Transcript Career Outcomes (1996 cohort)

Everything you wanted to know about career
ascendency but were afraid to ask
Michael van Dyke Ph.D. and Douglas Boyd, Ph.D.
MD Anderson Cancer Center
Emails: [email protected]
[email protected]
Tel: MVD-713 792 8594
Tel: DB: 713 563 4918
Session I (DB).
•
The route to an academic/industrial career,
•
Growth in # trainees and postdocs in US market,
•
Faculty hiring at universities (medical schools),
•
Research funding
–
–
NIH $$$
Success rates in getting first grant
•
Career diversification of our (GSBS) Ph.D. graduates
•
International trends that currently favor career ascendancy in the biomedical sciences (USA)
•
Is an intermediary positions after post-doc (Instructor) beneficial for career ascendency?
•
Some non-traditional jobs
•
Who to ask for career advice?
•
Importance of establishing time lines.
Session II (MVD) Noon-June 19.
•
What are faculty searches looking for
•
How competitive is the academic market?
– Experience of DB and MVD on search committees
•
Domestic vs. foreign applicants
– Does one have an advantage?
•
What are large and small institutions looking for
– Publications, grants, pedigree
•
Non-faculty positions in academia
–
–
Running a Core Facility
Research Scientist in a laboratory.
Career Tracks for Ph.D. Recipients in Biomedical Sciences
Junior
Faculty
Position?
Ph.D.
Student 4-6
years
Postdoctoral
Fellowship(s)
(3-4 years)
(X2)??
University Faculty
(Research/teaching)
Industrial Position
(Pharmaceutical/Biotech)
Non-traditional track (e.g.
administration, medical writer,
aviation science, pharma/biotech
sales, paralegal, FDA (drug
regulation))
First Question…
•
Is the supply (Ph.D. students, postdoctoral fellows) and
demand (faculty appointments, vacancies in industry)
balanced??
Substantial Job Growth Nationwide
(increased demand)
• Advertisements in Science for life science positions:
– 1973
• 26 in a typical issue of the periodical,
– 2004
• 109 in typical issue of the periodical
– Increase of >300 %
Growth in # of individuals receiving Ph.Ds
(increased supply)
• Nationwide,
• Our own GSBS
National Growth Trend in Ph.D graduates in
Biomedical Sciences
7000
6000
5000
4000
# Ph.Ds
Biological
/Biomedical
Science Ph.Ds
3000
2000
1000
0
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Year
2000
2005
2010
# Ph.Ds conferred by University of Texas GSBS
(1980-2008)
70
# GSBS Ph.D. Recipients
60
50
40
# GSBS Ph.D.
Recipients
30
20
10
0
1978
1988
1998
Year
2008
Trends in Postdoctoral Population growth
and its contribution to “supply”?
• US (and US resident),
• Foreign
Growth in US/Foreign Postdoctoral Populations and #
Principal Investigators
35,000
Total Postdocs
30,000
differential
# Indviduals
25,000
Principal Investigators
20,000
Foreign Postdocs
US Postdocs
15,000
10,000
crossover
5,000
2004
1999
1994
1989
1984
1979
0
Year
Source- Foreign postdocs: the changing face of biomedical science
in the U.S. Garrison et al. FASEB J. 2005
What about the demand end?? Are the # of tenuretrack faculty appointment also increasing at
medical schools??
60 % of postdoctoral fellows pursue tenure-track
positions in academia
(Babco and Jesse 2005)
Total and New Faculty 1970 to 2006 in US Medical Schools
45,000
16
40,000
14
Good news-faculty growth ??
35,000
12
Number
10
25,000
20,000
but first time hires
unchanged
8
6
15,000
Percent New Faculty
30,000
4
10,000
2
0
0
19
70
19
72
19
74
19
76
19
78
19
80
19
82
19
84
19
86
19
88
19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
5,000
Total Faculty
First-time Faculty
Source: http://www.aamc.org
Percent First-time Faculty
13
Career outcomes for our GSBS Ph.D.
graduates
•
Historical and recent outcomes
Career outcomes of our GSBS Ph.D. Recipients
(2 cohorts)
• 10 year follow up
– 1970/1972- queried as to career in 1980/1982
– 1996-queried as to career in 2006
0
10
8
4
Career
Other (computer
service manager,
scuba diver
instructor)
40
Postdoctoral
50
NIH
(Administration)
Industry
80
Faculty/Research
(Tenure-track)
% Ph.D. Graduates
Career Outcome (1970-1972 cohort)
Career Outcomes of (70-'72 Ph.D Graduate cohort)
75
70
60
Note high %
of faculty
n=24
30
20
4
8
Subsequent diversification of careers in
GSBS Ph.D. Recipients
0
9
Position Unknown
11
Other (housewife,
sales, teaching high
school)
4
Postdoctoral Fellow
Technology
Transfer
5
Clinician
10
Industry
15
Non-faculty in academia
30
Research
Academica (nonFaculty)
20
but…note non-tenure
track positions
25
Faculty/Research
(Non-Tenure Track)
35
Faculty/Research
(Tenure Track)
% Ph.D Graduates (1996 Cohort)
Career Outcomes (1996 cohort)
Total Faculty
=42 %
33
17
11
9
4
2
•
“New graduates in the life
sciences will continue to find the
relatively few research and tenuretrack positions in academia
extremely competitive”
– Babco and Jesse (2005)
Career diversification of our graduates is similar to
that nationwide (2005)
•
55 % in academic institutions
– But nearly half of these are in non-tenure positions,
•
5 % in non-profit organizations,
•
27 % in business sector,
•
10 % in government,
•
Remaining 3 % Ph.Ds in other sectors
•
Babco and Jesse (2005). BioScience 55: 879-886.
