I was just reading a post by YoungFemaleScientist about the ratio of foreign-born to US-born scientists in this country.
Personally, I was much more surprised to note how few US-born scientists there are in the US. At all levels. We're not just less than half, we're on average only a quarter of the total scientists at the post-PhD levels.... In other words, most of our science faculty in the US are not from the US.YFS goes on to discuss possible reasons for the success of foreign-born scientists:
- "I can't help feeling like it's somehow perceived as more okay to be smart and professional if you have a cool accent...."--we use our accents to charm our way to the top
- "...or that it's somehow more permissible to occasionally make a mistake and blame it on English not being your first language?"--we use the language barrier as an excuse when we screw up and that gets us a free pass
- "Is this just a cultural perception that they work harder?"--we take advantage of the perception of immigrants as hard workers when we're really just slacking off all the time
- "Is this the 'my visa is running out' phenomenon I've blogged about before, where PIs prioritize which postdocs they promote based on who is most likely to be deported?"--we use our immigration sob stories to get sympathy promotions and jobs
The professors who interviewed me for grad school were so enthralled by my exotic accent they didn't even notice my 2.0 GPA and pathetic GRE scores. And what about the time I destroyed the ultracentrifuge in grad school and told my advisor I just didn't understand what the postdoc had said about balancing my samples? Not only did I not get in trouble, that postdoc got yelled at for not taking a poor foreign student under her wing.
Then when I was a postdoc, my PI was so predisposed to think of immigrants as hard workers that I had him completely convinced I was working 24/7 just by making sure he saw me in lab when he arrived in the morning and again when he left at the end of the day. And my promotion to faculty? Man, you should've seen the unshed tears gleaming in my PI's eyes when I told him about the sacrifices my parents had made so I could come to the US and build a new and better life for myself here.
So all of you foreign-born scientists out there, learn from my example and use your foreign status to climb your way to the top. Because the day we foreign-born scientists are right up there with THE MAN on YFS's list of those who have kept her from her rightful position atop academic research is the day we'll know we foreigners have made it in the good ol' U. S. of A.
Oh, and the title of YFS's post? "As an American, I'm a minority in my profession." Cuz only people who were born in America are real Americans.
[/rant]
46 comments:
I can totally see why this rubbed you the wrong way. That said, there may be a valid question underneath the self-interested sourness.
Africans from abroad do much better in terms of science-repersentation than African-Americans. Now, I have never doubted there is a huge amount of racial bias in this country so I think it's safe to say they were all discriminated against at times, but this fact does deserve some attention.
Immigrants of all stripes tend to be especially qualified and/or motivated (or they don't get selected to come here/overcome the hurdles we put up). So that's probably the key difference.
That said, which "sounds" smarter, a British or French accent (which many Africans have) or a Southern US or (*gasp*) "eubonics" manner of speech?
Who experiences (regardless of absolute income measures) wealth and priviledge compared to others in their society?
Becca--I agree that that is a valid and interesting question, but YFS's post was not written as an exploration of the disparities between African immigrants and African-Americans, or Asian immigrants and Asian-Americans, in science. Her post focused on how foreign-born scientists, in her view, have somehow stolen or usurped positions in academic research through no merit of their own. Those two things are very, very different.
And while I agree that many Americans I know think British or French accents "sound smarter", it's unlikely that the 75% of scientists who are foreign-born (according to YFS's numbers) all have smart-sounding accents. In fact, Asians are generally overrepresented in science relative to their representation in the general population, and I have never heard any American comment on how smart a Korean or Japanese or Chinese accent sounds. Or do Asians get ahead in science because they're supposedly all good at math???
Not sure I understand what you're getting at in your last sentence, but with regard to differences between foreigners and American-born people of the same ethnicity, one key difference is the environment in which they grew up. I suspect the mentality and confidence level of someone who experiences discrimination in the US as an adult immigrant, but grew up free from discrimination as a member of the ethnic majority, is quite different from that of someone who has experienced discrimination his/her entire life.
