
Open Letter to My Students: No, You Cannot be a Professor (2011) - msvan
http://northwesthistory.blogspot.se/2011/11/open-letter-to-my-students-no-you.html
======
rayiner
Replace "history professor" with "any traditionally stable white collar job"
and you can re-post this same article on websites for bright, aspiring young
people in many different fields. Certainly, I've said more or less these words
to aspiring lawyers.

There is an underlying phenomenon affecting an entire generation of kids of
educated middle class parents, and that's this: the future of our society is
one of fewer jobs and more competition. It's just the structural dynamics of a
society that transitions from a long phase of fast growth to an indefinite
phase of maintenance.

It's not anybody's fault, not really, and there isn't much you can do about
it. A big generation that has a lot of kids creates a high demand for liberal
arts education. A smaller generation that doesn't have many kids creates a
lesser demand. When that big older generation continues to hold onto jobs, you
have a recipe for a job crunch for younger people.

More broadly, as capital shifts and is put to work in Asia, there is less
demand for ancillary jobs here in the U.S. That phenomenon affects nearly
everyone. Say you're an architect. Where do you think all the jobs are
designing big corporate high rises?

~~~
chez17
>It's not anybody's fault, not really, and there isn't much you can do about
it.

It's plenty of people's fault and there is plenty we can do about it. Instead
of investing in education, infrastructure, the social safety net, and
everything that helps the majority of people, we invest in the military
industrial complex, farm subsidies, and rush to cut taxes to the richest
people in the country. There is a massive wealth distribution going on right
now, I predict history will show the biggest ever, and it's easy to see the
repercussions. The rich are getting richer and the rate at which they are
accumulating wealth is accelerating. There is plenty we could do, we, as a
society, are just to lazy, comfortable, and scared to do it. Let's be honest
about it. This is all our fault.

~~~
tptacek
How is any of this responsive to the dynamics of the academic job market? What
does it have to do with colleges recognizing that lower-paid adjuncts can
deliver comparable services to tenured professors? What does it say about the
ability of smaller numbers of professors to teach larger numbers of students?

~~~
calibraxis
"Responsive to the dynamics of the academic job market"? A job market is where
you rent someone's life; then you can command them. As in any market, you have
the incentive to pay less and get more; the other person has the opposite
incentive. An area of antagonism.

You seem not to prefer the frame of wealth distribution. Instead, your post
reframes it into terms that school administrators prefer, as if we are
supposed to care what bureaucrats think.

A recent analysis of replacing people with lower-paid workers: _" The second
claim is that low-wage workers are easily replaceable and offer no benefit to
society. This is the argument aimed at service workers, who are on strike
because they make so little they cannot afford food or rent."_
([http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/09/20139231015...](http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/09/2013923101543956539.html))

Perhaps professor Vojtko herself saw this as a larger struggle between bosses
and workers: _" Contrary to what the Duquesne administration would have the
public believe, she sought out and strongly supported the new union."_
([http://workingclassstudies.wordpress.com/2013/09/23/adjuncts...](http://workingclassstudies.wordpress.com/2013/09/23/adjuncts-
class-and-fear/))

We still spend money — but on administration rather than teaching/research: _"
The last thirty years have seen a veritable explosion of the proportion of
working hours spent on administrative tasks at the expense of pretty much
everything else. In my own university, for instance, we have more
administrators than faculty members, and the faculty members, too, are
expected to spend at least as much time on administration as on teaching and
research combined. The same is true, more or less, at universities
worldwide."_
([http://thebaffler.com/past/of_flying_cars](http://thebaffler.com/past/of_flying_cars))

Hope some of these sources answers your questions, and puts them into the
greater context?

~~~
_dps
> A job market is where you rent someone's life; then you command them.

This seems like a one-sided and unproductively emotional framing. One could
easily flip the emotional bias and say "A job market is where greedy people
with skills stubbornly refuse to volunteer their help unless they get paid for
it." In fact, I suspect that's exactly how some might characterize the "job
market" for independent medical services where the employer is the patient.

Here's my suggestion for a neutral take: a job market is a mechanism where
people who are willing to take on responsibilities are paid money by people
who would like to delegate responsibilities. The current dynamics of the
academic job market (and many other markets for people with conventional
liberal arts education) suggest that fewer people want to delegate those
responsibilities, and more people are willing to take on those
responsibilities. This is not a market-created problem, it is a social problem
(i.e. we have somehow encouraged far too many people to invest in educations
that don't line up with current and near-future demand for responsibility-
delegation).

