Thread
Lovely replies on the upsides.

In case it is useful perspective for anyone else, here's part of how I managed the downsides as an ECR so that the upsides dominated my experience in academia.

Key downsides that needed managing for me: (a) dysfunctional culture that rewarded flashy findings over rigor and my core values, (b) extremely competitive job market, and (c) mysterious and seemingly life-defining "tenure"
In my 3rd year (~2000), I almost left grad school. Silicon valley was booming and calling. I was stressed, not sure that I could do the work. And I saw the dysfunctional reward system up close and wanted no part of that.

I didn't leave. I changed my perspective.
I decided that I would do science the way that I wanted to do it. If academia didn't want my way of doing it, then I would do something else interesting.

I had felt so much pressure to adapt my values to fit the reward system. Once I let go of that, my experience changed.
I was and stayed excited about the work I was doing. I pursued the problems that I thought needed to be solved, not what I thought would get me a publication or a job.

I was (still am) mad about the academic reward system, but it stopped shaping how I evaluated myself.
I liked the work I was doing. I liked learning about things I didn't know. I liked feeling befuddled about challenging problems. I liked the occasional insight, and wrestling with what I wanted to figure out next, and how.
The job market was stressful, but less about self-worth and more about opportunity to optimize passions.

The hardest part was feeling like a burden to my academic spouse. On the year we both went on the market, she was a star with offers from
Western, Waterloo, Missouri, Harvard, Virginia. I didn't get a single interview that year. And, it looked like none would hire me, except for a one year postdoc and no more commitment. Was I ruining her career opportunity by trying to get two jobs in the same place? That was hard
Backchannel feedback to my advisor from places I applied confirmed that I wasn't quite fitting the mold. I was a "techie" My prominent contribution was "just a website"

That made me mad not sad. I felt good about how I was doing my work and had my own vision for its importance.
Because of the earlier change in mindset, I was secure in my approach and if the academic culture didn't want me, then so be it. I'd do something else great.

Lucky for me, Virginia was able to bring me on as a spousal hire.
The same mindset carried me through early career and tenure process. My stress as an ECR was about how to do good work and not about tenure. In my third year review, the main criticism was that I work with my grad school advisors too much--the dreaded "show independence"
I ignored the feedback. Not because I was trying to be difficult, but because I loved the work I was doing with Tony and Mahzarin and because I thought it was the most important work that I could be doing right then. Why would I do something else?
When it came time to submit my materials for tenure review. I wrote them up, submitted them, and that was that. I didn't control anything other than doing my work in the best way I knew how, so I didn't spend time working about the things I didn't control.
The most healthy thing that I did to manage my key downsides of academia was to detach them from my self-worth.

Tenure worked out. But if it hadn't, I'd have been ok. I would have had more ammo for my rants about the reward system and then gone on to do something else great.
My grad school friends have had many different life outcomes. Some really wanted the academic life, others didn't. Some got that, others didn't.

All are living meaningful lives and doing work that is meaningful to them.
Mentions
See All