered successful campaigns, obviously. They earned hundreds of thousands of dollars for their research — a laudable accomplishment regardless of their original stated goals. But crowdfunding academics might want to stick with uBiome’s more accessible payment options if they hope to increase their chances of hitting certain milestones.

Crowdfunders also gravitate toward projects with tangible results, especially if they actually receive the product after launch. Nanolight, trumpeted as “the world’s most energy efficient light bulb,” offered an actual bulb as one of its incentives. It ended up attracting 5,746 supporters donating $273,278, when its original goal sat at $200,000. More than 2,500 contributors chipped in $52,089 toward DrinkSavvy, a startup company collaborating with a Worcester Polytechnic Institute professor to produce straws and cups capable of detecting drugs used in date rapes. Donors at specific levels will receive the results once they establish the finalized formula.

DrinkSavvy and Nanolight not only catered to sponsors’ desire for physical products, they also succeeded because of their appeal beyond the scientific community. Everyone benefits from rape and sexual assault prevention. Everyone benefits from eco-friendly technology. Because of this, both campaigns attracted supporters across multiple demographics. DrinkSavvy received donations from rape prevention groups and domestic violence shelters, while Nanolight enthused environmentalists. Engaging communities outside the industry involved reflects #SciFund Challenge’s goals of promoting learning while simultaneously furthering academic inquiry.

Crowdfunding through the right platform also determines success and satisfaction. Each one reaches out to a different audience and provides different services, which do influence how much money researchers receive.

Where to Go

Some of the most high-profile research projects chose general crowdfunding sites like Kickstarter (Nanolight) and Indiegogo (uBiome, DrinkSavvy) to draw support. RocketHub is another option appealing to broad audiences, including academics. Brazil’s 2012 iGEM team used it to raise the funding necessary to compete, earning $2,995 and surpassing their initial goal of $2,750.

Taking advantage of these platforms opens up projects to much wider audiences than their more niche-oriented counterparts. However, options exist for academics — mostly scientists — to raise money for projects alongside one another.

Gutierrez says, “FundaGeek is not an ‘all or nothing’ platform, and that is a big reason why researchers like our platform.” His company merges social media with crowdfunding for a full, satisfying user experience. Participating scientists appreciate both the community and the fact that they can keep the money, regardless of whether or not they meet their goals.

University of South Florida’s SciFlies marks a unique and groundbreaking relationship between crowdfunded research and the academic institutions that typically view them with hostility. The school recognizes crowdfunding as a viable strategy for supporting research, making it one of the few holding such a positive outlook. Unlike most of the other platforms out there, SciFlies also stands out because it only allows donors to contribute $10 or $20.

Microryza, Petridish, and iAMscientist all focus on crowdfunding options for specifically scientists as well.

Although the sciences dominate crowdfunded research, other disciplines have started cautiously exploring it as well. The Technology Commercialization Office at University of Utah announced a landmark partnership with RocketHub in February 2013. Known as the University Tech Vault, it encourages entrepreneurship among the school’s faculty, alumni, and student researchers. The program gives researchers the money necessary to develop their products as well as the support to commercialize them. Dr. Jim Martin’s Active Desk project, for example, has surpassed its goals thanks to this initiative.

Picking the Best Platform

Because crowdfunding revolves around money, it makes sense that money is the first thing any academic considering the option should research when choosing a platform, like how much of a cut the sites take(if any) and whether they charge to join and/or post a project.

Most importantly, researchers need to check whether they’re allowed to keep the money that’s donated if the original goal is not met by the deadline. Kickstarter and Indiegogo, the two most popular crowdfunding platforms, prove that both approaches have their supporters. Kickstarter only pays out to participants if they raise the minimum amount in the allotted time. Miss it, miss out on all the money. Donors are not charged. Indiegogo, however, lets users choose between two options: a fixed-funding plan that only pays out if they hit their goal, and a flexible-funding one that pays out no matter how much they raise (but which takes a bigger percentage of their earnings as a processing fee).

“Researchers should not choose an ‘all or nothing’ crowdfunding platform that only provides funding if the project meets its goal amount,” advises Gutierrez, whose FundaGeek allows users to keep whatever they earn no matter what. “In research, the goal amount is not that important, so if the campaign achieves 80% of the funding goals, the researcher should have the option to keep the funding. Many crowdfunding platforms will not allow funding even if you reach 99% of the goal amount.”

Always make sure to look over some of the academic research campaigns on every platform. This should provide some insight into roughly how much funding one can expect from a given community and which types of projects thrive or flounder. Proposals asking for hundreds of thousands of dollars might not work on a site where the most successful ones post five-figure goals. Know the target audience and the community before committing. More interdisciplinary projects might perform better on broader platforms, while niche research might appeal more to niche donors.

If crowdfunding is meant to supplement a grant or other source, check to see if a conflict of interest might result. Some institutions might not want to see backers supporting the project in tandem; they prefer exclusive financial control over the project.

Crowdfunding works best for research development and implementation, and not so much ongoing support. For example, academics will have more success with a campaign for a specific chemistry project rather than one aiming to regularly maintain a chemistry lab. Painstakingly analyze needs before attempting to meet them; not all research is created equal, unfortunately, and not all proposals will necessarily benefit much from a crowdfunded approach.

Things to Remember

• Offer good incentives and options: Always provide options staggered in such a way that small, medium, and large contributions are both allowed and properly compensated. Allowing for a wide range of funding options opens up more opportunities for donors; viewers will not look at your project and close the browser window disappointed that they couldn’t afford to help out. Nobody expects the $5 levels to receive the exact same rewards as their $10, $100, or $1000 counterparts. But make sure to offer appropriate rewards so they feel adequately thanked. Try picking ones that parallel the cost of what they’re giving.
• Clear methodology: In accessible language, explain to readers how you plan to conduct your research and make yourself available to answer any further questions. Sponsors appreciate concrete details; being vague or obscure won’t help you. If readers think your methodology might be suspicious, they will show support for other proposals.
• Remember pictures and videos: Including videos and images illustrating preliminary research or expected results greatly increases a project’s chances of getting funded. You may be offering an industry-changing proposal, but few will risk paying for it if you don’t illustrate exactly how everything will fit together.
• Budget: Crowdfunders want to see what all their money will purchase, so only showing them the final product won’t capture their interest. Break down everything you hope to buy, along with the estimated cost. And include some “stretch goals,” adding a little extra just in case you go over your original goal.
• Regular, transparent contact: During and after the campaign, always make yourself as available as possible to your crowdfunders, preferably through email. Address any of their concerns. Answer their questions. Show some love by collectively celebrating certain milestones, like $100 or $500 or $1,000, through emails to donors. If you manage to hit any delays or other hardships, be sure to contact them and keep them abreast of everything happening. Be apologetic and be polite. They’ll appreciate the honesty.
• Honor deadlines: For example, if you offer T-shirts as a $25 incentive, send them out once you get them from the screenprinters. Shipping estimates may not always line up with actual delivery dates, but you owe it to your supporters to alert them when the deadlines wind up pushed back.
• Find tangible rewards: You may grumble, but the fact is, crowdfunders prefer projects with results they find tangible and engaging. The Nanolights and DrinkSavvy straws attract more backers than sociological studies concluding as a journal article, or a research expedition in which they cannot actively participate. This may have something to do with project managers offering the final results as an incentive — a practice wholly recommended whenever feasible. People feel more connected to results they sponsored and can hold.
• Promote responsibly: Don’t ever use spam or sockpuppet techniques to solicit funding. Share the project through appropriate channels, like social media and the relevant sections of academic forums. If your product has crossover appeal, such as the DrinkSavvy straws’ merging of chemistry and social justice, you might want to pursue those avenues as well. Just stay polite and transparent as you would in anything else.
• Fund unto others: One way to build up a relationship with other crowdfunding academics is contributing to their campaigns. It fosters goodwill within the community, furthers the cause, and increases their chances of donating to your projects in the future.
• Always be gracious: Even $1 toward your campaign is $1 donated in faith and support. You might not always meet your goals, but you should always expend the effort to express genuine gratitude to every single contributor. Displaying a disappointed, accusatory, or defeatist attitude might actively sabotage future crowdfunding projects. A gracious researcher also takes care and time to answer any sponsor’s questions politely, clearly, and quickly.

With the exception of some pioneering early adapters like University of Utah and University of South Florida, most educational institutions approach crowdfunding with skepticism at best and hostility at worst. But educators themselves enthusiastically embrace the concept. Large sums of money necessary to support their research projects are not nearly as readily available as before, and crowdfunding lets them democratize progress. Most importantly, an engaged populace is an educated populace. Allowing people to take part in the research process through funding, incentives, and watching the results trickle keeps them invested in the experience and helps your research find a broader audience.

Stage One: The Basics

Inspirational Facebook images love that old adage about a journey of a thousand miles beginning with a single step, and it actually applies pretty well to the dissertation process. A dissertation is nothing without a cogent thesis. It needs to be focused (but not too narrow) and contribute at least something new to the overarching body of research on the chosen subject.

For example, writing about how A Confederacy of Dunces parallels doomed author John Kennedy Toole’s life covers extremely well-known scholarly territory. No faculty or department would approve this proposal. But pitching them parallels between the lively cast of A Confederacy of Dunces and archetypes common to Greek tragedy might pique their interest. It’s specific enough to fill the sometimes hundreds of pages necessary to complete a doctoral program, but it’s not so narrow that sources will not support the main ideas.

How students must structure their dissertations hinges largely on the school, the program, the major, and even the subject itself. There are no definitive rules for how long these documents must be upon completion, and no statistics about the average length appear to exist. Some dissertations can be as short as 30 pages. Others reach book length. Students will need to delve into specific programs’ general expectations before applying. Otherwise, they might find that 40-pager they were banking on is actually supposed to be a veritable phone book.

