I always wondered why children of successful academics also tend to be successful academics. The way you describe things seem to be very conducive to forming academic dynasties where the scions are propped up by older members.
OH yeah, and the person I describe above as an empire builder seems to have come from an academic dynasty that goes back all the way to Queen Victoria's time.
I know of one academic and her husband that credit their child with co-authorship of academic papers in order to improve his metrics if he goes into academia. Source - her sister. The family is toxic also.
It does feel like standing in a room of feral cats sometimes, trying to herd them towards a common good. Sometimes it feels like if you would release a swarm of mice, they would still be too busy fighting to catch em.
I’m getting a headache as I listen to what you’re saying. It’s pretty much the opposite of what I have always anticipated academia would be like. I’ve always thought of it as this community of science, research & knowledge loving & serving people. I thought their main driving motive was the love & passion for discovery, contributing to science as an intrinsic value in itself, and ultimately contributing towards eliminating human suffering. How foolish of me.
This is exactly what I thought all the time. But since I came on PhD, I found it is all about money and prestige, making me so disappointed. I love doing science, but politics and how it really (doesn't) work makes me sick! I am doing PhD in Europe.
Same experience for me. I got my bachelors and masters in a highly academic field. I sacrificed a lot of my life for getting so far. For years I could only study part-time because of other obligations and now I realize my expertise is basically useless for society. All the other scientists in my field are basically just doing it for the money, which I didn't realize at all. I thought there was some sort of progressive agenda, helping or improving people's lives, but it's basically just an academic playground with money involved. I wish I had realized that sooner. Because if it it's now all about money anyway I could have just taken a much more practical job.
It's difficult to find information on this but once I wrap my head around it, it actually is about pursuing ending human suffering. Once you figure out a way to heat a home without fuel it changes the entire political spectrum. A left wing would spread that information for free, a right wing would see it as a threat to hierarchy and make it exclusive. Natural selection vs. order, seems to be what every debate boils down to. Because if there was no hierarchy you would have tribes like it was before we got here... But look what happened to them... No unity means no power vs. a bigger foe
I remember someone pointing out long ago that Academia is like the military or a big church (e.g. Roman Catholic): rank is EVERYTHING. I have not seen any reason to question that.
I am a sucessful scientist that worked in a national lab. I had competed for academic positions out of grad school but eventually was very happy I did not have to be in academia. I was able to do some good basic research, but I almost got physically ill when I was surrounded by academics at conferences, society meetings. It was just the collective weight of petty politics and nasty competition that felt so stifling. It wasn't until I published a few major papers in really good journals that I got the respect of colleagues in academia. That first Nature paper was a salve.
My experience is in the humanities and it is thirty years out of date, but one kind of person I haven't heard of here is the empire builder. When I was in SOAS, London, there was a man there who had this lovely external aspect - thick thatch of silver hair, lovely manners, eager to listen to what you had to say - whose activity amounted to building an actual institutional position for himself. He had taken the lead of the local Christian student group, practically excluding the Anglican chaplain, because this made him the leader of a group within the environment, a group that could be seen as permanent. He was incredibly manipulative. The last thing I heard was that he had managed to set up a new History Department, and guess who was the head? SOAS had never had a history department as a separate entity, because the study of each Asian and African culture involved its history, and most of them were very separate. That was pure empire building, and it detracted from the mission and specialization of the college. As a person, I don't even want to discuss him, because I personally had a lot of problems with him.
I love this! I came in after you, but empire-building explains so much about activities within my department. I wasn’t an idealistic dolt, but I admit to being fooled by words, acts, appearances-until I didn’t, then I just enjoyed the students. Sometimes it paid just to look away from the big builders and carry on as a yeoman teacher. 😊
"the cheese in the academic sandwich" why did this make me laugh so hard, thanks for all the creative videos! I'm a relatively new subscriber, is content creation your main job now? Thanks for the quality videos :)
Talking at the end about the personal and academic side. When I went to industry and left the academic part behind, I was WAY too much of a softy and it threw me off. Had I taken my academic side with me to work tho, oh boy, it would have been way too much! It's an awkward process honing in a balanced approach. 😆
Very true. I’ve seen supervisors cause problems within their own ‘castle’ also. PIs who pit students against each other by only giving high quality and impactful projects to students that they feel deserve them. To be one of those students you had to work 12+ hours everyday, even having lab meetings on a Saturday morning.