Mad Hatter: Thank you for blogging this! Now I do not have to ;-)
This is a great post, I was left speechless after reading recent Ms.PhD's post and this is a great rebuttal. Thanks!
BTW. I did not even know you are not American.
Oh FOR F**KS SAKE! You know, I'm not even going to go read the original post because I can't be bothered with this insane 'blame every other group in society for lack of sucess in academia' attitude of YFS.
Great rebuttle, yes,but where does she see other English as first language groups in this little xenophobic rant? They qualify under the 'cool accent' criterion perhaps?
Yeah, there is probably a valid question in all of this but surely it is answered by considering that scientists from other countries achieve mobility by being EXCEPTIONAL scientists. You don't land the postdoc/faculty position in a different country by being merely average. You have to be at the very top of your game to compete, particularly because of all the visa hassle going on.
By the way, there are many British accents that do not sound 'clever', sadly those are often associated with less priviledged areas of the UK and individuals from there are less likely to achieve.
You know, this issue has actually nothing to do with science per se. Italy does not have a scientific enterprise even remotely comparable to that if the US, but, by gosh, it has a far better soccer league. Teams are willing to pay top money to bring in the best players they can recruit, and for one reason or another, over the past decade the number of foreign players has exploded. The team currently leading Serie A (Inter Milan), does not field a single Italian player in its starting line-up.
I routinely have this discussion with my brother, who laments this process of "internationalization" of Italian soccer, and amazingly, I hear many of the same "arguments"-- foreign players get recruited because of their perceived technical ability (in reality often times dubious), they clog the system making it harder for domestic talents to succeed, they enjoy benevolent treatment from the press, willing to cut them some slackif they perform inadequately as they "need time to adjust to serie A's climate" and so on and so forth...
And of course, when one mentions simple, common sense facts, such as
1) recruiting is done by Italian presidents, managers and coaches
2) if a franchise has the financial means to recruit all over the world it will do so, in order to be at an advantage over competitors. Thus, odds are that there will be a talent in some other country that will be preferred to a domestic player.
one hears a litany of amusing (if a bit trite) pro-foreign-players conspiracy theories.
Now, interestingly, what do Italian players do, whose spot is taken away by a foreign born player ? There are two categories: some, typically the good ones (e.g., Gianfranco Zola), simply accept the challenge and find a spot for themselves in some foreign league, including prestigious ones like the Spanish or the British.
The others... well, theywhine. Sounds familiar ?
YFS' rant is as stupid as Geraldine Ferraro's comment about Obama's "advantages" from being a black man.
Because the day we foreign-born scientists are right up there with THE MAN on YFS's list of those who have kept her from her rightful position atop academic research is the day we'll know we foreigners have made it in the good ol' U. S. of A.
HAHAHAHAHAHAH!
The thing you have to understand about YFS is that she is absolutely convinced that she is smarter than everyone around her, and that the only reason that people don't recognize that fact is that they are stupid, ignorant, or collaborators with the "system" that fails to recognize her brilliance.
I liked Massimo's analogy, although in general terms it is not completely accurate. In my experience, most foreign-born scientists that are hired as faculty members in the US generally have done their graduate and postdoc work in the US, i.e., have lived here for at least 7 yrs. In other instances, faculty members have obtained their doctoral degrees at top notch institutions in non-US universities, but have postdoc'd in the US. Very few junior faculty members are hired directly from other countries.
If anything, it has always be my sense from search committees on which I have served that US-born scientists (or at least native English speakers) applying for faculty positions in institutions with a significant teaching component (read introductory level classes) actually have an advantage. It is perceived that they will have good communication skills. Of course this is not always the case.......
I agree with Propter Doc. Foreign scientists are not an unbiased sample, - they are exceptional in many ways. The most important might be that they were willing to give up their home (social circle, family, cultural identity, save language ect.) for their job, - that is how much it means to them. The foreign scientists YFS should compare herself with are the ones that stayed home, while she should compare the foreign scientists in the US with US citizens that went abroad.