Dr. Jami Kovach, associate professor in the College of Technology at University of Houston and director of the Lean Six Sigma program, notes that some students receive the privilege of breaking one massive dissertation into several smaller, more manageable essays. “I think the format or structure of the traditional dissertation is starting to change (or at least there are more options). For example, as opposed to the traditional 8 or so chapter model, there is a growing trend for the 3-paper model,” she says.

“I like the idea of the 3-paper model because one of the most important things in the academic world is publishing research articles,” she continues. “So, why not teach Ph.D. students to do this through writing their dissertations? Then, when Ph.D. students graduate, they have some publications (or at least some under review) to bolster their C.V.”

Tone, however, is a little less negotiable. Everyone writes with their own personal flair, but they need to write scholarly, knowledgably, and clearly. The dissertation is a serious undertaking — not really a space for experimental stream-of-conscious automatic writing or competing for the title of America’s Next Top Tina Fey. Regardless of the discipline, professors and committees want Ph.D. candidates to write with the utmost clarity and heavy detail.

Dr. Heath Huckabay, a postdoctoral research associate at Oak Ridge National Laboratory who recently completed his Ph.D. in analytical chemistry, offers up an example from the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields:

“The tone of a scientific dissertation follows that of the scientific literature, which generally isn’t something seen elsewhere. … When you’re looking to publish scientific research, every word means something. ” he explains. “The phrase ‘cell reproduction was 15% faster at 32C as compared to reproduction at 22C’ means much more to a scientist than ‘the hotter cells reproduced faster,’ so word choice can alter how convincing a scientific explanation is.”

Depending on the discipline, the aspiring Ph.D. will have to know MLA, Chicago/Turabian, or APA formatting styles. Each department has its own standards for margins, font size, and spacing. However, every dissertation will require a bibliography of works cited and consulted in the required style, and frequently an abstract. Many fields, particularly the sciences, need a detailed explanation of research methods to ensure validity.

Most dissertations also involve an oral defense. Usually between 20 and 40 minutes, this component requires students to defend their research in front of a faculty panel. They explain the thesis, methodology, and conclusions behind their dissertations, and must prepare themselves to answer a volley of questions afterwards. Committees want proof that their graduates can think off-the-cuff about their chosen disciplines and know the content from all angles. As with the written portion, the oral defense should not be considered an opportunity to make jokes. Stay professional. A few splashes of lightheartedness can absolutely help add piquancy an oral defense, but it isn’t the place for breaking out the zany humor.

Dissertations take on different forms depending on the aforementioned variables. The lack of any industry standards defining how students should approach them makes the life-changing document seem even more intimidating. But the one thing they all have in common — no matter the school or industry or page length or decision to incorporate ed-tech — happens to be the one thing that actively chips away at the dissertation’s big, scary presence. Unlike the familiar essays written for class, dissertations are almost always self-directed. Even though they involve faculty advising, there are no prompts or rubrics to keep scholars focused, so they enjoy far more control over what direction they wish to take their research. That high degree of flexibility and independence empower Ph.D. candidates and grant them control over one of the most important documents they’ll ever write.

“Typically, you will select a dissertation advisor/committee chair at some point during your coursework,” Kovach says. “You will then develop a prospectus regarding your research topic and select a committee (usually 2-3 additional faculty members beyond your chair, although some universities are now entertaining the option of an industry committee member, I believe, especially when the research is being done or relates to an issue in industry).

“Near the end of your coursework, you will take a qualifying exam (sometimes called by other names in other fields, but this is what we called it in engineering), and then you officially become a Ph.D. candidate (if you pass),” Kovach continues. “Once your coursework is finished, you register for and receive academic credit for working on your research. Maybe halfway or two-thirds of the way through your research, you write your proposal and present it to your committee for approval (and feedback). If approved, you finish your research and defend your dissertation.”

Table of Contents

• Deciding to Pursue a Career in Academia
• Before You Graduate
• Succeeding in Academia

The economic downturn has been hard on just about everyone, even those hoping to find work outside of the traditional corporate workplace and carve out a career in academia. Academia, long unscathed by the ups and downs of the larger job market has been especially hard hit as state and federal spending on education has been slashed and schools look for ways to save even more by cutting back the number of new tenure-track positions available. These changes have had serious ramifications for young scholars hoping to forge careers as professors and researchers, and many have been pushed into poor-paying positions that offer little security and hope for advancement.

Yet this isn’t deterring many who have long dreamed of working at colleges and universities. In fact, more students are deciding to stay in school and pursue a Ph.D. than ever before. Science doctorates alone grew by more than 40% between 1998 and 2008, and Ph.D. graduation from all majors combined increased by 2.5% during the same period.

For those who are truly driven to work, research, and expand their areas of study, getting a Ph.D. is not only a smart career choice, it may be the only one that feels truly fulfilling. What’s more, while finding steady work within academia may be hard, it’s certainly not impossible. It’ll just require serious hard work, determination, and more than a little sound advice and preparation to get there.

Deciding to Pursue a Career in Academia

A career in academia can be immensely rewarding. It can also be frustrating and overwhelming, especially to those working their way up the ladder. That’s why it’s essential that students determine whether they really want to work in academia before taking on the often difficult task of finding work within the ivory tower. Here are some critical things to consider.

• Are you truly passionate about your research?

  Getting a Ph.D. and transitioning into work as a professional in academia requires an enormous amount of passion. You must truly love the field you’re working in and want to commit yourself to pushing it forward through your own research and discoveries.

• What is the job market like in your field?

  The job prospects for newly minted Ph.D.s in academia can vary quite a bit. Some fields have seen enormous growth in younger professors, while others are top-loaded with those who’ve been in the field for decades. Before committing to an academic life, do your research so you’ll know what challenges you’ll be up against.

• Do you enjoy teaching?

  While you may be able to take a couple of research-focused sabbaticals during your time in academia, you’ll generally be responsible not only for conducting your own research but also teaching courses. You’re likely to get some experience with this as a Ph.D. student, but not everyone will feel the same way about working with students and creating course content. While you can always work to improve your teaching skills, if you have an intrinsic dislike of it, academia might not be a good choice for you.

• What matters most to you in a career?

  Before choosing any career, it’s important to sit down and consider what matters most to you in a job. Is it prestige? The chance to make a difference? A healthy paycheck? Like with any career, there are benefits and drawbacks to working in academia, so make sure these pros and cons mesh with your values before diving in.

• What are you willing to compromise or give up?

  Getting ahead in academia will require some sacrifices. You may make less money, work long hours, or have to make choices that will impact your significant other and family. Consider what you are prepared to do to make this career a reality. Marie Hartwell-Walker, professor of psychology at University of Massachusetts Amherst and writer for PsychCentral.com, shares the advice she gives to Ph.D. students, stating, “If my student has a serious boyfriend or girlfriend, I urge them to talk about this together to make sure they are on the same page about what compromises they are each willing to make for each other’s careers, how much money they want to have, who should make it, and how they each want to balance their careers with other aspects of their lives.”

• Is it a job you picture yourself in for the long haul?

  Some Ph.D. students know they want to be professors before they even enroll in their first course in college. For them, academia is a dream job. It’s not simply a vocation, but a passion. Others, however, are less certain that academia is a long-term career for them. Make sure you’ve considered how you feel about your future as an academic and have addressed the alternative career opportunities that your degree will afford you after graduation as well.

This is not meant to discourage those working towards a Ph.D. to move away from academia. Rather, it’s to highlight some of the factors that may play into the potential success and job satisfaction that an individual may feel in getting involved in the academic sphere. Not everyone is right for a career in academia, and it’s smart to figure that out sooner rather than waste valuable time on a career path that just isn’t right.

Before You Graduate

Preparing for a career in academia begins while still in school, regardless of the type of degree or field you’re pursuing. In fact, some of the best and most important preparation for your future academic endeavors will take place before you start looking for a job.

Start Smart

The school you attend can matter more when getting a higher-level degree than at any other time in your career. Some schools are simply more prestigious, may provide you with more resources, and can even make you more desirable to future employers, so choosing the best school for your degree program is a smart first step.

Just as important is choosing an advisor. This person, usually a professor or researcher within the university, will be your source of support, advice, and guidance while you’re completing your degree. Choosing someone who’s interested in your research, who can point you toward resources and opportunities, and who is supportive of your ideas is critical to your success (and your enjoyment) in any upper-level degree program.

But what if you’ve already chosen an advisor and he or she isn’t working out so well? Don’t worry, all isn’t lost. The Academic Job Search Handbook advises turning to other sources of support in your department: “Take advantage of every opportunity to talk to and get to know other faculty members in your department. Ask them for opinions, perspective, and feedback in areas where you genuinely value their expertise.” In fact, some of the best career connections may be the junior faculty on your staff who are much closer to where you are in your career than the older, more senior faculty members.

Build Your Qualifications

In The Chicago Guide to Your Academic Career, economics professor John Komlos recommends that students get started early on getting published. He states:

“It would be extremely useful if you could start publishing while still in graduate school. There is no better way to impress upon the future readers of your CV that you are serious about embarking on a life of scholarship than to show written evidence to that effect.”

Not only will this help you build up a more impressive resume, it’s also a great way to build self-confidence and to help you to stand out as a productive scholar.

It’s not just publication that will help you build your desirability in college; other factors count, too. Sarah Anderson, Assistant Professor at the Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences at the University of Colorado, Boulder, adds that being a well-rounded student can also do wonders for your career. She says, “I think some of the best things that students can do to stand out are to have a part-time job, be involved in research, and be involved in student organizations. Of course it is important to do well in school and earn good grades, but potential employers and residency programs like seeing well-rounded students. If a student is able to balance school, a part-time job, research responsibilities, and student organization commitments, they make themselves an attractive job and residency candidate.”