I have been a public school teacher for over thirty years and have worked in Academic Administration for many years at the University of MN, Minneapolis, MN, USA, and everything you state and have stated on past videos is correct. It's exactly how I would describe the environment. It is as vicious as you present it. Thank you for speaking the truth. I am very tired of the professors in academics with whom I had to work.
Your videos are great! The academic politics do not stay just on the academic side of the the house. Student affairs has a nasty politics that destroys people and end careers. The same department heads who tout diversity and what it brings to the university, fire those same candidates not a year later. Glad I got out of the game when I did,
From making friends in kindergarten at lunch/ trying to get more fruit or snacks, to College academic & Teaching, etc... Careers at the office, making the Spots team, etc. Politics and anticipation of opportunities plus timing, lead to outcomes.... more to say..but our social system inherently trains us to this game called " Life" and achieving success
"The viperous malice of the monkish brood!" Academia is the fruit that did not fall far from the tree. Academia matured in monasteries as a Medieval institution.
When applying to assistant professor positions, some weirdos will judge you for not having acted as a PI during your career, but they disregard the fact that, in the vast majority of the cases, you cannot be a PI without having a professor title. Some senile professors, I mean, senior professors, are either super disconnected or full of bs.
I can totally relate to your analysis. It seems there are general academic laws which go beyond the boundaries. Time to write the general theory of academic systems. Cheers from Italy!
As always, every video opens your eyes about the academic world. I want to add a question. Is that hard to modify authors system? I see lots of people having hundreds or thousands of pubblication and I really can't believe that they've followed all of them in any way. Why we can't cancel this rule of the first name and add specific categories of authors? Like: data analysis "John, C.", project manager "Stuart, A.", founder "Jackson, B.", idk. There's too much competition in the actual system and younger researchers can't compete, it's always like a record to pass, but why? This should not be one of the objective of this job. Prestige should be based on quality of articles, not numbers
After trying out several graduate programs, my impression is that the fewer the jobs waiting for you, the greater the meanness of the students toward each other. In my case, this turned out to be Botany--a field in which you would think everyone had an idealistic love of the planet and would be especially nice to the few who shared that interest. Hah--no way. The jealousy, the tattle-telling, the gossip, the hoarding of equipment... terrible. You couldn't even get a desk anywhere in the department or a place to put your stuff down safely. At the university I went to, the Botany program, such as it is, is now part of the "Biology" department, which is almost all Zoology. The PhD student who caused me so much trouble never found a job after graduating, for all his trouble stabbing me in the back. When students treat each other like this, it is a sure sign that you are in a dying field.
I’m an academic in business management. We have plenty of politics but very different than what’s described in this video. It’s uncommon in our field for people to apply for grants because we have lots of resources within our colleges or our research is relatively inexpensive which negates a lot of the problems mentioned. I’m so glad I work in the discipline I do, I’m not sure I’d stay with academia otherwise.
On the topic of grants, here in Canada for medical research, the go to funding organization is the CIHR (Canadian Institute of Health Research). A few years ago they were rumored to have instituted a change that grants would only be awarded to future applicants that had a prior CIHR grant winner on the application. As if the world of academia wasn't already small enough lol.
I'd kill myself if I had a life like that. It goes to show that being 'successful' isn't necessarily what it's cracked up to be. A lot of these people are living in misery.
I'm not in that line at all but the "castle doctrine" made me realize something: When a new building is opened on campus it's not about "Ooo, somebody paid a lot of money to get their name on that," that would be the public perception (or mine, at least), but now when I hear about a new building I'm going to be imagining the out-of-this-world agitation of that herd of cats as they jockey for all that gorgeous new space! Also, the jealousy of the other disciplines the building is not dedicated to ... and now I'm thinking about the vicious politics that led to that particular building in the first place ...
One thing that this list is missing is how this independent competive nature begets terriotial behavior over grad students. I experienced this and had a weird falling out with the advisor that brought me into the school as a byproduct of the department chair "stealing" me from him.
As an academic in Australia, I always thought it’s low stake because academics hold tenure positions can’t be fired easily unless they do something really really wrong. Of course, there’s no true termite positions in Australia, which is a different story😂. Happy to be corrected if I’m wrong.
Really love your videos! Second year PhD here and always look out for your videos however, What about a video to motivate students? I wanna hear how amazing it is to work in academia / research? I assume this exists right?
