Other countries adopted a similar approach. The structure of a university lab, with the principal investigator PI at the top, followed below by postdocs and then the lowly graduate students, resembles a pyramid scheme. In order to staff their labs, faculty recruit PhD students onto their graduate programs with funding and the implicit assurance of interesting research careers. Upon receiving their degree, it is mandatory in most fields for students who aspire to a faculty position to first take an appointment as a postdoc.
Such a pyramid scheme works only as long as the number of jobs grows quickly enough to absorb the newly trained. But for many years, the system has not grown nearly fast enough to provide all those posts. Chemists have often had an edge over those trained in the biomedical sciences because of the large number of research positions for chemists in industry. But in recent years, industry hires have lagged — in part because of mergers and acquisitions in pharma and in part because of a fragile economy.
Why do smart people — and those recruited into PhD programs are smart — put up with such a pyramid scheme? Are students blind or ignorant to what awaits them? Several factors allow the system to continue. First, there has, at least until recently, been a ready supply of funds to support graduate students as research assistants. Second, factors other than money play a role in determining who chooses to become a scientist, and one factor in particular is a taste for science, an interest in finding things out.
There are approximately people employed as a Chemists and Materials Scientists. Read More. What is the Unemployment rate of Chemists and Materials Scientists? Given the job environment today, Chemists and Materials Scientists can Once employed, Chemists and Materials Scientists can expect to earn an In addition, over the coming 10 years Chemists and Materials Scientists will Holding its own in tenth place, Spain showed signs of growth in chemistry research publishing, with its Share rising by 1.
All Rights Reserved. Toggle navigation. Share on Facebook Tweet this article. First, we identified major themes that are shaping our world. We considered questions that directly impacted the chemical sciences, such as, is there a risk that chemistry will be left behind as sciences becomes increasingly interdisciplinary?
Will governments still fund research? We also looked at how the wider environment might evolve. For example, how will an aging population change the chemistry workforce and career structures?
Will countries collaborate more or less, and how will this affect research and development? We then considered the unexpected ways these themes might develop and interact, ran three scenarios workshops and came up with four surprising but plausible scenarios. This is a world that has been shocked by major challenges, from climate change, water shortages and natural resource scarcity, to providing healthcare for an ageing population. Thus research efforts have focussing in solving these challenges- governments, philanthropists , industry and academia are working together in massive initiatives.
Chemists have fulfilled their potential to help solve these challenges and are recognised and celebrated for doing so. Chemistry is a topic of everyday conversation and chemists have much greater influence in shaping policy.
0コメント