American Scientist

American Scientist's publisher, Sigma Xi, and the Journal of Science Policy and Governance (JSPG; sciencepolicyjournal.org) released a special issue in May on STEM education and workforce development. In this series, authors from the special issue discuss findings from their work.

Scientific researchers are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the workplace environment often associated with academic positions. Nature’s 2021 Salary and Satisfaction survey found that 37 percent of midcareer academic researchers and 32 percent of early-career researchers were unhappy in their current position. Those at lower levels of the academic hierarchy, such as graduate students, particularly express this dissatisfaction. In Nature’s 2019 survey of PhD students, 45 percent of respondents reported that their satisfaction had worsened since they started their programs. The same survey showed that 36 percent of respondents had sought help for anxiety or depression triggered by their studies, and 18 percent had sought help at their institutions but did not feel as though they were being supported.

Most students expect graduate school to be intellectually challenging, but they often are surprised at the extent to which they must put their financial, mental, and physical health on the line to pursue a degree that takes half a decade or more to complete. Reviews and primary data from the Council of Graduate Schools suggest about half of doctoral students finish their degree within 10 years, with approximately 30 percent leaving their programs before finishing their degrees and 20 percent taking longer than 10 years to either finish or decide to leave. Students from historically disadvantaged and low socioeconomic backgrounds are especially vulnerable to attrition.

Despite many graduate programs’ and universities’ existing policies to protect graduate students and prevent attrition, little to no research has studied the visibility, usage, and effectiveness of these policies from the graduate student’s perspective. Our report “Mapping Graduate Perception of Policies and Resources,” published in June by the National Science Policy Network, found that a diverse body of graduate students at various U.S. universities perceived many of these policies and resources as insufficient or missing entirely. In some cases, this perception was incorrect and represented a disconnect between students and present policy. Our recent op-ed in the Journal of Science Policy and Governance focused on addressing this issue.

In other cases, our results revealed that policies were correctly attributed as insufficient or missing. Some students were aware that certain policies existed but were highly critical of their perceived effectiveness; one respondent even said that their institution’s policy on issues such as mental health was “worse than nothing at all.”

We recommend that universities invest in a robust, critical analysis of their policies and resources for graduate students. This analysis should focus on the graduate students’ needs and concerns. Where students criticize existing policies, universities should engage in meaningful, collaborative development of new policies that meet the needs of both students and their institutions.

In particular, we recommend that academic institutions focus on improving “quality-of-life” policies, which include mental health services and various forms of leave. These policies can measurably benefit students’ well-being, which in turn will decrease attrition and boost engagement and productivity. Addressing these sources of unnecessary physical, mental, and financial stress will improve not only each individual’s career and development but also the growth of a talented and diverse workforce.

Mental Health Services

A growing number of studies have identified a persistent mental health crisis among graduate students. A 2021 report by the Council of Graduate Schools and the Jed Foundation found that graduate students experience clinically relevant mental health symptoms at a rate up to six times higher than the general adult population—with even higher numbers suggested in the wake of the pandemic. Overall, more than 50 percent of graduate students are at risk for mental illness and poor well-being. Across higher education, attrition rates skyrocket among students with diagnosed mental health problems: from 43 percent to as much as 86 percent, according to a 2021 report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

The vast majority (98 percent) of respondents to our survey believed that mental health services were available to some extent at their institution. Half of that subset had used the services, and 48 percent of the total indicated that these resources needed some degree of change. Almost two-thirds of respondents provided comments in the open answer section, with 79 percent of commenters indicating that the services available were insufficient or inadequate.

Common complaints were a lack of staff, insufficient appointment availability, and long waiting times. Additional concerns included a lack of confidentiality and the risk of being forced into medical leave if they sought help. Eleven percent of commenters stated that they were unsure what services the office provided. One respondent described the services at their institution as “structured very performatively,” and others suggested that investments should be made to provide meaningful onsite support for students in place of “stress management Zoom workshops.” The comments also highlighted the challenges of seeking care off campus, citing struggles with student health insurance that provided limited coverage for mental health concerns.

Many organizations want to help universities tackle these issues. In addition to the aforementioned collaboration between the Council of Graduate School and the Jed Foundation, the Association of American Universities is currently piloting at eight institutions their PhD Education Initiative, aimed at changing the culture of doctoral education and making it more student focused. The COST Action (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) is another initiative, spanning 41 countries and dozens of institutions.