I may be in the minority here, but I don't believe PhD students should require motivational input. On your other point, working in academia can be amazing, exciting etc. On the other extreme it can be a bad experience. Mostly it's somewhere in between the two extremes.
Grants going down because academia is inneffective. I dont want to offended anyone but I think real research and the best people work in private sector.
Great content! Would like to know how to stay out of the academic politics, that one sentence you mentioned at the end:) As a potential PhD. candidate I would love to learn how to do it right from the very beginning. Thanks!
Please don’t get swept up by all the negativity on here. There is absolutely a way to keep your head down and deliver great results, depending on your field. You will learn a lot of skills, technical and otherwise along the way which will open up a lot of career options for you. What I will agree with this channel is the monetarily you probably won’t be any better off than your friends who chose to get a job after bachelors and might be a little behind. Also I would not hold out hope for an academic career and work towards an industry job. In the industry they care more about what skills you acquired and less how much you published, although that is likely a factor as well depending on the field.
I really appreciate your insights. With no fault of yours, some experiences and advice do not resonate with me at all since they are specific to STEM. Here's hoping you inspire someone as creative and generous as you to make humanities/social science advice content!
4:10 This remark is field-dependent, I believe. Often true, but some fields (or subfields) measure things differently. E.g., all the giant CERN papers (with hundreds of authors) are alphabetical IIRC. I think if the author order *does* matter, then what you say is correct - the middle is almost always the least important (or perhaps in a longer list, more like "third quartile" is least important). But it doesn't always matter.
I'd love to know more about how professionals who have had successful careers and are, in their later years, "giving back" by becoming adjunct professors, threaten the standing of their doctoral level colleagues who are career academics, become political pawns. How about THAT for a run-on sentence?!?! :)
The Credit system in which the contribution classification is set does help weed out a lot of authors as it means they must sign off on those contributions. Not all type of contributions is accepted, as stated by good journals. It then becomes a legal document in which there could be consequences for not telling the truth. However, this is one of those whispers in academia
The real reason, at least in the liberal arts, is that most academics have nothing worthwhile to say. They aren't studying anything that really matters, like Homosexual Architecture in Proust, another empty fallacy review from a philosopher, or--yet another--rhetorical critique of some political event. They think they are carving out something novel and unique, but the need to publish is so pressing that it overrides the basic understanding that most academic articles are useless drivel to anyone other than rare few academics in your field. You know it's true, because you've opened a new journal and put it on the shelf after not finding anything interesting, and you've done that a lot. We all have. Here's a test: how many journals would you subscribe to if you had to pay for the subscriptions? LOL The hard sciences are different, I accept that. So I'm not referring to those researchers. Liberal arts resesechers don't secure much funding, so much of your points do not apply.
Yes yes, this is great academic 'insider baseball', but have you thought about why such a 'court politics' system exists? Which fields of study experience these issues the most and which the least? In which countries? Why do you think this is?
Since when isn’t the academy hierarchical? It’s a human construct, and the human species is a social one. The human species organizes itself in hierarchies; and it appears not to be able to organize in other ways despite claims to the contrary. That makes the academy inherently hierarchical. So I learned all too late in my tenure in the academy. And from my experience in other human institutions as well.
While I agree that academic politics is a brutal and vicious game, I think it's even more imperative that students (specifically PhD students) enter the fray. Academia is built on maintaining the status quo (at least in the us) and has been constructed on limiting diversity and inclusion among staff, faculty, and students.(Our department has any 80% white men as their faculty.) It is from experience that this hierarchy impacts PhD students the most, with refusal to increase stipends and refusal to promote better well being. Students need to enter this fight and enter the politics if change is going to occur
I'm from Africa, so I have zero direct knowledge of the status in American universities. But, I thought about applying to the fulbright scholarship for PhD funding in the US. I found that all the questions for the first round of selection were either related to intersectionalism or your lived/cultural experiences. They didn't even ask to submit a project proposal. Even though I'd written my own proposal prior to consulting potential supervisors, I decided not to enter since I'm a white male. Just thought I'd mention this. Edit: I'm a chemist in case this is relevant.
This is very true. I once overheard a professor commenting that graduate students were paid far too much money. It did make me worry about the students in his research group since they were working for someone with such a low opinion of graduate students. I never particularly cared for this individual since he was incredibly rude in the first place. Among academics where rude behavior isn't uncommon, that's saying something.
