Ads 468x60px


Showing posts with label Programs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Programs. Show all posts

Thursday, April 21, 2011

USA and other countries need to re-tool their science programs

Nature

The April 21, 2011edition of the British science journal Nature includes a look at the Ph.D. process.

EnlargeCloseNature

The April 21, 2011edition of the British science journal Nature includes a look at the Ph.D. process.

According to the multipart series in the journal Nature, the world is awash in Ph.D.s, most of them being awarded after years of study and tens of thousands of dollars to scholars who will never find work in academia, the traditional goal for Doctors of Philosophy.

"In some countries, including the United States and Japan, people who have trained at great length and expense to be researchers confront a dwindling number of academic jobs and an industrial sector unable to take up the slack," the cover article says.

Of people who received Ph.D.s in the biological sciences five to six years ago, only 13% have tenure-track positions leading to a professorship, says Paula Stephan, who studies the economics of science at Georgia State University in Atlanta.

All together, 10% are working part time or out of the labor force entirely, 33% are in academic positions that don't lead to a professorship positions, 22% are in industry and 20% are at community colleges or working in government or non-profit jobs, she says.

That 33% of Ph.D.s in non tenure-track positions is especially troubling, she says. It used to be that "post-docs," post doctoral research positions in a professor's lab, were a steppingstone to one's own lab and professorship. But now one-third of Ph.D.s are permanently stuck "basically working as research assistants." They have no job security and salaries start at $39,000 a year. "That's appalling: You could get that with a bachelor of science degree," Stephan says.

It's not necessarily the education that needs to change, but how the endpoint is presented, says Maresi Nerad, director of the Center for Innovation and Research in Graduate Education at the University of Washington in Seattle.

Even the way anything but being a professor is termed is a problem, she says. People refer to "alternative careers," which just screams "It's not the real thing, the real thing is becoming a professor,' " she says. The presumption is that if they don't become a professor, "something isn't right with them." But that track hasn't really existed for the majority for a long time.

In fact, her studies have found that about half of the science Ph.D.s end up working outside of academia in industry, government or at not-for-profits, and they're very happy and actually make more money and have more autonomy.

The glut tracks back to predictions in the 1980s that an impending wave of professor retirements and rising college enrollment would require a hoard of new Ph.D.s. This didn't prove to be true, but Ph.D.-track students flooded universities and then couldn't find jobs.

One reason the overproduction of Ph.D.s hasn't been dealt with is the economic incentives built into Ph.D. programs in science. Universities rely on graduate students and post-docs, Stephan says. "There are tremendous incentives for academic departments to grow their Ph.D. programs because it's a cheap, temporary workforce."

The future for Ph.D.s isn't all grim

View the Original article

Friday, April 1, 2011

Treasury Cheers TARP Profits, Defends Losses in Housing Relief Programs

AP

March 1: Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington.

The U.S. Treasury was quick to toot its own horn this week with news that the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, has turned a profit now that three financial institutions repaid a total of $7.4 billion in funds.

Treasury said the additional money puts TARP repayments at $251 billion in dividends, interest and incomes, while it spent $245 billion on the banks’ bailout. Treasury expects to earn nearly $20 billion in profit from the banking portion of the bailout.

But when it comes to Treasury's programs to offer relief to hard-hit homeowners, programs that have lost $45.6 billion, the Treasury hasn't been nearly as vocal. In fact, Republican efforts to kill President Obama's loan modification initiatives have put the Treasury on the defensive.

The Treasury sharply opposed a Republican bill to end the Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, which was enacted two years ago with funds from TARP. HAMP offers incentives to loan servicers to modify loans for people having trouble making payments. But the Treasury Department has no authority to compel banks and loan servicers to participate, and so far the program has only modified about 600,000 loans, well below the 3 million to 4 million anticipated.

The Treasury has said terminating the program would keep it from helping tens of thousands of additional families each month and claimed the program is designed to protect taxpayer interest.

The GOP-led House voted to terminate HAMP on Wednesday. The House this month has also voted to kill three other programs aimed at reviving the struggling housing market, including one to aid homeowners who have lost their jobs or become sick and another helping state and local governments buy and revamp abandoned properties. All face veto threats in the unlikely event they clear the Senate, but they have given Republicans a platform to show their commitment to ending inefficient or expensive federal programs.

The Treasury Department said the lifetime cost of TARP is likely to be limited to funding for the department's housing programs, which the department said were not intended to be recovered.

But the Treasury has pat itself on the back for ensuring that TARP cost little or no money to taxpayers.

"While our overriding objective with TARP was to break the back of the financial crisis and save American jobs, the fact that our investment in banks has also delivered a significant profit for taxpayers is a welcome development," Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said in a written statement.

"We still have more work to do repairing the damage caused by the crisis and strengthening the recovery, but today is an important milestone in our efforts to recover taxpayer dollars as we continue winding down TARP."

The Treasury Department also released a new estimate of the total cost of all the government's bailouts, including the massive assistance provided by the Federal Reserve to support the financial system. The new estimate projects an eventual profit of $24 billion, including a projected $110 billion in income Treasury estimates the Fed will make on its investments in mortgage-backed securities and other assets.

That gain will help offset losses of $45.6 billion in housing programs. But the outgoing overseer of TARP threw cold water on the good news.

"While the reduction in the anticipated direct financial costs of TARP from hundreds of billions of dollars to potentially $19 billion is certainly good news, the total cost of TARP necessarily involves far more than just dollars and cents," Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for TARP, said in a legislative hearing Wednesday, his last day on the job.

"In other words, the good financial news should not distract from the careful and necessary assessment of TARP's considerable, non-financial costs that, while more difficult to measure, may be even more significant," he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet View ArticleLeave a CommentSort: NewestSort: Oldest Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. You must login to comment.

View Article

View All Comments

Latest Politics VideosMore »



View the Original article