next »

[nezahualcoyotl]

I'm curious for other people's reasons for considering/deciding/wanting to quit academia. My own are simple enough:

-Losing interest in research. To make matters worse, the type of research I'm best suited for is precisely the one that interests me least.
-The academic job market. Without a TT position, there is little material incentive to stay.
-The glacial pace of academia. The time lapse between submitting a manuscript and getting it refereed, let alone published, can be utter insanity. Ships are built faster than academic books get edited. And don't get me started on academic bureaucracy.
-The admin load.

Sure, relatively flexible hours, etc are attractive, but there are just too many negatives. What about other forumites?

[tortugaphd]

lol, I think you have them all down!

[quotiazelda]

I loved research/writing, but I found that teaching was not what I wanted to do for the rest of my life. It gave me anxiety attacks and made me feel off-kilter and somehow disassociated from myself. I got a job that's a better fit for me, and - like magic! - the anxiety attacks went away.

I still interact a great deal with the academic world through my job, which is why I still hang out here.

[wildwest]

I don't know how to say this without sounding offensive.  But I just don't enjoy being around academics.  They aren't "my kind of people."  I feel like I can't be myself and say what I want.  I'm constantly on guard, continually feeling observed and judged--which can result in a weird kind of paranoia.  Many academics I know seem to waver between extreme self-doubt, and extreme arrogance and condescension.  I don't feel this way when I'm around folks in the creative arts or in business.  I guess I just don't fit in.

Also, I found the career itself to be downright boring.  Teaching . . . acacemic research . . . conferences . . . just boring.  You would think that the career would demand a certain kind of creativity, but I found just the opposite.  

      

[johnr]

I don't know how to say this without sounding offensive.  But I just don't enjoy being around academics.  They aren't "my kind of people."  I feel like I can't be myself and say what I want.  I'm constantly on guard, continually feeling observed and judged--which can result in a weird kind of paranoia.  Many academics I know seem to waver between extreme self-doubt, and extreme arrogance and condescension.  I don't feel this way when I'm around folks in the creative arts or in business.  I guess I just don't fit in.

Also, I found the career itself to be downright boring.  Teaching . . . acacemic research . . . conferences . . . just boring.  You would think that the career would demand a certain kind of creativity, but I found just the opposite.  

      

No offense taken.  I AM arrogant, condescending, unoriginal and boring.

[promovenda]

 Many academics I know seem to waver between extreme self-doubt, and extreme arrogance and condescension.        

This is really well-put, Wildwest. I'm afraid many of my colleagues fit this description, and I know I do.

[aprilmay]

There are two sets of reasons. One is for people who leave by choice, and the other is for people who leave because they have to as they are denied tenure or cannot find a position. Most of the reasons listed here are for people leaving by choice, but many others feel forced out.

[87735501111]

Getting back to the OP - saying that you would prefer to be in a more dynamic environment, with a faster pace to results, would likely be a great line to use in your non academic interviews.

[farm_boy]

April, there is also a category of people who have chosen to leave but can't.  Teaching is like a bad drug addiction for some of us.

My major reason for choosing to leave--though I'm still here--is disillusionment with my discipline (Spanish).  It is built on a lie: people (in the U.S.) don't learn to speak Spanish in college classrooms, but we try to convince our students otherwise.

[timurid]

In Soviet Academia, profession quit you.

[brixton]

I've described academia as a golden cage.  You're fed, and you sing, and it all is fine.  But it is also very circumscribed and provincial.  When you have a sabbatical, you get to fly around the back yard.  I first thought about leaving after that first flight.  You realize how stationary your job is. So maybe that's why I'd like to leave, but can't.  I've changed jobs since then, but I'm still in academia, and still find it small and feel a little bit caged.

[palla]

 Many academics I know seem to waver between extreme self-doubt, and extreme arrogance and condescension.        

Yep.  I have one friend at work - one person I would hang out with after work or invite to do something.  I have a ton of acquaintances, but the vast majority are not people I would want to hang out with.

I do enjoy my job, though. I love the students and teaching.  And it fits my life very well.

[nezahualcoyotl]

I don't know how to say this without sounding offensive.  But I just don't enjoy being around academics.  They aren't "my kind of people."  I feel like I can't be myself and say what I want.  I'm constantly on guard, continually feeling observed and judged--which can result in a weird kind of paranoia.  Many academics I know seem to waver between extreme self-doubt, and extreme arrogance and condescension.  I don't feel this way when I'm around folks in the creative arts or in business.  I guess I just don't fit in.

I feel more or less the same, though as an undergrad I found that my tastes and opinions onm the courses and so on were usually in line with the majority. In the two institutions I was a student after my BS, in one I for the most part found my peers to astonishingly uncritical, sheeplike (I liked the students I TAed much better, esp. the non-majors); at the other, I found them petty and profoundly anti-intellectual. The academics I've gotten along with have usually been those that don't really fit in, either (I'm a fan of one known for saying to a colleague 'You're a coward without moral qualities' and to the dean, 'I thought your word was worth something').

Also, I found the career itself to be downright boring.  Teaching . . . acacemic research . . . conferences . . . just boring.  

I'm not currently teaching, but I liked it when I was a TA (except grading, which I hated). But agreed on the research.

There are two sets of reasons. One is for people who leave by choice, and the other is for people who leave because they have to as they are denied tenure or cannot find a position. Most of the reasons listed here are for people leaving by choice, but many others feel forced out.

In my case it's both, really. If I had a TT I'd be wary of quitting. If I were passionate about academic research like I was when I started my PhD, I wouldn't quit, I'd do another postdoc or whatever it took.

[fencester]

I moved far away from family and partner.  I don't feel the sacrifice is worth teaching 18 year olds, having to chase them for things, persuade them to learn, and write syllabi that pre-empt lazy and dishonest behavior

[punchnpie]

When I see these posts I always wonder whether if you go straight through school to the PhD, at some point doesn't it just make sense that you'd get bored? Ten or fifteen years down the road, doesn't it make sense that people just get tired of the same old same old - especially in fields or specialties that don't change much? Is there any reason to think that academics should be in the same career for years - when most people change jobs several times in life?

I'm just putting this out there. I've certainly seen movies with the kindly old professor who's been teaching Latin for 40 years, but in real life, how many people do the same thing over and over again, for years? Why should academics feel they need to make an excuse as to why they're leaving the fold? I understand that different responsibilities come with different stages of the career, but let's face it, there are large parts of the daily grind that are the same all the time.

Also, I'm just curious here - in certain fields, is it possible to change focus in order to inject some newness into what has become routine? For example, if your area is 18th Cen British Lit, can you ever move into 20th Cen American Lit? In my field, things change all the time; it can be hard to keep up, but at least no one year is just like the other which makes me feel that I'm kept on my toes. Can this happen for academics in the humanities?

Good luck, OP, with your choices.