We're throwing some of our most brilliant brains into a meat grinder. Who benefits from this system? Publishers? College administrators? Or is it only like this way because of inertia?
I’m curious if once these academics make it and become prof/tenure profs, do they earn a lot of money? Like high caliber surgeons 1 million a year etc?
A poll came out at my Big State University in the late 90s. 80% of my Profs were Democrats, less than 10% Republicans, and less than 10% Green. Libertarians/Anarchists didn't even register. It alerted me as a Freshman that I had no future there. In an effort to hire people who look different, the liberals in charge forgot to hire people who think different.
in a lot of his videos he keeps saying "the stakes are so low", if this were true, why would he have so many gripes with academia. Something doesn't add up.
I always wondered why children of successful academics also tend to be successful academics. The way you describe things seem to be very conducive to forming academic dynasties where the scions are propped up by older members.
OH yeah, and the person I describe above as an empire builder seems to have come from an academic dynasty that goes back all the way to Queen Victoria's time.
I know of one academic and her husband that credit their child with co-authorship of academic papers in order to improve his metrics if he goes into academia. Source - her sister. The family is toxic also.
It does feel like standing in a room of feral cats sometimes, trying to herd them towards a common good.
Sometimes it feels like if you would release a swarm of mice, they would still be too busy fighting to catch em.
It's a fundamentally broken system. But it does not end at the doorsteps of the university. Es gibt kein richtiges Leben im Falschen.
I’m getting a headache as I listen to what you’re saying. It’s pretty much the opposite of what I have always anticipated academia would be like. I’ve always thought of it as this community of science, research & knowledge loving & serving people. I thought their main driving motive was the love & passion for discovery, contributing to science as an intrinsic value in itself, and ultimately contributing towards eliminating human suffering. How foolish of me.
This is exactly what I thought all the time. But since I came on PhD, I found it is all about money and prestige, making me so disappointed. I love doing science, but politics and how it really (doesn't) work makes me sick! I am doing PhD in Europe.
Same experience for me. I got my bachelors and masters in a highly academic field. I sacrificed a lot of my life for getting so far. For years I could only study part-time because of other obligations and now I realize my expertise is basically useless for society. All the other scientists in my field are basically just doing it for the money, which I didn't realize at all. I thought there was some sort of progressive agenda, helping or improving people's lives, but it's basically just an academic playground with money involved. I wish I had realized that sooner. Because if it it's now all about money anyway I could have just taken a much more practical job.
I think it's ultimately because of a broken funding scheme and lack of democracy.
There are people like that too.
It's difficult to find information on this but once I wrap my head around it, it actually is about pursuing ending human suffering. Once you figure out a way to heat a home without fuel it changes the entire political spectrum. A left wing would spread that information for free, a right wing would see it as a threat to hierarchy and make it exclusive. Natural selection vs. order, seems to be what every debate boils down to. Because if there was no hierarchy you would have tribes like it was before we got here... But look what happened to them... No unity means no power vs. a bigger foe
I remember someone pointing out long ago that Academia is like the military or a big church (e.g. Roman Catholic): rank is EVERYTHING. I have not seen any reason to question that.
Charles Eisenstein is one famous person who said this, too
Rank is important in any organization, but for some reason in universities it’s very toxic.
I am a sucessful scientist that worked in a national lab. I had competed for academic positions out of grad school but eventually was very happy I did not have to be in academia. I was able to do some good basic research, but I almost got physically ill when I was surrounded by academics at conferences, society meetings. It was just the collective weight of petty politics and nasty competition that felt so stifling. It wasn't until I published a few major papers in really good journals that I got the respect of colleagues in academia. That first Nature paper was a salve.
Yes. I get a vibe of evil in my stomach like Buffy the Vampire slayer senses Evil! 😅😅😅
Doesn't Ph.D. stand for Doctor of hokey Politics? Great video---especially liked the part about academic castles---explains so much.
My experience is in the humanities and it is thirty years out of date, but one kind of person I haven't heard of here is the empire builder. When I was in SOAS, London, there was a man there who had this lovely external aspect - thick thatch of silver hair, lovely manners, eager to listen to what you had to say - whose activity amounted to building an actual institutional position for himself. He had taken the lead of the local Christian student group, practically excluding the Anglican chaplain, because this made him the leader of a group within the environment, a group that could be seen as permanent. He was incredibly manipulative. The last thing I heard was that he had managed to set up a new History Department, and guess who was the head? SOAS had never had a history department as a separate entity, because the study of each Asian and African culture involved its history, and most of them were very separate. That was pure empire building, and it detracted from the mission and specialization of the college. As a person, I don't even want to discuss him, because I personally had a lot of problems with him.
