心理专业学生如何才能做好学问？第三部分2

sos862004

It has recently been reported that one half of all psychologists who receive a research degree go on to nonacademic settings. Given that many still believe that success is defined by an academic appointment in a research university, what implications does the fact that half pursue nontraditional careers have for the traditional criteria of success or failure? Do our conceptions of success need to be changed? What can be done to acknowledge the value of such nontraditional careers?

Robert Sternberg.
The only people who have that value system are those inside academia. As soon as you step outside the university, it reverses. In my case, my mother wanted me to be a lawyer, and when I wanted to go to graduate school, she looked at it as kind of a second‐rate disaster. And I got a PhD, and she pointed out that the president of Rutgers had both a PhD in psychology and a law degree, and it was not too late to get that law degree. And then when I got tenure, she said now that you have shown what you want to do, you can get serious about what you want to do for your career. So one thing to remember is that once you step outside the ivory tower, the value system will change very quickly.

The second point I want to make is that students who I regard as successful are not necessarily the ones who find the most prestigious academic job. It is the ones who find the best fit to themselves, regardless of the job they take. What I care about is if there is a good fit. So if I think about just a few of the students I consider successful, some have gone into academia and have done stellar jobs, but one of my students became one of the top editors at Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates, a publisher, and she has done spectacularly well in the publishing business. And I look at her as one of my greatest successes. I still remember the day I said, I am not sure that academia is the right thing for you. She was absolutely crushed; it was like I told her she had termites or something, because there is so much of this value system that if you do not go into academia, you are considered a failure. But I think it has worked out really well. Another student has been very successful and went to work at National Opinion Research Center and is one of the top people there now, and he has continued to publish. Another recent one went to work for a market research firm and has been promoted three or four times in the two years she has been there. So the only point I want to make is that I am really happy if a student gets a top academic job—if that is what they want to do and if that is the right thing for them—and I am just as happy if they get some other kind of job if that is the right thing for them. There is not the right career path in the abstract, there is just right for you.

Shelley Taylor.
I just want to underscore what Bob said. The important thing is that while you are in graduate school, it feels like academic values are the values, and those are the ones that you are being held up to, those are the ones to which you are supposed to aspire. It changes so fast, however, and you can find the rewards and the positive feedback in a nonacademic setting so quickly after you get out. So you need to keep that in mind as you are thinking about pursuing what may be thought of as a nontraditional and perhaps somewhat less valued path. It may be less valued according to those criteria, but those are not the criteria by which you will judge yourself or by which you will be judged, so forget about it.

Martin Seligman.
I want to say two things about being an academic. First, I want to distinguish between a job, a career, and a calling. A job, as I see it, is something you do for the material ends, and when those material ends dry up, the job dries up. A career is work that you do that has a trajectory through development. In academia, and other fields as well, that trajectory gets disrupted for a lot of people. When the trajectory gets disrupted—when you do not get tenure, you do not get promoted to full professor—the work dries up. But it is the third thing that
Bob, Shelley, and I have and I wish that most of you have, and that is a calling. We would be doing what we are doing regardless of its material benefits or regardless of whether or not the career trajectory worked. This is something we were created to do and will spend every day of our lives doing. Academia is filled with some who have jobs, some who have careers, and some who have callings.

The second thing I wanted to say is that I believe that in principle, academia is the best institution ever thought up by human beings, but in practice, it is a very far cry from that. In practice, it is not the place where most of the life of the mind is being led. I think a lot of this has to do with job, career, and calling. I hark back to the analytic–synthetic question as one example of ways in which the life of the mind need not be led in academia. I do not think academia has synthetic thinkers very often. If you are a synthetic thinker, you may be at a disadvantage. I do not think it has intellectuals, and it does not have broadly educated people. It has some of them, but more and more as it became an industry, it has a lot people who are technocrats who just analyze single small problems. So this very best of all institutions is our great hope. I think the process of science is literally sacred, but I think we have lost our way about it.

irismaple

最近报道显示，获得学位的近半数[url=http://bbs.psysoper.com/forum-71-1.html]心理学家[/url]供职于非专业机构。大多数人将成功定义为大学研究所里但专家，那么怎么界定这半数在非专业机构供职的[url=http://bbs.psysoper.com/forum-71-1.html]心理学家[/url]的成功与失败？我们的成功观是否需要修正？怎样界定非传统职业的价值？


罗伯特·斯腾伯格（Robert Sternberg）
持有这种价值体系的人/大多是心理学圈内人。等你大学一毕业，这种观点就会改变。拿我来说吧，我母亲希望我当一名律师，我却想读研究院，母亲认为我这个选择不亚于二级灾 难。当我获得博士学位时，母亲对我说罗格斯大学校长就有心理学和法律博士双学位，希望我也能考个法律学位。当我成了老师之后，母亲则说，现在你做了想做的事情了，你可以认真考虑一下你未来事业的发展了。所以，你要记住，当你一旦走出象牙塔，你的价值系统将会很快改变。


另外我想说的是，我眼中的成功学生不一定从事享誉盛名的专业工作，而是找到最适合自己的，不管他们从事甚么样的工作。我所关心的则是，这些是否是合适他们的工作。我的成功学生情况如下：有些进了学术界，做着一流专业的工作；一名学生进了劳伦斯&埃尔博姆联合出版社（美国一家著名的学术理论期刊和软件出版机构），成为一名顶--级编辑，该学生在出版界做得很好。而我则将其视为我最成功的学生之一。我记得那天我对她说做学问不一定适合她，她当时就崩溃了。因为价值观告诉你：如果你不进入学术界，你就是个失败者。我则不以为然。另外一名学生也很成功，在全国**研究中心工作，至今也是一位佼佼者，且频频有著作问世。最近一名学生在一家市场调查机构工作，且两年内升职3－4次。因此我想说的是，如果我的学生选择做学问，而且他们喜欢做且做学问适合他们的话 ，我很高兴；但如果他们做自己喜欢的事情，我同样为其高兴。这个世界上没有正确的或者错误的职业道路，而只有适合你的。

