Do Emerging Scientists have a Future in New Zealand?
Programme
Welcome: Shaun Hendy, President NZAS
Session one: The State of the Nation; Government, Universities and CRIs
Session two: Policy, Statistics and Fellowships
Session three: The Emerging Scientists
Session four: Industry Perspective
Session five: Panel Discussion
Session six: Drinks nibbles
Thanks for responding to my post. So what is your plan now? Try and find a job elsewhere or try and set up your own company? If the latter, I am happy to share my experience of doing that and how to go about doing that. So far I am very happy with having made the decision that I made. It requires a very big leap into the unknown but looking back, the gulf was not that big.
There's some comfort in knowing you're not the only one in this position, but it's very disheartening to know that there are such systemic problems in science.
Reading the following: 'Such feelings of depression, frustration and disenfranchisement led me more than two years ago to resign from my position... I didn’t resign because I had a better job offer elsewhere or even a position somewhere else. I resigned because I realised just how unhappy I was and that I would rather quit science and be unemployed than to continue as I was.' rang a bell - I've also just resigned, under the same circumstances.
Speaking with colleagues since I've handed in my notice, I've realised that many of them are experiencing the same problems as I have.
Although I am a recipient of one of the inaugural Rutherford Discovery Fellowships I certainly strongly support any call for increased postdoctoral funding in New Zealand. Postdoctoral funding was already far too low before the FRST scheme was discontinued. Postdocs are the key members of any good research group. But I think it is dangerous to line up Rutherford Discovery Fellowships with the discontinued FRST postdoctoral scheme as if its an either/or choice -- they don't serve the same purposes.
I should also point out that as a direct result of my obtaining a Rutherford Discovery Fellowship, my department was able to advertise and appoint a 5-year lectureship that brought a strong NZ researcher back to New Zealand from the USA. This was possible because my department is paying for only a fraction of my salary for the next 5 years. Of course this outcome occurred because in some sense I was willing to spread the wealth of the fellowship by donating my portion of the overheads that would normally have been accessible for spending on my own research. But by working with the Faculty and Department we were able to get a better result: bringing an exceptional talented NZ scientist back to NZ from overseas and build critical mass in my extended research group. I would strongly recommend to my fellow Rutherford Discovery awardees that they consider strategic decision making of this sort when they wield their newfound leverage within their host organizations.
And congratulations to all the 10 Rutherford fellowship winners. A fellowship substantial enough that it will be able to transform careers. See the full announcement here.
This afternoon, the MSI has already released what appears to be a response to the open letter ... they are planning to review the Rutherford scheme, soon ...
"MSI is aware that there are concerns in the research sector about support for early to mid-career researchers, including those who have recently finished their doctorates. In the light of these concerns in the research sector, MSI will be bringing the review forward."
As the author of this proposal, I neglected to mention CRI libraries' existing agreements with the Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) and between CRIs. I apologise for this omission, which has given a false impression of the situation in CRIs.
Yes, please, where do I sign up. As for Edward above, I am also in a similar situation (two person ecological consultancy). I do not like to leverage off my friends for papers, and it has been my own experience to see first hand an international ecological organisation to lean on their local university collaborators for papers.
Pleased to see the potential benefits indicated for independent science companies. I'm also interested in whether CRIs see mutual advantage in providing such a service, and also other government agencies such as DOC and MAF. For example, I understand that science library services are poor for MAF Wellington but much better where MAF is co-located with a science institute.
This would be fantastic for me. I operate a small science consultancy, and we have no formal access to science libraries. At the moment costs of accessing journals are prohibitive for small organisations. We do have access to interloan services through the public library, and access to a small number of science journals is also available through them. The only practical option for us is to leverage our networks of friends and collaborators in the universities. Not exactly professional!
As an emerging scientist I look forward to any conclusions drawn.
Do Emerging Scientists have a Future in New Zealand?
Programme
Welcome: Shaun Hendy, President NZAS
Session one: The State of the Nation; Government, Universities and CRIs
Session two: Policy, Statistics and Fellowships
Session three: The Emerging Scientists
Session four: Industry Perspective
Session five: Panel Discussion
Session six: Drinks nibbles
Thanks for responding to my post. So what is your plan now? Try and find a job elsewhere or try and set up your own company? If the latter, I am happy to share my experience of doing that and how to go about doing that. So far I am very happy with having made the decision that I made. It requires a very big leap into the unknown but looking back, the gulf was not that big.
There's some comfort in knowing you're not the only one in this position, but it's very disheartening to know that there are such systemic problems in science.
Reading the following: 'Such feelings of depression, frustration and disenfranchisement led me more than two years ago to resign from my position... I didn’t resign because I had a better job offer elsewhere or even a position somewhere else. I resigned because I realised just how unhappy I was and that I would rather quit science and be unemployed than to continue as I was.' rang a bell - I've also just resigned, under the same circumstances.
Speaking with colleagues since I've handed in my notice, I've realised that many of them are experiencing the same problems as I have.
Although I am a recipient of one of the inaugural Rutherford Discovery Fellowships I certainly strongly support any call for increased postdoctoral funding in New Zealand. Postdoctoral funding was already far too low before the FRST scheme was discontinued. Postdocs are the key members of any good research group. But I think it is dangerous to line up Rutherford Discovery Fellowships with the discontinued FRST postdoctoral scheme as if its an either/or choice -- they don't serve the same purposes.
I should also point out that as a direct result of my obtaining a Rutherford Discovery Fellowship, my department was able to advertise and appoint a 5-year lectureship that brought a strong NZ researcher back to New Zealand from the USA. This was possible because my department is paying for only a fraction of my salary for the next 5 years. Of course this outcome occurred because in some sense I was willing to spread the wealth of the fellowship by donating my portion of the overheads that would normally have been accessible for spending on my own research. But by working with the Faculty and Department we were able to get a better result: bringing an exceptional talented NZ scientist back to NZ from overseas and build critical mass in my extended research group. I would strongly recommend to my fellow Rutherford Discovery awardees that they consider strategic decision making of this sort when they wield their newfound leverage within their host organizations.
Alexei
And congratulations to all the 10 Rutherford fellowship winners. A fellowship substantial enough that it will be able to transform careers. See the full announcement here.
Note that the deadline for abstracts is now October 15th.
This afternoon, the MSI has already released what appears to be a response to the open letter ... they are planning to review the Rutherford scheme, soon ...
"MSI is aware that there are concerns in the research sector about support for early to mid-career researchers, including those who have recently finished their doctorates. In the light of these concerns in the research sector, MSI will be bringing the review forward."
As the author of this proposal, I neglected to mention CRI libraries' existing agreements with the Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) and between CRIs. I apologise for this omission, which has given a false impression of the situation in CRIs.
Yes, please, where do I sign up. As for Edward above, I am also in a similar situation (two person ecological consultancy). I do not like to leverage off my friends for papers, and it has been my own experience to see first hand an international ecological organisation to lean on their local university collaborators for papers.
Pleased to see the potential benefits indicated for independent science companies. I'm also interested in whether CRIs see mutual advantage in providing such a service, and also other government agencies such as DOC and MAF. For example, I understand that science library services are poor for MAF Wellington but much better where MAF is co-located with a science institute.
This would be fantastic for me. I operate a small science consultancy, and we have no formal access to science libraries. At the moment costs of accessing journals are prohibitive for small organisations. We do have access to interloan services through the public library, and access to a small number of science journals is also available through them. The only practical option for us is to leverage our networks of friends and collaborators in the universities. Not exactly professional!