Recent Posts
- 07/25 Math Scores Show No Gap for Girls
- 07/16 So graduate school is good for what, exactly?
- 07/09 Sloan Grants
- 07/02 Foreign Born TAs
- 06/29 Science Prizes
- 06/24 phds.org Facelift
- 06/04 Larry Summers Revisited
- 06/02 Women in Science in the News
- 05/28 Remember all those imminent faculty retirements?
- 05/21 Japan worried about engineering "shortages," too
- 05/19 Hard times in physics?
- 05/18 Tolstoy Syndrome
- 05/13 Manufacturing Innovation
- 05/06 Making the Grade
- 05/03 Privacy paranoia at NSF?
Categories
Funding
Fiscal Sponsor
Geoff,
Nice analysis! I have never looked at the postdoc population divided that way before. The only limitation of the analysis is that the NSF data used to estimate postdoc numbers is based on surveys that have various drawbacks (i.e. not counting postdocs who earned their PhD's overseas, not counting postdocs at national labs etc.). It is unclear at this point whether NSF really has a good handle on how many postdocs there are. The Sigma Xi survey was the most comprehensive (as you well know) but only offers a snapshot.
All that notwithstanding, I agree with your conclusion... that based sheerly on the numbers, life for postdocs is about to get worse, not better. Hopefully awareness raising being done by the NPA and various PDOs and PDAs will counteract this trend.