You’ll also want to make sure to attend conferences to present your research and network with others in your profession. These events are a great way to meet the major players in your field and to develop connections that have the potential to help you in your job search later on. Even better, you’ll also get a chance to share what you’ve been working on with these, and other leading professionals in your field, who may take an interest in you and prove to be valuable resources in finding job openings and doing well with selection committees.

Start Your Search

Another major question many students face is when to start searching. In the Academic Job Search Handbook, it’s advised that students start early, with the book stating, “It is important to begin to prepare for your job search well before you finish your dissertation; in many fields it is also important to time the actual search to coincide with the completion of your dissertation. Many scientists, on the other hand, are competitive on the tenure-track market only after a few years of post-doctoral research.”

The ideal time to start looking for a job will vary depending on the field you’ve chosen to pursue. Those in the sciences will likely want to pursue post-doctoral research before job-hunting as it’s not only generally required but also a great opportunity to get more experience and to publish more articles. In other fields, timing can be especially important because you don’t want to spend your first year as a new professor working on your doctoral research. You want to be able to focus on things that will count towards tenure and securing your position at a school, so getting your dissertation done before or immediately following securing a job can be critical.

Making Connections

It’s not just research that students feel they miss out on while in grad school. Brett Floyd, a Ph.D. candidate in music, states, “With graduation closer than ever, I wish I had fostered strong relationships with more professors I took classes with. These professors are great for references and letters of recommendation. If I had stayed in contact with more professors after the class was finished, I would have a larger pool of people to gain resources from. It would be strange to email a professor and say, ‘I took your class two years ago… Could you write a letter of recommendation for me?’ That professor really can’t perform that task for me because I did not keep in touch with them. If I had kept them up to date on my projects or progress in school they could be a great reference for my job applications.”

Those still in school can use these insights to their advantage, embracing more research projects, building stronger relationships, and getting as much career preparation out of a degree program as possible.

Finding a Job

While the first few months after graduation from a Ph.D. or professional degree program may leave you feeling giddy and on top of the world, it should quickly become evident that you need to turn your degree into a career. This is often easier said than done, especially in a job market where academic jobs aren’t easy to find or get, especially those that come with prestige or tenure.

If you’re not sure where to begin your search, Professor John Komlos offers this advice:

“The job market starts with advertisements appearing in early autumn, more frequently in the newsletters of professional organizations, some of them on the web and continually updated. The Chronicle of Higher Education also lists job openings throughout the year in all disciplines including some administrative openings for which you might qualify. In addition, you can write or call colleges in your vicinity or in a location for which you have some preference.”

Doctoral candidate Brett Floyd stresses the importance of using connections to get ahead in your careers. He states, “Leverage the relationships you have built over your academic career. These professors and teachers want you to succeed, and they are in the academic field you want to be in. Most professors have a good understanding for their chosen specialization and have many contacts. They can help you find open job positions and through their knowledge, help craft cover letters that will make you stand out.”

Finding a job in a market like this one where the number of applicants far exceeds the number of available positions can be frustrating, and you may not find a job right away. So how long should you keep trying for your dream career in academia?

John Komlos advises, “I would consider two cycles to be appropriate, provided you really put your best foot forward. I mean by that that your dissertation was in hand and you applied to a wide array of institutions and did not limit yourself geographically or any other way. You really have to apply everywhere because you have so little credible information about your abilities relative to other applicants.”

Even then, he says if grads are really committed to finding work in academia then they should keep at it. If you can’t afford to keep searching without a steady income you may want to take on temporary jobs or look outside of academia.

The Curriculum Vitae

Of course, one of the most critical factors in getting an academic job is building an impressive CV, or at least one that you can be proud to call your own. Here are some tips to ensure that you’re not making any major mistakes and are highlighting the right skills and assets to get you the job.

• Make it results-oriented.

  More and more academic departments are concerned with the value you can bring to them. Showcase the ways you’ve played a key role in your department during your studies, your research or publication numbers, and other things that might help you to stand out as a smart decision.

• Tailor it to your audience.

  You may have more luck getting the attention of certain schools by tailoring your CV to their needs and values. For example, a small college may like seeing your teaching experience highlighted while a premier research university will want to know all about your research up front.

• Keep the length reasonable.

  While CVs are generally allowed to be a bit longer than the typical resume because they have to encompass research and publication, try to keep yours around two pages long. If you’re new to the job market, that shouldn’t be hard to do.

• Use a standard format.

  You need your CV to be clear and easy to read as it highlights the best parts of your career thus far. Check out some examples online or in books to get a better idea of how to construct your own CV.

• Update regularly.

  Every time you have a new accomplishment under your belt, add it to your CV. This will help in your job search, but can also be useful in other areas of academia where a CV is required including publication, awards, conferences, or even in grant applications.

Letters of recommendation are also important in putting your best foot forward. The best source is usually your advisor, though others from your department can also offer strong support of your work. You can also make it easier on them and ensure they highlight your greatest achievements by giving them a list of your accomplishments as a student.

The best advice for anyone looking to break into academia? Stay positive. It’s not always easy to find a job, especially not one that offers full-time pay and benefits, but the journey can be worth it in the end. Floyd advises students: “Continue to network, grow your resume post-graduation, and don’t be discouraged during the job hunt. Remember, there will be many nos, but all you need is one yes.”

Succeeding in Academia

Dr. Anderson offers some career advice for those just starting out in their careers. She stresses that these are some of the most essential traits to build when new to being a professor to give you a firm foundation for a lifetime of success in academia:

• Dedication:

  “The life of an academician is rarely (if ever!) 9 to 5. That said, it is also a flexible, customizable job.”

• Flexibility:

  “No two days are alike, and it’s important to be able to roll with the punches!”

• Persistence:

  “Ask lots of questions, and don’t give up when things don’t work out as you expect them to.”

• Collegiality:

  “Whether it be success in the classroom or success on a research project, maintaining positive relationships with co-faculty members and collaborators is a must.”

• Mentoring:

  “Find that person who helps you to navigate the unknown as there’s a lot to learn as a new faculty member!”

• Networking:

  “Similar to collegiality, it’s important to know not only your own faculty colleagues but to develop relationships with faculty at other schools and colleges to share ideas, successes, etc. that can provide mutual benefit.”

There’s no doubt that building a career in academia is a challenge these days, but it can be done. Start with preparing in graduate school, find great mentors to guide you, and don’t give up if you don’t succeed right away. Academia may not be the easiest place to find work but once you get a foot in the door you may find that it was well worth the effort, especially if you’ve been dreaming of a career as a professor.

Table of Contents

• What Will a Ph.D. Do for You?
• The Skills
• A Key to New Careers
• The Academic Option

Over the past few years, the value of a college degree has been questioned, though perhaps not quite so harshly as the Ph.D. While criticisms of doctoral study have not been entirely unfounded (Ph.D.s are struggling a bit more in the current job market than they have in years past) the reality is that earning a doctorate in most fields can be a solid career move that offers potential for advancement and can potentially open up entirely new career avenues.

Still, the time and money poured into a Ph.D. can make many prospective students (and current ones, too) wonder if getting a Ph.D. is really all it’s cracked up to be. While there’s no simple answer to that question (it can differ quite a bit based on individual goals and the field of study), a Ph.D. does offer some career advantages that other programs, whether master’s or professional, simply can’t match. With so many resources out there telling you not to pursue a Ph.D., it’s important to also look at the reasons a Ph.D. can be good for you and to explore some of the practical skills a Ph.D. will teach you that will make you a desirable commodity on the job market.

What Will a Ph.D. Do for You?

When doctoral degrees were first created in 19th century Germany, they were designed as a method of generating new knowledge, not to be vocational or career-related. But, like nearly every college program, the Ph.D. has changed a bit since then. Today, a Ph.D. is not only a way to generate new knowledge but also is a potential pathway to prestigious careers, research positions, and management.

It’s important to note, however, that while many Ph.D.s make very good salaries, getting a doctoral degree is rarely a way to earn huge amounts of money. That’s in part because they take so long to earn. The six or more years spent earning a Ph.D. is usually time spent away from the job market, earning considerably less than someone else who went directly into a career. For that reason, pursuing a Ph.D. for purely financial reasons isn’t usually the best investment. That isn’t to say that getting a Ph.D. can’t earn you more than many other jobs within the same field (especially those which don’t have a lot of corporate appeal), but that salary shouldn’t be the sole reason behind pursuing one, no matter what financially focused pundits might say. Students also need to be passionate about the subject matter and be looking to utilize the skills produced by getting the degree, not simply hoping for a sizable paycheck.

While most people assume that those getting a Ph.D. are planning to go into academic life, that isn’t actually where most end up. A significant portion of those who graduate from Ph.D. programs go on to work outside of academia. In fact, a recent study showed that only about half of students in science-related Ph.D. programs plan to work in academia after graduation. This move away is partly because academic jobs are limited in number, but it’s also because those earning Ph.D.s are learning more than just how to work in their own fields; they’re also learning critical thinking, problem solving, and technical skills that can be applied to a wide range of industries and professions, many of them outside academia.

As you work through your Ph.D. program, you’ll garner skills that are highly valued by employers and open up doors to careers that can only be accessed by those with a doctoral degree. In that way, spending the time, effort, and money to get a Ph.D. can actually be a smart, savvy way to prepare for a long and successful career in just about any field.

The Skills

While many have complained that Ph.D. programs aren’t preparing students for the realities of the working world, there are actually a lot of skills to be gained from taking on a degree program at this level that will not only appeal to academic institutions but to a range of other employers, as well. It does come with a serious investment, though. A Ph.D. can take anywhere from six to 10 years (or more) to earn, on top of the four or more years students will have already spent in college earning a bachelor’s degree. In contrast, a master’s degree usually only takes about two years to complete, making it a much faster way to gain some educational traction while getting back into the job market relatively quickly. So why go after the Ph.D. when you can get a master’s degree? In short, it’s because getting a Ph.D. teaches you things that a master’s program simply doesn’t.

