As part of the Review of Academic Physics in Canada the Canadian Association of Physicists has undertaken a study of the employment patterns of Canadian Physicists. Questionnaires were collected from 945 individuals who received their B. Sc. in the 12-year period 1985 to 1996. The number of graduates from this period who responded was 12% and 18% of those eligible to respond with the B. Sc. or M. Sc. Degree as their latest degree and much higher, at 40%, for those who had obtained the Ph. D. degree. Roughly half of the responses were from students with a B. Sc. as their last degree and one quarter each were from those with an M. Sc. or a Ph. D. as their last degree. The majority of responses from the latter two groups were from individuals associated with Condensed Matter Physics and General Physics.

This survey shows a low level of unemployment for physicists (2 to 3%) and for those with graduate degrees it is too low to be effectively measured (less than 1%). Four-fifths of Canadian physics graduates remain and work in Canada. Roughly half of all respondents classify their jobs as teaching or research. Eighteen percent of all of those who responded to the survey and 15% of those with a Ph. D are women. Forty percent of M. Sc. graduates and 30% of Ph. D. graduates do not use their physics background directly in their employment but they nevertheless use the skills and/or modes of thought from their physics background in their employment. Only 2-3% neither use their background directly nor use the skills and modes of thought from their physics education. Moreover, both those who use their physics background directly in their jobs and those who use it indirectly in their jobs rate the usefulness of their physics education as high.

At the graduate level, university instructors involved in an active research program are clearly seen to be better able to fulfil their roles than those who were not actively involved in research. Involvement in research was also seen to be important to the quality of physics instruction at the senior undergraduate level, though to a lesser extent.

1. Introduction

The Highly Qualified Personnel study attempts to determine: (i) background information on the nature of the Highly Qualified Personnel who have graduated in physics from Canadian universities over the last twelve years; (ii) the nature of the employment found by those individuals; and (iii) the nature of any relationships between that employment and their university experience.

A degree in physics represents a substantial investment in time, money and opportunity costs on the part of the student. It also involves a substantial social investment on the part of society through the expenditure of tax dollars by governments. One of our goals is to gain some knowledge about the perceived merits of such investments from the perspective of the student. An assessment of the economic return on that investment to the country as a whole is included as part of the discussion of the economic benefits of physics research which is also a part of this Review of Academic Physics in Canada. We wish to find out if the graduates of our universities believe that their own investment was worthwhile and if it led to suitably challenging employment and other benefits that justified the initial investment. In other words, we wish to know if physicists are justified in recommending a physics education to students entering post-secondary education. We believe that this study has shown that answer is definitely in the affirmative.

We are particularly interested in the answers to these questions as they apply to those with graduate degrees in physics. It is beyond the scope of this study to make comparisons with other scientific disciplines. However, assertions have been made that a physics education has become less relevant to the needs of society than in the past. It is our hope that this study will illuminate the basis of any such assumptions about the role of physics in human, social and economic development at the end of the millennium.

We state at the outset that we operate on the assumption that a physics education is, like any other education, more a process of intellectual development than a process of training to carry out specific tasks. We wish to know the merits of choosing physics as the discipline, which will provide the working material for that process of intellectual development.

The importance of choosing the forgoing as the underlying question is readily apparent at a time when careers change frequently, and when the prospects for success in any endeavor are enhanced by the acquisition of mental skills.

Related questions that have been addressed in this study attempt to determine the present state of physics employment in Canada. We wish to know where physicists find employment, their role within employment sectors, their distribution within physics sub-disciplines and the involvement of women in physics.

Physics graduates who had received a B. Sc. from a Canadian university through the years 1985 to 1996 inclusive were asked to participate in this study. Respondents were then divided into those for whom the latest degree was the B. Sc., the M. Sc., and the Ph. D. Individuals who had been awarded a B. Sc. within the designated 12-year period, but who had received an M. Sc. or Ph. D. in the spring of 1997 were also included.

The questionnaire was designed by Bev Robertson, Michael Steinitz and Paul Vincett. In response to some criticism of the questionnaire used to gather data for the work of the sub-discipline committees associated with this Review of Canadian Academic Physics, the questionnaire was kept as short as was reasonably possible. It is attached as Appendix A.

Names and last known addresses and email addresses of graduates in physics from Canadian universities who had graduated during the period given above were requested from the 52 Canadian universities and colleges who are institutional members of the Canadian Association of Physicists. Most cooperated with the study by either forwarding the questionnaire to their own graduates or by providing a mailing list for our use. For those universities that responded with address lists, copies of the questionnaire were sent, either by conventional mail or by e-mail, to all individuals who had graduated with a B. Sc. in physics over the past 12 years, with a request that they complete and return the questionnaire. However, the address lists maintained by universities are usually incomplete or dated and we are not able to estimate what fraction of the total sample population was reached by this means

The questionnaire was also distributed as an insert in French and English in the November/December 1996 issue of Physics in Canada. In addition to these more traditional methods of distribution and retrieval, the questionnaire could also be completed by accessing it directly on the world-wide-web site of the Canadian Association of Physicists. Completed questionnaires were received from graduates of a total of 70 universities.

