Translator: Mariana Cerdeira
Reviewer: Leonardo Silva 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 your own 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)
