Academia is not a meritocracy…and other lessons I’ve learned as a scholar abandoned by the academy
Someone (probably on Twitter) once said that academia is like a bad relationship where the aspiring academic gives and gives and never gets anything in return. Countless PhD holders sacrifice everything to “succeed” in academia, with success defined as attaining a tenure-track job, a position that guarantees you at least seven years of job security, good benefits, and institutional support to conduct research. (No matter that you might be a wonderful teacher or have published a whole book — if you don’t have a TT job, you’re a failure.)
Then, of course, there’s the question of securing tenure, a rigorous process conducted around the sixth year of employment for which you have to submit a record of your publications, letters of support by colleagues, and evidence of being a good teacher (as determined largely by highly subjective student evaluations that often display not only gender bias, but may even constitute legal discrimination!) and of providing service to your department, institution, and professional society. Institutions vary widely in their rates of tenure, with the University of California system known for supporting their faculty so that the majority of them gain tenure, and the Ivy Leagues notorious for not tenuring junior faculty. If you don’t get tenure, your academic career is all but over, as any other institution at which you might apply for a job will know you’ve been denied tenure and likely view you as damaged goods.