Students in Ph.D. and master’s degree programs will generally take the same number and types of courses, so there is little difference in the actual in-class preparation that goes into each degree. The key difference happens once students get beyond those initial courses. While master’s students can expect to write a thesis or to create a research project, these projects don’t even come close to approaching the amount of time, effort, and sheer brainpower that goes into crafting a dissertation for a doctoral degree. It is precisely this experience of working on a dissertation that often makes those with Ph.D.s so valuable on the job market.

While opportunities for advancement based on doctoral degrees will certainly exist in a student’s own field of study, the research skills honed during the four or more years spent toiling over a dissertation also make grads appealing to employers in a much wider scope of professions. For example, a Ph.D. student in mathematics or computer science may have the skills and expertise that top investment firms need to develop complex algorithms and computer programs used in the financial industry. A study of four leading colleges, including Duke, UNC Chapel Hill, UC Santa Barbara, and The Ohio State University, showed that 27% of Ph.D. grads weren’t working in academia at all. So what do they do? Ph.D. s are commonly found in higher education administration, publishing and editing, museums, in the military, within government agencies, consulting and research firms, and even running small businesses.

So just what skills do employers prize in Ph.D. students that make them so appealing outside of academia? Here are a few to consider:

• The ability to identify an unsolved problem. In the academic world, this means pointing to gaps in knowledge or exploration in your field. Outside of academia, this skill can help companies address areas for expansion, where they might be losing money or customers, or simply push forward new ideas for products.
• The ability to solve a problem by teaching yourself the necessary skills and information. There is a certain amount of self-motivation that’s required to complete a dissertation, and it’s a skill that translates well into any field that values problem solving, innovative thinking, and independent work.
• The ability to persevere. Getting a Ph.D. is a lot of hard work, and there are countless roadblocks and difficulties along the way, the chief among them being able to defend your work in front of a panel of experts. Being able to accomplish something of this scope shows employers you have what it takes to stick with a project and make it successful, a skill that isn’t always easy to find or for employees to demonstrate.
• The ability write and teach. During the course of your doctoral program, you’ll have to do a lot of writing and probably a fair amount of teaching. Both of these can be appealing to employers who want workers who are skilled at communication and can easily convey information to others.

In a piece forThe Chronicle of Higher Education in late 2012, history Ph.D. grad L. Maren Wood explains that few of her classmates actually ended up working directly in the field of history. That didn’t mean that their degree wasn’t a source of value, however. She states, “While many alternative career paths do not actually require you have a doctorate, Ph.D.s are often hired because of the skills and knowledge gained through their graduate training. You don’t need a doctorate to become an insurance consultant, for example, but the language skills, theoretical background, research and writing abilities, comfort with public speaking, success at grant writing, and ability to learn and master new subject matter that you gain from graduate school are assets.”

Aside from the skills that a Ph.D. can offer, there is a certain cachet that comes along with the degree, too. Employers often want experts and the most qualified individuals they can get, something they see a Ph.D. as designating.

Dr. Peter Glassman, a retired anesthesiologist and addictionologist, had an MD (a degree he describes as being academically equivalent to a master’s) before heading back to get his Ph.D., and he believes it was a great career asset. He says, “Most corporate (human resource departments) are directed to hire the Ph.D. holder when there is equal experience among for those applying for a job, as I found out (to my benefit) when I was hired by Behring Ingenious Pharmaceuticals. So I think a Ph.D. is good to have in today’s competitive environment.” In general, he believes that the combination of his degrees made him much more marketable to employers in the corporate world but also opened up opportunities for work within universities, who are often much more likely to hire those with Ph.D.s.

A Key to New Careers

While a Ph.D. might be an asset in certain career fields, in others it’s a requirement. There are some careers where not having a Ph.D. will make it so individuals simply can’t qualify for positions, or at least not ones with potential for advancement. Without that critical degree, the best jobs are simply out of reach, even for those with loads of other qualifications and even master’s degrees in the subject.

This need for a Ph.D. isn’t the same across the board. In some fields, like nursing, engineering, or secondary education, a master’s degree is more than enough, and most people, even highly qualified professionals, will not have a degree above this. In other fields, however, a Ph.D. is needed to even get in the door. Most of these careers are in highly technical or scientific fields, though even something like economics doesn’t become viable career-wise without a Ph.D. (in fact, terminal master’s programs in economics aren’t especially common).

A good example of a career that requires a Ph.D. is medical science. While non-Ph.D.s can get jobs working as laboratory techs, to create and lead research teams requires a Ph.D., with very few exceptions save for perhaps exceptionally gifted M.D.s, though that is incredibly uncommon. To be a medical scientist, there is no other career path other than to pursue a doctoral degree. Many other fields in the sciences and technical fields have similar requirements, with few jobs available to those who don’t hold Ph.D.-level qualifications. Examples include biochemistry, biophysics, astronomy, and physics. In these cases, a Ph.D. isn’t just a smart career move, it’s the only career move.

The value of a Ph.D. isn’t always such an extreme either-or, however. For other career paths, Ph.D.s might not be required to get in the door, but they can be a big asset to making it to management positions or into certain areas of professional practice. For example, in psychology, students can find a wide range of jobs that only require a master’s degree, including work as school psychologists, industrial-organizational psychologists, or even as assistants in clinical, counseling or research settings. But without a Ph.D. or a Psy.D., those working in this field cannot work independently as a clinical psychologist or counselor and may find options for research and patient interaction limited. Additional education at the doctoral level can be the key to unlocking access to these types of careers and providing greater career advancement, mobility, and opportunity over the course of a lifetime.

Keep in mind, however, that the value of a Ph.D. isn’t the same across the board. Some fields are enjoying stronger growth in the labor market than others, and in those fields jobs both within academia and outside of it will be much easier to find. Two examples include computer science and health, which have both seen a huge growth in the number of jobs for newly minted Ph.D.s.

The Academic Option

While academia isn’t the only career path for those getting a Ph.D., it’s hard to ignore. There are few fields within academia where those with only a master’s degree are considered for professorial positions, though these are usually fields where a master’s degree is the highest terminal degree offered (such as in the fine arts). Unlike in many careers outside of academia, Ph.D.s are not just a must-have for those in the sciences and highly technical fields. Their unemployment rate is much lower than the national average: just 1.4%. While problems with adjunct positions, poor pay, and difficultly finding work after getting a Ph.D. do exist, the reality is that those with doctoral degrees are often much better off than those with fewer academic qualifications and there are many practical, positive benefits to taking on the arduous process of earning a degree.

Table of Contents

• The Motivation Behind MOOCs
• The Challenges of Teaching Online
• A Disconnection from Students
• Preparing Courses for a MOOC
• What About Cheating?
• Best Practices for Teaching MOOCs
• What to Tell Your Students
• The Future of MOOCs

Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are a learning revolution that have the power to impact millions of students around the world. The offering of MOOCs has been compared to the invention of the printing press, opening higher education online to the masses, and it’s clear that this revolution is showing no signs of slowing down. There are hundreds of MOOC courses currently available, and more universities are opening their courses to the MOOC format at a blindingly fast pace. For educators participating in this revolution, there are unique motivations and challenges, as well as great rewards and promises for the future.

The Motivation Behind MOOCs

For many professors, the motivation behind offering MOOCs often goes deeper than a simple career duty. Teaching MOOCs offers educators a great opportunity to teach not just students who are able to take their courses on campus but students around the world, many of whom don’t have access to traditional forms of higher education.

Legendary MIT physics professor Walter Lewin estimates that in 47 years of teaching at MIT, he has had about 25,000 students in his classroom. Compare that with the 33,000 students who are now enrolled in his 8.02x MOOC offered by EdX.

“My goal is to educate the world. My dream is to reach out to one billion people on a time scale of about 10 years, and that all of the good universities in the United States, in Europe, in Japan, in India, that all of them will reach out to the world and give people an opportunity to effectively, a free education. That will have a huge impact on the world. You’re not talking about teaching a million people, you’re not talking about teaching 100 million people; you’re talking about a billion. In principle, we can educate a billion people,” says Lewin.

Not every student will take MOOC courses that seriously, but for those who make the most of the opportunity, it can be life-changing. With access to free higher education resources, they can get a job, become inspired to earn a degree, or take on a career change. Universities may even give credit for this work, potentially through qualifying exam placement that, with MOOC experience, students now have the knowledge to pass. Many professors, Lewin included, view MOOCs as an opportunity to make a real difference in the lives of their students.

And those students are often quite appreciative, making the experience of teaching online very rewarding. “My lectures change their lives, and it changes their lives in a way that is enormous,” Lewin says of his students. “I get fan mail every day, and I have changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people in the world. They’re people who were bus drivers and are now back in the classroom. There are people who say, ‘You’ve changed (the way I look at the world), and now that I know how I should really look at the world, I want to see more.’ And so, they change their careers, they start taking courses. Now of course with MOOCs, there’s a beautiful opportunity. And that’s enormously rewarding.”

Offering a MOOC allows professors to not just influence the lives of their students but also be a part of a worldwide revolution. Lewin compares the availability of open online education to the invention of the printing press: “Before the printing press, it took one person five years to copy a book. They copied it by hand. One book, five years. Then the printing press was invented, now you can print in one month, 500 books,” says Lewin. “This revolution is of comparable magnitude, because now, we reach out to the whole world.”

The Challenges of Teaching Online

The MOOC revolution is an exciting movement, but there are challenges that arise when courses go online, especially when they’re offered to thousands of students at once. Professors and support teams regularly deal with issues including cheating, translating course materials into interactive content and discussion, and maintaining a connection with students. Here are some things you should know if you’re planning on leading a MOOC.