As to your point about intrinsic antagonism: naturally, in any negotiation
there is a zero-sum element _on the margin_ , i.e. while we both benefit we
can still argue over how the mutual gains are to be distributed. On the one
hand, this is a valid point, and the asymmetry of leverage in this on-the-
margin zero-sum negotiation between employers and employees is an excellent
theoretical argument for labor regulations and labor unions. On the other
hand, framing the labor negotiation as zero sum _overall_ is, I believe,
counter to even Marxist [0] analysis of labor relations.

[0] My lay understanding of Marxist labor relation theory is that it argues
capital obtains the lion's share of the mutual benefits (or "surplus value")
arising from delegation, but it does not argue that the exchange is what we
would nowadays call zero-sum on an overall basis.

------
timr
_" The thing about grad school is that everyone else is at least as special as
you, and most of them are more so. They all had 4.0 GPAs, they all have gone
through life in the same insulating cocoon of praise, they all really, really
love history. Hell, some of them shoot rainbows out of their butts and smell
like a pine forest after a spring rain--and they mostly aren't going to get
jobs either."_

Oh man, does this ring true. If I had a nickel for every snotty remark by an
arrogant first-year grad student about how _they 're_ not going to have
trouble finding a professorship, I think I'd have enhanced my earning power
more than the actual degree. In academia, everyone is a unique snowflake.

If you ever interview for a PhD program, you may notice that the people at the
recruiting party are all first or second year students. There are many reasons
for this, but a big one is that there are _very few_ students past the second
year of a PhD program who are under any illusions about their specialness in
the order of the academic world. These are not the people you want recruiting
new grist for the research mill.

~~~
pekk
> In academia, everyone is a unique snowflake.

and in startups, everyone is a 10x ninja. Guess that's an invariant.

~~~
Domenic_S
Same for corporate life.

"But I'm super smart and work really hard!"

Congrats, you're not fired.

~~~
grecy
Congrats, you're not fired, _today_.

------
leephillips
With the exception of a professional school (medicine, law), do not pay to go
to graduate school. If they're not paying you, something's wrong.

~~~
jnbiche
Would you apply this advice to even a master's degree? In my experience, it is
exceedingly rare for universities to offer tuition reduction for a master's
degree, unless it's a pure research master's degree. Some offer a limited
number of scholarships, but other financial aid is rare.

And I actually think paying for certain masters degrees, for example in
computer science or engineering, is a better financial investment than paying
for most law schools, particularly in the present environment.

I do agree that one should not pay anything for a PhD.

~~~
ronaldx
A master's degree is almost certainly worth less than than a year of full-time
work experience on your resume.

So, the master's is potentially costing you triple - you're paying for it,
you're not getting paid, your value as an employee isn't going up as much as
someone who is working.

If you can't find a sponsor to pay for a master's degree, then I would assume
that nobody values you having that master's degree.

~~~
lsc
>A master's degree is almost certainly worth less than than a year of full-
time work experience on your resume.

For how long is this true? I mean, at this point, I have "more than a decade"
of experience - and, considering, I think I'm likely to say 'more than a
decade' even when I have two or three decades of experience; no reason to
point out that you are old.

On the other hand, people leave their degree on their resume forever.

My point here is that years of experience seem to have, ah, a diminishing
marginal return.

(that said, I'm almost certain that you are correct for the first five years
of your career... /if/ you can get a good job without a degree and without
experience, which in my very relevant experience, depends a whole lot on the
shape of the job market at the time.)

Actually, as someone without a degree... the 'perishability' of my credentials
is something I think about often. I mean, i wrote a book, [1] which is a
pretty strong credential, but will one obsolete book mark me as 'middle class'
20 years from now? probably not. A masters degree would. (Now, would that
masters, if it was fallow for a decade or two, get me a job? probably not by
itself. But, my impression is that it keeps it's value as a credential longer
than, say, my book, and certainly longer than work experience.)

[1][http://nostarch.com/xen.htm](http://nostarch.com/xen.htm)

------
short_circut
I am currently about a year away from my PhD in computational physics and
chemistry and looking out towards the future I have very similar sentiments to
this professor. Finding a decent job in academia is very very difficult. Even
when you do get one it really won't be worth the work and time you have to put
into it. At least in my field it is much better to develop your skills
elsewhere and use that to enter into industry. I just wish someone had told me
this 4 years ago.

~~~
acadien
The world for a graduating History PhD is totally different than for most STEM
majors. Very very few History PhD's get their tuition paid for and are
typically hugely in debt upon graduation. At least in the sciences its
/possible/ to graduate debt free. Also in the sciences its entirely possible
that your specific domain expertise will land you a job.

Not to say a history PhD is useless for finding work, but its likely more
difficult to find work than say a Physics PhD (which has a 96% employment rate
1st year after graduation, according to the APS[1]).

[1][http://www.aip.org/statistics/trends/reports/phdinitial.pdf](http://www.aip.org/statistics/trends/reports/phdinitial.pdf)

