Natural history studies in the classic sense can help you with writers block, but will not ever get funded. The problem is that what is and is not natural history is a hazy area. Modern natural history studies encompass most research on life history ecology, evolution, biogeography and behavioural ecology. They are hypothesis driven, and they provide predictions and results. Through the 1960s, life history research was growing in importance at the expense of systematics. Currently, its gone the other way, with systematics growing at the expense of life history. Both are largely the same kind of thing, examining evolutionary variation and outcomes. A lot of the systematics has grown due to molecular methods too. However, I would not encourage any student to do a doctorate that is restricted to life history research. This is important research and fun. If that interests you, it is best to do it as a sideline and focus on an area that is marketable. I do some life history research, but I also do research in ecological immunology (an area of behavioral ecology), ecotoxicology, and conservation. Heck, Discover Magazine listed my 2007 article on amphibian extinction among the 10 most important articles on amphibian declines. It was largely computational in nature. You cannot restrict yourself to natural history because there are even those who think its a total waste of time. Of course, they can go fight with Harry Greene (Cornell) and Vic Huchison (U of OK) about that if they want. When you first graduate with a PHD, any pub is impressive because so many graduates have none or few. So acquiring some life history papers will help you a bit. But, you need to produce articles that have wide-ranging impact too, and the older you get, the more important this becomes. You have to never stop learning new methods, techniques, and continuously expand your knowledge set. If you do these things, and develop a reputation as a solid research, who brings in money...the last part is especially critical, you will maximize your chances at employment.
Beware though, if you take a job at the wrong school, you can be in a position where you are not allowed to apply for grants with course or summer pay, in which case you will find it very difficult to demonstrate capacity to do the research or project. I got caught in that situation for a while, and it hurt my grant procurement a lot. In the end, each of us does what they can and what the do. If all you can do is observation life history research, which by the way is a very good skill at small schools where there simply are no research resources, This is what I meant earlier by having two lines of research. There is a certain amount of luck involved with all of this. If you restrict yourself to life history descriptive studies your marketability at larger schools will be severely encumbered. When I graduated with my PHD, my focus was ecological immunology and ecotoxicology, with a sideline in natural history. While at my first school, I published a few notes while writing proposals to establish a lab. After obtaining all the stuff I needed from proposal writing, I never got to use it. Then, I moved to the new school, which had no lab space, we were supposed to be building a new building accompanied with an expansion of faculty. After three years of the building being delayed another year, they broke ground. In my third year, I discovered they had axed all the research labs and the entire thrid floor because the money wasn't there. That meant, I would have no lab, and I needed space to do more than the simple life history studies I was doing to stay productive and avoid becoming deadwood. You just can't predict what will happen, so a lot of it is just do what you can and hope its the right decision. If I took the premeire postdoc I was offered instead of taking the tenure track position back in 2003, maybe I'ld be in an R1. Then again maybe I would have contracted a serious spinal virus that put me in a wheel chair, like one of my associates I respect greatly. Maybe I'ld have been killed by warring tribes in Kenya? Or, maybe I'ld have fallen off ship and drawn while sampling Gray whale blood? Who knows! I've made my decisions based on the best information I could find at the time. Some bad decisions were based on bad info, other times they were mistakes. Oh well! That is what you need to do too. Get the best info you can and use it to your advantage. Right now, you have some information that natural history is old-hat, and that it is potentially unfundable, some may poo-poo you for it, but it is also important, useful and fun. Now its your job to decide how to use that information and what decisions to make in regard to your future. Doing it will not make you unemployable, but neither will not doing it. You might discuss what I've relayed to you with your advisor. My guess is that he/she is considering your best interests. Good luck. M On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Christopher Blair <[email protected]>wrote: > There are obviously non-academic jobs for people, with the quantities and > opportunities depending on the field in which the PhD was obtained. > However, people need to realize that it is usually just as difficult, if > not more so, to get some of these non-academic jobs as it is a tt job. For > example, many environmental consulting firms only require a BS or MS > degree. However, nearly all require previous consulting experience and > substantial familiarity with state and federal regulations. These are NOT > skills we are likely to acquire when pursuing a PhD in the life sciences. > Second, in contrast to tt academic jobs, many companies tend to hire > locally. Why hire a PhD from out of state and pay them more versus hire > someone locally with a BS who has previous consulting experience? State and > federal jobs can also be just as competitive as tt jobs. I recently applied > for a curator position at the Smithsonian and am guessing that they > received >500 applications. > > In sum, there are other opportunities for PhDs besides academia, but we > cannot kid ourselves into thinking that pursing alternate careers will be > much easier. > > Chris > > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Judith S. Weis < > [email protected] > > wrote: > > > The existence of many good and rewarding jobs outside academia - in > > federal agencies (EPA, NOAA, FWS, USGS, FDA etc.) as well as in state > > agencies, the private sector (e.g. consulting firms) and non-profits > > (environmental groups) or for those who love teaching, teaching in K-12 > > seems to be ignored in this discussion. > > > > > > > > > If we agree that jobs for ecologists are resource limited, and > > > If we agree that resources are not increasing, > > > then it follows that ecologists who wish to produce intellectual > > offspring > > > (MS and PhD) should produce such offspring in a way that maximizes the > > > probability that they will be represented in the next generation's > career > > > 'gene pool'. > > > > > > If ecologists believe the current job market is competitive, they > should > > > reproduce like albatrosses, maximizing their investment in a very few > > > highly competitive offspring with a wide array of attractive skills > > > (K-slection). > > > If they believe the current job market is essentially a crap shoot, > then > > > they should spawn like salmon, investing little or nothing, with > > > subsequent > > > massive mortality, and only a few offspring surviving (r-selection) > > > > > > The present situation seems to be more salmonid in an albatross > > > environment > > > with considerable human carnage. What can be done? > > > > > > Individuals can look into other fields but that means giving up a dream > > > and > > > acquiring more debt if they go back to school to retrain. If they stay, > > > they risk remaining on the outside of academic/professional leks, > > > opportunistically exploiting irregular and marginal rewards. They can > > > teach, becoming contingent faculty, a growing national scandal where > > > untenured faculty with precarious teaching positions may rely on food > > > stamps to get by. If they have a large debt from student loans, they > will > > > end up taking just about any job that allows them to make their monthly > > > repayments. > > > > > > The long term solution is a ZPG for ecologists: professors should > > > essentially only reproduce themselves. Some may reply that they need > > > 'excess' grad students as teaching assistants. In reality these > positions > > > could be filled and better taught by what are now contingent faculty. > > Make > > > these better paid, give them a heavier load than one or two classes a > > > semester and provide five-year contracts that would give them with more > > > security. Faculty should not admit grad students unless they can be > > fully > > > supported by fellowships. > > > > > > With fewer degrees each year, agencies might consider increasing the > > > number > > > of independent post docs that are long enough to be useful (5 years?) > to > > > allow people to develop. Funders should be prepared, if they fund > > projects > > > with interns, to fund them at a living wage. Funding agencies should > also > > > support programs that support those in overcrowded fields who wish to > > > retrain for teaching or health fields. We make a big point of wanting > > more > > > people to enter the STEM fields, maybe we need to think more about how > to > > > retain them. > > > > > > > > > > > > David Duffy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:57 AM, David L. McNeely <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> ---- Kevin Klein <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > I haven't been able to follow the entire thread but one thing I draw > > >> from > > >> > what I have read is that it is incumbent on those of us who work > with > > >> > students at all stages in their academic careers to also advise them > > >> to > > >> > consider the job market in their chosen disciplines. In so doing, > > >> they > > >> > make more informed decision and they study with eyes open wide on > the > > >> > possibilities open to them at the next stage in their life and > career > > >> > journey. Much easier said than done. It reminds me of two PhD > > >> markets > > >> in > > >> > recent years. One, where hundreds of applicants vied for the > reported > > >> 2 > > >> or > > >> > 3 job openings that year and second the hundreds of positions open > for > > >> the > > >> > 2 or 3 PhD candidates graduating each year. Hopefully we advise our > > >> > students of the job market realities. One place a student might > look > > >> for > > >> > this information can be found here. > > >> > http://www.bls.gov/ooh/occupation-finder.htm > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Hmmm.... . I was an academic biologist for 35+ years, after the time > > >> spent preparing. I cannot recall a time when there were "hundreds of > > >> positions open for 2 or 3 Ph.D. candidates graduating each year." I > do > > >> recall a good many times when the opposite was true. > > >> > > >> David McNeely > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit > > > Botany > > > University of Hawaii > > > 3190 Maile Way > > > Honolulu Hawaii 96822 USA > > > 1-808-956-8218 > > > > > > > > > -- > Christopher Blair, Ph.D. > Postdoctoral Associate > Department of Biology > Duke University, Box 90338 > BioSci 130 Science Drive > Durham, NC 27708 > ph: 919-613-8727 > [email protected] <[email protected]> > <http://individual.utoronto.ca/chrisblair/index.html> > Website: https://sites.google.com/site/christopherblairphd/home > -- Malcolm L. McCallum Department of Environmental Studies University of Illinois at Springfield Managing Editor, Herpetological Conservation and Biology "Nothing is more priceless and worthy of preservation than the rich array of animal life with which our country has been blessed. It is a many-faceted treasure, of value to scholars, scientists, and nature lovers alike, and it forms a vital part of the heritage we all share as Americans." -President Richard Nixon upon signing the Endangered Species Act of 1973 into law. "Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" - Allan Nation 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, and pollution. 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction MAY help restore populations. 2022: Soylent Green is People! The Seven Blunders of the World (Mohandas Gandhi) Wealth w/o work Pleasure w/o conscience Knowledge w/o character Commerce w/o morality Science w/o humanity Worship w/o sacrifice Politics w/o principle Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