A Disconnection from Students

Understandably, it’s difficult to recreate a brick-and-mortar experience online. There is no substitute that offers the same experience as face-to-face interaction between students and educators and among students themselves. But instructors and students are able to connect with tools like discussion boards, and the ability to communicate and collaborate online can be an advantage. Students are able to more deeply participate in social learning, with more room for discussion in the course than they might find in a lecture hall of hundreds or even thousands of students. And for some students, this disconnect is a welcome departure from the traditional classroom, allowing those that are less willing to speak up in class shine when participating in online discussions.

Darren Adamson, an associate professor at Northcentral University, finds that the challenge of communication is one of the most exciting aspects of teaching online. Unlike a physical classroom where students may hide behind a desk, online students are often required to participate in discussions and interaction. “The online classroom can be as engaging as any traditional classroom if the teacher and the student are willing to deal with the challenge of rapid and broad-ranging technology changes,” he says.

Preparing Courses for a MOOC

Outsiders, and even current students, may not appreciate just how much work goes into making courses appropriate for MOOC offerings. Lectures that were once recorded and uploaded online are made interactive, with challenge questions, quizzes, and exams added to the experience. For large and involved courses such as Lewin’s, that process can take months. In fact, it took a team of six people a full six months to get Lewin’s 8.02 course ready for EdX.

The work that makes MOOCs ready for the web may be extensive, but once a course is properly designed, it can function on its own largely untouched as the course software does all of the hard work. Instructors do, of course, need to maintain presence and support in online discussions, but probably not as much as you might think. According to Lewin, “There is a natural evolution that students are going to talk with each other. These 33,000, they are beginning to form groups, and they even exchange emails with each other, which is fine, we like that.” Lewin says that students in his course with EdX often discuss the work among themselves, answering questions that otherwise would have to be addressed by Lewin or a course assistant. Social learning and student self-assistance are encouraged by the online format of MOOCs.

What About Cheating?

Students taking exams in a lecture hall may have 50 minutes and nothing but a pencil and the knowledge in their minds to help them, but online students typically have a few days’ time and the ultimate open book: the Internet. It’s not necessarily fair, but most schools have taken measures to minimize cheating in open courses.

In Lewin’s course, every test is different. The format of the questions may be the same, but the numbers are not. This makes it possible for students to help each other understand concepts and formulas, but they can’t just plug in answers without working through the questions independently. Even with help, students will still need to understand the idea behind the question. Westwood College adjunct instructor Mike Feinman cites Turnitin.com as vital to tracking sources. The site is also a good resource for detecting copied text, but it is less useful for paraphrased passages.

Schools that really want to crack down on cheating can utilize more advanced methods. It might be out of the question to ask students to travel to a test-taking center, but remote proctoring, in which students are observed via webcam by a human proctor, seems reasonable. So are identity checks, such as personal history questions, IP address verification, and video interaction, all of which can greatly discourage the practice of students who hire paid course takers to complete assignments.

Best Practices for Teaching MOOCs

Forget about discussions, support teams, and cheating. According to Lewin, the most important part of a great MOOC is a great lecture. Many online students are taking MOOCs out of their own interest, unlike traditional students who may be enrolled in courses as a degree requirement. No one’s making them listen to what you have to share, so be sure that what you’re saying is engaging enough to keep them interested.

Lewin has become a superstar for turning physics into a demonstration, a choreographed show that millions, even those with little interest in physics, will want to watch and learn from. He certainly makes the experience look like fun, but be assured that the process behind creating such an engaging educational resource requires a lot of thought and hard work. Lewin works diligently for months to ensure that his lectures will inspire and educate.

Says Lewin of his lectures, “It has to be comfortable. You have to challenge the students, it has to be inspiring. You have to make them feel good about it, you have to make them laugh at times, you have to make them cry at times, and you have to make them stop breathing at times.” For Lewin, delivering such a lecture is a process that takes months, including dry runs, detailed notes, and even walks on the beach.

Great educational content is by far the most important part of offering successful online courses, but you still can’t overlook the details. A great learning system allows professors to streamline much of their work, and Web 2.0 tools make it possible for learning to be more connected, even as course participants span time zones and even continents. Adequate bandwidth access is an important consideration for professors planning to teach from a variety of locations, as are websites that allow for the sharing of large multimedia resources that can enhance learning and teaching.

In addition to great content and technical details, online professors must make discussion and availability a priority. Offering feedback to students, as well as regular office hours, can really make a difference in the level of support, and ultimately, achievement, that students experience.

Finally, professors should prepare to be challenged. Online learning, and particularly massively open online learning, is undoubtedly different from traditional learning, and in that difference, there are opportunities for learning and growth. Says Adamson, “It is the nature of the online learning environment to challenge the teacher to continually learn new and more effective ways to teach. The technology provides opportunities to enhance the learning environment for the student and is a source of learning and development for the teacher. Anyone wanting to teach in an online environment must be willing to learn.”

What to Tell Your Students

Professors aren’t the only ones challenged by online offerings; students typically find online courses to be a different experience as well. Professors should impress upon students the following tips for success:

• Take the course as seriously as you would one on campus. MOOCs may not require a financial investment, but they certainly call upon much of a student’s time and effort. To stay on top of your work and pass the course, students will need to take it seriously. Says Lewin, “Take the course as seriously as MIT students would take it. You have to work on it at least 12 hours a week, and don’t cheat.”
• Make contact with your professor and fellow students as much as possible. Studying online can be lonely, but it doesn’t have to be. To get the most out of learning opportunities, it’s essential to engage with other students, ask questions of your instructor, and maximize your opportunity for mastering the material with all of the help you can get.
• Know what is expected of you, and understand due dates. Staying on top of your MOOC responsibilities is essential. With thousands of students at a time, professors simply will not check in with you to make sure you’re on track. Go over the course materials and expectations early on, and map out deliverables well ahead of time so that you can be prepared to turn then in on time. For many MOOC courses, once the due date passes, the assignment is no longer available at all. Portland State University professor Daniel Draz recommends working ahead of the schedule whenever possible, as you may be more busy some weeks than others.
• Use trustworthy, reliable resources. There’s no end to the amount of resources available to students for cheating and cutting corners in class, but Feinman cautions students to use trusted resources and back everything up with facts. “There is an amazing amount of information that can be found online, but there’s just as much misinformation,” he says.

The Future of MOOCs

MOOCs offer an unusual challenge for professors, as well as an amazing opportunity. This type of education can be exceptionally rewarding, allowing professors to reach students around the world and potentially change their lives in dramatic ways. Professors offering MOOCs are a part of something that’s bigger than a classroom or online course. MOOC professors are offering, now more than ever, knowledge that has the power to change a student’s life, and possibly even the world.

Universities are still hashing out exactly what they want to accomplish with MOOCs and open online courseware, but, says Lewin, they know that it is a revolution, and they want to be a part of it. Lewin believes that the open online learning revolution is as important as the printing press, allowing free education to reach a billion people, or even more. Says Lewin: “It’s viral. It’s spreading all over the world as fast as you can imagine. Everyone wants to be a part of it.”

Yet being a teaching assistant is much more than a helpful addition to a resume. It requires a huge commitment of time and effort, and most first-time teaching assistants go into the experience having little idea what to expect. While most students know what it’s like to deal with a T.A. (good or bad) during the course of their undergraduate education, it’s an entirely different matter to be the one in charge and standing in front of a classroom full of students. So what is being a T.A. really like? Well, like any job, it’s complicated.

The Benefits

For some grad students — the lucky ones, anyway — one of the benefits of being a teaching assistant is, well, benefits. Some positions come with health insurance that can be a weight off for those who don’t have their own plans. Additionally, tuition waivers, not to mention fairly stable salaries, ranging between $17,000 and $30,000 a year on average, can be attractive to grad students as well.

It turns out that besides the pay and some help with tuition, being a T.A. offers one huge benefit that students might not be able to get in many other places: experience teaching a college-level course. Matt Rarey, a former teaching assistant at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and current Council on Library and Information Resources Mellon Dissertation Fellow, felt that being a T.A. was great experience in preparing for a life in academia, despite the lack of guidance from professors that some students might find challenging.

Rarey says, “I was lucky to have a professor who trusted our judgment: the other T.A. for the class and I were given relatively free reign to construct our sections, and so students had a radically different experience based on their T.A. I think this was great prep for being a future professor, but some T.A.s may hate the lack of direction.”

Erin McKellar, a doctoral student and teaching assistant at Boston University, agrees, stating that being a teaching assistant gives you a chance to really see what works and what doesn’t in teaching college-level courses. She advises that students work with more than one professor if possible, adding, “It has (been) incredibly useful to T.A. for different professors because it’s given me an opportunity to see different management and lecture styles at work.”

But what if you’re not planning a career in academia? Is being a T.A. still worth it? Jenny Carroll, a graduate of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign College of Law, worked as a legal writing T.A. while she was getting her degree. Even though she didn’t plan on being a professor, she still felt that being a T.A. was an incredibly valuable way to learn more about the material and to get to know fellow students.

“My first semester, I was a teaching assistant for a legal writing class for international students. I really felt that I was providing them with a great service, because as a T.A. who was a fellow student, I think they felt that I was more approachable than the professor,” Carroll said. “It also helped me to polish my own legal writing skills and was almost like a refresher course. Mostly, it was just enjoyable to get to know the other students.”

While being a teaching assistant can help students get to know undergrads better, it can also be a great way to get to know other graduate students, especially those who are also working as teaching assistants. Students can share tips and advice, get help, and help each other through the educational process. Some may even find collaborators for future research projects, lifelong friends, and a support system that makes the challenges of grad school just a little less scary.