I love this! I came in after you, but empire-building explains so much about activities within my department. I wasn’t an idealistic dolt, but I admit to being fooled by words, acts, appearances-until I didn’t, then I just enjoyed the students. Sometimes it paid just to look away from the big builders and carry on as a yeoman teacher. 😊
"the cheese in the academic sandwich" why did this make me laugh so hard, thanks for all the creative videos! I'm a relatively new subscriber, is content creation your main job now? Thanks for the quality videos :)
Talking at the end about the personal and academic side. When I went to industry and left the academic part behind, I was WAY too much of a softy and it threw me off. Had I taken my academic side with me to work tho, oh boy, it would have been way too much!
It's an awkward process honing in a balanced approach. 😆
Very true. I’ve seen supervisors cause problems within their own ‘castle’ also. PIs who pit students against each other by only giving high quality and impactful projects to students that they feel deserve them. To be one of those students you had to work 12+ hours everyday, even having lab meetings on a Saturday morning.
Your videos makes me satisfied why academia need a change
Cheese in the middle? More like the wet tomato that nobody actually wants but is added to make the sandwich look more healthy.
Me: LOVES the tomato in sandwiches
I have been a public school teacher for over thirty years and have worked in Academic Administration for many years at the University of MN, Minneapolis, MN, USA, and everything you state and have stated on past videos is correct. It's exactly how I would describe the environment. It is as vicious as you present it. Thank you for speaking the truth. I am very tired of the professors in academics with whom I had to work.
Your videos are great! The academic politics do not stay just on the academic side of the the house. Student affairs has a nasty politics that destroys people and end careers. The same department heads who tout diversity and what it brings to the university, fire those same candidates not a year later. Glad I got out of the game when I did,
From making friends in kindergarten at lunch/ trying to get more fruit or snacks, to College academic & Teaching, etc... Careers at the office, making the Spots team, etc. Politics and anticipation of opportunities plus timing, lead to outcomes.... more to say..but our social system inherently trains us to this game called " Life" and achieving success
"The viperous malice of the monkish brood!" Academia is the fruit that did not fall far from the tree. Academia matured in monasteries as a Medieval institution.
This video has been very factual with relatable points addressed about how politically toxic academics are 💯
When applying to assistant professor positions, some weirdos will judge you for not having acted as a PI during your career, but they disregard the fact that, in the vast majority of the cases, you cannot be a PI without having a professor title. Some senile professors, I mean, senior professors, are either super disconnected or full of bs.
I can totally relate to your analysis. It seems there are general academic laws which go beyond the boundaries. Time to write the general theory of academic systems. Cheers from Italy!
"no one wants to be the cheese in the academic sandwich" . This is solid gold
As always, every video opens your eyes about the academic world. I want to add a question. Is that hard to modify authors system? I see lots of people having hundreds or thousands of pubblication and I really can't believe that they've followed all of them in any way. Why we can't cancel this rule of the first name and add specific categories of authors? Like: data analysis "John, C.", project manager "Stuart, A.", founder "Jackson, B.", idk. There's too much competition in the actual system and younger researchers can't compete, it's always like a record to pass, but why? This should not be one of the objective of this job. Prestige should be based on quality of articles, not numbers
In some journals, authors' specific contributions are described at the end of an article.
I know, I was not only referring specifically to articles but the whole academic prestige/valuation system made of indexes and things like that
After trying out several graduate programs, my impression is that the fewer the jobs waiting for you, the greater the meanness of the students toward each other. In my case, this turned out to be Botany--a field in which you would think everyone had an idealistic love of the planet and would be especially nice to the few who shared that interest. Hah--no way. The jealousy, the tattle-telling, the gossip, the hoarding of equipment... terrible. You couldn't even get a desk anywhere in the department or a place to put your stuff down safely. At the university I went to, the Botany program, such as it is, is now part of the "Biology" department, which is almost all Zoology. The PhD student who caused me so much trouble never found a job after graduating, for all his trouble stabbing me in the back. When students treat each other like this, it is a sure sign that you are in a dying field.
