I have already transferred schools once, moving because there were no advisers in my area at school #1 (the one I had planned to work with became emeritus right as I joined). I like the school I am at now a lot more than I like computer vision. In fact, my main issue with my current situation is that it appears that no one can do fundamental research in computer vision: all of the major conferences require you to pander to shorter term commercial applications if you want to publish and I’d rather move to a new field than jump through those hoops.
I don’t consider options 4, 5, 6, or 7 to be remotely realistic for me. I can’t think of an Asian or South American countries to where I would be happy with the governments or the long distance from family and friends if I were to live there semi-permanently. Those considerations are at least as important to me as job considerations. I don’t consider unemployment or extreme part-time work an option because I have other life goals, like traveling, home ownership, etc., that I want to financially support in addition to whatever career path I choose.
I appreciate your suggestions, but I have really thought about this a considerable amount. The post that I linked above has some more details about what thinking I have already done. I would really appreciate more targeted advice if you are interested. Given the climate for faculty jobs, what is the best way to try to achieve one? What are ways to do theoretical work / teaching at a university level for a living that are non-traditional?
When you say “I have really thought about this a considerable amount”, I hear “I have diagnosed the problem quite a while ago and it’s creating a pit in my stomach but I haven’t taken any action yet”. I can’t give you any points for that.
When you’re dealing with a difficult problem and if you’re an introspective person it’s easy to get stuck in a loop where you keep going through the same sorts of thoughts. You realize you’re not making much progress but the problem remains so you feel obligated to think about it some more. You should think more, right? It’s an important decision after all?
Nope. Thinking about the problem is not a terminal goal. Thinking is only useful insofar it leads to action. And if your thinking to action ratio is bad, you’ll get mentally exhausted and you’ll have nothing to show for it. It leads to paralysis where all you do is think and think and think.
If you want to make progress you have to find a way to decompose your problem into actionable parts. Not only will action make you feel better, it’s also going to lead to unexplored territory.
So what kind of actions can you take?
Well, your claim is that major conferences require short term commercial papers. So if you go systematically through the papers published in the last year or so you’ll find either (a) all the papers are boring, stupid, silly or wrong. (b) there are a bunch of really cool papers in there. In case of (a) maybe you’re in the wrong field of research. Maybe you should go into algorithms or formal semantics. In this case look at other computer science papers until you find papers that do excite you. In case of (b) contact the authors of the papers; check out their departments; etc, etc.
To recap: Find interesting papers. Find departments where those interesting papers were written. Contact those departments.
Another strategy. Go to the department library and browse through random books that catch your eye. This is guaranteed to give you inspiration.
This is just from the top of my head. But whatever you do, make sure that you don’t just get stuck in a circle of self-destructive thought. Action is key.
If you’re certain you want to eventually get a faculty job, do a combination of teaching and research, own a house and regularly go on holiday, then I can’t think of any alternatives to the conventional PhD → faculty route. What’s the best way to achieve a faculty job? I don’t know. Probably a combination of networking, people skills and doing great research. If you want a faculty job badly enough you can get one. But once you get it there’s no guarantee you’re going to be happy if what you really want is complete autonomy.
I’m sorry I can’t give any targeted advice.
(PS: some people like the idea of travel more than they like travel and some people like the idea of home-ownership more than they like home-ownership. For instance, if you haven’t traveled a lot in the past 5 years you probably don’t find travel all that important (otherwise you would’ve found a way to travel).)
If you want a faculty job badly enough you can get one.
I disagree. I think much of the evidence about the rise of post-docs as principal investigators and the diminishing number of tenured positions is at odds with this claim. This claim is essentially why most students go to a Ph.D. program and they become depressed when they learn it doesn’t work like this about 3 years into the process.
For instance, if you haven’t traveled a lot in the past 5 years you probably don’t find travel all that important (otherwise you would’ve found a way to travel).
In the last 5 years, I’ve taken low-paying math research jobs several summers so that I could live in Paris, Hong Kong, and College Station, TX, just to experience parts of the world I had not been to. I’ve moved (at great personal expense) 3 times in the past 4 years to get out of life situations that I found unsatisfactory. I think that my thinking-to-action ratio is not bad.