I often get angry about such ideas, but I am afraid that people that have never lived abroad just can't grasp what it takes. Especially not if there is a new language/culture involved.
Great advice Mad Hatter, I will go forth and become more foreign fortwith!
Seriously, I am speechless, it seems like Ms.PhD has a massive chip on her shoulder. Maybe someone should tell her that if she is a minority because of being foreign, then she has a much better shot at all those NIH grants, particularly at the postdoc level, that none of us free-riders can apply for.
This is a great response to a post that has a. no basis in fact and quantitative data! and b. is as CPP put it kindly xenophobic.
Good on you.
The stats are readily available at the NSF for anyone to read:
Of the full rank Professors in Science and Engineering, 68% are white and male, 24% are white females, and a mere 1.3% are black and female. Asian females do a little better coming in at 1.5%.
Even when you look at Assistant Professors (because these likely represent new hires) 44% are white and male and 30% are made up of white females. Three percent are Asian females and 2.2% are black females.
If you want to read more I've written several posts:
http://girlpostdoc.blogspot.com/search/label/diversity%20in%20science
Ah, come on Mad Hatter, you make it sound so easy! Surely, there was more to it than just waltzing in and collecting the offers. I mean, sure, search committees routinely give interviews to all applicants whose visa are running out, but then you still have to beat the other foreigners. You should write a book on "How to tell a convincing deportation sob story" and stuff!
(As a lengthy aside: One thing one has to say about the US scientific system is that it discriminates less against foreigners than many other countries do. Granted, part of this may be language (most scientists know English, not so many know, say, French), part of it may be that other Academic systems are just not as attractive, but still. Not, of course, in the sense that foreigners actually have it easier than Americans in the US, but I think it is easier for nationals from many countries to become a professor in the US than it would be for an American in their countries.)
I NEVER SAID these people weren't qualified.
I make NO CLAIM that people who aren't otherwise QUALIFIED are getting ahead BECAUSE of their accents.
I am blogging this as a hypothesis, and you don't even want to have an open discussion.
You're the one who's making it into hyperbole, not me.
Um Ms PhD, just out of curiosity:
If
"I can't help feeling like it's somehow perceived as more okay to be smart and professional if you have a cool accent, or that it's somehow more permissible to occasionally make a mistake and blame it on English not being your first language?"
is NOT to be taken to mean that the writer thinks that less qualified people (the ones making mistakes) get an advantage out of English not being their first language, then what is it supposed to mean? (See, English is my third language, so I may have trouble understanding you.)
Granted, you only write that you think ("I can't help feeling", funny way to present a "hypothesis", BTW) that (a) capable foreigners have an advantage due to their accent and (b) foreigners making mistakes get a break because of the language barrier. You did indeed not write that "people who aren't otherwise QUALIFIED are getting ahead BECAUSE of their accents." But then, neither did Mad Hatter claim that you had written exactly that. She just cited you verbatim.
(See, English is my third language, so I may have trouble understanding you.)
Oh, you such a showoff !
Ms.PhD--You wrote:
"Among the students from my graduate school, it's mostly those who came from outside the US (I'm not saying 'overseas' because I'm including Canada) who are getting interviews now. What's up with that? I don't see any obvious correlations with publications, creativity, or any other measure that should correlate with productivity or potential for success."
True, you don't state that they are unqualified, merely that you don't see any evidence that they are more qualified than US-born scientists. But for someone who spends a great deal of time writing about the insidious ways in which gender discrimination can manifest itself, you should be able to perceive the obvious insinuations in your statements.
What if a male scientist says of a female scientist who receives tenure, "Well, I don't see anything obvious that makes her more deserving of tenure than the male scientist who didn't get tenure. I can't help feeling that perhaps it's because she's really pretty"? I think you and I both know we'd be all over the sexist implications of that statement, and rightfully so.
