I know that I'm opening myself to criticism and accusations of both stupidity and arrogance by writing this, but I'm so intellectually lonely, I just have to share and see if there's anyone else out there who feels the same way.

My biggest problem with graduate school is that I have so little respect for my faculty. I am at the top institution in my social science field, working with "the best of the best." And yet, I find both their intelligence and professionalism incredibly lacking. Their research and conversations abound with such wild errors in logic, scope shifts, semantic inconsistencies, and conclusions that grossly overextend the data that I can't even summon the energy the begin the arduous process of explaining all the errors. When I find an isolated error that is easy to communicate and prove, it gets brushed off. People are so concerned with what's trendy, and that alone seems to be enough to make quality decisions. I have never been able to get someone to argue with me or explain logically why an idea they disparage is wrong, or why an idea they embrace is valid, in any logically convincing way. The amount of money I see wasted on running experiments that are fundamentally flawed (and return results that are flawed in exactly the way I warned) is astounding. And, their lack of maturity blows my mind. The gossiping, random yelling matches, and backstabbing are more reminiscent of adolescents than university faculty. Or so I would have thought. And these people are almost all current or formed editors of A list journals in my field.

Other than having faculty that I think are bad scientists, things are good in my program. I have none of the typical grad student complaints -- I am not overburdened with grunt work, I'm funded well, have ample contact with faculty, and generally have a good deal going on. And the program certainly has a good reputation.

The thing is, I left a very successful career in industry to come here. So, although I'm treated and funded well, there is a big opportunity cost to my studies -- well over half a million dollars, not to mention respect, etc. After three full years in the program, I "want my money back," so to speak. What made "the package" worth it to me was that I was expecting to be immersed in an intellectual Eden. I was expecting, and looking forward, to being the dumbest person in the room, and soaking up the genius of those around me. Instead, I've found myself beating my head against a brick wall, fighting to not be swallowed up by the kool-aid of bad science. I fully acknowledge that I could be incredibly arrogant and misguided. But after three years of immersion, I have to acknowledge that this is my honest assessment as a scientist.

It's incredibly lonely feeling this way about my entire department, and not being able to share it with anyone (no one takes kindly to "I think you're all stupid.") And the thing is, I like doing my own research, and I'd like to have a

(... continuing... went over the word count limit)

It's incredibly lonely feeling this way about my entire department, and not being able to share it with anyone (no one takes kindly to "I think you're all stupid.") And the thing is, I like doing my own research, and I'd like to have a PhD. But no man is an island..... you get the picture. Do I just continue to play along with the charade for another two years until I graduate, trying to maintain research integrity but also fit in with my department? Holding on to bits of intelligence that I find here and there? Do I keep the hope that I'll find faculty at other schools that I will enjoy working with as peers when I become a professor? I do I kick all of academia -- or at least all of my field -- off the pedestal right along with my department, and cut my losses?

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Again, my intention is not to be arrogant or disparaging. It's to express profound disappointment among possible kindred spirits.

Don't get me wrong and please forgive the possible "not-correct" way I am going to write, as English is not my first language.

I find it a little difficult to believe that everything in your department is wrong and nobody knows what they are doing except from you... I find it difficult to believe that (using your own words) "Their research and conversations abound with such wild errors in logic, scope shifts, semantic inconsistencies, and conclusions that grossly overextend the data ". Maybe this is true for some of them, bur for all of them?
And if you think that everything is wrong, why don't you try to base your thesis on proving that earlier research on your subject is not correct and that yours is here to "do the right thing"?

You may be frustrated with your department, but if you are going to get your PhD and have a successful academic career you need to show them a little more respect as they are the gatekeepers to your future. Despite what you think and say, they are far from stupid; instead they are at the top of a competitive field, where you as an early-career research student, are basically at the bottom. You need to accept this and move on, get over this immature disappointment sooner rather than later for your own benefit.

I think that you are behaving like the adolescent here, also the staff are only human after all, and it is human nature to gossip and argue sometimes.

Hello,

I get that you're not trying to be arrogant. I really get what you are trying to say. I appreciate your post because I think it's written with raw honesty in terms of revealing what you think/feel.

I have no sound advice as I'm not an expert in terms of psych stuff and workplace dynamics. What I can tell you though, for all my 2 cents's worth, is that I think you're starting or have started to get disillusioned with academia. We have an understanding/impression/conception that the ivory tower is a haven of intellectually superior, mature people. As a consequence, we have high expectations of it. The "truth" is, no matter how A-level you get, people are people. People get rubbed off the wrong way, hold grudges, hold on to their egos, driven to project an image of success, and most of all, find it hard to accept that we make mistakes once in a while. The last one is especially hard to accept when "phd" follows your surname or "professor" precedes name.