The Rough Stuff

Like any job, being a T.A. isn’t all sunshine and rainbows. Along with the benefits come some serious challenges, especially when trying to balance the demands of teaching with the rigors of graduate-level work. Many students find that the end of the semester, already a stressful time, is exponentially more so while working as a T.A. Not only are graduate students trying to wrap up lengthy papers, do research, and keep up with reading for their own courses, they’re also grading papers and tests for 50 or more students, answering emails, and teaching courses.

It can be an exhausting experience, but there is light at the end of the tunnel.

“Grading and preparing can take an eternity, especially if you really care,” Rarey says. “The hardest part for me, then, was putting in the effort to comment on students’ work, trying to give them very personal direction, and just seeing a select few not care. But just one student taking it seriously, for me, made all the effort worth it.”

While working with students can be rewarding, it comes with its own set of challenges. Not all students are equally prepared to take on college-level work, and some may be lacking critical reading, writing, and time management skills that can incite some serious frustrations among the teaching assistants tasked with guiding them. Additionally, while many (if not most) students will put in the time and the effort to do well in the course, most teaching assistants eventually realize that not every student can be won over. Some simply won’t care, no matter how much help and guidance they’re offered, which can be disheartening to dedicated T.A.s.

One of the biggest challenges facing T.A.s is often learning how to teach and be in front of a classroom, as many enter the job with little or no experience. Some teaching assistants may even find themselves responsible for the entire content of a course, which can be incredibly intimidating. Yet taking on a course solo isn’t always as bad as it seems, especially after a little practice. McKellar says, “When I started to T.A., I felt unprepared to actually write the occasional lectures I would have to give. I still feel apprehensive about this to some extent, but I realized pretty quickly that it’s not as bad as I thought it would be, and that the students do actually listen to what I say, which is pretty unbelievable.”

While most students will form rewarding, strong relationships with the professors in their departments, not all are so lucky. Some professors simply aren’t willing to offer feedback that can help teaching assistants improve their performance or are too busy with their own writing, research, and teaching to be of much help. Students may sometimes need to seek out professors to act as mentors to monitor and help them through their teaching assistantship, which can be an additional strain on an already overwhelming situation.

So Is It Worth It?

The reply will different from person to person, depending on personal and professional goals, but largely, at least according to those who’ve taken the challenge head on, the answer is yes. Despite difficulties with too-cool-for-school students and a serious learning curve for teaching and developing lecture material, most T.A.s find the experience immensely rewarding. McKellar, Rarey, and Carroll all agree that being a T.A. is well worth the time and the effort, especially when students really start to make improvements and grasp what they’re being taught.

“I’ve found myself becoming a better public speaker. I’ve also found it rewarding to see students improve, as the ones I worked with one-on-one in office hours have turned in more assignments,” McKellar says of her experience. “Since the courses I’ve taught for this year are related ones, it’s also been nice to develop working relationships with the undergraduates and to get a sense of what their interests are.”

In fact, some teaching assistants may find their experiences working with undergraduates far more rewarding than even their own educational goals or research.

“At the end of the year, one of my students was accepted to a graduate program and left a cupcake on my desk to tell me the news and thank me; two days later I won a teaching award that still means more to me than any fellowship I’ve won or diploma I have,” Rarey says.

The truth is that being a T.A. is both harder and more rewarding than many students initially expect. It’s not easy, but the challenges you face as a T.A. can help to prepare you for a career as a professor or may even make you realize that you don’t want to teach at all. Either way, you’ll learn, build networks, get inspired, and have a better idea of where you want your career to take you over the next few years or even the rest of your life. As scores of current and former T.A.s can tell you, it’s not always easy, but it can be worth it.

An Unequal Academia

Research has shown that what turns many women away from a career in academia may not be overt discrimination — though that can be a factor — but something much more subtle. A joint study by the National Science Foundation and UC Irvine found that women in academia experienced unspoken but ever-present “deeply entrenched inequities.” Among them, failure to progress as fast as their male colleagues, fewer opportunities to earn tenure or be named full professors, earning less than male colleagues with equivalent experience, and feeling excluded from networking opportunities. These experiences often take a heavy toll on women in academia. A study by the Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education found that female faculty exhibit lower levels of job satisfaction and are more likely to leave academia than their male counterparts, citing unnecessary competitiveness, poor work-life balance, and a general feeling of just not fitting in as reasons for their dissatisfaction.

What’s worse for many women is that long-standing, often unconscious prejudices aren’t just held by their male professors and colleagues. A study done at Yale in 2012 provided professors with identical applicants for a job as a lab manager at a university, with only one difference: one applicant had a female name and one had a male name. Across the board, from both female and male professors, the female applicant was evaluated as being less competent despite the applications being identical save for the names. What’s more, the starting salary offered to the female applicant was significantly lower — more than $4,000 lower. With both women and men exhibiting a bias against females in academia, it’s not likely that overt misogyny is the cause of difficulties in academia faced by women. Instead, the authors of the study suggest that subtle internalized prejudices and societal stereotypes, perhaps at the root of those “deeply entrenched inequities,” are to blame.

Whatever the cause, many women in academia feel the persistent presence of invisible elements holding them back, and even with many examples of women who’ve had prestigious, successful careers, the glass ceiling in academia makes getting ahead much harder than it should be in an age that places a heavy value on gender equality.

The STEM Situation

Problems like these don’t occur equally across the board. Some academic fields have certainly fared worse than others. While some humanities fields, like philosophy, have dismally low numbers of female doctorates, the biggest gender divide lies in STEM, with fields like physics, computer science, engineering, and chemistry having incredibly gender-skewed enrollments in both Ph.D. programs and faculty appointments. Currently, women make up only 27% of STEM faculty at American research universities, and even fewer manage to make it to the top, with just 18% of female faculty in STEM becoming full professors at their respective schools. Worst of all, according to NSF research, at the top 50 research universities, the percentage of female full professors ranges between 3% to 15%, well below the national average.

STEM fields pose an interesting conundrum. Numerous studies have shown that women are not only interested in science and engineering but also often excel in these fields. Women even make up a significant number of those enrolling in STEM graduate programs (though still much lower than their male counterparts in all areas except for the biological sciences), yet few stick with academia as a career. Many believe that the factors that push women out of academia overall are only amplified in STEM, where men often outnumber women four to one. Academia’s real challenge, then, isn’t just bringing in smart, capable women, but creating an environment where they want to stay, grow, and find fulfilling careers. It may be easier said than done.

Nothing illustrates this more clearly than a recent study done by the U.K. Resource Centre for Women in SET and the Royal Society of Chemistry. Researchers found that 72% of female chemistry Ph.D. students in their first year of study were planning to pursue career in academia. By their third year, however, that number had dropped to 59%. Even worse, among those who planned to pursue research positions, only 12% felt academia was their first career choice.

Data like this is troubling, but it shouldn’t be surprising. Despite those in the ivory tower cultivating an image of progressiveness, academia still doesn’t offer an environment that’s particularly friendly to women (at least not consistently). What’s more, this is hardly a revelation. Over two decades ago, research was already pointing to major problems with the work environment created by academia. A 1992 study by professors at SUNY, Columbia, and Northwestern found that women experience a much different social environment at work than their male counterparts, making it more difficult to socialize, network, find support, collaborate, build self-confidence, and ultimately to advance in their academic careers.

The Growth of the Female-Friendly Business School

The difficulties colleges have had in attracting and retaining female faculty, as well as in getting women interested in certain fields in the first place, have an interesting counterpart in business school. Business schools, much like business itself, have long been a male-dominated arena. In the 1970s, fewer than 4% of business students were female, though today that number has risen, with schools reporting an average of 37% female enrollment in 2010. Not all of those female students are getting MBAs, however; many are also pursuing doctoral degrees. In fact, 35.4% of doctoral students in business are now women, compared to 31.7% five years ago. Women are not only more commonly preparing for careers in business through graduate schools, but also for careers as professors and mentors to other students.

Why the change? It’s all about creating a female-friendly environment. Many business schools have been actively trying to woo women into their programs, in part spurred by the demand for more women in upper management. Changes have been made in how business schools recruit, support female students, and even in the design and flexibility of business programs themselves.

Take Fordham University. The school has begun pairing female applicants with current female students to help them see what life is like at the university and to provide guidance and mentorship if applicants decide to attend. Other schools are using similar methods to draw in students, with a few additional female-friendly benefits: courses that are highly flexible so that women can more easily balance career and family, access to female mentors in faculty and business, and special female-only scholarships that help make school more affordable. In part because of these kinds of efforts, Fordham and many other schools now boast male-to-female ratios that are much closer to 50/50.

Beyond Business School

While business schools are stepping up to attract women, the effect hasn’t quite trickled into the upper echelons of the business world just yet. Business as a whole is still an incredibly male-dominated field. Consider this: just 21 Fortune 500 companies are headed by women, a new high, but hardly an achievement. Similarly, just 15.7% of senior execs at those companies are women. There are still major issues of sexism and unintentional bias that exist in the business world that may be keeping many women out of top management positions, just as they deter women in academia, but the situation is far from hopeless. Like business schools, business as a whole is seeing the value in bringing women on board, especially as studies report that having women in management can actually help boost the bottom line.

While progress for women in business has been slow, almost glacially so, the face of business has steadily been changing. Women may not yet have an equal share of top leadership positions, but with women making up almost 40% of full-time workers in management that’s likely to change, especially with studies showing that companies who already have one female director are more likely to appoint more women than those with all-male boards. The increasing number of women in leadership positions may also account for why 40% of current female directors attained their positions within the last five years, a dramatic shift in balance. What’s more, women have been starting businesses at a higher rate than men for the past 20 years and are expected to create more than half of the 9.72 million new small business jobs over the next year. Incredible considering that just three years ago women only created 16% of small business jobs in the U.S.