[ 本帖最后由 irismaple 于 2008-8-6 17:12 编辑 ]

fanhypsy

楼上将Robert Sternberg翻译成 罗伯特.斯德恩博格。

但该名在心理学界有个约定的译法：罗伯特·斯腾伯格，这里还是沿用旧法比较好。

irismaple

原帖由 fanhypsy 于 2008-8-6 01:18 发表
楼上将Robert Sternberg翻译成 罗伯特.斯德恩博格。

但该名在心理学界有个约定的译法：罗伯特·斯腾伯格，这里还是沿用旧法比较好。

谢谢。本想下载一本心理学大辞典，每次查阅方便。但级别还不够。继续努力吧

芦苇

原帖由 sos862004 于 2008-7-29 17:29 发表
Shelley Taylor.
I just want to underscore what Bob said. The important thing is that while you are in graduate school, it feels like academic values are the values, and those are the ones that you are being held up to, those are the ones to which you are supposed to aspire. It changes so fast, however, and you can find the rewards and the positive feedback in a nonacademic setting so quickly after you get out. So you need to keep that in mind as you are thinking about pursuing what may be thought of as a nontraditional and perhaps somewhat less valued path. It may be less valued according to those criteria, but those are not the criteria by which you will judge yourself or by which you will be judged, so forget about it.

雪莉·泰勒
我只想强调一下鲍勃说的。值得注意的是当你在研究所的时候，好像学术上的价值才有价值，而那些学者们就是你们将要成为的人，你们被认为期望成为那种人。但是这种看法改变得很快，当你不再在研究所里的时候你会很快发现非学术机构的回报和积极反馈。所以当你考虑追求一条也许被认为是不合传统甚至有些逊色的道路时要把它记在心上。也许根据那些标准它不是那么重要，但你以后并不用那些标准来评价自己或者是被评价，所以忘了它吧。

芦苇

原帖由 sos862004 于 2008-7-29 17:29 发表
Martin Seligman.
I want to say two things about being an academic. First, I want to distinguish between a job, a career, and a calling. A job, as I see it, is something you do for the material ends, and when those material ends dry up, the job dries up. A career is work that you do that has a trajectory through development. In academia, and other fields as well, that trajectory gets disrupted for a lot of people. When the trajectory gets disrupted—when you do not get tenure, you do not get promoted to full professor—the work dries up. But it is the third thing that
Bob, Shelley, and I have and I wish that most of you have, and that is a calling. We would be doing what we are doing regardless of its material benefits or regardless of whether or not the career trajectory worked. This is something we were created to do and will spend every day of our lives doing. Academia is filled with some who have jobs, some who have careers, and some who have callings.

马丁·斯里格曼
关于成为一个学术工作者我想说两件事情。第一，我想区分一下工作、事业和calling(?职业)。工作在我看来是为了物质需要做的事情，当物质需要满足了，工作就不需要了。事业是你所做的有发展轨道的工作（？不确定）。在学术上，也包括其它领域，对于很多人来说那个轨道中断了。当这个轨道中断时——当你没有得到任期时，当你没能提为正教授时——这份工作就没有了。但是鲍勃、雪莉和我拥有的并且我希望你们中的大多数能有的，是第三种，这是就calling（？）。我们将做的是不管物质利益怎样，也不管事业轨道是否行得通我们都会去做的事情。这是我们生来就要做并且我们会用生命中的每一天去做的事。学术界的人有些拥有工作，有些拥有事业，而有些人拥有callings（？）。

芦苇

原帖由 sos862004 于 2008-7-29 17:29 发表
The second thing I wanted to say is that I believe that in principle, academia is the best institution ever thought up by human beings, but in practice, it is a very far cry from that. In practice, it is not the place where most of the life of the mind is being led. I think a lot of this has to do with job, career, and calling. I hark back to the analytic–synthetic question as one example of ways in which the life of the mind need not be led in academia. I do not think academia has synthetic thinkers very often. If you are a synthetic thinker, you may be at a disadvantage. I do not think it has intellectuals, and it does not have broadly educated people. It has some of them, but more and more as it became an industry, it has a lot people who are technocrats who just analyze single small problems. So this very best of all institutions is our great hope. I think the process of science is literally sacred, but I think we have lost our way about it.

我想说的第二件事是我相信从原则上说，学术界是人类想出的最好的机构（？不确定），但在实际远非如此。事实上，学术界并不是绝大多数心智生命被引领的地方。我想很大一部分原因与工作、事业和calling（？）有关。我重提分析——综合问题作为一个例子来说明心智生命不一定由学术界领导。我认为学术界并不经常出现有综合思考倾向的人。如果你是一个综合思考者，你也许会处于不利地位。我不认为心理学界有很多知识分子，或是受到广博教育的人。是有一些这样的人，但随着心理学越来越工业化，有很多只会解决孤立的小问题的科技主义者。这种机制就是我们的伟大希望所在。我认为科学的进程的确是神圣的，但我想我们已经迷失了道路。