academia and industry; what about the grad students
05/03/07 08:49 PM Filed in: Science
Gershom Edwin Samuel wrote a great article over at The Science Creative Quarterly about the interface between academia and industry [ACADEMIA-INDUSTRY - ALLIANCE AT WHAT COST?]. in it he discusses the implications of the fusion of these two cultures and the benefits and risks for each.
Samuel brings up some interesting points such as the key differences between the two cultures:
for example, if there is a discovery by a graduate student, which greatly benefits the company that is funding the work, the company will most likely not want the data published, for then it becomes part of the public domain and more importantly available to competitors. the PI might have signed a contract before the work was started, stating that the work will not be published for three years if the company feels that it has future implications for monetary gain, but what about the grad student?
this poor student busted their ass trying to get results just to have them withheld from being published because industry funded their work. since in most grad programs publications are what get you out faster and determine where you get a post doc or job after finishing your PhD this student's career may be damaged before it begins since their current and any future work on this project is no longer publishable. never mind the fact that three years is half of the time you are in grad school and about three quarters of the time you are actually working on your thesis project.
in the simplest terms, the grad student is being punished for doing good science.
i do understand the monetary crunch and how funding via industry can be beneficial to both the PI and the company, but i plead with the PIs out there, who do accept funding from industry, to think about your grad students and make sure that if you put someone on an industry based project, that it will be amicable to their career as well as yours.
Samuel brings up some interesting points such as the key differences between the two cultures:
In the academic world, there is a traditional rule; for career advancement (to obtain tenure and receive full professorship), one has to secure research grants and publish papers. Thus, the old saying “publish or perish” is a reality...In contrast, for pharmaceutical industry, the vital thing is the new-drug application to the FDA. A journal article is worth nothing without the FDA approval. However, publication in prestigious journals along with FDA approval is just like icing on the cake that would influence physicians to prescribe the company’s product. (Bodenheimer, 2000)he also talks about disclosure, conflict of interest, and the "JAMA Fiasco:"
The lead author — Lee Cohen, director of Massachusetts General Hospital’s Center for Women’s Mental Health, is a consultant to three antidepressant manufacturers, a paid speaker for seven of them and has his research work funded by four drug makers. None of those ties were reported in the study. Dr Cohen and his colleagues maintained that it was not relevant to disclose their ties with industry in the paper in part because the study was funded by the government, not drug maker (Armstrong, 2006). Such incidents ruin the academia’s reputation as independent truth seeker and reduce public trust in research. Henceforth, more often questions will be raised on integrity of research, researchers and science journals.one key point regarding the fusion of industry and academia that Samuel doesn't talk about is the rock and the hard place that graduate students can be put in.
for example, if there is a discovery by a graduate student, which greatly benefits the company that is funding the work, the company will most likely not want the data published, for then it becomes part of the public domain and more importantly available to competitors. the PI might have signed a contract before the work was started, stating that the work will not be published for three years if the company feels that it has future implications for monetary gain, but what about the grad student?
this poor student busted their ass trying to get results just to have them withheld from being published because industry funded their work. since in most grad programs publications are what get you out faster and determine where you get a post doc or job after finishing your PhD this student's career may be damaged before it begins since their current and any future work on this project is no longer publishable. never mind the fact that three years is half of the time you are in grad school and about three quarters of the time you are actually working on your thesis project.
in the simplest terms, the grad student is being punished for doing good science.
i do understand the monetary crunch and how funding via industry can be beneficial to both the PI and the company, but i plead with the PIs out there, who do accept funding from industry, to think about your grad students and make sure that if you put someone on an industry based project, that it will be amicable to their career as well as yours.