Many of these initiatives are in their infancy, and data collected in the coming years will help determine the best policies and approaches. Unfortunately, that does not help the thousands of graduate students who are currently struggling. Therefore, drawing from these various initiatives and the data from our survey, we have several reasonable, attainable recommendations that universities can implement now.

It is critical that universities increase the availability and number of dedicated staff in their existing mental health services and expand mental health insurance coverage for chronic conditions. Schools should prioritize the use of discretionary budgets to rapidly expand services where they are lacking and incorporate sustained investment for mental health support into their annual budgets. Universities should listen to students about aspects of their experiences that are key drivers of stress and empower student-facing staff to recognize when students are struggling so they can provide support and referrals to available services when needed.

Universities experienced dramatic spikes in demand for support as the pandemic and social unrest of the past several years pushed many students past their limits for coping on their own. Universities should not wait until they lose students before investing in mental health services.

Vacation Days

The results of our survey indicated that vacation policies are another crucial quality-of-life benefit that needs improvement to prevent burnout, ensure fair access to time off, and ultimately increase retention. Only 40 percent of the surveyed students believed they had access to a vacation policy, and many commenters suggested that even when vacation policies were present, they were not followed or enforced. The consensus was that vacation time was a matter decided between a graduate student and their supervisor. Although this system provides flexibility for unique courses of study and research, it can lead to inequitable and unfair situations when supervisors do not allow their students to take reasonable time off from mentally taxing work.

Having a healthy work–life balance and appropriate time to recharge is an important part of any job, and most respondents with access to a vacation policy had used it. An overwhelming majority of students from underrepresented groups used their vacation policies if available. Although the survey’s scope did not probe further, these responses imply that the ability to take time off is important to students from underrepresented groups and a key factor in their retention.

Overall, our survey revealed a high demand for vacation policies when they were absent and great interest in reforming policies when they were present. Although the status quo of determining vacation policies on a case-by-case basis may appear to be efficient, there are too many cases where this practice is abused. By establishing clear vacation guidelines, such as mandatory days of paid vacation, universities and graduate programs can improve their students’ well-being and increase the likelihood that their students complete their degrees.

Sick Leave

The lengthy COVID-19 pandemic brought the threat of long-term illness to the forefront of public consciousness and highlighted graduate students’ need for sick leave. In addition to the days needed to recover from a fever or cough, longer-term leave is sometimes necessary for a more protracted recovery. Both types of sick leave are important in graduate school, but long-term leave is a special concern because many components of a graduate student’s daily life—stipends, fellowships, student loan deferments, and health insurance—are tied to maintaining their student status. The loss of this status during long-term illness can have devastating consequences. A report by the Association of American Medical Colleges found that students who disclosed taking a leave of absence have a significantly higher risk of not graduating. Students then must choose to either take the time to heal at the risk of their degree, or focus on their degree at the expense of their health.

When asked about long-term sick leave, respondents to our survey frequently mentioned the fear of losing their funding. This problem is not one that only universities must face; respondents mentioned that reporting requirements on federal grants also compounded this difficult choice.

Many respondents were unsure whether their programs had a sick leave policy or if they would be allowed to use it if one was in place. This confusion was especially apparent regarding short-term sick leave, which is typically left to the discretion of principal investigators. One respondent mentioned that enforcement of the policy was not uniform and professors are left to determine whether the student is sick enough to warrant leave, which can lead to “people who are clearly ill being on campus because they had no other choice.”

Creating clearer, easily enforceable, and more generous sick leave policies would remove some of the burden on graduate students and increase access for underrepresented students who wish to pursue doctoral degrees. This outcome has already been proven in industry settings, with a 2022 study by the Washington Center for Equitable Growth demonstrating that the implementation of sick leave policies increased both retention and productivity.

Parental Leave

Although only a few respondents in our survey gave feedback on parental leave policies, we believe establishing, expanding, or promulgating these policies to prospective and current students will help recruit and retain talent. (The second part of this Policy column provides more detail about family support policies.)

The Value of Well-Being

The scientific research community needs to reckon with a culture that confuses a career with an identity and that emphasizes personal sacrifice as the bedrock of a successful work life. These ideas contribute to graduate researchers feeling as though they have to sacrifice their physical and mental well-being to succeed. While we wrestle with these longer-term challenges, we can change current policies for graduate students now.

The more we support all members of the research community, the stronger it will become. To successfully direct further policy development, organizations and funders need to invest in studying the current challenges surrounding the well-being of early-career academic researchers, especially graduate students. By improving and publicizing successful quality-of-life policies and resources, institutions can reduce attrition rates, and students can focus on intellectual hurdles, rather than well-being ones.