Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, November 5, 1995 TAG: 9511030046
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: G-3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: PHILLIP A. GRIFFITHS
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
But today the system is under great stress. Newspaper and magazine articles chronicle the plight of new Ph.D.s unable to find jobs. Employers complain that the new Ph.D.s they hire are not ready for the demands of the work place. Policy-makers wonder if the United States might be producing too many Ph.D.s.
Two widespread misconceptions have muddied much of this discussion:
The myth that most Ph.D.s go on to careers as professors in colleges and universities. Many do, but this has never been the norm. Today, more than half of new graduates with Ph.D.s find work in nonacademic settings, and the percentage has been rising for the past 20 years.
The myth that Ph.D.s suffer from a high level of unemployment. Unemployment for new Ph.D.s is only about 2 percent, substantially lower than for all professionals. Although job openings in colleges and universities have diminished, the demand for Ph.D. scientists and engineers to fill less traditional roles - such as those in industry and business - has been growing fast enough to absorb most graduates.
Nevertheless, many new Ph.D.s undergo a difficult reorientation when they enter the job market. Graduate students traditionally have been led to believe that they will find jobs like the ones their professors have. As job openings in academia have dried up, more Ph.D.s have entered postdoctoral study, worked in temporary research positions, or taken one-year faculty jobs. They have found jobs eventually, but in the interim they have felt the pain of unmet expectations.
At the same time, employers in government and industry have been looking for new Ph.D.s who can do more than just topnotch research. They are seeking people who also can communicate, collaborate and work across disciplines. More and more organizations need highly trained individuals to take on such problems as industrial and technological development, health care, environmental protection, economic growth, precollege education and urban decay. Doctorate recipients who have obtained a wide-ranging education are ideal for these positions.
To create a better fit between new Ph.D.s and the jobs available, universities need to reshape their graduate programs. First they should provide a broader range of educational options for students. Employers value highly the original research experience that is the hallmark of the Ph.D., but students should avoid overspecialization and should supplement their research work with such options as a minor field of study, additional coursework in related fields, and off-campus internships. These experiences will give students skills desired by both academic and non-academic employers.
Universities also need to provide students with much better career information and guidance. Part of the problem is that good information often is not available. A national data base on employment options and trends would help students and faculty advisers make good decisions in planning academic and professional careers.
By supporting many graduate students through research grants, the federal government contributes to the narrowness of graduate education. The government should shift its support for graduate students away from research grants and toward education and training grants, which would be awarded to departments for improving the versatility of graduate education. Such a shift also could help to reduce the amount of time it takes students to earn Ph.D.s, which has increased 30 percent in some fields over the last 30 years.
Some observers of graduate education advocate a simple solution to the current mismatch between jobs and graduates: Produce fewer Ph.D.s. I believe that such an approach is fundamentally misguided. Reducing the educational attainments of our young people is hardly the way to compete in a world where prosperity increasingly depends on knowledge. What's needed is a new kind of Ph.D., one more attuned to the demands of the 21st century.
Federal efforts to manipulate the labor marketplace have notoriously bad records. When the government has predicted past surpluses of scientists and engineers, there have been shortages, and vice versa. The unpredictable nature of science makes it difficult to forecast the nation's needs for science and engineers. With Ph.D.s playing an ever more important role in our society, we would be foolish to limit their production.
Phillip A. Griffiths, director of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N. J., chairs the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy of the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering and the Institute of Medicine.
- National Academy Op-Ed Service
by CNB