Hi fellow academics,
With all the funding uncertainty in the U.S. right now, I am genuinely unsure whether staying here long term makes sense. I started searching last October, applied super widely (nearly 200 applications worldwide), and two of the better univs I have had onsite interviews just announced hiring freezes.
I recently received three options:
- A very generous TTAP offer from my home country (China), with a startup package large enough to support around 7 Ph.D. students through graduation. But this is basically a one-way ticket, due to geo-political issues, there’s no going back.
- A TTAP offer from a new R1 in the U.S. — it’s officially R1, but rather low-ranked, and it seems quite hard to attract Ph.D. students there.
- A two-year postdoc offer from one of the very top universities in the U.S., with excellent research opportunities but, of course, no long-term security.
How did you think about the risks of staying in the U.S. system versus returning to a stronger base elsewhere? What factors would you prioritize in this situation? Does it make sense to stay longer with option 3 to see how things develop?
Would love to hear your thoughts.
Comments
Taking 3 would be insanity considering all the hiring freezes and budget cuts. No one knows what the job market will look like in 2 years, but I assume it won’t be good.
Taking 1 or 2 is really up to you. Do you really care about having PhD students? Do you see yourself living in your home country, settling down there? Or is being in the US more important to you? This is a very personal decision.
In my opinion, Option 1 sounds like the best choice.
However, this will have to be a personal decision on your part. If you love the US and want some hope of staying there, then Option 2 would be better: in theory, you could stay, network, and work your way into a better R1 if the first job is not great.
On a more personal note, I took the one-way ticket out of the US. It took me several years to come to terms with the fact that I was really never going back. So whether you are ready to do that is something you will have to decide.
I am an American academic working in the UK. I would take 1. There is a real problem with universities in the US at the moment. Also I think there are legitimate concerns about the overall stability of the country
It’s your call. Timothy Snyder and Jason Stanley left for Canada.
I would go back to your home country. You have a good offer there.
It’s always a good time to leave. The system is set up to flush out 60-90% of the people at each promotion step. Now it’s going to be even higher because of the massive funding disruption.
I would think your field, area of study, and country you are from would play a huge role in this decision. Really hard to make recs without knowing that stuff. Generically, 1 is your best bet. 2 is your second best bet. 3 is a huge gamble even in the best of hiring years. I’ve watched too many great researchers take post docs and never get a full time offer. I’d typically always recommend a full time job over it, especially if you can continue to pursue your goals.
Postdoc option should be off the table. Option 2 is a possibility, you are not signing a life contract. Do well there and move to a place where you can have more impact. If you are good, option 1 will always be available.
What kind of position are you working toward? Many researchers looking for more independence primarily need research support. "Support" means enough money, time, and enough talent to do the work.
Obviously, some types of research are cheaper to fund, some people are energized by teaching, etc. But I would think about your dream job five years from now and consider what resources it requires. I would take the position that best supports that future position.
If you’re getting TTAP offers now from your home country, I strongly suspect you could get them again after a good two-year postdoc, but you know the market back home better than I do, and perhaps it fulfills your dream job characteristics.
Regarding that two-year postdoc, has the PI told you what happens if you perform well during those two years? Might there be extension to three or four? In those cases, does the PI have unrestricted/discretionary or foundation funds to weather downturns? Do you know what the "best case" papers look like from this postdoc? This could in fact be the most stable position of the three that sets you up best for the job you want.
With the low-ranked R1, are there recent hires who can give you a detailed picture of the kind of support they do and don’t receive? Prepping new courses can be incredibly time-intensive. Graduate students, especially new ones, can easily be more of a burden than a help. Do you know if you will be able to hire a good postdoc or work with good grad students in your first few years? I don’t just mean have the money — do you have postdoc candidates in mind who might follow or see good ones already at this R1? If not, will they give you enough startup and resources for you to produce excellent papers on your own so you can apply for other jobs in a few years? (Keep in mind that as a postdoc, you would have much more time for research than a new assistant professor.)
Random question, but is #2 WPI?
Go with option 1.
Sounds like you’d do option 3 in hopes of getting option 1 later. But you’ve already got option 1, so take it!
I think it is a great time to leave, and based on the information presented, option 1 seems most appealing.