The tides appear to be turning for women in business, even in fields that have long had a reputation for being male-dominated. Those same STEM fields that drive women away from the upper echelons of academia are drawing more and more women into the upper echelons of business. Over the past decade, women have been appointed to top positions in a number of high-profile companies in technology and engineering. Yahoo’s new CEO Marissa Mayer made major headlines, as did IBM’s Virginia Rometty, the first female CEO in the company’s 100-year history. Women also hold top positions at companies like Facebook, Google, Oracle, Xerox, Cisco, Lockheed Martin, HTC, Twitter, Zipcar, and HP, and while still only making up 14% of top executives at Tech 500 companies, are gaining some serious ground in heavily male-dominated fields.

So what allows women to excel in the male-dominated world of business and not in academia? While a lot of these success stories can be attributed to simple things like talent, education, and drive, a big part of their ability to succeed may have been in finding work with open-minded companies. Companies headed by younger, more progressive leaders who are open to women in leadership positions offer drastically different opportunities for success than in academia where many professors have been teaching since women were a relative rarity in the profession. Another critical factor is mentoring and collaboration with other female coworkers. Xerox CEO Ursula Burns has said she loved the experience of working side by side with former CEO and longtime Xerox exec Anne Mulcahy, a partnership that not only catapulted her to her position as CEO but actually helped to save the company. It also doesn’t hurt that many businesses also working hard to bring more women into leadership positions by offering training, creating better work-life balance, and extending family-friendly benefits.

What Academia Can Learn

Business is hardly a perfect example of women breaking through the glass ceiling, as success stories are still few and far between. Yet it does show that forward-thinking policies that cater to the needs and talents of women at all levels, from grad school onwards, can help women have long, successful, satisfying careers, even in heavily male-dominated industries.

In light of this, promising changes are already on the horizon at some colleges and universities. Carnegie Mellon University, Georgia Tech, and Harvey Mudd College have all worked to change the cultural climate, recruiting methods, and support for women in computer science programs. Carnegie Mellon’s efforts helped to expand its female undergraduate enrollment in computer science from just 7% to 42% in only five years. Critical to attracting and retaining female students in programs like this, and others, have been several factors: active recruiting, department social activities, changes to the climate of the department, and informal mentoring groups that help students from school into jobs.

When it comes to professional-level reforms, similar initiatives may be helpful to finding and retaining female faculty. Those in academia may also find that emulating many of the measures that have proven successful in bringing more women into the business world could work equally well in the academic setting. Sally Shaywitz, a professor and co-director of the Center for Dyslexia and Creativity at Yale, says that measures like chairing a search committee with a female faculty member can often lead to more women in academic positions. Additionally, providing women with mentors and support systems for research, as well as policy changes that are more family-friendly also help women feel more at home in academic roles. Without these kind of changes, many schools, even top universities, may find they’re losing serious female talent to other industries that have adopted more female-friendly environments, perhaps, moving forward, even business.

Although the Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts a 17% increase in the teaching profession for postgraduate students, it seems international students will take up a large percentage of those roles. The Council of Graduate Schools reported an 8% increase for international students enrolling in U.S. graduate schools, while the number of U.S. students enrolling decreased for the second consecutive year, by 1.7%.

With the continual decline in full-time faculty positions across the nation and the average salary for professors hovering around $62,000, it’s no wonder so many graduates are pursuing careers outside the academic realm.

For Ph.D. graduates Adam Ruben and Bob Conrad, life away from academia definitely had more appeal, though both still dabble in education. Ruben, a molecular biologist, is in a field that is growing at a fantastic rate according to the BLS, while Conrad’s industry, marketing communication, is also climbing.

The Comedian

As serious as what Ruben has had to go through to attain his Ph.D. in molecular biology from Johns Hopkins University, he has been able to put a humorous twist on all of it. His comedic take on life and a serious career has enabled him to stake several claims in two fields.

Ruben is a molecular biologist for Sanaria Inc. working to develop a malaria vaccine, which can’t get any more serious. But he’s also worked as a stand-up comic opening for Dane Cook’s Tourgasm comedy tour, performing his one-man show entitled “Please Don’t Beat Me Up: Stories and Artifacts from Adolescence” at the Capital Fringe Festival, and teaching an undergraduate course every January on stand-up comedy at Johns Hopkins. Although graduate school is no laughing matter, he wrote about his Ph.D. experiences in the memoir Surviving Your Stupid, Stupid Decision to Go to Grad School. The title might make it sound like Ruben has regrets about his path, but he’s actually happy with the way things have turned out.

Did you ever consider pursuing a career in academia after earning your Ph.D.? Why or why not?

I had considered academia, but my top priority was that I wanted to work on something I believed would benefit people. And all over academia, I saw tons and tons of “basic” research, research performed for the sake of expanding the knowledge base. Now, there’s nothing wrong with basic research, and it’s vital for eventual applications. But I was much more interested in working on one of those applications than in adding to the general body of knowledge. I once talked to a seminar speaker who said something that made an impression on me. He said, “The reason there are so many petty squabbles in academia is because there’s so little at stake.” To me, that sounded like lose-lose.

A Ph.D. can often make a candidate look overqualified. In your industry, does a Ph.D.. create a higher demand from companies or does it do the opposite?

It depends. It creates higher demand for certain jobs, but will definitely overqualify you for others. For example, in my limited experience, companies looking to hire a candidate for a bachelor’s- or master’s-level position won’t consider a Ph.D. for that position, simply because it’s not the same level of work.

Do you think other Ph.D. graduates feel limited by the standard options of teaching or research, or do they feel just as free as you did to pursue different paths?

I think Ph.D. graduates box themselves in a bit when they consider their career options. I spent seven years getting my Ph.D. in biology, for example, so that’s the kind of job I’m going to look for. But at one point, a recruiter from a consulting firm came to my department looking for Ph.D. candidates, the idea being that Ph.D. recipients are naturally good at analysis, regardless of their field, so they can be trained to be good business consultants.

Do you think the economic struggle in higher education, and education in general, plays a role in Ph.D. graduates pursuing careers outside of the academic world?

“In my field, in order to someday be a tenured professor making a good salary, one would need to first withstand 5-7 years making $20-25k/year (grad school), then 4-6 years making $30-35k/year (post-doc), before finally becoming an assistant professor for several years (with salaries ranging widely, but typically not spectacular). I definitely know people for whom grad school was the last time they’d be willing to subsist on Ramen noodles. Then again, it’s also true that a lot of biologists are more driven by their interests than by money, or at least I’d like to think so.

Every good story usually stems from an interesting experience. How were you able to put your grad school experience into a comic narrative?

For a few years in grad school, I was writing humor pieces for National Lampoon. At one point, they asked me to pitch a book, so I pitched Surviving Your Stupid, Stupid Decision to Go to Grad School (which was then called The Third Degree). They ultimately rejected the proposal since their demographic — drunk frat guys — tended not to go to grad school. So I worked on the proposal some more, then pitched it to agents, and luckily someone liked it.

How long have you been doing comedy? And have you always known you were funny?

I started performing stand-up in college, but I didn’t really get into it until grad school, so I’d say somewhere around 10-plus years. I don’t know if I really am funny, but I do know I’ve always been interested in humor writing. At summer camp as a kid, I’d read Dave Barry books over and over again, learning his patterns and rhythms and why his written jokes worked. I think stand-up was just a way for me to get humor writing to an audience as quickly as possible and with instant feedback.

There are a lot of comedians out there who aren’t funny. Should there be a Ph.D. concentration in comedy?>

I’m sure someone’s done it, a dissertation on stand-up comedy. Actually, I just Googled it, and here’s a dissertation from 2007 at Georgia State called Stand-Up Comedy as Artistic Expression: Lenny Bruce, the 1950s, and American Humor. Here’s one from the University of Iowa in 2007 called Was that supposed to be funny? A rhetorical analysis of politics, problems and contradictions in contemporary stand-up comedy. So these things do exist, but they’re within concentrations in history, linguistics, etc. And “comedians who aren’t funny” is a relative term — some people think certain comedians aren’t funny, but they’re comedians who thousands of others think are funny.

What are the benefits of earning a Ph.D. and working outside of academia?

“I can leave work by 5:30 or 6:00, and it’s unusual to stay late or come in on the weekend, though it does happen. Most importantly, I can work on something that, if it turns out well, could actually be a real product that saves people’s lives. That may be true in some parts of academia, but it wasn’t in my graduate school lab, where we worked on drug design from a more academic and theoretical, not pragmatic, perspective.

Why did you pursue your Ph.D.? And what would you tell others considering attaining theirs?

I pursued my Ph.D. because it just seemed like the thing to do if you’re good at school. You get whatever is the highest degree in your given specialty. And despite the title of my book, I’m glad I went to grad school. There are a lot of aspects of grad school worthy of complaint (hence the book), but ultimately it was a good decision. I hated not knowing when I would graduate, but I also got to learn a lot, practice lab techniques, and think about the world in new ways, which is kind of the point. I’d tell anyone considering a Ph.D. to know exactly what they’re getting into. Talk to current students in the department you’re considering joining, and see what their major complaints are. If they’re things you can live with, you’ll do just fine.

The Marketer

Bob Conrad stays engaged in academia through part-time teaching at Morrison University in Reno, Nevada, after working as the director of marketing communications at the University of Nevada-Reno, where he earned his Ph.D. in educational leadership and higher education administration.

Most of his time, however, is spent away from academia as energy outreach coordinator for the Nevada State Office of Energy and the founder and CEO of Conrad Communications. He has also written several books, including Spin! How the News Media Misinform and Why Consumers Misunderstand and The Good, The Bad, The Spin: Collected Salvos on Public Relations, New Media and Journalism.

Did you ever consider pursuing a career in academia after earning your Ph.D.?