You don't get to rail against this kind of discrimination only when you're the target, and expect to be able to dish it out to other demographic groups without being called on it.
Massimo, sure I am. See, not everyone has your stunningly good looks, and I have to compensate!
Massimo, sure I am. See, not everyone has your stunningly good looks
Oh for chrissake, I told you I am not the referee of your paper ! You won't believe me, will ya...
MadHatter, you hit the nail on the head. The statements I get about the "advantages" of being foreign are exactly the same statements I get about the "advantages" of being female. Call a spade a spade!
Thanks, everyone, for your comments!
DrL--Guess I'll have to work on appearing more foreign, huh? :-)
Propter Doc--I think you're absolutely right that scientists who land positions abroad are the ones who are exceptional. Do you think non-British people can readily discern the various regional British accents? By the way, I don't think I've had the chance to tell you how nice it is to have you back in the blogosphere!
Massimo--Oh, there are definitely parallels to many other industries. Sadly, anti-immigration arguments are always largely the same, regardless of the specific context in which they are framed.
CPP--Ya know, that comment you left looks strangely familiar...like maybe I've seen it recently at Candid Engineer's place. Dude, are you recycling your comments?!
Fia--I agree it's difficult for people who haven't lived abroad to understand how challenging and bewildering the language and cultural barriers can be. As if succeeding in science weren't hard enough without those added difficulties!
An Indian Abroad--"I will go forth and become more foreign fortwith!"--that totally cracked me up! :-)
Schlupp--Hey, great to see you again! Yeah, it's been such a piece of cake. Just wait till you hear about my plan to get all my grants funded by spelling everything according to British instead of American convention! By the way, if you're going to inflate Massimo's ego by commenting on his stunningly good looks, you should not neglect to mention his incredible prowess with household appliances. ;-)
ScienceGirl--Wouldn't it be great if you could make those people switch places with you and live with your "advantages" for a while? Although you probably wouldn't want to be them for that period of time....
I am speechless at YFS's assertions.
It's *easier* for foreign-born Ph.Ds to get faculty positions?! Girlpostdoc's statistics sound about right to me--although the preponderance of postdocs in the biological sciences are foreign-born, the preponderance of tenure-track faculty I've seen *in every single department I've worked in* have been U.S. born citizens. The Asian-born scientists I know all say it's harder for them to get positions because they cannot speak and write English as fluently as native speakers. I would tend to think that's right--a thick "exotic" accent and difficulty with English grammar are not exactly advantages when it comes to selling your work at a conference or writing a grant. And of course, the fact that foreign nationals are not eligible for training grants and most forms of NIH support also make it more difficult for them to compete. They also have visa issues that restrict mobility and options if they find themselves in a bad situation. And let's not even bring up the possibility of racism when it comes to getting hired in the U.S. system--or indeed, of racism at lower levels of the scientific enterprise (No, I'm not going there). But foreign-born, non-native English speaking scientists have an advantage in the U.S.?
Uhh, yeah. Next thing you know, YFS is going to claim that having children gives some women scientists a terrible, unfair advantage compared to scientists like herself.
My personal observations are that foreign-born, non-citizen scientists who are able to attain faculty positions in U.S. overcome a number of barriers to do so, and are extraordinarily talented people.
You go, Mad Hatter!
YFS is in some mental state where she feels she is a superstar and if others get ahead in their careers where she does not, then it must be due to some unfairness, not her qualifications. In my field there are even affirmative action programs for US citizens and permanent residents to get postdoc and grad fellowships. And the thought that people from say mainland China have an advantage on the job market is pretty laughable. Yeah, that professor over there, he was hired only because of his thick Chinese accent that made him so endearing!
I think American students and postdocs like MsPhD deserve some sympathy, since if they want to find an academic job at a research uni in their home country then they are competing not just against the best from their own country but from the whole world.