You don’t give enough information.
Do you want to stay in the USA? What is your home country, and do you want to move back there? You talk about R1 and all that, but do you care about research more or teaching more?
without all the information, I’d say go with home country. That’s only because I’ve lived in 5 countries for academia and the one at that ranked last, even though I had a good time, is USA.
It’s hard to say without knowing which country option 1 is, but I’d most likely take it. Unless you think the post doc will land you at an even better position abroad, do you think your application is weak right now? Is that why you also applied to post docs?
Re:#1 Science in China is well funded, and obviously free-er than in the past on some axes, decidedly less so on others.
I would talk to Chinese academics in the US – not online, but in person! – about pressures their friends/colleagues experience at the moment in the chinese system re: metrics/incentives driving many many decisions, and what happens after v. generous startup runs out. There are real concerns there. There are probably others!
Can you share what field you’re in? I think the answer depends a great deal on that.
Without knowing anything specific about you I would recommend 3. As other people have stated, the offer from your home country is likely to be there for the foreseeable future and taking 3 gives you the best optionality.
As an aside, imo 47’s threat to academia is really overstated. And if we’re honest some reforms were needed. Fraud (and just plain bad science) is absolutely rampant in some areas and the funding model is hard to justify. That doesn’t mean that going about it in a chaotic and ham handed way is a good idea. But it is important to keep perspective.
If the US gets its shit together in 5-10y time then if you’ve published well from China I think there is a good chance you could come back to a nice position.
If the US hasn’t gotten its shit together by then… you made the right choice anyway.
If my family and most of my close friends weren’t in the US and I had a real opportunity to make a financially-smart move elsewhere, I would not hesitant for even a moment
Maybe the first option is the best, because in the foreseeing future, there will have more people facing the situation you have. So if you landed on a TTAP spot, better take it. Probably after the postdoc it will be more difficult to landed on your option 1.
I am an American academic of non-Chinese ancestry who works part time in China. I have a lot of Chinese colleagues who made the decision to return to China and many who have worked hard to move themselves and their families to USA. The most important considerations for most of them was which country they most wanted to live in and those considerations overshadowed the specific questions about careers. Some really wanted to be in their home country, near family, didn’t like being an immigrant in the USA, and weren’t bothered by concerns about China politics/limitations on freedoms like the Great Firewall. Others really wanted to leave China, felt much more comfortable in the USA, and thought their children would have a higher quality of life in the USA. The two countries are so very different, that I think you really need to do soul searching and weight your personal and family lifestyle preferences the highest. Do you want to (ultimately) be an American citizen of immigrant origins, or a Chinese citizen living in your home country? Do you like the American lifestyle (pros/cons including single family homes, urban street crime, car-dependency, high prices) or the Chinese lifestyle (pros/cons including apartments, crowds, high-speed rail, easily ordering food and services online at a cheap price, stressful educational system for your children)? What quality of life in each country will your salary allow you to afford? You mention below that you have a fiance — I would weight very highly what kind of life your fiance wants, and what life you want for your children (should you choose to have any). If you are going to have a life together you need to be on the same page.
I also have been informed and seen with my own eyes that the job contract quality for early career faculty in China has decreased markedly in the past decade. 10 years ago some colleagues were hired after postdocs abroad as full professors with job security and generous salaries and research support. Now colleagues returning from postdocs abroad are hired into much more precarious assistant professor situations. China has instituted a tenure system that they claim is based on the American system, but they are making the criteria very difficult and some I talk to think that the goal is to deny tenure to a fairly large proportion of faculty to make sure only the best are retained. I tell them that the American system was never that strict and except for a few universities only a small percentage fail to get tenure. Almost all the early career faculty I know are stressed, working even harder than in the past (basically they are always at work, 996 or even 997), and not optimistic about their career prospects. If you are going to take a job in China be sure you clarify any of these expectations and know exactly what they will be expecting from you and that they are reasonable expectations.
Finally, China is still doing a good job of funding science, better than the USA, especially in rich provinces like Guangdong. However, I also hear from colleagues that funding is getting tighter, and read about how the Chinese economy is stagnating. Therefore, make sure you take into consideration that things in China could change, as of course they have and may continue to do so in the USA.