"Hanging on in quiet desperation", to paraphrase Pink Floyd. That about sums up remaining in academia as an older scientist (over sixty) in some workplaces and universities. At my former workplace, there were many older scientists who were deemed unproductive by research leadership. That may have been true for one or two older scientists, but by and large the majority of older scientists were just as productive and had just as much motivation to do research, publish, and mentor PhD and Masters students as scientists half their age. But they seldom got the chance because research funding dried up and no matter how relevant they tried to make their grant applications, they were rejected. It often started when they were in their mid- to late-fifties and just continued. My question is why any older scientist in his or her right mind would want to hang around languishing in a workplace that no longer wants them or considers them productive? To languish is to be 'forced to remain in an unpleasant place or situation'. That describes the daily life of many older scientists. Of course I understand that not all cannot retire in their fifties (although I know teachers and civil servants who did just that, with good pensions to support them).
So what's an older scientist to do in an academic workplace that no longer
values him or her? He or she can hang on in quiet desperation and 'hope' for
more grant funding after having written grant application after grant
application ad nauseam. Good luck with that. 'Hope springs
eternal', as Alexander Pope said. Or the older scientist can hope for some good
will from research leadership, but I would say don't hold your breath. From
what I've seen and heard during the past decade, some of the research leaders
did nothing but badmouth the older scientists they deemed unproductive. They
disparaged them or poked fun at them; I know because I sat in on some of the
leader meetings and was witness to their behavior. Of course not all research
leaders were like this. But as karma would have it, one of those types of
leaders in my former workplace is now having problems getting funding for his research;
he's reached that crucial age when it all changes. And so it goes. Since he was
one of those leaders who actively disparaged his peers, I am very glad to hear
that he is now having problems of his own. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy as
we say in America.
Publish or languish. That is the
choice for many older tenured scientists. It becomes a catch-22 situation after
a while. If you no longer obtain funding for your research, you cannot attract
students nor will you be able to get technical help. You will end up working
alone in the lab, and it goes without saying that your research production will
slow down, you will publish much less, and that will go a long way toward
ensuring that you do not remain in the running for grant funding. And so it
goes. No grant funding, no students and no help, thus no publications and no
grant funding.
Do I have ready answers to this problem? I do not. I merely present it. It
used to be publish or perish, but nowadays it's publish or languish because so
many older scientists hang onto their tenured positions with every ounce of
strength they've got. Some who should have more self-insight refuse to
acknowledge that their time in the sun is over. For some it's an identity
problem; they simply cannot see themselves doing anything else other than research.
They've lived and breathed research their entire lives. My advice to academic
scientists who are approaching that crucial age when it all changes, is to take
a good long hard look around them, around their workplace. See if older
scientists are valued or if they are just pushed to the side and ignored. See
if there is subtle pressure on them to retire early. Just see how they're
treated, because guaranteed, once you reach their age, that is how you yourself
will be treated.
