Who of you was born between the 1980s and the early 2000s?
Right, most of us ...
So most of us here, including me,
are part of the generation of millennials,
or “generation Y.”
I suspect this “Y” stands for “'Why' are we so misunderstood?”
(Laughter)
A stereotype about the millennials is that we were told at an early age
that we could be whatever we wanted to be.
Contrary to our parents' and grandparents' generations,
we millennials were privileged enough
not to have to struggle with war, or recession,
or to have to emigrate in order to find a job.
No, life was finally relatively stable,
so we were raised to be high achievers.
"The sky is the limit.
The world is your playground."
So,
by the time I was 17 years old,
I was finishing high school in Brazil,
my country of origin,
struggling with the question many millennial teenagers struggled with:
“What do I want to do when I grow up?”
Knowing I would probably not be able to answer that at such an early age,
I figured I’d settle for answering a smaller question instead at that point:
“What do I want to study at university next year?”
Then, once I’m at university, I'll ask myself what I want to do next,
then do that again, step by step.
It sounded like a good plan.
And have you always known, since you were little,
what you wanted to study at university?
If so, I envy you,
but my thought process was more like this:
"OK, I like biology in school,
but to be honest,
I’ve got no interest in studying plants or insects,
and I don’t really want to become a medical doctor."
So I thought I’d start a bachelor's in Biomedical Sciences,
to study human biology.
That seemed to fit well.
And soon after I started,
I saw that my suspicion from high school was true:
Science was awesome!
The human body works in ways that seem out of this world!
It’s unbelievable how much goes on inside one tiny cell in our body.
So I was really enjoying the subjects in my bachelor’s,
and I was getting pretty good grades.
So I thought: "I must be doing something right."
But there was still something bothering me.
Now the time had come to ask myself what I would do next.
But everyone who I asked what my options were for after getting the degree
would tell me the same thing:
“There are no 'options.'
There is 'one' option:
After your bachelor’s, you do a master’s;
after your master’s, you do a PhD;
for the ultimate goal is to become a university professor and researcher.”
Everyone would tell me that because that’s all they knew.
But wait, what do you mean, “there’s only one option”?
I’m a millennial; I was told the sky is the limit.
Doing a master’s and a PhD was OK with me.
I loved science and wanted to get deeper into it
and keep doing some cool things in the lab.
But the last part about becoming a professor really concerned me
because back then I already knew I didn’t want to do research forever.
So I did my master’s and my PhD,
still in love with science,
but always feeling like the black sheep in my graduate program,
the one that doesn’t share the dream of a professorship,
the odd one out.
And so I went on, at first mostly alone,
almost embarrassed, almost apologetic,
trying to find the answer to my new question:
what kinds of jobs could I have that don’t involve me doing experiments,
but are still related to science?
So I spent years doing my own research,
having my own little side project in parallel to my thesis,
reading and talking to a lot of people.
I started coming across more and more colleagues
who were looking for the answer to the same question.
It turns out I wasn’t alone.
There were a few other black sheep like me.
And I found that there are so many kinds of jobs one could have
with a science or technology background.
you can work with business consulting,
project management, science journalism,
digital health and science technology,
editorial of a scientific journal,
public policy,
patent protection and intellectual property,
public health;
entrepreneurship, starting yourown company ...
Just to name a few.
I suddenly went from "worried that there won’t be any options"
to "overwhelmed with all the dozens of possibilities."
And I asked myself,
"Why is it that not all graduate students know that?"
Why did it take me so long to find out the truth?
And I realized that it's because the academic world is a bubble.
Sometimes it feels like people who are in that bubble
don’t have so much contact with the outside world.
There’s little space for sunshine or vacation in that bubble.
That’s why graduate students look so pale.
A diet based on instant noodles and coffee doesn’t help either.
I know, because I lived in that bubble for 10 years,
and I noticed that my lack of access
to information coming from outside the bubble
was due to the academic culture.
One of the core aspects of the academic culture
is that most people still believe
the main purpose of doing a PhD is to become a university professor
and researcher.
Now, historically, this is true this used to be the case in the past
it was like that in my grandparents’ generation.
And it’s still true that if you want to be a professor today,
you have to do a PhD.
And a post-doc.
And a second post-doc.
And sometimes a third one ...
But you don’t necessarily have to become a lifelong academic researcher
just because you did a master’s and a PhD.
In fact, most PhDs -
90 to 99%, depending on the country -
end up elsewhere, outside academia, after their studies.
So, becoming a professor is not the "classical path" anymore.
It has become the "alternative path."
But even though doing something else is the most common path,
there is still a culture of discouragement if you want to leave academia,
which contributed to making me feel like a black sheep during my studies.
I’ve heard academics call those who leave the academic bubble four things.
"Time-waster."
They say by leaving academia
you’re throwing out of the window all the time and effort
you put into learning science all those years.
But pursuing a career unrelated to academia
does not mean "unrelated to research."
You’re also called a "traitor."
My personal favorite.
"The University invested so much money in training you,
and now you’re turning your back on academic research."
I mean, we should be forever grateful to our graduate programs,
but I don’t remember ever signing a lifelong contract to stay in research.
You’re also called a "failed scientist."
Ouch.
Yeah, if you’re leaving the academic bubble,
it must mean you were not good enough to make it in it.
I’ve even heard a professor say, almost mourning:
"I once had such a brilliant student
who later went to work in the private sector ...