You seem to dismiss the possibility that there can be real life Catch-22s. Given my preferences, I think I am in a Catch-22 and I cannot determine an actionable step. Some of my favorite life advice came from a high school math teacher who said “when you don’t know what to do, do something.” I think I am more insightful than just to wallow in akrasia.
So if you go systematically through the papers published in the last year or so you’ll find either (a) all the papers are boring, stupid, silly or wrong.
Yes, this is exactly what I have been doing for the past 2 years. But when I have discussed the option to switch to other research fields with faculty and older graduate students, they are telling me that the condition (a) is going to be true in every research field where there is actually enough grant money to finance my studentship, and that (a) is just a part of life in science and that I should be more focused on just doing programming tasks and coming up with small software developments that cater to commercial interests, leading to papers that fit into condition (a). I completely reject their point of view; I think they are wrong, and I think that if academia is set up this way, then my options are to leave academia for jobs that I think are very suboptimal or else agree to unhappily suffer through the academic hoop-jumping that I don’t like.
Given that these are my only options, I am trying to prepare myself to choose one or the other. But the biggest opportunity cost that I feel scared about is losing the chance for theoretical research and philosophical aspects of science to be a major component of the value that I contribute over my career.
Yes, there are a lot of constraints. They aren’t all hard constraints, but that’s life. I’m not going to put all my eggs into one basket, but I think I would be about as significantly unhappy if I can’t resolve career issues as if I can’t live within a 4-hour plane ride radius from my family.
Regarding the part-time job thing: it would be pretty hard to sustain myself financially that way. Like I said, I have additional goals like saving money for retirement/home ownership. I don’t see this as being orthogonal to doing a career I derive personal meaning from at all: being able to do this is a standard byproduct from most careers at the earnings levels that my master’s degree would provide. How do I pinpoint the subset of those careers that also satisfy the constraint that they pay me money to do mathematical research?
I have already transferred schools once, moving because there were no advisers in my area at school #1 (the one I had planned to work with became emeritus right as I joined). I like the school I am at now a lot more than I like computer vision. In fact, my main issue with my current situation is that it appears that no one can do fundamental research in computer vision: all of the major conferences require you to pander to shorter term commercial applications if you want to publish and I’d rather move to a new field than jump through those hoops.
I don’t consider options 4, 5, 6, or 7 to be remotely realistic for me. I can’t think of an Asian or South American countries to where I would be happy with the governments or the long distance from family and friends if I were to live there semi-permanently. Those considerations are at least as important to me as job considerations. I don’t consider unemployment or extreme part-time work an option because I have other life goals, like traveling, home ownership, etc., that I want to financially support in addition to whatever career path I choose.
I appreciate your suggestions, but I have really thought about this a considerable amount. The post that I linked above has some more details about what thinking I have already done. I would really appreciate more targeted advice if you are interested. Given the climate for faculty jobs, what is the best way to try to achieve one? What are ways to do theoretical work / teaching at a university level for a living that are non-traditional?
When you say “I have really thought about this a considerable amount”, I hear “I have diagnosed the problem quite a while ago and it’s creating a pit in my stomach but I haven’t taken any action yet”. I can’t give you any points for that.
When you’re dealing with a difficult problem and if you’re an introspective person it’s easy to get stuck in a loop where you keep going through the same sorts of thoughts. You realize you’re not making much progress but the problem remains so you feel obligated to think about it some more. You should think more, right? It’s an important decision after all?
Nope. Thinking about the problem is not a terminal goal. Thinking is only useful insofar it leads to action. And if your thinking to action ratio is bad, you’ll get mentally exhausted and you’ll have nothing to show for it. It leads to paralysis where all you do is think and think and think.
If you want to make progress you have to find a way to decompose your problem into actionable parts. Not only will action make you feel better, it’s also going to lead to unexplored territory.
So what kind of actions can you take?