~~~
nnntrn
_" Very very few History PhD's get their tuition paid for and are typically
hugely in debt upon graduation."_

This is incorrect. It's absolutely possible to earn a humanities doctorate
without going into debt (at least for the postgraduate degree(s)).

~~~
acadien
Yes, that was poor wording. I meant to imply it is often difficult to graduate
debt free for STEM majors as well. TA stipends simply aren't enough to pay the
bills these days.

I don't mean to imply a STEM major is more valuable than a History PhD either,
simply that its (likely) easier to get a job after graduation. Honestly, its a
damn shame the public doesn't appreciate both of these areas of work more as
they are the cornerstone for improving society.

------
jerryhuang100
It would be the time to discuss or even revamp the tenure system of the
professorship at universities, just like what happens to the NYC public school
teachers. The tenure system of the job protections for the past 200+ years of
the Western higher education system is based on the low supply of advanced
degree holders, which is just the opposite to today's situation. There are a
lot of very good tenured professors doing amazing academic works and teachings
even at their old ages. But I believe everyone knows one or two such tenured
professors just doing sloppy works or not publishing for a long while. You
want to complaint about those kind of professors? Try ratemyprofessor or FB
and that would be it. The only winners of such university tenure system are
the tenure holders who view their professorships as entitlements, rather than
try to advance the human knowledge or educate the next generation. The losers?
The schools, the students and the new crops of PhD graduates with mountain
high of passions.

~~~
glesica
It isn't that simple. One of the key reasons for the tenure system is to
insulate "thinkers" from political or social pressure. Tenure allows
researchers to be more objective because they don't have to worry (as much)
about being fired for unpopular teaching or research findings.

This system has already been polluted by the prevalence of corporate funding
for research, but destroying it entirely would be a terrible thing for society
as a whole. There is certainly waste (and we should try to minimize it), but
some waste is worth the benefits in my mind.

------
dkkarthik
The article is funny, and the cynicism adds to the humor. But as someone who
was on the faculty market last year, I have to say it is not at all
representative of Computer Science.

CS depts are still growing, and are helped by the growing number of students
wanting to major in CS. This is requiring many/most departments to grow
further. And the reason why students are wanting to major in CS, is that there
is plenty of work to be found. If you are well grounded in basics, and can
program well, there is ample opportunity in both big companies, as well as
startups.

------
mediumdave
"you will find yourself...banking on the thin chance of landing a job in some
part of the country usually only seen on American Pickers"

Because those of us who live in rural areas are worthless degenerates, right?

~~~
bernardom
Almost by definition fewer people want to live in rural areas.

~~~
sp332
Well, any _given_ rural area of the same size. America only recently crossed
the 50% urban threshold.

~~~
snogglethorpe
Hmm, I suppose it depends on how you defined "urban," and the particular area
(etc), but a quick google generates a lot of results that show the U.S.
generally passing the 50%-urban threshold around 1910-1920...

E.g. the graph here seems typical: [http://blogs.census.gov/2012/04/04/how-do-
we-measure-urban-a...](http://blogs.census.gov/2012/04/04/how-do-we-measure-
urban-areas/)

------
johnmaxwellx
I work at a private intelligence firm in London. We provide intelligence and
risk analysis to oil companies, banks, insurance firms etc.

In the office next to me there is a PhD in classics, a MA in maths, and a PhD
in ancient history. They all make over £150k (that's like $240k).

I don't earn that much as I work in a different part of the firm, so I'm not
boasting.

------
wotzotz
I think there is an important missing caveat. Yes, everyone might be really
bright and have 4.0 GPAs, but there are signs that you might have a real
chance. Are you not just bright and have a 4.0, but did you also get into more
than one of the top 5 departments in your field, giving you the pick of the
litter and some negotiating power when you enter? Is your prospective advisor
high profile and genuinely excited about you? Are you entering the program
with an NSF GRFP fellowship or a Javits? If you are answering yes to these
kinds of questions, you will most likely be able to get an academic job at a
research university or a major liberal arts college. Seriously. I fit into
this profile, defended in 2012, and have a tenure track job. I was in a small
cohort--three people--but two of us have tenure track jobs and the other is in
a high profile post-doc. I looked at all the PhDs from the last 5 years of my
program. 8 people have TT jobs, 1 has a post-doc, and 3 have industry jobs,
but 1 of those 3 really wanted an industry jobs when he entered. No one is
unemployed, and we're talking about the roughest years from 2008 on.

Yes, it is not the case that a PhD guarantees you an academic job without
reference to your department, thesis topic, and advisor. Do people actually
believe otherwise, though?

Can you be a professor? Yes, but not based on your undergraduate performance
alone. You need to do an honest assessment to see if you are on a trajectory
to be one of the top people in your field when you graduate. You can see this,
in part, by looking at what the current graduate students in your prospective
program are doing and where the recent alumni are. If not, then you should
absolutely not go into grad school thinking otherwise.

