2012
Contents
1.
Who are the PhD students of the Max Planck Society?
1.1.
1.2.
1.3.
1.4.
1.5.
2.
Working conditions
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
2.5.
3.
Have you thought about giving up your PhD?
Career plans
Supervisor support
Conclusions
Funding of the PhD students
4.1.
4.2.
4.3.
4.4.
4.5.
4.6.
4.7.
4.8.
5.
Satisfaction
Supervision
Work life balance
Parenthood
References
Career perspectives
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
4.
Where do they come from and where are they
Age distribution
Gender disparity in different sections
Conclusions
References
Types of funding
Students preferences
Did students know?
Relationship between funding and nationality
Do different fundings imply different tasks?
What are the opinions of students?
Conclusions
References
Health insurance
5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
5.4.
Insurance options for PhD students
Who has what and for how much
Conclusions
References
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
10
13
18
20
21
21
22
23
24
25
25
26
26
27
29
29
30
30
32
32
33
34
35
6.
Not all institutes are created equal
6.1.
6.2.
6.3.
6.4.
6.5.
6.6.
6.7.
7.
Institutes that prefer contracts over stipends
Institutes with many non-German PhD students
Institutes with the highest overall satisfaction
Institutes with the most successful supervision
Institutes with the healthiest PhD students
Institutes with highest percentage of students that want to stay in science
Institutes with PhD students that will not give up
Methods
7.1.
7.2.
7.3.
7.4.
7.5.
Who are the PhD students of the Max Planck Society?
Working Conditions
Career
Funding of the PhD students
Health insurance options
36
36
36
36
37
37
37
37
40
40
41
44
46
48
8.
Acknowledgements
50
9.
About the authors of this survey
51
Introduction
Summary
1. Who are the PhD students of the Max Planck
Society?
1.1. Where do they come from and
where are they
German: 59.9%
RWKHU
American: 4.4%
$VLDQ
(8í(XURSHDQ
56.9%
CPT
1RQí(8í(XURSHDQ
BM
GSH
6.4%
5.0%
1.3. Gender disparity in different
sections
1.2.
Age distribution
1.4. Conclusions
1.5. References
Walking on sunshine – Satisfaction with working
conditions
2.1.
Satisfaction
overall satisfaction
lab equipment
work environment
admin support
scientific support
workload
salary, benefits
very high
high
undecided
low
very low
My supervisor has
excellent knowledge of
my field of research
My supervisor is
open to and respects my
research ideas
My supervisor gives
helpful feedback on my
research
My supervisor supports my
professional development
HVWDEOLVKLQJFRQWDFWVUHFRPí
mending conferences, etc.)
fully agree
partially agree
undecided
partially disagree
fully disagree
not applicable
My supervisor teaches me
how to write grant proposals
Conclusions
2.2.
Supervision
My supervisor does not teach
me how to write papers
My supervisor is not available
when I need help
My supervisor is not informed
about the current state of my
thesis research
Follow my lead - Who is your Supervisor?
fully agree
partially agree
undecided
partially disagree
fully disagree
not applicable
Satisfaction
Satisfaction
Happily ever after - Effects of Supervision on
Satisfaction
Satisfaction
Conclusions
Time flies - How do we spend our working hours?
2.3.
Work life balance
Voices of the survey
“Having who work in
rts
from
cs, expe
o
d
t
s
rn more
o
a
p
e
l
n
a
more
c
, so I
i c area em”
c
e
p
s
y
m
th
“If
people wer
e approved
what they
for
are doing,
li
fe
w
o
uld be
much more
pleasant.”
“Sport
facilities”
“Hire
less people,
give them better
supervision.”
“
more Accept
from innova
tio
PhD
stud n
ents”
t
ea
“I se ependen rather
,
d
of in papers ng.”
e
r
cultu f getting f learni
pts o culture o
m
e
t
t
a
a
than
“Ins
r
man esources titute
shou aged by , that ar
e
the a
ld n
give ot be pre dmisins
n to
adm fferentia tration
i
apar nistrato lly
rs
tmen
ts.” , e.g.
“PhD
projects should
be clearly de ned at the
beginning of the project, as it
is common for scienti c grants,
deviations from the plan should
be in accordance with the
supervising committee.”
“
resea Doing
rch i
n
not i
ndiv groups,
idua
lly.”
nt,
ore
ork
“M eldw nagme
a
n
gs o oject m
n
i
n
trai ogy, pr ware.”
ol t soft
hod
met relevan
“I
think
it is n
o
health t
y if yo
super
visor, ur
y
direct
or (an our
d
emplo
yer) a thus
n
your P
d
h
exami D main
ne
united r are
in
perso one
n.“
Give me a break – about holidays
Sick and Tired – Stress induced illnesses
Work life balance options at Max Planck Institutes
Voices of the survey
“A gym and outdoor sport facilities.”
