Perspectives on the Postdoctoral Experience

According to one workshop participant, "being a postdoc is the best job in the world—for many of us." Certainly many current and past postdocs report high levels of satisfaction with their postdoctoral appointments. A postdoctoral appointment gives many young scientists an opportunity to concentrate on research to an extent that may not be possible later in a career.

Yet many postdocs—including several of the postdocs who attended the workshop—report that they had or are having very unsatisfactory experiences. One breakout group at the workshop divided these problems into four categories: pay, status, standards, and roles.

Average pay levels for postdocs are very low for people with their amount of training and their job responsibilities. The average pay for postdocs in academic settings was reported to be about $30,000 per year—with pay levels in chemistry tending to be even lower than the average. Furthermore, many postdocs do not receive health insurance, retirement contributions, child-care assistance, or other benefits. And the resulting financial pressures often fall during a period of life when many postdocs are starting or supporting families. Attendees noted that postdoctoral appointments in industry or at government laboratories typically pay better, but in general postdocs make much less than their peers who have entered other professions.

The low levels of pay and lack of benefits can discourage many people from undertaking a postdoctoral appointment. Several established academic researchers at the workshop who had been postdocs reported that they had nearly chosen other career paths when facing the financial disincentives of a postdoctoral appointment. Some postdocs have other financial resources on which they can draw during their postdoctoral years. People without such resources may choose professional routes that are less financially onerous.

In that regard, the financial demands placed on a postdoc can be an especially strong disincentive for minorities underrepresented in the sciences and engineering. Several minority scientists at the workshop expressed the belief that more minorities would choose to become postdocs if the financial sacrifices were not so great. Especially for first-generation college students, the short-term strains of a postdoctoral appointment can easily outweigh a long-term desire to remain in academia.

Beyond the financial demands of the postdoctorate, many postdocs feel that they do not get the respect or visibility that they need and deserve. Because their positions are transitional and unstandardized, many postdocs feel invisible to their institutions—indeed, many universities know very little about the number or characteristics of the postdocs who work on their campuses. Essentially, the postdoctorate as an established position was seen to have grown tremendously without a commensurate increase in the visibility and respect accorded postdocs. This lack of visibility can be especially acute for temporary residents in postdoctoral appointments, many of whom need help adjusting to a new culture, mastering a new language, and dealing with immigration issues.

Many institutions have few standards for the employment or treatment of postdocs. Postdocs reported that they rarely benefit from annual performance reviews, grievance procedures, or authorship guidelines. Few institutions have policies that ease the demands on postdocs with family responsibilities. The right of postdocs to receive adequate guidance, mentoring, and skills development is rarely made explicit.

Finally, most postdocs feel that their roles are highly uncertain. Though the primary objective of the postdoctorate is to foster independence and creativity in young researchers, many postdocs said they found it difficult to achieve this objective. They may not receive sufficient guidance from an advisor, may not be able to collaborate with others, may not be sufficiently recognized for their contributions to a project, or may not receive responsibilities commensurate with their abilities. A number of workshop participants pointed to the tension that characterizes many postdoctoral appointments: advisers want postdocs to produce as much research as possible, while postdocs have goals in addition to research.

The failure of many postdoctoral appointments to foster critical skills has major negative consequences. Employers of individuals who have completed postdoctoral appointments often say that many of the people emerging from those appointments do not have the attributes needed to be a successful faculty member or government or industrial researcher. While someone who has completed a postdoctoral position may be technically proficient and well versed in a particular area of science, that person can lack the creativity, independence, adaptability, teamwork skills, and communication skills needed to be a scientific leader. The postdoctoral experience needs to foster these abilities, workshop participants said, even if the price to be paid is less time spent on research.

Workshop participants pointed to other lost opportunities created by deficiencies in the postdoctoral experience. In particular, postdocs could play a much greater role in strengthening the nation’s research infrastructure than they do today. For example, one workshop participant pointed out that half of the nation’s undergraduates are enrolled in community colleges, and three-quarters of elementary and secondary school teachers receive their only science education at community colleges. Involving postdocs in research programs and other activities at these and other institutions could benefit such institutions in many ways and build skills that many postdocs do not acquire today.

Deficiencies in the postdoctoral experience have been one of the factors driving the establishment of postdoctoral associations at individual institutions and on broader scales. For example, the National Postdoctoral Association[14], which received a founding grant in December 2002 from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, has as its goals to establish a self-sustaining organization that can provide a voice for postdoctoral scientists, build consensus about best-practices policies for postdocs, develop educational initiatives, and work collaboratively with government bodies, funding agencies, and professional organizations to advocate for improvements in postdoctoral policies.