If there is such an “undersupply”, then why do physicists have such trouble getting jobs? I’ve known so many people who’ve struggled in the job market.
George

So what changed from the late 80s when all my Physics friends couldn’t find jobs? I recall extended series of post-docs, job hopping around the world, despair and angst. Perhaps that killed the perception the Physics was a good career choice, and in the meantime enough Physicists have retired to reopen the market?

I know when I was a physics student (undergrad and grad) we never heard much about career tracks other than grad student-postdoc-assistant faculty-tenured faculty. We were subtly and not-so-subtly steered in that direction, and it was implied that anyone choosing another career path after graduation (B.S., M.S. or Ph.D.) was “giving up on the field.” The people that I know struggling to find jobs are those searching for the rare, coveted faculty positions. Others that have moved farther afield are having more success. Perhaps some education - even informal - for students about wider options would help dispel the notion that the job market is terrible?

I was going to reply to everybody’s comments but think that Katie’s response is pretty much what I was going to say, and it is something that Ted Hodapp mentioned in his session also.

Roughly 1/8 of physics undergraduates go on to obtain PhDs but many physics departments give an impression, either intentionally or implied by their other actions and comments, that the only worthwhile outcome from a physics undergraduate degree is a PhD and an academic career.

The anecdotal evidence I have is similar to Katie’s. The people I know having trouble finding work are the ones on the academic track, but I don’t know any other physics grads having trouble finding work. Of course, the experience of people I know isn’t data, but it is consistent with what the studies say.

I think that education about wider options is a very good idea, but first you have to convince faculty in physics departments that there is a life outside the academic track and that they shouldn’t be dissuading people from finding it.

I think everyone missed the point of the article. It’s not adressing the issue of job placement, but rather the downfall of enrollment of undergrads. I know that places that focus fundamentally on research and development, ie NASA, are in a frenzy because something like 60 percent of the workforce is able to retire in the next 10 years. I’m currently a physics undergrad at a school of 25,000 students…there are 70 physics majors on campus as of now. That is a problem. As for the statement that mostly everyone with a BS in physics wants to do academia: that is partially true. The main reason why people want to go into acadmia is simply because they want to do research that has long term goals. The reason why one is attracted to physics in the first place it to be able to study the laws of nature, and where is one able to do solely that?…academia. I know that a lot of used-to-be research and development companies are now turning towards NOW NOW NOW research..that is, they only want activites that focus on what can be used right now rather than something that takes a few years to fully understand, then use it.

I feel that one should ultimately look at where every major discovery had started (cough, physics) and reconsider your harshful statemants. When the study of physics and natural sciences loses ground, like what is happening right now, we will all see the standard of living drop…significantly.

Shortage of physicists? What shortage? The invisible hand of the employment market doesn’t signal any shortage!

When physicists — with all their special education — make as much money as lawyers, there will be real evidence of a shortage. And then maybe students will clamor to get physics degrees instead of going to law school!

Until then, professional society hand-wringing should be seen as nothing more than lobbying for their own aggrandizement.

Finally, the opportunity areas you list — radiology, nuclear engineering, etc. — are really opportunity areas for engineers and computer programmers. Why get a physics degree if you’re going to program? Just cut to the chase and get a CS degree.

Jason said: “The APS is laser-focused on getting students to enter the graduate degree track without planning for the end result other than ‘get on the tenure track or you are a failure.’”

I absolutely agree that many physics academics only promote the academic career track. I haven’t seen the APS “laser-focused” on that, however. The people speaking at the meeting from AAPT/APS were explicitly pushing for academic faculty to change the story they tell students about possible careers to more than just the option of the academic career track. The prescription you recommend of “turning out folks who look at how to apply what they’ve learned to many fields outside academia” is exactly what was being espoused in this session.

David, my apologies for not being clear. Given your summation, the only statement I *can* agree with is the struggles of school administrators to hire high school teachers. I hold today’s teachers in high regard — no one works harder for less money and appreciation by society than they do — but I don’t want to join them.

At the SB meeting, there was a rather spirited session about undergraduate enrollment and jobs for Physics PhDs. The same line was pitched then, “lack of students.” When many in the room, faced with the post-doc merry-go-round and the elusive brass ring of tenure, were asking “where are the jobs?”

I would say that undergraduate enrollment is as close to a textbook free market economy that you can find. If there is a demand (jobs at the end), then there is enrollment.

Call me a cynic (my Mother would), but the physics departments aren’t focused on undergraduate teaching (that’s what TAs are for) but instead on cheap labour. I remember my own advisor calling me into his office to ask me why I hadn’t applied for this “ideal” post-doc position. The look or horror on his face sticks with me when I said, “I have a job at (large corporation) why would I take a post-doc for a third the salary?” I got a fantastic education but I’ll tell you I got it despite the environment and entrenched philosophy of every professor and department I interacted with.

I have watched many of my friends from grad school struggle with deep seated feelings of “failure” because they were not on the tenure track. Some of them are highly successful in their jobs but to this day, they see themselves as having fallen short.

