berezin at MCMAIL.CIS.MCMASTER.CA
Wed Mar 20 11:21:25 EST 1996
On 20 Mar 1996, STEVEN DOWD wrote:
> In article <4invrr$g4 at ccshst05.cs.uoguelph.ca>, donaldma at uoguelph.ca (Donald Martin) says:
> >So you spend 3-7 years getting a Ph.D. and often a considerable amount of
> >tuition and you're NOT supposed to expect to be employable after that.
> >Nice sentiment, but totally unrealistic.
> I think schools should be open about employment possibilities.
Unfortunately, they (schools) can't by their very nature.
By the same reason that you can't expect the Church 'be open to
the possiblilty that God may not exist'.
I know several case of professors having serious troubles
with administartion when they argued in favour of more
clear warnings to potential [ graduate ] students about
poor job prospects. Openness about these matters can come
only from dissenting voices.
> >: Trouble is when you start viewing degrees as "union cards" for
> >: employment.
> >No, you're right on that one. Hard work and a proven record of excellence
> >should be the ticket to employment, but this isn't nececessarily the case
> >anymore as many will tell you...
> You are correct, and in some cases, this mitigates against employment.
> Read the results of a study the other day that found that "good" workers
> (eg., good attendance, etc.) were the *least* likely to get re-employed
> after a lay-off.
Agree. Another recent poster said that success has nothing to
do with efforts and hard work. That may be true in previous
generations but not in the world which emerges now.
More information about the Bioforum