It's a sad realization, but it looks like being able to get through or succeed in academia does not only require intelligence, but the capacity to navigate your way through its politics and daily entrapments-- pretty much like everywhere else. Not all of the published and well-accomplished academics have Einstein IQs, they just work their a**es off and stick to it. I think you may be having a bit of a culture shock. Some of us stand outside the walls of the ivory tower, thinking it must be so great to get in there, very impressed with people with all kinds of titles and what not. But once we get there, we realize that it's not as grandiose as we have imagined, and can even be petty as it gets. "Isolated" is a typical description of being an academic. Not all academics are necessarily isolated, but there's a good chance that people work alone on their research.

In my opinion, if you'd really like to be a professor, then expose all the flaws in your colleagues' arguments in a paper and publish it. Wish you the courage to get through.

Hi

I'm sure it's not everyone in the department who is doing terrible science, I'm sure this is true in some cases but it could be that people are trying to fob you off in discussions because maybe they don't want to really talk deeply about their work to "just" a PhD student? this could be the case.

I would say that most academic departments probably have more politics than any work department, and fewer concrete "rules" which probably leads to more politics. The academic staff may have never had a job outside academia, which means they have always gone through life arriving and leaving when they want to and setting their own agenda, as long as publications result from this, nobody has any problem.

The publications, people are under much pressure to publish, so such a system will either mean: people work harder, or they publish lesser quality work. In my experience this usually means the latter takes place, so there are external factors contributing to the standards of the work. Chances are if it is a top department, there are some very clever people there plus many who are simply good at playing the game. A game is basically what academia has become because of all the pressures to publish that are out there now.

I know this sounds like a random stream of consciousness, in short should you expect professionalism: probably not, should you expect intelligence: yes, although there is also much pressure to perform causing a drop in standards.

This is how I see it anyway

Out of interest, what social science field are you in?

I think that the 1950s behavioural revolution within US social sciences has had a lasting negative impact on US academia and has profoundly retarded the growth of American academic work; leaving the discplines arguing over minor points of method rather than major questions that lie within the use of essentially contested concepts (I say this from a politics background, but it applies even more so to economics.)

It may be that, in order to be a bit more humble, a bit more open to others' perspectives and way more open to actually conducting research that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking, that you need to examine your own internal assumptions and spend some time understanding different philosophic positions than your own. I also recommend you cast off the shackles of thinking of yourself as a "scientist" and think more of yourself as someone with a very informed opinion.

I can see what you mean as I had similar ideas about academia, doing a PhD and what academics would be like.  I think when we are on the outside looking in we do seem to have an idealised view of what it would be like to be surrounded by like minded intellectuals so that we can debate openly about our work and gain inspiration. Maybe that's what the Victorians and previous thinkers did in the age of scientific curiosity and enlightenment!  I think that is what draws a lot of people to academia (i.e. the challenge of doing your own research with like minded people in a supportive environment!)  Unfortunately in today's academic environment it's alot tougher as the pressures seem to have increased - there's a constant pressure to publish (you get judged how good you are by the number of publications you have) so you can move forward and get funding and establish yourself as a researcher!

Academics are humans so once you see that they have all the usual traits (some good and some not so good!)  When the academics are off their pedestals it's such a disappointment when you realise that some of them are really petty, protective of their turf as academia is very competitive, backstabbing, rude, have shout matching matches etc... you've seen the real academia!   Alot of staying in academia is about politics which is unfortunate and unbelievable!!!!  Those who get furthest often have a good game plan - good research and being able to work the system and play the game!  You don't get anywhere by just being good unfortunately! I was prepared for all the hard work necessary to do a PhD I didn't realise how much politics was involved!  (Bang goes the ivory towers image out the window!)

I think as money is so tight in most of academia unless you can commericalise it the competition is very intense so people will fight to keep their share of the pie!  There is a lot of gossiping about as well especially as everybody knows each other as it's usually a small field.  In that sense networking is good as it keeps you in the loop to know what everybody else is upto!

Status is very important in the hierarchical structure of academia so the higher up you go the more entrenched you become in your position which is a shame as that doesn't encourage open and honest debate which moves your subject forward!  They don't like to be told they are wrong especially Professors who have made their reputation on it!  Though this is a generalisation as you get some open-minded academics who are keen to foster new ideas and develop new talent. 