You’ve got in!!
• You’re a new Assistant
Professor hire
– What about research funding??
????
The Public Purse (i.e. National Institute of Health
(NIH)-one of the major sources of funding)
• Funding for biomedical research
– Trends in funding
NIH Budget in Current and Constant Dollars
$35,000
$30,000
Program to double NIH
budget in 5 years
$31,748
$31,337
$29,648
$28,130
$25,709
Dollars (Millions)
$25,000
$31,131
$28,100
$23,068
$28,626 $28,524
$29,137 $29,465
$29,137
$28,473
$29,465
$27,502
$26,740
$21,012
$23,188
$18,966
$20,000
$17,128 $17,495
$18,297
$20,513
$17,814
$15,000
$15,643
Total NIH ($ Millions)
$13,687
$12,771
$10,000
$11,341
$11,881
Constant 2007 ($ Millions)
$5,000
$0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Pres
Budget
23
Recent updates on the Public Purse-2009
• Stimulus package (President Obama)
– Payline increased to 16 % (yeah!!),
– Some unfunded grants within 10 % get 2 year awards,
– Challenge grants.
What does this all mean for getting
that research grant??
Success Rates for New (Type 1) Applications,
Including First R01 Award
35.0%
30.0%
25.8%
26.6%
27.1%
26.2%
26.7%
25.3%
24.7%
25.0%
Success Rate
21.9%
23.5%
20.6%
20.0%
18.7%
25.9%
25.5%
24.5%
24.1%
23.0%
20.5%
19.2%
24.9%
25.4%
21.5%
21.9%
22.1%
19.5%
Trend shows increase
Good news!!
20.6%
20.0%
21.8%
21.3%
19.2%
18.2%
18.8%
20.7%
20.0%
17.9%
16.3%
16.9%
15.0%
18.5%
15.9%
14.8%
10.0%
All Research Project Grants (Type 1)
R01 (Type 1)
5.0%
First R01 Award
0.0%
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Other good news: factors favoring future
traditional career ascendancy in USA
• International competition for students and researchers
– Singapore, European Union,
– Council of Graduate Schools indicate # foreign applicants
declined 25 % between 2003 and 2005
Trend in International Applications to our GSBS
# International GSBS Applicants
700
600
500
2009 data ~30 % down
compared with 2003
400
300
200
100
0
1985
1990
1995
2000
Year
2005
2010
So….the pendulum swings back and forth
Does an intermediary position (e.g. Instructor)
facilitate career ascendency in academia?
•
For a cohort of MDACC instructors (cohort 2002-2008)
– What % were promoted internally?
– Of those who departed MDACC, what % were promoted at the other institute?
Career Outcomes in academia for
MDACC Instructors
% Instructors Promoted at MDACC (2004-2008)
Ex-MDACC Instructors promoted
at other Institutions
40.0
35.0
45
30.0
40
25.0
35
30
% 20.0
%
15.0
25
20
10.0
15
5.0
10
n-=54
n-=46
N.B. Point of diminishing return with time!!
Tenure Track
Assistant
Professor or
greater
0
Non-tenure
track
Assistant
Professor
Tenure Track
Assistant
Professor
5
Non-tenure
track Assistant
Professor
0.0
What about life outside of
Academia?
Some non-traditional jobs
(more on these in Session II)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Running a Core facility,
A research scientist position in a laboratory,
Research in a start-up company,
Administration,
Editor for a journal,
Patent law,
Regulatory Affairs,
Clinical Service,
Teaching,
Technology Transfer
So you’re undecided: which faculty member(s)
should you ask for career advice for ACADEMIA?
• Your mentor?
• may/may not be a good person,
» Track record in placing trainees in the career path you are
interested in?
• Faculty on departmental faculty search committee
• He/she could advise you on what THEIR dept is looking for info:
BUT-may be uninformative for other departments/institutions.
So you’re undecided: which faculty member(s)
should you ask for advice on NON-TRADITIONAL
careers?
– Your mentor?
• might/might not be the best person
» limited insight,
» prejudice against non-traditional route,
» track record
– Some faculty might be able to put you in touch with persons who
have taken this route,
– Graduate school Alumni,
– Boyd/van Dyke (pondered over this for 15+ years)- have
contacts.
• Some other considerations
– Start thinking about your career objectives NOW
• What do you like doing?