I don’t know where I went wrong."
Well, maybe that student left because he or she wanted to?
Not because they had to?
And finally, you're called "greedy."
Yeah, because the industry pays better than academia.
Well, actually the industry pays reasonable salaries,
appropriate for highly educated professionals.
It’s academia that underpays.
I personally don’t get it, why academics get so defensive
about graduate students leaving for non-academic jobs.
There are not enough jobs in academia anyway!
The number of fresh PhDs has gone up tremendously over the years,
while the number of new faculty positions has stayed roughly the same.
The universities right now just cannot accommodate that many PhDs
as permanent researchers.
So, you see,
if you want to leave academia,
you’re a greedy, failed, time-wasting Judas.
But if you actually want to stay,
there’s no job for you!
To solve this academic paradox, there are a few options.
One is to limit the amount of students being admitted into graduate programs,
to try to control the number of new PhDs getting a degree,
but I personally don't really like the idea
of restricting access to education.
A second, obvious way is to create more researcher positions,
hire more people as permanent scientists.
This would already help a lot, but it wouldn’t be enough.
So, we really have to face the facts
and approach the issue from a different angle.
Graduate programs have to start preparing their students
for tasks they will actually be doing in the future.
Companies want to hire PhDs for their deep knowledge of science
and their ability to solve problems and learn fast.
And students right now are being trained to become excellent investigators,
which is great,
but if most of them will end up working in the private sector,
they should also be trained to become excellent administrators,
negotiators,
communicators,
leaders.
Graduate programs have to start teaching, at least as an option,
courses on business concepts,
entrepreneurship,
project management, marketing, finance ...
It’s time we bring a bit of the MBA into the PhD.
On top of that,
graduate students also need to receive more career support and guidance.
Many of them are not even aware
that their chances of getting a professorship are minimal.
Right from the start of their programs,
they must be constantly exposed to, not hidden from,
all their possibilities beyond the academic bubble,
so they can make an informed career decision and prepare for it,
and not just take anything that comes their way.
So they really only go on to do a post-doc
if they actively decided for it,
not because they didn’t know what else to do
and turned on the autopilot mode.
And students should also be more active in getting career information.
I know it’s hard ...
We don’t have time for anything other than our theses,
and most of the time
we just prefer to avoid thinking about the future altogether.
But, you know,
it will come anyway.
Your university education is not your whole career;
it is your background.
No bachelor’s, master’s or PhD lasts forever,
even though it might feel like it most of the time.
They are all temporary positions,
and we’ll soon have to figure out our next move.
And you don’t have to do it alone.
You can team up with colleagues who are in the same boat.
That’s how we’ve established the Career Development Initiative,
the CDI, here in Berlin,
which is entirely organized by students, alumni
and one professor who acknowledges the need for a culture change.
They are still rare, but they exist.
Together, we use the time none of us have -
evenings, weekends -
to put together events, training programs and internships
to help students find jobs where they feel fulfilled and recognized,
inside or outside the bubble.
I’m happy to share with current students
what I’ve learned about career options after a PhD,
so they don’t feel like black sheep themselves.
For all of this to work,
for graduate students to get more information and training
to become prepared for a transition into the job market,
the professors who supervise them need to support them.
If you're a professor and can’t be a career mentor yourself -
because, after all, you’re also in the bubble -
at least do not discourage your students from doing this.
Let them take part in courses and extracurricular activities
even if they're not directly related to research.
It most likely won’t interfere with the quality of their theses,
and it might make a huge difference for their future.
Let’s keep in mind that most graduates will leave for non-academic jobs
and that it is not a sign of failure.
And I know that if you’re not in the academic bubble yourself,
you might be thinking:
“OK, so life for graduate students is hard.
Cry me a river."
“It was their own choice to go down that road.”
“I’m a lawyer, why should I care?”
I’ll tell you why you should care.
Most of innovation, of ideas that improve society -
be they cures for diseases,
or solutions for world hunger,
or the latest technologies -
are born in universities.
And most of the people working on this are graduate students.
Sure, professors manage and supervise everything,
but the everyday, hands-on, "dirty work"
is done by the students.
If research is like constructing a skyscraper,
they are the thousands of bricklayers.
If it’s a war, they are the army.
If it’s Game of Thrones,
they are the white walkers.
They even look just as pale.
(Laughter)
The progress of science and innovation depends on graduate students.
So let’s take care of them,
value them and give them career guidance and mental support.
Let’s encourage them to be the best version of themselves.
Science is amazing,
and it can do so much for our lives if done out of passion and not pressure.
We need a change in the academic culture.
First of all, let’s stop thinking:
"Hmm ... Things are not great,
but that’s just how it is and has always been."
No, after we leave here today,
let’s not again reproduce the century-old speech
that a PhD is a one-way ticket to "Professorland,"
and let’s start opening our eyes
to all the things a millennial with a degree can do -
if he or she ever gets off that phone.
Academics should start reaching out more to people outside the bubble
and be supportive of their colleagues.
Graduate programs have to listen more to their students
and adapt to their needs.
Let’s burst that bubble and bring academia to the twenty-first century.
Most of all,
it’s essential that we become aware of these issues
and talk about them, like we’re doing here.
Let’s keep a critical eye on the system we live in,
and yes, change it, if it needs improvement.
After all ...
that’s what university taught us to do.
(Applause)