Yesterday, I had a great phone chat with Paula Chambers, whose name you may know from the WRK4US listserv. Paula and I were yakking about all things post-academic when it dawned on me why, exactly, I like the phrase “post-academic.” More specifically, I finally clued in as to why I’ve never, ever used the expression “alternative careers.”
My reason? The idea that doing anything with a PhD other than replicating the professoriate — that is, taking on a so-called “alternative career” — only reinforces the belief that taking a faculty job is the norm. The phrase “alternative career” suggests a deviation (in the many sense of the word) from the acceptable mainstream. This is, of course, complete and utter bullshit. MAs, ABDs and PhDs have long been exiting academia and going into any and all other fields (or, in some cases, giving up paid work altogether and focussing on raising a family). And yet the belief that graduate training only qualifies you for one career path persists. The phrase “alternative careers,” IMHO, reinforces that.
As I type this, I have a vague feeling that I may be echoing what Susan Basalla and Maggie Debelius write about the issue in “So What Are You Going to do With That?”: Finding Careers Outside Academia. To me, their use of the phrase “post-academic career” rather than “alternative career” always seemed like the most respectful and accurate way of looking at the career trajectories of people coming out of academia. Over at Carolyn Steele’s Career Sense blog, she mentions that the University of Chicago is now using the phrase “post-graduate career.” This sounds nice, but some people leaving Ph.D. programs do so without parchment in hand. Sure, they are graduates of a Master’s degree. But I think “post-graduate” isn’t all-encompassing enough–plus there’s all that confusion with the UK and their definition of “post-graduate.”
But what do you think?
Loading ...
Related posts:
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
Good point. I am a big believer in creating the discourse that you want. And we need to raise awareness that most graduate students do not go on to academic careers.
I am building a career, period. I am working on thinking of this experience as holistically as possible. So I’m looking at (or working on doing so) my progression from the PhD to the tenure-track to the ‘real world’ as being a process of natural development of my skills and experience … rather than a radical shift. Now, the rest of the world (and the recalcitrant parts of my psyche) might see it more as a radical shift … but I think there’s a lot of value in *not* reinforcing a boundary between the ‘academy’ and the ‘real world’ in my own mind and the minds of interviewers, etc. as much as possible. So, re. JoVE – that’s the discourse I want, and I’m working on it
“Post-academic” has too many associations with the idea of moving beyond something, getting over it, and even of trauma of some sort. Of course, graduate study can warrant these associations, but not automatically. I certainly don’t want to move onto a non-academic career and end up thinking of my time as a graduate student a something left behind, like a religion or a psychological problem, which describing myself as a post-academic would seem to encourage. Going through grad school isn’t like going through puberty. Rather, it’s something I did for a while and now something I don’t do. No one else describes themselves as post-law after giving up law, or post-accountancy after leaving that field. They’re just doing something that isn’t law or accountancy. So it’s “non-academic” for me. The “post” prefix still smacks too much of making academia out to be something special and surely we should try to think of being a graduate student or an academic as a job just like any other.
How about a non academic career in academia? I have a PhD and an MBA and work as Director or Research Services & Knowledge Exchange at York. I get to work with research and researchers everyday but I don’t have to do research. Ideal for me.
I agree with greyeyes: for me it’s a career, period. And, the interesting thing is, it might take me back to the university one day, although if I do it will be on my terms, and probably not in a teaching position.
I never wanted an academic position after my PhD. But getting a PhD was nonetheless a condition to be considered seriously in the field I wanted to get into, in which I constantly have to deal with researchers and policy makers.
Let’s not close too many doors. We never know where the future what the future has in stock.
Matthew says exactly what I would have said but he beat me to it.
For me, calling a career “post-academic” makes it sound like it’s something I could only have done after academia, that I would have had to go through academia first, in a way that “non-academic” doesn’t, and I don’t think of what I’m doing as something you have to have gone through academia to do (since it’s law school, and you don’t). Calling it “post-academic” would feel, uncomfortably (and illogically), much more defined by academia than “non-academic” does.
But that’s just for me. I can see how any number of careers would feel more “post” academic than mine happens to for me.
(A friend of mine refers to “post-academic stress syndrome.”)
And I forgot to say that I do agree with your criticism of “alternative” careers. It reminds me of how you used to have “history” and “women’s history,” which was the “alternative” to the “real,” “normal” history.
Hmmmm! Interesting stuff, here! Matthew, I see your point. I never thought of it that way, but I totally get it. New Kid, I see what you’re saying, too, jumping off from what Matthew said. Never thought of that, either. And as for David Phipps, he DOES have a really cool job (I can say that ’cause I just did an info interview with him last week precisely to find out more about the field of knowledge mobilization).
So Brigitte and Greyeyes, do you resist my use of the phrase “post-academic” when I refer to the “post-academic community”? When I set up the Ning network (www.leavingacademia.ning.com) I referred to us as “academic ex-pats” to avoid these troublesome labels and add a little cheekiness.
Hi Sabine et al.
I don’t “resist” it, it just doesn’t represent the way I like to see reality. However, if an event like “post-academic drinks” was organized surely I’d go and have a beer or two with those folks.
Hi – I agree with Brigitte. It’s really about my own reality & for my own ability to move forward with my life and not be bitter or regret my PhD or my academic job that I prefer to think about a career – and not use post/non academic.
I like the ‘academic ex-pats.’ It gives me the great image that we’re all sitting in the sunshine in Provence, dressed fabulously, & drinking lots of great wine.