As for the suggestion that Americans can go find uni jobs in other countries, it must be emphasized that Schlupp's "lengthy aside" above is resoundingly correct. Whereas the US unis (at least the major ones) are looking to hire the best researchers they can get regardless of where they come from, Americans who go looking for jobs abroad are unlikely be competing on a level playing field with the locals.
In some cases it is simply a language issue. E.g., how attractive is it going to be for a German uni to hire an American who can't teach in German? (Germans in USA don't face the same problem, having become fluent in English from learning it in school and general exposure to US/English culture - movies, pop music etc.)
Those who are more adventurous (or desperate), and go looking for opportunities in developing or recently developed parts of the world, are likely to encounter the following reaction:
"In principle we are open to hiring foreigners, but in practice we are only interested in hiring foreigners who don't want to work here, since if they were willing to work here it would a sign that they weren't any good and therefore we don't want them."
However, for foreigners who are willing to take jobs not at the top level unis in these countries, but at sufficiently small and obscure ones, and with sufficiently low pay compared to western standards, then yes there are jobs to be found.
think American students and postdocs like MsPhD deserve some sympathy, since if they want to find an academic job at a research uni in their home country then they are competing not just against the best from their own country but from the whole world.
The reason why they are in this predicament is because their government and country invest in research more than the rest of the world. I will take any day over what I left, for example, in my country of origin, where there would not have been any competition of any kind -- the job would have gone to the person next in line (surely someone from that city, having studied at that very university), regardless of ability.
oh thanks for ranting a bit about this! I posted some comments on the origianl post since I felt it was a bit of confusion there.
Now you addressed most of my issues so I can refrain from adding my rants on my blog.
I guess I can't say that "all post docs who move to the US are excellent" although I do think you can say that "all post docs who move to the US are either excellent in their field, wanting to get a job or desperate to work hard with whatever the PI wants you to".
(I'd like to see myself as somewhere in between those categories since I'm hesitant to call myself excellent.)
I got mostly confused about the "foreign" thing since I think that most people in facutly are citizens but of course I forgot that even if you do your undergrad/PhD in the states and then become a US citizen you are not a true American. Maybe I wouldn't had been as annoyed if it would have said "educated abroad compared to PhD from the US" but then agai, I don't think the argument would have worked....
/end of rant
.... but thinking a bit more, maybe the post docs who end up in the US are more than average back home?!?! And therefore supporting the throey that it is hard to be average in the US as an American?
I personally think there is more to the old "Americans with a PhD don't see the point of slaving in a lab as a post doc for 20 000 a year and no health insurance" After all, who really thinks that is a reasonble wage:work ratio?!?!?
Bean-mom--As always, you say exactly what I'm thinking, just much more eloquently! But wait...you don't think having kids totally gave you the edge in getting your job??? :-)
Anon--Affirmative action programs for US citizens and permanent residents? Really? Now I'm really curious about what field you're in.
Ancient Physics Postdoc--You make a good point about how hard it can be to succeed when one has to compete against the best from multiple countries. But isn't getting the best scientists regardless of where they're from better for science than making it a protected national industry?
Chall--I'm always happy to rant on behalf of other people who agree with me! Although that certainly shouldn't stop you from writing your own rant as well. :-)
"But isn't getting the best scientists regardless of where they're from better for science than making it a protected national industry?"
Yes, definitely! That's why America remains nr. 1. I wasn't suggesting it should be changed, only that American postdocs deserve a bit of sympathy on this count.
Now that I think about it, maybe it would also be good if some pressure was applied to foreign countries to open their university job markets more and allow Americans and others to compete with locals on a level playing field, just like in USA.
Ancient Physics postdoc:
Being in Germany for the last ten years I have worked in five cities and six univerities/institutes/companies. In that time I have worked with one American but five English, two Irish and three Australians (not to mention all the other non-native German speakers). The Americans I met at conferences were generally shocked at the idea of leaving their own country - "What for? We're the best!"