“Better/more daycare facilies.”
“First of all: sticking to basic rules of work,
i.e. weekends, accepting working hours etc.”
“Stress management seminars, yoga classes,
tness courses.”
“After school activities for kids and a room
for the kids to meet and do homework.”
“Music room, tness room, game room.”
“Be able to access institute-network from
home.”
“Social gatherings and more tness activities.”
“Showers would be great to get to the institute
by bike or running.”
Let´s make a change – Increasing the performance
Conclusions
2.4.
Parenthood
Doing it for the kids – consequences of parenthood
Voices of the survey
“I appreciate the introduction of 400 € child
bonus. However, I cannot see why its fair to
make this available only for new stipend holders.”
“Giving one extra year of contract per child,
at least if it’s born during the PhD.”
“Recommending some childcare companies
charging up to 30 Euro a day and even not
covering the full work day is NO support”
“The nearby campus childcare is completely
overcrowded, and you have to enlist way
before the child is born to have at least a
chance.”
“Provide the possibility to apply for extramoney for a babysitter”
“Offer seminars in the morning, not the late
afternoon.”
“A kids playroom in the institute where kids
could stay for some time would be helpful.”
“Childcare not just for kindergarten children.
A 12 year-old boy is to young to be alone all
day.”
“Give adaptive funding to parents that they
can handle even sickness of the children
which is most dif cult because every sickness
pulls out one without preparation”
2.5.
Conclusions
References
3. Career perspectives
3.1. Have you thought about giving up
your PhD?
Voices of the survey
“Absent supervisor”
“No supervision at all”
“Atmosphere among members of the group”
“Stress related migraine”
“Dif culties with the group leader”
“Too low salary”
“Frustration due to experiment failures”
“Felt overcharged, too much other scienti c
work for a long time; nding out, that I don’t
want a career in science, questioning the use
of the PhD for me”
“General unhappiness”
“Lots of work, hard to publish in established
eld, bleak career outlook”
“No other persons working in the eld at the
institute”
“No positive feedback”
3.2.
Career plans
Yes
No
0%
25% 50% 75% 100%
Yes
No
0%
25% 50% 75% 100%
“I think that I am not developing as a scientist. PhD students should participate in establishing collaborations with other people. They
should go to meetings and know people from
their eld. They should know more or less in
which lab they want to do a postdoc.”
3.3.
Supervisor support
Never
Briefly
Often
Yes
No
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
3.4.
Conclusions
Voices of the survey
“In our institute, PhD students are supposed
to work with post-docs.”
“He lets me develop my own ideas.”
”My career is not important for his research!”
“Nothing, not even present, contact about 3
times a year.”
“Personal guidance, career planning, administration advices.”
“Did not get support in the ways mentioned
above. Only scienti c support, such as proofreading paper/thesis.”
“Pays a lot attention to details, but not to
a result (that every or most of the graduate
students publish at least once). Doesn´t care
about people, but cares about having something for the lab in total.”
“Actively sets out to teach me how to do
things like write abstracts, edit my writing
etc.. Discusses future career options.”
“Council/advice, commentaries on drafts,
patience, con dence in my person and work,
and general strategic hints, references.”
“Brainstorming and troubleshooting.”
4. Funding of the PhD students
4.1.
Types of funding
4.2.
Students preferences
4.3.
Did students know?
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
partially not
fully
informed informed informed
4.4. Relationship between funding and
nationality
QRQí*HUPDQ
&37QRQí*HUPDQ
CPT German
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
stipend
contract
other
contract
other
%0QRQí*HUPDQ
BM German
100%
stipend
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
stipend
100%
contract
other
stipend
contract
other
*6+QRQí*HUPDQ
GSH German
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
stipend
contract
other
stipend
contract
other
4.5. Do different fundings imply different tasks?
4.6.
What are the opinions of students?
4.8.
4.7.
Conclusions
References
Voices of the survey
“The sti ized black
al
g
em is le
t
s
y
s
d
n
pe
labour.”
“I guess
still think
one should king environers
great wor
a MPI off
about the
,
k
ic
k
r
e
e
the car
uch worse
ment and
m
to
is
th
are
y.”
and comp
a universit
t
a
s
n
io
it
cond
“I’m
very disappointed tha
t there isn’t
a more univ
ersal and w
ell
explained, d
etailed guid
e for
non-Germa
n students a
n
d
health insur
ance within
the MPG.”