I’m an academic in business management. We have plenty of politics but very different than what’s described in this video. It’s uncommon in our field for people to apply for grants because we have lots of resources within our colleges or our research is relatively inexpensive which negates a lot of the problems mentioned. I’m so glad I work in the discipline I do, I’m not sure I’d stay with academia otherwise.
I like all your videos. (Ph.D. in computer science - from Algeria)
On the topic of grants, here in Canada for medical research, the go to funding organization is the CIHR (Canadian Institute of Health Research). A few years ago they were rumored to have instituted a change that grants would only be awarded to future applicants that had a prior CIHR grant winner on the application. As if the world of academia wasn't already small enough lol.
I'd kill myself if I had a life like that. It goes to show that being 'successful' isn't necessarily what it's cracked up to be. A lot of these people are living in misery.
I'm not in that line at all but the "castle doctrine" made me realize something: When a new building is opened on campus it's not about "Ooo, somebody paid a lot of money to get their name on that," that would be the public perception (or mine, at least), but now when I hear about a new building I'm going to be imagining the out-of-this-world agitation of that herd of cats as they jockey for all that gorgeous new space! Also, the jealousy of the other disciplines the building is not dedicated to ... and now I'm thinking about the vicious politics that led to that particular building in the first place ...
That absolutely is the truth.
One thing that this list is missing is how this independent competive nature begets terriotial behavior over grad students. I experienced this and had a weird falling out with the advisor that brought me into the school as a byproduct of the department chair "stealing" me from him.
As an academic in Australia, I always thought it’s low stake because academics hold tenure positions can’t be fired easily unless they do something really really wrong. Of course, there’s no true termite positions in Australia, which is a different story😂. Happy to be corrected if I’m wrong.
Thank God I have already decided that I'll not pursue academics in any institution but on my own and for benefits of society and personal joy .
Really love your videos! Second year PhD here and always look out for your videos however,
What about a video to motivate students? I wanna hear how amazing it is to work in academia / research? I assume this exists right?
There is a reason he hasn't made that video. You'll see once you get your degree. Hope you are lucky.
I may be in the minority here, but I don't believe PhD students should require motivational input. On your other point, working in academia can be amazing, exciting etc. On the other extreme it can be a bad experience. Mostly it's somewhere in between the two extremes.
Grants going down because academia is inneffective. I dont want to offended anyone but I think real research and the best people work in private sector.
"Big fish in a small pond" - that's why academic politics tend to be vicious. At least at the department, faculty and above level.
Yesterday I supplied fresh ideas to a PI, but she is not going to offer me the position.
Great content! Would like to know how to stay out of the academic politics, that one sentence you mentioned at the end:) As a potential PhD. candidate I would love to learn how to do it right from the very beginning. Thanks!
The only way out is the way out of academia.
You can't. You have to play the game.
Please don’t get swept up by all the negativity on here. There is absolutely a way to keep your head down and deliver great results, depending on your field. You will learn a lot of skills, technical and otherwise along the way which will open up a lot of career options for you. What I will agree with this channel is the monetarily you probably won’t be any better off than your friends who chose to get a job after bachelors and might be a little behind. Also I would not hold out hope for an academic career and work towards an industry job. In the industry they care more about what skills you acquired and less how much you published, although that is likely a factor as well depending on the field.
I really appreciate your insights. With no fault of yours, some experiences and advice do not resonate with me at all since they are specific to STEM. Here's hoping you inspire someone as creative and generous as you to make humanities/social science advice content!
It's just as bad, if not worse, in the humanities.
Thanks Andy
Spot on!!
I have always thought this kind of politics doesn't happen in foreign countries, looks like human beings are the same.
Again, work in ANY industry and this happens. I have relatives in human resources, they now hate ALL people.
Spot on
What would be a field that could use someone who is academically smart? A field that’s not very hierarchical, has decent pay and moderate prestige?
Omg the thumbnail😂
Competitive vs Collaborative
4:10 This remark is field-dependent, I believe. Often true, but some fields (or subfields) measure things differently. E.g., all the giant CERN papers (with hundreds of authors) are alphabetical IIRC.
I think if the author order *does* matter, then what you say is correct - the middle is almost always the least important (or perhaps in a longer list, more like "third quartile" is least important). But it doesn't always matter.
