212 CAREER ADVICE FOR LIFE SCIENTISTS II
tion from and are very successful in their
research contributions.
The biggest single burden nontraditional
faculty endure compared to other faculty is
lack of job security. Contracts for these posi-
tions are typically one to three years, and
sometimes less, since salary funds are usual-
ly soft money, dependent upon grant fund-
ing. While more and more academic institu-
tions are moving away from tenure and
toward such rolling contracts, these colleges
and universities remain the exception rather
than the rule. There is also often ambiguity in
evaluating one’s success in these nontradi-
tional positions, although it almost always
reflects a combination of the usual research,teaching and service. Nonetheless, institu-
tions utilize extensive latitude in evaluating
performance in these positions, and some-
times this vagueness can be intentional in
order to be able to eliminate positions or to
justify maintaining a scientist in a nonperma-
nent status, depending upon the immediate
needs of a department or institution.
Nontraditional faculty indisputably enjoy
less salary and research support than their
tenured colleagues.
There is an undeniable perception, if not
reality, that one gets less respect for accom-plishments at one’s home institution. The
unspoken sense is that even if one is doing a
good job at teaching, service and even
research, if one were just “better,” one would
have a permanent position. Moreover, the
feeling of inclusion depends on the depart-
ment, and perhaps on the title itself. One non-
tenured faculty member indicated that he is
“virtually invisible” to his department
despite being on the faculty for over eight
years. An interesting research topic would be
a comparison of the impact of individuals
from different job categories on both the suc-
cess of the educational institution and one’s
research field.
These positions are sometimes considered
“way stations” on the road to a “real career.”
This misconception overlooks the depth and
breadth of excellence and commitment of the
cadre of professionals in these roles. Many
scientists have chosen these jobs for all the
advantages outlined above, and their inten-
tion is to advance within these nontraditional
ranks, enjoying the independence and satis-
faction of the significant contributions they
are making. Others however are indeed hired
with the misleading understanding that as a
traditional position opens up, they will be
first in line for full consideration.
The most important advice for scientists
considering impermanent positions is, “Look
before you leap.” Often one may be told, “We
will try to move you into a more secure posi-The unspoken sense is that even
if one is doing a good job at
teaching, service and even
research, if one were just
“better,” one would have a
permanent position.Institutions utilize extensive
latitude in evaluating
performance in these positions,
and sometimes this vagueness
can be intentional in order to be
able to eliminate positions or to
justify maintaining a scientist
in a nonpermanent status.