• What are your strengths/weaknesses?
• Are you a social butterfly or a “loner”?
– Speak up
• Faculty/mentors are there to help but you have to approach him/her.
• Talk to more than one investigator.
– Time Frames
• Establish Early (VERY important)
– Time flies by VERY quickly.
Summary
•
Employment in Academia:
–
Have not seen an un-employed Ph.D in our career outcome queries,
•
–
•
Decreasing Ph.D. applicant pool from overseas,
Expansion of non-traditional careers in research.
Factors hindering career ascendancy:
–
–
–
•
Academic positions harder to secure cf 30 years prior.
Factors favoring career ascendancy:
–
–
•
But situation where under-employed individuals,
Reduced retirement of faculty (traditional),
Increased pool of national Ph.D. recipients,
Large pool of international Ph.Ds.
Employment in non-Traditional jobs:
–
–
–
Wide range,
Find someone who has taken such a career path or who can put you in contact with such a
person,
Different priorities, expectations, culture, mindset compared with academia.
The End
0.0
25.0
Other (administration, database
management, Editor, Medical Writer)
drop in faculty
appointments
Postdoctoral Fellow
Clinician
27.0
Industry
Faculty/Research (Tenure Track)
% Ph.D. Graduaates (1987-1988)
Career Outcomes (1987/1988 Cohort)
increase in
trainee #
30.0
27.0
24.3
20.0
16.2
15.0
10.0
5.0
5.4
rise in nontraditional
careers
Traditional Routes
Pharmaceutical/Biotech Industry
Research/teaching
Ph.D. Recipients by Age
Doctorate Recipients by Age Group (2006 cohort)
50.0
44.7
45.0
40.0
35.0
32.2
% Total
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.5
10.0
6.9
5.3
5.0
0.4
0.0
21-25
26-30
31-35
36-40
Age group
41-45
>45
Either way
• Looooooooots of training……but in 1998 survey of
GSBS students from (graduating 1966-1998)
– 82.5 % of GSBS students are appropriately employed in light of
their education,
– 92.7 respondents very satisfied or satisfied with GSBS
education,
– 83.8 % would either very strongly or strongly recommend GSBS
http://gsbs.uth.tmc.edu/alumni/surv98.html
Response rate= 70 %
• Academic research scientists:
– A Ph.D. program and dissertation …requirements for the job,
…can take 6-8 years. Add ..several years (postdoctoral) of one's
career to qualify for coveted tenure-track positions.
– During the postdoc phase, ..likely to teach, ..experiments that
require you to check in at all hours, publish research – for a
salary that may not exceed $43,000.
– ..made tougher still by fact that in many disciplines, not nearly as
many tenure-track positions as there are candidates.
Source: http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/15/pf/training_pay/index.htm
But… is it really that dire???
Some concerns regarding
the expanding pool of Ph.D.s
• “…usually not possible for every Ph.D. trained to become a faculty
member. “Tragically, there is a current pool of Ph.D.-trained
individuals…laboring under the incorrect presumption that if they
only work hard enough and long enough, there will be a faculty
job...”
– - Stephen Ekker Ph.D.
• The “route to (academic) success, so common a decade ago, is
usually now limited to a relatively lucky few that picked the right
project in the right laboratory at the right time. The net result is a
pool of highly skilled individuals in (an) academic holding pattern,
and that pool is growing each year.”- Stephen Ekker Ph.D.
NIH COMPETING RPG* PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: TRENDS IN
APPLICANTS, AWARDEES, AND FUNDING RATES
FY 1998-2007
35
40%
35%
30%
25
25%
20
20%
15
Funding Rate
Number of Investigators (in thousands)
30
15%
10
10%
5
5%
0
0%
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Fiscal Year
Number
Success
*RPG activity code
in R00,Reviewed
R01, R03, R15, R21,Number
R22, R23,Awarded
R29, R33, R34, R35,
R36, R37,Rate
R55, R56, RL1, RL5, RL9, P01, P42, PN1,
UC1, UC7, U01, U19, U34, DP1, DP2, RL1, RL2, RL5, RL9. Also includes RPGs from NLM as of FY07.
RPG 46
Funding for Research Grants
$18,000
$16,000
$14,000
$14,673
$15,030 $14,853
$15,402
$14,923 $14,903
Dollars (Millions)
$13,776
$12,000
$12,624
$11,309
$10,000
$9,955
$8,000
$6,152
$8,195
$7,312
$7,047
$6,539
$6,434
$5,680
$4,000$4,332
$10,176 $10,288 $10,122 $10,046
$9,031
$8,626
$7,662
$6,000
$9,747
All Research Project Grants
$5,136
$4,683
R01 + R29
$2,000
$0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Pres Est
Budget
35
Budget Gains From NIH 5-Year Growth Campaign
Have Been Eliminated
Funding Level (in Billions)
30
Actual NIH
25
Estimated NIH Budget Growth At
1969-1998 Average (9.0% )
20
15
Program to double NIH
budget in 5 years
10
5
0
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007