Examining Employment Data Is Useful In Assessing Biomedical Ph.D. Training

Are we overproducing Ph.D.'s in biomedical sciences? If so, should we regulate future Ph.D. production? To address these questions, we need to examine the data. Biomedical Ph.D. production has increased dramatically. In 1995, United States institutions awarded 5,878 new Ph.D.'s in biomedical sciences, a 55 percent increase over the 3,791 degrees in 1985 (Washington, D.C., National Research Council, Survey of Earned Doctorates, unpublished survey). What forces drove this increase? The number of biology graduate students with research assistantships doubled from 1977 to 1985, while other forms of student aid remained level or declined. This suggests that the demand for research assistants was associated with increased production of new Ph.D.'s. The growing demand for graduate students has been met by an increase in the number of non-U.S. citizens in U.S. graduate programs. Doctorates awarded to non-U.S. citizens rose from 587 in 1985 to 2,031 in 1995, while the number of Ph.D.'s earned by U.S. citizens grew from 3,050 in 1985 to 3,746 in 1995. (Citizenship status was not reported by 154 Ph.D.'s in 1985 and by 101 Ph.D.'s in 1995.) How has this affected the job prospects of U.S. Ph.D.'s? Very few U.S.-citizen biomedical science Ph.D.'s are unemployed: 1 percent in 1973 and 1.8 percent in 1995. According to the National Science Foundation, 3.3 percent of the Ph.D.'s in biological and health sciences were employed "involuntarily out-of-field" in 1995, compared with 3.5 percent in 1993 (Characteristics of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers in the United States: 1993, Washington, D.C., NSF, 1996; Data Brief: Unemployment Among Doctoral Scientists, Washington, D.C., NSF, 1997). The percentage of U.S. Ph.D.'s working as postdoctoral associates has increased. In 1973, one-fourth of the new biomedical Ph.D.'s went on to postdoctoral positions; by the beginning of the 1980s, approximately half the recent graduates did so. A pattern of longer postdoctoral study is also evident. In 1981, 23.6 percent of the employed U.S. biomedical Ph.D.'s were postdoctoral associates three to four years after receiving their degree, compared with 32.1 percent in 1995 (Washington, D.C., National Research Council, Survey of Doctorate Recipients, unpublished survey). Jobs held by U.S. biomedical science Ph.D.'s have shifted away from academia toward industry. The total number of academic positions remained constant during a period in which the total number of U.S. biomedical Ph.D.'s increased. The percentage of employed U.S. biomedical Ph.D.'s in academic positions declined steadily from the late 1970s (when it was just under two-thirds) to the early 1990s (when it leveled off at just over half). However, the percentage of biomedical Ph.D.'s employed in industry (including the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries) doubled between 1981 and 1995. In 1981, 15.6 percent of biomedical scientists worked in industry nine to 10 years after receiving their doctorate, compared with 31.9 percent in 1995. Students and faculty should be aware of the important trends in biomedical Ph.D. production described here and in a longer report (Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, Graduate Education Consensus Conference Report, Bethesda, Md., FASEB, 1997; available at http://www.faseb.org/opa). Job expectations of predoctoral students and postdoctoral associates should be tempered by current trends, and faculty mentors should encourage students to consider a wide range of employment goals. We oppose suggestions that biomedical Ph.D. production be regulated at the national level. Biomedical research is at the threshold of exciting new discoveries. There is tremendous potential, but we cannot determine the exact impact of biomedical research advances on the job market. Projections of work force needs are inexact, and changes in many areas of the economy affect employment trends. Many of the key variables--long-term trends in research funding, retirement rates, college enrollments, migration patterns, creation of new jobs in emerging areas--are notoriously difficult to forecast. Since future employment demands for biomedical Ph.D.'s cannot be determined precisely, and the success of our higher education system has been so profound, we should not rush to alter graduate education. Graduate-school applicants, students, and graduate-program administrators should make adjustments based on careful consideration of the experiences of recent graduates. Similarly, we oppose suggestions that biomedical Ph.D. production be regulated by arbitrarily capping the number of non-U.S. predoctoral students. Applicants from both the U.S. and abroad should be judged on their qualifications. Institutions should not admit underqualified applicants simply to meet their work force needs of teaching or research. For biomedical students to successfully compete for jobs in research or transmission of scientific knowledge in a variety of environments, they should be trained in depth in one specific area of biology and educated broadly in other areas of biological and physical sciences. Predoctoral training should continue to focus on independent research. Graduate programs should not be restructured to train students for the small number of career options outside traditional research settings. Graduate programs should be sufficiently flexible, however, to allow students to broaden their education to help meet their individual career goals. In addition, students should develop specific skills, such as effective communication, ability to work as a team member, and use of information technology. These skills are valuable in a variety of employment contexts. To ensure completion of the Ph.D. in five or six years, faculty committees should review the progress of graduate students at least annually. Faculty should be supportive of the range of career options their students might follow. For some, a master's degree alone or a master's coupled with a degree in another field (such as law, finance, or journalism) may be appropriate and sufficient. Howard H. Garrison is director of the Office of Public Affairs at the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology in Bethesda, Md. Susan A. Gerbi is the Robert P. Brown Professor of Biology and chairs the department of molecular biology, cell biology, and biochemistry at Brown University.

Examining Employment Data Is Useful In Assessing Biomedical Ph.D. Training

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of