The future of the postdoc 劝转党居然没贴Nature最新的报道

digitclaUID: 150299

pdf版 http://www.nature.com/polopoly_f ... umn/pdf/520144a.pdf


最后一段 "As for Thuault-Restituito, she does not regret her postdocs. But if she had to walk that path again, she would move into another career much earlier."

http://www.nature.com/news/the-future-of-the-postdoc-1.17253



Nature 520, 144–147 (09 April 2015) doi:10.1038/520144a

digitclaUID: 150299

底下的评论也很有意思 有兴趣的可以点进去看看

digitclaUID: 150299

正能量评论
Final word. Dear PhD student, I hope that this blog post will not discourage you to carry on with your amazing doctoral research. Keep going! My PhD years were the most formative of my life. But do play with the idea that you may end up somewhere else. And in preparation for that possibility, think of ways to re-purpose your work and “remarket” yourself early on. You will not regret it.

------------------
I would hate to live in a world where postdocs can't make their own choices. Freedom of choice is the greatest luxury we have as scientists. Like any risky enterprise science flourishes on a diet of optimism and youth. Everyone knows the odds going in, and we choose to continue to do science anyways. As long as discoveries are still unpredictable, scientists will continue to pay the price (and reap the rewards). Every advisor I've ever had has been frank about these realities. We can repeat the obvious truth this is a risky career in case anyone is so totally daft they can't see that, but more funding is the only solution.

北辰远UID: 2320774

Rittub 发表于 2015-4-9 23:12
正能量评论
Final word. Dear PhD student, I hope that this blog post will not discourage you to carr ...

"but more funding is the only solution"

这和王版的言论差不多啊，“以我的体会，拿到名校的phd，发一些不错的文章，回来任教还是很吃香的。”。

把最困难的部分说的好像挺轻松似的。

LC50UID: 3609050

Alberto Pepe：
I'm a former postdoc (Astrophysics @ Harvard) who left academia last year to become an entrepreneur. While I did not really pursue the academic route (i.e., I did not formally apply for any tenure-track positions) I have always been fascinated with the question: "What were my chances of getting an academic job at the end of my postdoc?". I analyze that question in this blog post. Bottom line: the ratio of Ph.D.s who (for one reason or another) do not become professors is somewhere between 75% and 99.5%. My advice to PhDs and Postdocs: learn early on how to re-purpose your work and “remarket” yourself

bottlecapperUID: 3604192

发帖人最好在英文引用下面加一段中文总结，不然在列举大量资料后，却找不到主要观点和结论，这是写作的的大忌，也不利于读者的快速理解和信息的传播。

digitclaUID: 150299

bottlecapper 发表于 2015-4-9 23:51
发帖人最好在英文引用下面加一段中文总结，不然在列举大量资料后，却找不到主要观点和结论，这是写作的的大 ...

好大的口气...不过你要是看不懂英文的话还是算了吧

bottlecapperUID: 3604192

退一步，连英文总结都没有，读者不太可能在两三分钟内知道你想说啥。

digitclaUID: 150299

bottlecapper 发表于 2015-4-10 00:15
退一步，连英文总结都没有，读者不太可能在两三分钟内知道你想说啥。

这是Nature的feature文章, 你有意见跟Nature的编辑说去, 在这较劲干啥, 爱读不读...

bottlecapperUID: 3604192

不管是立论还是驳论，大量引用缺乏对论点的总结都是不恰当的。

bottlecapperUID: 3604192

这是你发的贴，我并没有驳nature的文章，只是你就这么一贴文章挺省事的，但是读者很难抓住你的主要论点，也从另一个侧面说明楼主不用心，而且照搬原文本来就是plagiarism。

digitclaUID: 150299

bottlecapper 发表于 2015-4-10 00:18
不管是立论还是驳论，大量引用缺乏对论点的总结都是不恰当的。

如果一个领域的flagship journal发文说the postdoc system is broken, 我不觉得还有什么值得提出的对论点. 你想让Science发一篇文章说the system is wonderful?

digitclaUID: 150299

bottlecapper 发表于 2015-4-10 00:21
这是你发的贴，我并没有驳nature的文章，只是你就这么一贴文章挺省事的，但是读者很难抓住你的主要论点，也 ...

有道理, 原文已删

bottlecapperUID: 3604192

就算引用，也最好少量摘抄，而不是大段复制。更为妥帖的方式是先列出自己的观点，然后贴一个链接就好了，没必要把整篇文章都搬过来。

bottlecapperUID: 3604192

楼主驳我的两点都显得很小学生：
第一是说看不懂英文。写文章得看读者群，这儿的读者用同样的时间阅读中文比阅读英文多许多，也就是中文的传播能力更强，不是每个人都像北辰那样有很多时间阅读的，一般人进来看个两三秒，发现，哇，大段英文引用，再找论点，没有，可能就直接关掉了，这样你的观点就只能传播给极少数人，这篇文章的传播力就弱。

第二是生搬了一篇nature，稍有人质疑，就无脑地让我和编辑去说。首先我质疑的是你的表达和写作方式，并不是这篇文章，其次退一步，就算你有论点，但是引用的文章能不能支持论点还两说呢，怎么能觉得引用了一个nature就铜墙铁壁了呢？动不动就一句问编辑去，那你自己的独立思维能力在哪里？

看来这儿的版主也就这水平，不知道是哪个专业的，感觉没有受过基本的写作训练。