What's a postdoc?
a. A student
b. A faculty member
I'm interested in hearing both your own opinion on the matter and how your institution/department deals with it.
Edited to add: Thanks for all the comments so far! I agree with the general consensus, "neither." But if you had to lump postdocs with one of the two categories here, which would it be? (Thus far, the answer seems to be "faculty.")
18 comments:
Neither. A post-doc has the degree (i.e. has finished a graduate program), but is not faculty in the sense that s/he's not involved in faculty governance nor does s/he *have* to teach (unless s/he explicitly has one of those teaching post-docs. But those are just glorified adjuncting.)
I think of a post-doc as a research associate. Same kind of thing as someone who has a soft money position, except that someone else got the money on their behalf.
I would say... neither... but some other role. Definitely NOT a student, because the person is a Doctor! The degree has been completed. Yet the postdoc does not have to do service or teach (right? or am I wrong about that?), so not faculty, either.
We don't have many post-docs in my field, but once in a while we have them, and I'd like to think they get treated closer to equals with faculty than not, though, in terms of respect for their expertise most of all.
Oh, I agree with Ianqui's research associate comment.
The heirarchy at my uni is roughly: grad student (PhD) - postdoc(3 years or less after PhD) - research associate (over 3 years from getting PhD) then faculty member. So there is a spectrum going from trainee to fully fledged faculty member.
Techinically postdocs are refered to as research trainees, a term that my faculty has, at my urging, abolished only this week!
Personally I think a postdoc is a researcher who works for a PI (not independent), who may manage a lab, assists in the supervision of students but who primarily conducts research in line with the PIs research goals. A postdoc should not participate in faculty service tasks or teaching. But may do if they wish. I do both of these for what its worth. A postdoc is not cheap labour, but someone whose goal at the end of the postdoc is to launch a career, not become a glorified lab tech.
Sorry, touchy subject this week,
I agree, neither. But if I had to choose one or the other (i.e. for policies that only define two groups), I would group postdocs with faculty, no question.
At our university the difference is usually that postdocs are entirely externally-funded (on an ARC post-doc fellowship, or off someone's external grant), while faculty generally have a base salary from the university, and then some have grants on top of that.
But there is also a tendency to refer to anyone on a temporary contract at level A, one or two years out from the PhD, as a postdoc, no matter what the source of their funding.
Neither. I would say Staff... though the distinction between a post-doc, who should be conducting and directing research, from a technician who would not be expected to initiate projects is important.
I think however you cook it, it's kind of a limbo place. Neither student nor faculty, but somewhere in the transition between.
Neither, like everyone else said - not that I necessarily agree. What I think people must feel is that they don't go through the same process as faculty to get their jobs (at least not in my field) and they don't go to faculty meetings etc. So in that sense they aren't faculty. They aren't students though because they get paid more, are not seeking a degree and do not take courses. Like Ianqui said, they are sort of like (usually) self paid research assistants - but with an understood impermanence. The plan usually is that they will move on to a faculty position at some point. Or at least that's what it is like in my field in my experience.
Now at my graduate school institution (you know where that was right? if not and you want to know, email me) they are considered students in the sense that they have to pay tuition (!!!!!!) but not student enough to get the same benefits like cheap health insurance or free bus rides or tickets to sporting events. It's completely ridiculous.
Postdocs had to pay tuition? That's the most absurd thing I've ever heard.
For what it's worth, I kind of wish I'd had a postdoc before I got my position. I could have used a couple of papers before I started teaching.
Propter Doc, I'm so glad you got that trainee name abolished -- it's horrible! My old uni used to use it, specifically because they thought postdocs would be less likely to union organize if they thought of themselves as "trainees." It's also disgustingly infantilizing, especially as that person already has a doctorate.
Blech. I hate academic hierarchy.
I agree with the others, neither.
In my position, I'm considered staff. I'm a full-time worker with benefits. Post-docs don't have the same responsibilities as faculty and aren't considered students.
Postdoc is what you are when you leave the hosiptal/physicians office.
...or the way you feel when you just learned they cut half your paycheck.
If I had to pick one I'd say faculty. We don't pay tuition (normally), we don't have to go to class, earn credits and do assignments. There is no degree to get so we do not fit the definition of student.
Propter Doc's explanation is pretty much in line with my thinking so if I had to go with one, I'd choose faculty.
The main problem with this is that although post-docs have many more similarities with faculty than they do with students, it's not a permanent position (again, at least not that I know of in my field - which is basic biomedical scienc, btw). So I guess I can see why schools are tempted to want to classify them as students - they don't want to invest resources in them. But in addition to the fact that they are not seeking degrees - many post-docs do work that is vital to the research lab they are working in (and have to leave some of that work behind when they go - again, potentially specific to my field). They might also teach courses (although this is rare in my field), but their work in the lab (both at the bench and all the mentoring they do) certainly frees up time for the PI to complete their teaching responsibilities - so post docs are a significat contribution to the department as a whole. There is just no way this translates to student status, no matter how awesome it is that they would then be able to continue to defer repayment of their student loans.
Uh, I guess I'm done now...who knew I had such strong feelings about this?
Yeah that trainee thing drives me nuts. But that's what the Federal governmet thinks we are- I think we deserve at least a paper hat for that. If I had to vote for one my dignity would force me to vote for faculty. Just because we are still "learning" doesn't mean we are still students. Faculty keep learning too!
Here in California, postdocs are definitely not faculty. We're generally considered staff, although the 'real' staff (office workers, IT people, even the janitors and gardners) are eligible for a bunch of perks that postdocs aren't. Why? Not because we're trainees - because we're temporary.
I think Ianqui put it well in comparing with a research associate/ someone in a soft money position. But if I had to choose it would be faculty. Actually I think this post and the replies captures quite well what the problem is with postdoc'ing, that it is not well define what the definition is and what we are supposed to get from it - not to speak of how.
Postdocs are cheap labours, ill treated and exploited! Their ideas are grabbed by PI's and sent to the funding agencies, get the funds and pay the postdoc small amount and torture them on dialy basis using their results for giving the ph.D's to their grads!...sorry do not even get me to talk on this matter.
Post a Comment