~~~
sfeats
I would just like to highlight one of your criteria: Is your prospective
advisor... genuinely excited about you?

This is more important for future academic prospects than I would have
anticipated going into my PhD program. I fit your list of attributes for all
other criteria save this one. And without my supervisors enthusiasm for my
work or my future prospects I've started losing confidence in myself and in my
abilities. More than confidence, I'm missing out on networking opportunities
due to his lack of interest.

~~~
wotzotz
That is so rough. I don't know exactly what your situation is, but there might
still be options. If you're at the dissertating stage, you might have a
committee member that is more stoked with stuff you're doing. You might be
able to use them as your unofficial mentor to cover for deficiencies in the
relationship with your primary advisor.

------
dalai
I sometimes wonder whether there is indeed less need for professors or whether
it is easier and cheaper to use postdocs, adjuncts, "research professors",
etc. for the work that professors are supposed to do. It appears that
universities are trying to avoid offering tenured positions at all costs.
Florida polytechnic for example adopted a non-tenure faculty model which
according to its Board of Trustees _will help recruit and maintain top talent_
[1]. I wonder if they actually believe that.

When I was a phd student I did an informal check on the professors in my
department. Even though it was no ivy league school, on average it took them
2.8 years from entry into the phd program to getting a tenure-track position.
Now 2.8 is probably the average number of years as a postdoc you need to have.

1: [http://floridapolytechnic.org/news/non-tenure-faculty-
model-...](http://floridapolytechnic.org/news/non-tenure-faculty-model-and-
bog-work-plan-approved)

------
moocowduckquack
If you still really want to be a professor, find a load of other unemployed
PhD's and a bored billionare or two and go and found a University.

------
bonemachine
What's really heartbreaking about this is growing up in high school, the most
respected older adults in my life -- indeed, the ones most responsible for
steering me out of the abyss -- where high school history teachers, and local
university history professors.

 _Every long-term educational trend points towards the end of the
professoriate. States continue to slash funding for higher education. Retiring
professors are not replaced, or replaced with part-time faculty. Technology
promises to provide education with far fewer teachers--and whether you buy
into this vision of the future or not, state legislators and university
administrators believe._

~~~
comrade_ogilvy
Keep in mind that even if the tenured faculty of yesteryear do not disappear,
the numbers are likely to not do better than flat.

Consider the numbers...

A successful professor, who brings in the grant money, can supervise 10-30
graduate students towards their PhDs over the course of their career. Others
will supervise fewer, but that is because the money is scant.

The bottom line is that if you are not _obviously_ one of the top 10% students
of your program, you are second string. Half the first string players are
having trouble finding a professorship. What are your odds?

------
dinkumthinkum
The problem with this kind of advice and the fairly overly confident advice
over here at HN is the individual, in my view, should not pay a terrible
amount big attention, sure read and think about but this kind of thing applies
in _aggregate_. For _you_ , things could be very different because of various
situations, opportunities, etc. You could sit and ready stories of upset
adjuncts or you could just be tenacious keep jabbing and find a way.

Sure, in aggregate, let's mourn the professoriate.

But for _you_ , don't buy into the hype too much .., you don't need every job,
just one that makes you happy.

This applies to most of lamentations of job markets.

------
hacknat
I've never understood the argument that getting a PhD is worth it because
education is worth it on its own. The premise is correct, but the conclusion
doesn't follow. A PhD used to mean a qualification you had to get for a
specific set of jobs or careers, now a lot of people argue for it as some
culturally enriching experience. If you look carefully at this assumption it
masks a pretty insidious elitism, which is that you can only truly appreciate
culture and art via qualification. This is bogus. As Will Hunting said,

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZI1vgJwUP0&t=2m25s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZI1vgJwUP0&t=2m25s)

------
mathattack
I was originally going to comment that it was more accurate to say they
shouldn't try, but he's right. In history, they just can't. The academia
machine has screwed up incentives. Schools and professors are individually
incented to produce more candidates than the market needs. It's up to people
to say "No, I won't do it." or "No, I don't expect to get a job after 5 years
of service and learning."

I do wish I had the guts to follow up with his _Hell, some of them shoot
rainbows out of their butts and smell like a pine forest after a spring rain--
and they mostly aren 't going to get jobs either._

------
paul_f
The only growth profession is entrepreneurism.

------
kaonashi
[http://s.mlkshk.com/r/NF6J](http://s.mlkshk.com/r/NF6J)

------
Siecje
What else can you do with a History Degree?

~~~
johnmaxwellx
My brother studied history at Oxford, and is now a captain in the British
Army.