It is no more impossible to apply for and get a job in another country than it is for the US and their job markets ARE open for it - but here you have to speak German to get group leadership/tenure (phd/postdoc is no problem. I came here with none and learnt it). THAT is no more discriminatory than the American job market which insists on a working knowledge of English.
When I saw MsPhD’s post all I could do was roll my eyes at yet another obstacle that she perceives to be preventing her elevation to junior faculty. I left a comment to that effect but I doubt she’ll post it as we’ve locked horns before.
As a white, female, non-American citizen/resident who originally came to the US for a postdoc, I obviously got my current junior faculty position because they didn’t want to hire an American [<-- sarcasm]. I’m sure my successful job search had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the 9 first author publications I have … or the 20+ conference presentations/posters, 9 awards/prizes, extensive (15yrs+) teaching experience, enthusiasm or great communication and interpersonal skills. In all seriousness, the bottom line is that I was the most qualified, best suited, most experienced person for this position.
In reality, it would have been substantially easier for my current school to have hired an American because it cost them a pretty penny to transfer my H-1B work visa and it’s going to cost them an arm a leg plus a shit-ton of time for me to get permanent residency/green card as that’s the only way I’ll be able to stay in the US long enough for them to see a return on their initial investment. Throughout all of these processes, the school constantly has to PROVE that I was more qualified for this position than ANY of the American applicants … I’m talking about pages and pages of written justifications, including showing the ranking sheets from the search process, search committee comments, faculty/student comments from my interview presentation etc. Hiring a Damned Foreigner for a faculty position isn’t something that is taken lightly.
And as an aside, my accent probably did go some way towards charming the search committee and faculty! Both they and my students think my accent’s exotic … my parents don’t.
Ancient Physics Postdoc--I think it would be fantastic if scientific research in all countries were more international. But as you pointed out in your earlier comment, language fluency can be a problem.
Dr. J--For many research institutions in the part of the world where I'm from, doing a PhD or postdoc abroad is viewed as being prestigious and is an advantage in getting faculty positions. I don't think this is true for American research institutions. Perhaps this lack of incentive is one reason American scientists don't often apply for positions abroad.
PiT--Yeah, me too. I don't usually respond to her posts, but this one made my blood boil. I think most Americans have no idea how much paperwork it takes for a foreigner to be employed here. Good for you for getting that job!
Dr J,
Interesting to hear your perspective on Germany. For postdocing, doing research, and working in companies I would expect their job market is completely open to foreigners. But I imagined that for faculty jobs at universities they would generally prefer people who can teach in German. That's just my speculation though.
It's possible to get a snapshot of the situation for faculty hirings in my field in Germany by looking at the following jobs shortlist rumor page:
http://members.fortunecity.com/gasdrumor/
The large majority of the names on the lists seem to be Germanic/Nordic, but also a few foreign ones in there.
I was a postdoc in the Netherlands at one point, and the environment there at postdoc level was very international: the majority were non-Dutch (including English and Australian, but I don't remember that there was anyone from USA). However, at faculty level it was completely different: they were nearly all Dutch in my department. At one point there was a faculty opening there and the job went to a Dutch guy who had done his PhD and postdocs at illustrious unis in USA. That is of course just one data point, but my feeling is it might be typical.
MadHatter - you're right that American's don't see it as prestigous. Which means it's not about opening up foreign markets, but opening up the US mindset to working in foreign countries.
Ancient physics postdoc (can I just call you APP?) - Interesting list (I used to work at DESY!), it looked like on every short list at least half were coming from a previous position internationally. The names are predominantly German, and I also pick a number to be northern European (which, if they are, are non-German speakers).
I still don't understand why everyone gets upset about having to work and teach in German. OF COURSE you have to - it's Germany! No one is going to hire a foreigner in the US and say "Sure, teach in Polish.. the kids'll love it!". Yes, Northern Europeans are a step ahead because they learnt English at school but why should you expect other nations to let you teach in your native tongue when you won't let them?