I'd love to know more about how professionals who have had successful careers and are, in their later years, "giving back" by becoming adjunct professors, threaten the standing of their doctoral level colleagues who are career academics, become political pawns. How about THAT for a run-on sentence?!?! :)
The Credit system in which the contribution classification is set does help weed out a lot of authors as it means they must sign off on those contributions. Not all type of contributions is accepted, as stated by good journals. It then becomes a legal document in which there could be consequences for not telling the truth. However, this is one of those whispers in academia
The real reason, at least in the liberal arts, is that most academics have nothing worthwhile to say. They aren't studying anything that really matters, like Homosexual Architecture in Proust, another empty fallacy review from a philosopher, or--yet another--rhetorical critique of some political event. They think they are carving out something novel and unique, but the need to publish is so pressing that it overrides the basic understanding that most academic articles are useless drivel to anyone other than rare few academics in your field. You know it's true, because you've opened a new journal and put it on the shelf after not finding anything interesting, and you've done that a lot. We all have.
Here's a test: how many journals would you subscribe to if you had to pay for the subscriptions? LOL
The hard sciences are different, I accept that. So I'm not referring to those researchers. Liberal arts resesechers don't secure much funding, so much of your points do not apply.
Yes yes, this is great academic 'insider baseball', but have you thought about why such a 'court politics' system exists? Which fields of study experience these issues the most and which the least? In which countries? Why do you think this is?
Since when isn’t the academy hierarchical? It’s a human construct, and the human species is a social one. The human species organizes itself in hierarchies; and it appears not to be able to organize in other ways despite claims to the contrary. That makes the academy inherently hierarchical.
So I learned all too late in my tenure in the academy. And from my experience in other human institutions as well.
Great video...
"Can't touch this..", with MC Hammer.
What could go wrong, if term Access means the same as Accessibility?
While I agree that academic politics is a brutal and vicious game, I think it's even more imperative that students (specifically PhD students) enter the fray.
Academia is built on maintaining the status quo (at least in the us) and has been constructed on limiting diversity and inclusion among staff, faculty, and students.(Our department has any 80% white men as their faculty.) It is from experience that this hierarchy impacts PhD students the most, with refusal to increase stipends and refusal to promote better well being. Students need to enter this fight and enter the politics if change is going to occur
I'm from Africa, so I have zero direct knowledge of the status in American universities. But, I thought about applying to the fulbright scholarship for PhD funding in the US. I found that all the questions for the first round of selection were either related to intersectionalism or your lived/cultural experiences. They didn't even ask to submit a project proposal. Even though I'd written my own proposal prior to consulting potential supervisors, I decided not to enter since I'm a white male. Just thought I'd mention this.
Edit: I'm a chemist in case this is relevant.
This is very true. I once overheard a professor commenting that graduate students were paid far too much money. It did make me worry about the students in his research group since they were working for someone with such a low opinion of graduate students. I never particularly cared for this individual since he was incredibly rude in the first place. Among academics where rude behavior isn't uncommon, that's saying something.
So true
Grant videos sound very interesting!!!
There is always comeuppance in this world. Those who stab someone in the back end up getting stabbed back numerous times. History attests to this.
We're throwing some of our most brilliant brains into a meat grinder. Who benefits from this system? Publishers? College administrators? Or is it only like this way because of inertia?
I’m curious if once these academics make it and become prof/tenure profs, do they earn a lot of money? Like high caliber surgeons 1 million a year etc?
Not even close.
I keep thinking you are Simon whistler
Sir kindly make video on how apply for PhD and Post Doc
If you need someone else to tell you how to do 5h3se applications, you have not place in moving forward.
Isnt the academia actually a medieval system?
The stakes are high. To br the first person to publish replicable study where the statistics have been hacked.
Academia is the last vestige of feudalism.
Lol. Oh if only you knew How TOXIC my last 11 months got.....😅😅😅😅
The comments reminds me of that bit of buddhist wisdom:
"whoever likes sausages and science, shouldn't learn how both are made".😅
I'm in the process of revoking my PhD .
what does that mean? You revoke your own PhD for ?
What?! You don't just work for the $$ ??
A poll came out at my Big State University in the late 90s. 80% of my Profs were Democrats, less than 10% Republicans, and less than 10% Green. Libertarians/Anarchists didn't even register. It alerted me as a Freshman that I had no future there. In an effort to hire people who look different, the liberals in charge forgot to hire people who think different.
It’s by design, they’re well aware of what they’ve done.
12
in a lot of his videos he keeps saying "the stakes are so low", if this were true, why would he have so many gripes with academia. Something doesn't add up.
academics should be ignored