Well, your claim is that major conferences require short term commercial papers. So if you go systematically through the papers published in the last year or so you’ll find either (a) all the papers are boring, stupid, silly or wrong. (b) there are a bunch of really cool papers in there. In case of (a) maybe you’re in the wrong field of research. Maybe you should go into algorithms or formal semantics. In this case look at other computer science papers until you find papers that do excite you. In case of (b) contact the authors of the papers; check out their departments; etc, etc.
To recap: Find interesting papers. Find departments where those interesting papers were written. Contact those departments.
Another strategy. Go to the department library and browse through random books that catch your eye. This is guaranteed to give you inspiration.
This is just from the top of my head. But whatever you do, make sure that you don’t just get stuck in a circle of self-destructive thought. Action is key.
If you’re certain you want to eventually get a faculty job, do a combination of teaching and research, own a house and regularly go on holiday, then I can’t think of any alternatives to the conventional PhD → faculty route. What’s the best way to achieve a faculty job? I don’t know. Probably a combination of networking, people skills and doing great research. If you want a faculty job badly enough you can get one. But once you get it there’s no guarantee you’re going to be happy if what you really want is complete autonomy.
I’m sorry I can’t give any targeted advice.
(PS: some people like the idea of travel more than they like travel and some people like the idea of home-ownership more than they like home-ownership. For instance, if you haven’t traveled a lot in the past 5 years you probably don’t find travel all that important (otherwise you would’ve found a way to travel).)
I disagree. I think much of the evidence about the rise of post-docs as principal investigators and the diminishing number of tenured positions is at odds with this claim. This claim is essentially why most students go to a Ph.D. program and they become depressed when they learn it doesn’t work like this about 3 years into the process.
In the last 5 years, I’ve taken low-paying math research jobs several summers so that I could live in Paris, Hong Kong, and College Station, TX, just to experience parts of the world I had not been to. I’ve moved (at great personal expense) 3 times in the past 4 years to get out of life situations that I found unsatisfactory. I think that my thinking-to-action ratio is not bad.
You seem to dismiss the possibility that there can be real life Catch-22s. Given my preferences, I think I am in a Catch-22 and I cannot determine an actionable step. Some of my favorite life advice came from a high school math teacher who said “when you don’t know what to do, do something.” I think I am more insightful than just to wallow in akrasia.
Yes, this is exactly what I have been doing for the past 2 years. But when I have discussed the option to switch to other research fields with faculty and older graduate students, they are telling me that the condition (a) is going to be true in every research field where there is actually enough grant money to finance my studentship, and that (a) is just a part of life in science and that I should be more focused on just doing programming tasks and coming up with small software developments that cater to commercial interests, leading to papers that fit into condition (a). I completely reject their point of view; I think they are wrong, and I think that if academia is set up this way, then my options are to leave academia for jobs that I think are very suboptimal or else agree to unhappily suffer through the academic hoop-jumping that I don’t like.
Given that these are my only options, I am trying to prepare myself to choose one or the other. But the biggest opportunity cost that I feel scared about is losing the chance for theoretical research and philosophical aspects of science to be a major component of the value that I contribute over my career.
It seems you have added a lot of constraints to your problem, consider that you can add only so many until it becomes impossible to solve.
I don’t get what is so bad about the part-time job if you wrote that:
So you aren’t making much at the university either are you?
Yes, there are a lot of constraints. They aren’t all hard constraints, but that’s life. I’m not going to put all my eggs into one basket, but I think I would be about as significantly unhappy if I can’t resolve career issues as if I can’t live within a 4-hour plane ride radius from my family.
Regarding the part-time job thing: it would be pretty hard to sustain myself financially that way. Like I said, I have additional goals like saving money for retirement/home ownership. I don’t see this as being orthogonal to doing a career I derive personal meaning from at all: being able to do this is a standard byproduct from most careers at the earnings levels that my master’s degree would provide. How do I pinpoint the subset of those careers that also satisfy the constraint that they pay me money to do mathematical research?
Are your computer vision skills transferable to other fields that you can do your preferred type of research in at your current university?
Are there related fields that you think you would be interested in, and would be willing to branch out into?