From everything I've been told by colleagues (yes, I'm on anecdotal evidence with this, like most others here it seems) you don't have a hope of getting a tenure position in the US without at least a postdoc, but usually having also done your PhD there. That sounds pretty much like here, so why do you think there should be different rules?
Dr. J,
It's fine to call me APP (or app). Interesting that you worked at Desy - I've been there, but only briefly. Hamburg is a nice city.
I don't think there's a problem of people not wanting to work and teach in German. Personally I'd be happy to, and I'm sure many other English speakers on the job market would as well if offered a faculty job there.
My question though is how willing the German universities would be to hire a foreigner who needs a number of years to learn German before he/she can teach. I've heard of this happening, but only in special cases where a specific foreigner was recruited for a specific reason. I suspect that if German universities were willing to do this in general then there would be a lot more English names on the shortlists on that website I mentioned. There are many English speakers who do a postdoc in Germany these days, but most don't manage to learn German to any high level during the 2 years they are there (my impression) and move on to somewhere else afterwards.
About the Northern Europeans on the lists, I expect they are already proficient in German since it is taught to a high level in the schools in those countries. (E.g., the Danes and Dutch I know are just as fluent in German as they are in English.)
As for getting faculty jobs in USA, I can think of a few examples of people in my field who got those after having spent their entire previous research career in Europe. But it is true that in most cases it is people who were phd students or postdocs there beforehand. I'm sure that helps, since then they will be better known in the US research community.
The question that leads onto is whether foreigners who do phd or postdoc in other countries are able to compete with the locals of that country on the same level playing field as in USA. As someone whose phd and postdocs were all done in foreign countries (on 4 different continents), my personal impression was always that locals had an advantage for faculty jobs, except in USA where it seemed completely open. Admittedly it's hard to be completely objective about that though...
In terms of the language issue: the statement you just made doesn't really change my point at all. US uni's don't hire someone at tenure level before they can speak English and then give them a few years to learn it either. So in regards to that it's the same here and there.
As to the postdocs already here: Call me unreasonable if you want, but my personal opinion is if English speaking scientists working in foreign countries don't bother learning the local language well enough to teach in it then they can't complain about not being able to get tenure in those countries.
As to the US being more open: in the end you are probably right that is more common to have non-USians in tenure in the US than here. I still would put forward the theory that that is more due to language issues than to European uni's being less open. From what I understand of your answers, your call to make European uni's more open is actually a call to make them all speak English.
And as to Hamburg: it is a lovely city (although not as good as Berlin ;) ), but you're not missing anything in avoiding the DESY canteen for lunch!
"As to the postdocs already here: Call me unreasonable if you want, but my personal opinion is if English speaking scientists working in foreign countries don't bother learning the local language well enough to teach in it then they can't complain about not being able to get tenure in those countries."
I think it depends... For each of my foreign postdocs I made it clear from the beginning to the people there that I was very interested in the possibility of a subsequent faculty position in the country. If the feedback had been "learn our language and then you will have a chance" I would have done so. But the actual feedback wasn't like that at all, at least not in the western countries. There seemed to be an expectation that the foreign postdocs would move on after their 2 years was up, and that if they did manage to find a faculty position it would be back in their home country.
"From what I understand of your answers, your call to make European uni's more open is actually a call to make them all speak English."
Certainly not! As mentioned previously, I would personally be happy to learn a foreign language to get a faculty job in a foreign country, and I expect many other job seekers would as well.
But I think maybe you are underestimating how tough it is to master a foreign language from scratch to the point of being able to teach in it. For random reasons I ended up doing my undergrad/masters degree in a Scandinavian country, and it was at least 3 years before I was anywhere near fluency. (Fortunately maths and physics is mostly equations, not too much language needed.) After 4 years, when I was instructor for a tutorial class, some students complained of "language difficulties"... Maybe others with more language talent could learn it quicker. But to expect a typical postdoc to be able to master a foreign language within 2 years, while they are under huge pressure to be continually doing research and pumping out papers, is frankly unrealistic.