I did. I had hoped to work in academia, but it would have meant relocating, which I was not keen on doing. That said, I did apply at a handful of institutions and had a few interviews, but nothing panned out. One offer I received would have meant a significant pay cut in addition to moving to an area I was not too sure about. Options for academic work in my area (Reno) are limited, but I do teach part time at a private university and have taught part time at a local community college. Teaching part time is a great way to stay engaged in academia.

How has your Ph.D. helped you in the energy field?

I think it helps from the administration side of things. Administration is where I’ve worked for the past 12 years (higher education, then government), so I am more generally qualified than specifically toward energy.

Do you think Ph.D. graduates feel obligated to dedicate themselves to teaching or research, or are other paths commonly explored?

A doctoral degree is a research-centered degree; however, my research was focused mainly on my dissertation, and I do not have a research background aside from my dissertation. That said, my work experience helped increase my job options, just not necessarily in academia. I think a Ph.D. combined with solid work experience can be helpful for non-academic but technical fields.

Do you think the financial struggle in higher education plays a role in Ph.D. graduates pursuing careers outside of the academic world?

Absolutely. Public higher education is in big trouble; hence, at least part of why my options in Nevada are limited. California is also in dire shape in terms of higher education. Having a Ph. D. can make you more marketable, but not necessarily, as it may mean a candidate could be perceived outside of academia as being overqualified. In some ways, it’s a catch-22.”

How demanding is the field of energy? And how much pressure falls on your shoulders — directly or indirectly — to lead since earning your Ph.D.?

Our office is small, so I’m not feeling that pressure – yet. The field is very exciting, and there is a ton of potential in Nevada for energy. So far, the challenges have been exciting.

What are the benefits of earning a Ph.D. and working outside of academia?

I think it shows that you are an expert in a particular area, which many folks cannot claim (aside from maybe a lengthy career or experience). I think having a research-based mindset is very helpful for filtering out good information from bad information. That to me is the most valuable aspect that I think I can bring to the table.

The Ph.D. is the highest level of education you can receive, and but it’s worth noting that economic demand for Ph.D.s in the educational system fluctuates even while students continue to get the degree. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the number of global Ph.D. graduates increased by nearly 40% between 1998 and 2008, which has created an open market for companies and institutions throughout the private sector to hire exceptionally qualified employees. As such, even though there will always be some opportunities for graduates to enter academia, Ph.D. holders might be better suited for the working world outside the ivory tower.

1. There has been a Ph.D. glut since 1970:

   We realize this doesn’t sound comforting at first, but bear with us. The glut of Ph.D. graduates is nothing new. In fact, there’s been a surplus of Ph.D.s for more than 40 years. As experts point out, this is normal and to be expected under the current government-funded system of research. No need to panic now; grads have been making it work for nearly two generations.

2. There are 16,000 new professorships available:

   Contrary to popular belief, the job market for Ph.D. graduates in tenure track positions is not at an all-out standstill. It’s still growing, with 16,000 new professorships created between 2005 and 2009. The problem is, in that same period of time, 100,000 new Ph.D.s graduated to compete for those 16,000 new professorships. Still, even though the odds are not great, there are jobs out there for the lucky few to snatch up.

3. Half of science Ph.D.s don’t even want to work in academia that badly:

   100,000 new grads competing for 16,000 jobs sounds daunting, but that’s only if we’re assuming that all 100,000 of those Ph.D.s actually want to compete for those jobs. It turns out, they don’t. Only about 50,000 of them do. A 2012 study surveyed biology, chemistry, and physics Ph.D. students, asking them to rate a range of careers. In this survey, only about 50% gave the highest rating to an academic research career. Other areas of high interest include research jobs in the private sector and working for startups.

4. If you can get a job, you’ll enjoy one with 26% higher salary:

   Although the job market is not great, the payoff for science Ph.D.s is there for those who find a position. Ph.D.s will earn 26% more than those who do not have the same level of degree. It is worth noting, however, that a master’s degree is associated with a 23% increase, nearly just as much.

5. The chemistry unemployment rate is only 4.6%:

   The current overall unemployment rate is 7.9% of the job force. Compare that to just 4.6% of chemists who are unemployed. And that 4.6% is the highest it’s been for chemists in 40 years. Although some may have trouble finding positions, it’s certainly not terrible out there for everyone, and it’s better to have a chemistry Ph.D. than join the ranks of the 7.8% unemployed.

6. Biomedical Ph.D.s are doing even better:

   According to NIH, only 2% of U.S. trained biomedical Ph.D. graduates from 2008 are unemployed. That’s incredible. Instead of the unemployment predicted for Ph.D.s of their kind, these graduates have gone on to do academic research or teaching, industrial research, and science-related non-research, among other things. Thirty percent of them even skipped doing a postdoc and still got a job.

7. Ph.D.s often do well in their careers even if they’re not tenure-tracked:

   Sure, unemployment stats can be misleading. Everyone knows that these chemists are counted as “employed” whether they’re working for a research university or Starbucks. Even if chemists are not finding jobs in their area of choice, they’re putting their knowledge and degrees to good use in paid work. Some science Ph.D.s have been hired as journalists and even investment bankers.

8. Science Ph.D.s are likely to continue working in research, even if it’s not academic:

   The NIH studied the career paths of U.S.-trained biomedical Ph.D.s, discovering that only 23% end up in tenured or tenure-track positions. Not surprising. But about the same amount are still in research of some kind, with 18% researching in industry, and 6% in government. For those who are not working in research, they are still often part of the scientific enterprise, working in industry, government, and other settings that require graduate training in biomedical science.

9. Schools are considering alternative paths to divide scholars and teachers:

   Recognizing that many students will not go on to take on research jobs, schools have begun to mull over the idea that perhaps, they shouldn’t have to spend years upon years on research. If they’re not going to spend their careers in research, why have them go through all of that work? That’s why some schools are considering an alternative Ph.D. path that divides scholars from teachers, offering different versions of the doctorate. Instead of a research doctorate, students would have the option to take on a professional doctorate for teaching jobs and many of the other positions popular with Ph.D.s outside of the scope of academia and research.

10. Biomedical Ph.D.s have a lower unemployment rate than medical doctors:

    Physicians are typically acknowledged as having one of the safest jobs in the world. There’s always room for more doctors, right? It’s true, and 82% of doctors will go on to practice non-research patient care. But 2.3% of them will be unemployed. A low figure for sure, but one that’s edged out by that of biomedical Ph.D.s, who enjoy a similarly low (but slightly better) unemployment rate of just 2%.

1. Set common goals and clearly communicate them:

   Make sure students know what you expect of them the first day of class and explicitly draw up course goals to keep in mind as everything clips forward. While they might still have questions, giving them clear, concise instructions on the front end prevents stressing out on the back. Remain communicative throughout the semester and makes everyone’s lives that much easier in the long run.

2. Have a strong syllabus:

   Communicating effectively extends well beyond setting realistic goals and expectations. Another way to keep students from bogging themselves down in confusion is keeping with an explicit syllabus. Yes, Virginia, deviations are inevitable and staying rigid won’t help your class any. But combining flexibility with strength makes it easier to ensure students learn things on schedule without succumbing to excessive stress and pressure.

3. But don’t overdo it:

   Overpreparing for a class and overthinking that syllabus poses the same risk of ineffectual teaching as its under- equivalent. For novice teachers especially, discovering the proper balance might mean a few mistakes, and that’s OK! But don’t feel the need to present every minute detail of every covered topic. Pick out the most important points to make and stick with those. Otherwise class would never end, and nobody wants that.

4. Reach out. Ask questions:

   Don’t let pride preclude productivity. If you start struggling with anything, ask your professor or even other TAs for advice. Most people aren’t horrible and will be more than happy to offer up tips helping you through any confusing patches. The best TAs – and teachers for that matter – understand that they should admit weakness and that no shame exists in seeking assistance. After all, you can’t grow as a grad student without opening yourself to learning whatever you can. That’s kinda sorta the whole point of graduate school.

5. Engage with teachers:

   Beyond asking questions, exert a concerted effort to try and talk to the full-time professors in your department. You don’t have to be their best friend, and most of them probably wouldn’t much want that anyways, but you can certainly learn more about your chosen discipline that way. Plus, comfort and familiarity mean an easier time approaching them with questions about drawing up a viable syllabus and keeping those undergraduate rapscallions in line.

6. Engage with other TAs:

   Same logic as above, really, except you gain perspective from your own generation rather than more experienced, seasoned professionals. Maintaining an effective, supportive coterie of both demographics provides a well-rounded pool from which to learn, maybe even teach. That should provide richness and texture to the graduate school experience. Also you might be able to finagle another TA into covering for you in case of an emergency or a hangover.

7. Mistakes are okay:

   It isn’t that we don’t have faith in you. We do! But we’re also going to assume that, if you’re reading this, you’re probably human. If you are, that means you will not execute a flawless triple axel of a course. All you can do is learn from the boo-boos you sustain while teaching and apply them to later experiences. Maybe even offer up some help to younger TAs and keep them from facing the same issues in their respective arrangements.

8. Don’t force opinions:

   The best educations expose students to facts and the wide variety of perspectives surrounding them, allowing them to make their own autonomous decisions about what to think and what to feel. Listen to Spider-Man’s Uncle Ben and understand that with great power comes great responsibility. You were given a pulpit; use it wisely and remain objective in your lessons.

9. Bring extras:

   Even the most astute undergrads sometimes experience cognitive slippage and forget to bring the necessary Scantrons, pens, pencils, and other incidentals. You probably experienced the exact same panic at some point in your studies. Show them some love and keep a few extras on hand for days when they just can’t think straight and stay organized.

10. Don’t hook up with your students:

    Yes, everyone’s sex and romantic life is their own business so long as nobody breaks the law. But professors and institutes of higher learning dissuade graduate students serving as TAs from getting too chummy with their students for one pretty obvious reason: conflict of interest. It increases the risk of favoritism. Swallow those hormones until after the class ends, OK?