Monday, December 20, 2010

Chart of the day: openings versus graduates


Thanks to Anon1219100226a for the link to this chart from Calvin College's Computer Science department. I suspect that the chart was being used to suggest that there were plenty of computer science positions; one hopes this is an accurate statement, for the graduates' sake.

Anon notes the paucity of life sciences positions; while we all know this to be the case (pity the poor biology Ph.D.), I think it's interesting to see. It's worth pointing out how many life science graduates end up becoming physicians, which are not reflected on the jobs side (18k in 2010, according to Wikipedia.)

Chemists, of course, are physical scientists; our pain is not reflected in this chart. Well, that's life.

7 comments:

  1. I must say, I was very surprised to find out that their postdocs are around 5 years on average and less optional than they are for organic chemists (ie; most of them do one even to get an industrial position).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Biology is one of those fields where I think the system is just plainly rigged against you; maybe someone can tell me that chemistry is about the same, but until then, I'm going to believe there's a qualitative and quantitative difference.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm assuming that "computing jobs" range from software engineering at the premier firms to bitchy IT drone work in industry, government, and academia. I'm not surprised that there are so many undergraduate life science majors. Most are pre-health anyway, and that's a good thing. Otherwise the already abyssmal job situation for life science grad students would be aggravated by more PhD pursuants.

    ReplyDelete
  4. A6:06a: Ah, yes, forgot how many of the life science grads aren't pre-MD, but also 'allied health' types. (RNs (?), physical therapy, etc.)

    ReplyDelete
  5. I thought that CS was far ahead of the pharma/life sciences curve in outsourcing positions to places half a hemisphere away - so unless they're counting jobs for Indian citizens, I'm wondering if this is some spin by CS professors to keep the Ponzi scheme going for one more round.

    On the other hand, the next social media program doesn't need FDA approval, so I guess it's easier to start your own business and actually generate a product. Of course you can do that in the life sciences, too, so long as you have a golden tongue and no conscience. I'm wondering when the first wave photon-enhanced medications are going to hit the market.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hap, you missed the rather wonderful line from Calvin College:

    "One of the most ridiculous is the myth that all the computing jobs are going overseas. By contrast, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (US-BLS) predicts that computing will be one of the fastest-growing U.S. job markets in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) for the foreseeable future..."

    ReplyDelete
  7. Looking at this old article: http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/09/news/economy/few_science_majors.fortune/index.htm

    The comments from the facebook responders definitely show the public already knows science is a dead end or at least poor career choice. It is very surprising that the comments skewed toward a negative view of science here, since in general people think of these careers as solid.

    ReplyDelete