Riley,
As a current undergrad at Caltech, I would argue that Jason’s idea of a physics education seems to be colored by his own experiences. There are plenty of physics undergraduates here who don’t even go on to grad school. I can see why some might feel a sense of failure at failing to achieve those tenured faculty positions. After spending a good decade of your life working at one subject and doing research, it’s only natural to want to get to the highest point of the system, a tenured professor. Those people were probably in love with the idea of academic research, and to end up doing something else is naturally disappointing. A physics degree is not really limiting. There are many people, (especially if you take the appropriate electives and show your interest in a field), who either go on to grad school in some form of engineering, (usually EE), or even get a “normal” job right out after school. An astrophysics major (at least at Caltech) might limit you more because of the larger number of course requirements in fields that have little outside impact, (e.g., The Evolution of Galaxies) as opposed (e.g., Applications of Quantum Mechanics)

“I have noticed that my CS teacher has a lot more to say about the success of his former students who pursued degrees in CS than my Physics teacher has to say about his former students… I’m also concerned about Jason’s most recent post that suggests that Physics profs will treat me as “cheap labor” in undergraduate research positions.”
Well I won’t argue with that. “Success” after a CS degree, is often working for Google, MS, etc. The notion of success for a physics degree is usually doing groundbreaking research at XYZ university. Moreover, as the article says, there are simply far fewer physics undergrads than CS undergrads. Therefore the likelihood of you hearing about one of them is somewhat low. And, (at least here), you will in some ways be cheap labor for the professors. But you do get to do your own work (you have to do a SURF presentation after all), which however, does usually relate to the professor’s research. But I’ve never heard any undergrads complain about being forced to do excessive amounts of work.

“For a student who loves research but also likes practical applications, does Physics have more to offer than other fields?”
It depends on the balance between research and practical applications. As you lean more towards the applications side you become an engineer, towards research, a physicist. If you seem to be straddling the boundary between the two, you could become a Applied Physics major. They do research into quantum optics, plasma physics, and other more materials science related areas. They have a strong connection with EE as well, since they know how transistors and other devices actually work. But I really can’t see much of an overlap between CS and physics (other than maybe quantum computation). (Although, there are some physics professors who basically spend much of their time working on high speed networks to transfer data to and from the LHC.) CS at Caltech is extremely theoretical. It’s basically a math major with courses tailored towards computation. Plenty of CS majors go on to industry though, but it’s definitely possible to research as a CS major as well, just not research in physics.

btarlinian:
nice reply. very well said.

riley:
don’t listen to jason, like btarlinian said, it is probably his experience that he is reflecting on. a major in physics is a VERY job applicable thing. not only are you mathematically and scientifically inclined, you also build awesome problem solving skills. when you are looking for jobs, a lot of businesses hire physicist simply because they are able to look at a problem and break it down in a rational and logical manner. im currently an undergrad and have a research position with NASA and i am having a blast. yeah my research is guided by my advisor and goes along with what he is doing, but he allows for me to make my own decisions and conduct myself in the lab and on the computer. that goes for a lot of research physicists as well. i would recommend any person that is contemplating a major in physics to go with that simply because you will be able to do anything an engineer can do, plus more (physics research and non-science careers).

More rants on physics as career choice:
As long as there are no ads in the paper, and actual job offers to physics degree holders at salaries comparable to similar professionals, American undergraduates are realistic in not choosing this field.
But, indeed, people with a B.S. in physics are all very successful,
–> if they leave physics Hence physics departments should keep in touch with their alumni working in industry, so as to offer contacts to job-seeking graduate at any level.
- Even if you are a successful industrial physicist, you’ll be aware that the chief legal officer (and, of course, chief financial officer) of most companies makes more than the chief technology officer or chief engineer, although the latter needs to have some ingenuity to come up with actual products that sell.

Perhaps the advantage of physics is that it attracts people who really like the field, and are willing to live in genteel poverty in exchange for being able to ponder the secrets of the universe. But one has to admit that this motivation will not attract too many people, and of those still pursuing it, their motivation changes over time, say once they want to have a family and pay a mortgage.

————————
[1] E.g. with a B.S. in physics you are more likely to be
admitted to medical school than the average pre-med. (And,
as long as you pass the State Board, an M.D.’s income exceeds that of a Ph.D. physicist in industry, or your professor.)
[2](This was brought home to me by a very good minority undergraduate whom my school tried to recruit as a graduate student; he pointed out that - being the first in his family to get higher education - he’d go to med school, so that he’d be assured of a good job paying enough so he could assure the college education of his smaller brothers, rather than being a subsistence-wage post-doc or lecturer 7 years later).

If these jobs are not filled, they will one way or another be outsourced to other countries. Therefore, for those of us with a physics degree, fewer competitors in the job market do not translate into more job opportunities.

Outsourcing is not possible in the case of e.g lawyers, which is one reason why you’ll see stakeholder organisations in the natural sciences (like the APS) plead for more students to fill their ranks, but not hear it from organisations representing lawyers.

A corollary of outsourcing is that the “invisible hand” others mentioned will not necessarily raise our salaries nor fill magazines with job ads.