As for academics particularly professors behaving like adolescents some of the stuff I first heard I was thinking "but you are intellectuals at the top of your field surely you can't think that????" but it's such a disillusion when these supposed esteemed colleagues have such immature views! Education clearly hasn't done much for them!  I had this chat with some other students and they were of the same opinion!  Some of the professors should know better too!  Remember some academics have poor social skills so say the most inappropriate things!

Once you are aware of all those drawbacks and pitfalls I think you've made the transition from being a student to an academic or an academic in training!  Saying all that above I'd still prefer to be in academia than anywhere else.  The system has its flaws which I don't know if they can be fixed as it'd take a lot of effort and change especially as academics don't like change especially by young PhDers!  Where else do you actually get to do what you want pretty much most of the time, choose your research topics and talk about it all day?

A word about quality - due to the immense pressure to publish these days to be seen as a "successful" academic some people maybe tempted to play the game and publish lower quality papers or split their research into so many fragments to get as many publicati

======= Date Modified 18 May 2011 21:34:19 =======
Opps got cut off ... must be writing too much!!

A word about quality - due to the immense pressure to publish these days to be seen as a "successful" academic some people maybe tempted to play the game and publish lower quality papers or split their research into so many fragments to get as many publications as possible. There maybe a backlash about this as I've seen some retiring academics publish about this - research was a more valued activitiy in their day as it wasn't a means to an end! They didn't have the RAE in their day! Maybe it's due to the short sightedness of the research funding so there's not much job security! Even those with permanent jobs need to find funding for new projects. There is are differences between academics like students so they are only as good as their work shows (or otherwise!!!)

Basically you get out what you put in and some more so you need to know how to work the system. It's not a good place to look at the moment but hopefully in a few years time after you've banged your head off a few walls, challenged a few academics and done some schmoozing the job market'll improved! I hope so for all our sakes!

Good luck! It's a frustrating and strange experience but what a journey you'll go on! You will be able to find out how much you can put with :-s and then you'll be ready for academia!!! ;-)

Hi! Well I don't have either the guts or the will to accuse all of my superiors of lacking in intelligence, not least because I really admire the work they have done, but I can certainly sympathise with you about all the petty arguments and politics. I'm also being supervised by a couple of world-reknowned academics in my field and boy, they can be so bitchy, two-faced, spiteful...you name it, I've seen it all. My primary supervisor can be very immature when she's not getting her own way, shouting and door-slamming, and also positively enjoys seeing other academics fail at something, whether it be a grant application or whatever. I just try to keep my head down, ignore it all, and aspire not to be like that. We might not be able to change it, but we can choose not to get so bitter and twisted and then take it out on everyone else! Probably best just to mind your own, finish what you've started, and move on. When you've finished your training and are successful in your field, you will have the opportunity to have your own say and be listened to by the masses :) Best, KB

Wow, thanks everyone for sharing your thoughts. It's amazing how much better I feel just having been able to say those things "aloud" and to hear from people who understand. You collectively brought up some great points. I think a lot of you are right -- that the pressure to publish has caused a lot of people to stop caring about the higher truth and just "play the game" to be able to stay in it and be successful. And Slizor, you're spot on, many of the old timers in my department were some of the forerunners building up that behavioural revolution. And yes (I forget who wrote this) but I have considered that some faculty may have good explanations for their decisions, but can't be bothered to explain them to "just a phd student" -- and that's bothersome as well, as we're providing very cheap labor in exchange for learning... so if we're not learning....

Anyway, I guess, what it comes down to is just wanting to lament in a safe place the disappointment of having had the ivory tower illusion shattered... kind of like when I stopped seeing the Disneyland shows as being magical and instead saw overworked and underpaid staff with fake smiles plastered on. And wishing that I'd known more about what it would be like on the inside before I made all the sacrifices I did to come here. Not even that I'd *necessarily* have made a different decision... but it would have been nice to have been able to come in with eyes wide open.

Thanks for listening :) It's so nice to have people on the inside that are safe to confide in.

The posts here would pretty much sum up the highs and lows of my own experiences with academia. I also had thought it would be some bastion of intellectualism being gently and vigourously nutured in an ivory tower---forget about that notion! Politics are far more rampant than anything it seems, but I am not convinced that is a new development....That said, politics are within any kind of employment/working situation....and I have also had the benefit of having caring, supportive and genuinely bright colleages and having met some incredibly kind and accomplished academics. Often it is a matter of having to find each other and then build supportive networks--forming what you wish was already there---but it can be done. I tend to stick to those people who are positive and helpful as ones I interact with closely, and keep others at a polite arm's length.