My host at Desy actually apologized about the canteen! Not that it was *that* bad...
MadHatter> I ended up with a short short rant and a link here ;)
It was actually more in regards to translation issues and language as well as a run in with [an american professor who professed some 'truths' about women and science, or rather, men in science] reality.
I can totally sympathize with the anti-xenophobic rant, and I think GirlPostdoc is on spot with the stats. American-borns probably do have an advantage in the US TT job market. However, when you are fighting to stay in the science that you've spent over almost two decades training for, it can be a wee bit irritating to have to compete with every other scientist on the planet to get a job in your own country. Especially when other countries have an explicit favoritism for their natives; i.e, the job ads for Canadian positions state outright, "We prefer Canadian citizens" (is this reasonable? yes, because otherwise Canadians fear they would be outcompeted for jobs in their home country). And at least several European countries have extremely insider-tracked job systems (which I know from folks native to these countries who essentially had to get jobs in the US because they were outside the 'system'). I have no problems with the language requirements - but it's nearly impossible for most adults who have never been fluent in a second language to pick up a foreign language on top of the work required to get a TT job - especially when everyone switches to English on you!
Chall - nobody said someone who was born elsewhere, but raised and naturalized here are any less American - just people who were born, raised & schooled elsewhere & came here as adults who have citizenship from where they were born are perhaps a little less American, hm? Foreigner is not a dirty word.
Especially when other countries have an explicit favoritism for their natives
Anon: read my comment about the amount of paperwork and the associated costs that schools have to do in order to employ foreign workers. There IS an "explicit favoritism" in the US to employ Americans as faculty and I don't have a problem with this at all - it's the way it should be. But if the best candidate is non-American and the search committee is adamant that nobody else will do, they still have to justify their decision not to hire an American to the university in order to be able to make them an offer ... and the school then has to go out of their way to help them get the appropriate visa in order to be able to work.
I'd be interested to see if there were more scientists and faculty per capita in the US than there is in most other countries. Even though funding levels are low, there's certainly more research opportunities here than most other countries regardless of how many non-Americans are employed in this sector.
Late to the party here... great post, MadHatter! And this is why I don't read YFS' blog...
Regarding the statement about preferring Canadian citizens and permanent residents: that's not just in academia, you'll see it in job ads in just about every sector here. I think it's a federal government requirement.
Anon 12:27 here -
PiT - I don't believe for a minute that the fact that you may have to provide posthoc justification & paperwork after hiring a foreign national remotely impairs that person's chances at getting hired. Does not qualify as explicit favoritism because it does not impact the selection process. Everyone knows you can tweak the requirements to suit the hired; just as we all provide "human health" justification on our grants. Someone on a Canadian search committee would have to comment on whether 'Canadians preferred' translates into a true advantage for Canadians candidates.
Anon: you clearly aren't familiar with the quantity of paperwork, time, effort and cost involved in hiring a foreign national - it's not just a matter of filling in a form to justify your selection. All I'm saying is that if it comes down to a choice between two equally good candidates, the search committee is more likely to favor the American citizen/resident because it's easier and cheaper ... and because that's the way it SHOULD be.
Chall--Sweet! I'll be right over to check out your rant!
Anon 12:27--I think Chall was being sarcastic in response to my sarcasm (last paragraph of my post), which was in response to YFS' exclusion of foreign-born American citizens in her use of the term "American".
Cath--Thanks! I know...I should stop, but it can apparently inspire me to blog more.... :-)
I'm so glad you commented on YFS's post. I was partially raised in Germany, go to Universität there and was born in America by a Croatian mother. I'm a foreigner whereever I go.
Had YFS written this post on a German blog, there would have only been one reply:
NAZI!!!!
Sorry about that... I was really upset and now I can't erase my post. I should learn not to take things so personal. Sorry.
dieFremde--Don't worry about it. I think that post probably upset a lot of people. I can delete your comment for you if you'd like, but it's totally up to you. Thanks for commenting!
Post a Comment