“The
ld PhD
same, o
ow
blems: L of
o
r
p
t
n
e
stud
mes
r long ti rom
e
t
f
a
e
m
inco
ent f
ndepend o uni
(
g
n
i
y
stud
d), n
or stipen ce, costly
t
c
a
r
t
n
co
ran
ent insu
sion
employm urance, no pen n
s
o
health in e system relies
h
fund... T lism of young
the idea chers.”
resear
it is
“I th
sys
in
i
max tem, unl genera nk
imum
l an
ess t
unfa
he s
lev
stipe
nds ‘ el. The M tipends a ir
aw
re
P
that ards’ bu S should paid at
they
t
t
are j should stop cal he
rath
l
ust c
i
ng
er
heap
er...” confess
“It
would be gre
at
if the Max P
lanck Society
would have
an arrangem
ent
with an healt
h insurance
company”
“I
onvert
would c
racts
nto cont
i
s
d
n
e
ts
p
all sti
n studen ute
g
i
e
r
o
f
n
lai
trib
and exp d does not con r a
n
fo
e
ip
to apply n
that a st
d
e
d
e
e
ar n
nsio
to the ye t residence, pe
n
e
perman rk-related acd
an wo nts.”
cide
“I think ven prefergi
ve
ould be
them lea
h
f
s
o
s
t
d
s
n
o
e
stip
they
use m
rs, beca tDoc. Therefore e
e
n
g
i
e
r
o
ably to f ter PhD or Pos rance or into th
try af
h insu
the coun ed to pay healt fund. ”
dont ne
pension
german
5. Health insurance
60%
SXEOLFLQVXUDQFH
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
SULYDWHLQVXUDQFH
50%
IXOO\LQVXUHG
OLPLWHGLQVXUDQFH
QRWFRYHUHG
SV\FKRORJLFDO
FRQGLWLRQV
FKHFNXSV
60%
SUHíH[LVWLQJ
FRQGLWLRQV
Insurance options for PhD students
pregnancy
5.1.
QRLGHD
QRWDSSOLFDEOH
5.2.
100%
100%
80%
80%
60%
60%
40%
40%
20%
20%
0%
German
Other
European
1RQí
European
Who has what and for how much
0%
Stipend
private health insurance
public health insurance
family health insurance (through partner or parents)
health insurance through another EU country
Contract
Other
available
money
640 €
other
insurances
45 €
rent
405 €
pension
64 €
5.3.
Conclusions
health
insurance
131 €
5.4.
References
6. Not all institutes are created equal
6.1. Institutes that prefer contracts over
stipends
6.3. Institutes with the highest overall
satisfaction
6.2. Institutes with many non-German
PhD students
6.4. Institutes with the most successful
supervision
6.6. Institutes with highest percentage
of students that want to stay in science
6.7. Institutes with PhD students that
will not give up
6.5. Institutes with the healthiest PhD
students
Voices of the survey
ion
“Extens service until
ia
/Cafeter
n
e
e
t
n
a
of C
21.00h”
“Grou
lead
p
that P ers should
hD stu
start t
den
o th
privat ts can also ink
e life.
have a
”
“It
would be he
lpful to
have the op
tion to work
from home.”
“A
dedicated a
nd con den
tial profess
ional conta
ct (probably
outside the
institute its
elf) to conta
case of sign
ct in
i cant prob
le
m
s
with the
working co
nditions.”
“O
more rganize
soci
like p
arties al event,
,m
ball...
Nowa usic, footno mo days there
ney fo
r this. is
”
“
supp More
ort i
mat
with ters of l n all
reall nding ife: e.g. h
a
y
beca had tro school elp
(w
ub
us
we s e of the le settlin e
olve
s
g do
choo
d it
w
l
to a
very by send situation n
scho expensi in our s ,
on
ol (a
ve pr
b
i
mon out 650 vate
Euro
th)”
/
“More
be
ies can
t
i
v
i
t
c
a
10 thou- en
her
t
d
e
n
g
e
o
p
t
s
t
h
ge
itute can on thing. But w
t
s
n
i
e
h
d. T
rati
r
orgnaize on useless deco ing activities, o
z
euro
ciali
o
sands of o supporting so , then there is n
t
g
it comes cienti c meetin l.”
s
n
t
e
a al
ev
funding
a
ple n apa
ase
r “R
org tment enting
ani
ze a is a b
w ig p
it.” orkin roble
gh
m
elp ,
wit
h
“I
t prices
think tha e extremely
s
rias ar
in cafete I administration
MP
he
high and e about this. T
cont car
ople on
e
p
does no
r
o
f
re ne
lders
prices a t for stipend ho
tracts bu dents far too
and stu
high.“
7. Methods
Figure Reference
7.1.
Who are the PhD students of the Max Planck Society? (page 6)
7.2.
Working Conditions (page 9)
7.3.
Career (page 21)
7.4.
Funding of the PhD students (page 25)
7.5.
Health insurance options (page 32)
8. Acknowledgements
9. About the authors of this survey
Rosa Glöckner
Daniel Herde
The Myth of Sisyphus
Julia Holzmann
Pablo Sartori
Chlamydomonas
cilia
Stefan Siegert
Layout
Ole Herud
Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology
PhD Student Survey 2012
Max Planck PhDnet
www.phdnet.mpg.de
[email protected]