...there is the way that science is done and papers are authored. These measures are pushing people into having larger groups. It is a simple matter of arithmetic. Since the group leader authors all the papers, the more people, the more papers. If a larger proportion of young scientists in a larger group fail, as I suspect, this is not recorded. And because no account is taken of wasted lives and broken dreams, these failures do not make a group leader look less productive.I know several once-and-previously scientists read this space from time to time. Any thoughts to share?
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Valuable Life Lessons
Faithful Reader D.R. sense along a link to this paper, about the massive failures of the way in which scientific research is pursued in the current era. I don't think the paper is entirely right - at least in some fields, you ought to have to justify your research and show a real result every once in a while to maintain funding - but the paper has lots to recommend it. This passage hit especially close to home for me:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
What if a whole string of young scientists in a group fail, in close succession?
I actually felt a little bad bailing on my research group when I did. My advisor put faith in me and invested time and reputation in what eventually proved to be a lackluster research career. I escaped to a paying and satisfying job along a different career path, while she was left to deal with the legacy of another failure.
Fortunately, this particular advisor also happens to be uncommonly concerned with the prosperity and happiness of her young lablings, and she has always seemed perfectly content when that prosperity and happiness is found away from research or academics, even when it comes at the expense of her group's reputation, as must surely be the case.
Post a Comment