Changing the 'academia or bust' mindset

In my recent post, "Alt-ac: how our profession can do better?", I suggested that grad programs and professional organizations (such as the APA) should do more to foster alt-ac opportunities for their students. At the moment, our profession leads all too many its early-career members into an awful situation. As anyone who has gone to grad school or sent off undergrads to grad school knows, many people enter grad school with a false sense of their chances (youthful optimism is surely a very real thing). They then spend anywhere from 5-10+ years doing little else than academic philosophy, often while racking up student debt. Then, after 5-10+ years, only around only around 35% of those who finish the PhD end up getting permanent academic jobs. And the rest? As Ben Sheredos' paper on professional failure illustrates--and countless discussions both online and offline attest--those who don't end up with permanent academic jobs can end up feeling like abject failures utterly ill-equipped to make a living in the non-academic world. Insofar as this is our profession--and insofar as grad programs often seem to entice students to enroll with optimistic pictures of career success--I believe we should make changing this situation our responsibility. But how?

In my last post, I suggested there are a few simple things that grad programs and professional organizations might do:

1. Grad programs (placement directors, dissertation supervisors) could cultivate contact-lists of students of theirs who have entered non-academic industries, staying in touch with them personally for the purposes of helping students network for alt-ac opportunities.
2. Professional institutions (such as the APA) could also publish a "who's who" directory of philosophers in industry, as well as organize alt-ac networking events at major conferences (much like other disciplines do, where industry representatives have informational tables for potential job-candidates).

Readers who commented seemed to like these ideas. However, although I think simple steps like these might dramatically improve things, one major difficulty is getting them to happen.

Indeed, there not only appears to be a good deal of inertia in favor of the status quo (e.g. grad programs and institutions traditionally focusing on academia). There also appears to be a deeply ingrained tendency--at least in some quarters (both among grad students and faculty)--of positively looking down on leaving academic. At least anecdotally, I've heard that when grad students seek to leave academia, they can be treated like persona non grata in their department. Equally importantly, as Blake Francis writes, grad students often seem to internalize an 'academia or bust' mindset themselves ("I had deeply internalized the message that I either get a TT position or I’m some kind of a failure").

Consequently, if our discipline is going to change and begin to do more to develop alt-ac opportunities, it seems like we are going to have to fundamentally change the mind-set of many people in the discipline: grad students, grad faculty, grad program and placement directors, and those in charge of major institutions. How can this be done? As with other social issues, I think it may take a multi-pronged approach of advocacy from many different directions. Here, for instance, are a few suggestions:

1. Public consciousness raising is, I think, probably vital. Things will never change in the profession unless and until more people speak out loudly and publicly about the need for our discipline--for grad programs and institutions--to change. Although it may not have been his intent, I think Ben Sheredos' paper on professional failure was a real service to the profession. It told a very real human story of the casualties our profession creates--and it moved me, for one, to work harder to change things (indeed, it is why I am writing this post right now). So that, I think, would be my first suggestion: speak up on these issues, tell your story, etc. either openly or anonymously. If you care about these issues, write about them. Heck, submit something to the Cocoon (we publish anonymous contributions!). The more attention people bring to these issues, showing the personal side and human cost the status quo is visiting on grad students and job-marketeers, the more likely is people may be to do something to change things.

2. Individual grad faculty (including placement directors) can choose to set an example for others. For example, are you a junior or senior faculty member in a graduate department? You can begin cultivating contact-lists of former students who enter industry, stay in touch with them, and help connect students to them. If you begin doing it, and your students begin benefiting from it, the mindset in your department may slowly begin to change - especially if you can leverage what you are doing to attract talented new admissions to your program (viz. making the case to prospective students that your program actually supports alt-ac opportunities!).

3. Graduate students can start pushing--both individually and collectively--for more attention to alt-ac opportunities in their department. Does your grad program have a student representative who attends faculty meetings? Push them to speak up and advocate for some of the things suggested above. And do you have a sympathetic dissertation advisor? Talk to them about these issues. Encourage them to stay in touch with grads who enter alt-ac industries and help current and recent grads network with them.

4. Prospective graduate students (particularly those with multiple admission offers) could make it a point to express the importance of alt-ac support. They might even put pressure on programs they choose not to join, telling the admissions committee that they would have found the program more attractive if it did more to support alt-ac opportunities for its students.  

5. Institutional leaders (e.g. at the APA, etc.) can take a greater stand on these issues. I think it is great that the APA put together this brochure. And I seem to recall the APA even having some sort of alt-ac networking event at one of its recent meetings (am I recalling correctly?). Still, I think it could do far more. For example, how many of you even know about the APA's member group for philosophers outside of academia? I didn't until just now! Leaders at the APA could not only do more to publicize groups like this not just on a one-off basis but instead more consistently. The APA could also do more to encourage those who do leave academia to join these groups so that early-career people in the profession can network with them. Indeed, perhaps the APA could have something as simple as an exit form of sorts that it could publicize to grad programs and job-marketeers that they could fill out on the APA website when choosing to leave academia. The form could not only ask them to volunteer contact information for networking purposes, but also give them an opportunity to stay "tuned in" to the APA, invite them to join the above group, and so on. Finally, the APA could increase the prominence and activities of its Non-Academic Careers Committee, such as by having APA sessions (symposium sessions, etc.) where philosophers who entered industry give talks, etc.

Anyway, these are just a few suggestions. What do you all think? Do you have any ideas of your own?

Comments

[Al]

I think the solutions offered here are very good and I do agree that a very important part of the issues here concern the expectations that are set. I’d like to add a really simple resource that isn’t going to solve the problems but shouldn’t be forgotten: most universities have career offices. I’ve had director indirect experiences with a number of these, that is, at different institutions. They aren’t perfect but they have all had some good resources and I can think of one case where a PhD friend of mine really got a lot out of using one when leaving academia.

[Job marketeer]

The faculty at my PhD program did a good job reminding grad students that the market is tough. I think this is one reason there wasn't much stigma associated with quitting the program. On the other hand, they didn't seem to acknowledge the possibility that those who intend to complete the program may also want to consider alt-ac employment. The biggest reason this seems like an oversight is that 1) (given the 35% stat) most philosophy PhDs will not land a permanent job in academia within a reasonable time-frame and 2) there are no obvious alt-ac career choices for philosophers.

[Marcus Schultz-Bergin]

An additional step graduate departments could (should) take is to cultivate various avenues for graduate students to engage with other disciplines at the University. For instance, working with (or taking classes with) engineers, biologists, a nursing/medical school, etc.

These sorts of experiences could immediately lead to generating new philosophical interests and publishing opportunities. And these new interests and publications can form the basis of finding alt-ac opportunities - working in the tech sector, etc.

The other benefit to this sort of activity is that it can be beneficial even for people who aim at academic jobs as it can open up additional avenues for those jobs that may not be open to a more traditionally trained philosopher. So it doesn't have to come off as "you should do this as a backup in case you don't get an academic job".