A large fraction of the responses received were, unfortunately, from individuals who had not received their B. Sc. within the period 1985 to 1966. Although the instructions for the questionnaire invited partial responses, some of those received did not contain sufficient information to facilitate their use. The numbers of responses that were suitable for use in this study were: e-mail, 104; traditional hard copy mail, 410; and from the web site, 431, for a total of 945 responses. Of this number, the highest degree for 469 (50%) was the B. Sc. The highest degree for 249 (26%) was the M. Sc., and for the remaining 227 (24%) it was the Ph.D. Over this period of 12 years, the number of B. Sc. graduates of Canadian universities in physics was 7864. The number of M. Sc. and Ph. D. degrees granted in that period was 2682 and 1393 respectively. [1,2] These numbers represent Canadian citizens, permanent residents and those with temporary visa status.

The responses mentioned above, for those for whom the B. Sc. was the highest degree, represent 6% of those who received the B. Sc. in the 12-year period. Those who later received a graduate degree in another discipline and those working toward a graduate degree in physics but who have not yet received that degree would also be included in this category. Those who later received a graduate degree in physics are included only in the M. Sc. and Ph. D. categories.

The 1997 report on 1996 Bachelor’s degree recipients in the United States showed that 32% entered graduate school in physics immediately and 18% entered graduate school in another discipline. [3] The remainder entered the workforce. Of those, roughly one-half of those who entered the workforce expressed an intention to return to graduate school in physics later. Information as to how many actually did, and if so, after what period of time, is not available. Assuming that these numbers apply reasonably well to Canada, we will make the very approximate assumption that roughly 50% of the 7864 who obtained a B. Sc. have removed themselves from the population from which the B. Sc. sample was obtained by receiving a higher degree in physics, thereby doubling the estimated response rate to approximately 12%.

Similar arguments would apply to those with graduate degrees, but the results also depend on the effective number of years contained in the sample population, which would be 12.5 years less the average number of years between the time when a student obtains a B. Sc. and when the same student obtains the advanced degree.

The number of M. Sc. degrees that were granted in Canada during the 12-year period was 2682. According to a study of Postgraduate Scholarship and 1967 Science and Engineering (1967) award winners in all disciplines for the year 1985, carried out by NSERC in 1994, the average time for the winners of these scholarships and awards to complete the requirements for the M. Sc. in the physical sciences was 2.2 years. [4] We will use that value and assume that all of those who eventually received the M. Sc. immediately began their M. Sc. studies immediately after they were awarded the B. Sc. That leaves 10.3 years of M. Sc. production, (out of the 12.5 years surveyed). For simplicity we will round that number to ten years. Strictly speaking, those years would be from mid 1987 to mid 1997. We do not know what fraction of the total number of degrees awarded in a year should be associated with the spring or fall convocation of a university, and we will use instead the full period from 1987 to 1996 inclusive to estimate the number of eligible students. Further, data is not yet available for the year 1996 and we will assume that the numbers for 1995 also apply to 1996. We then obtain 2274 as the number of M. Sc. degrees awarded in that time period. [1,2] Some of those degrees were granted to foreign students. We will assume that none of those foreign students also received a B. Sc. physics degree in Canada during the period 1985 to 1986 inclusive. The number of eligible respondents from the ten-year period is then further reduced to 1715.

The aforementioned NSERC study found that, averaged over all disciplines, 61.4% of Ph. D. recipients had also completed at least one M. Sc. previously. We argue later that the number of physics Ph. D. degrees that form the sample population for the Ph. D. group is 565. If we assume that physics is representative of the physical sciences, that the fraction of students who have completed an M. Sc. before the Ph. D. also applies to the physical sciences, and that the number who obtain more than one M. Sc. is not significant, the population from which our M. Sc. group is drawn is reduced to 1370 by the removal of those who have also obtained a Ph. D., thereby removing themselves from the eligible sample. This gives a response rate for the M. Sc. group of 18%.

The survey of former Postgraduate Scholarship and award winners carried out by NSERC in 1994 also found that the average time to completion of the Ph. D. in the physical sciences was 4.9 years. [4] If physics is typical of all disciplines, 61.4% of those also spent 2.2 years working toward their M. Sc. We then calculate 6.25 years as the average time spent working toward a Ph. D. in physics in Canada. The mean time spent by U. S. citizens in graduate school in order to complete the requirements for the Ph. D. from universities in the United States and who graduated in the 1994-1995 academic year was 6.5 years. [5]

Ignoring any time spent out of the academic stream after the B. Sc., and assuming that this figure applies reasonably well to all of those who have obtained a Ph. D. in physics in Canada over the past six years, our sample population of Ph. D. recipients should include the last six years of Ph. D. production. Those who did not receive their physics B. Sc. in Canada or received it before 1985 make up a significant part of the total number of Ph. D. degrees granted in those years but do not contribute to the population from which our sample is derived. Forty three percent of physics graduate students in the U. S. are non-US citizens [5]. Averaged over the past decade 28% of students in physics doctoral programs in Canada have been non-Canadian and 27% of degree recipients have been non-Canadian. [2] We will assume that none of the foreign students who graduated with a Ph. D. in the past six years also obtained their B. Sc. in Canada in the 12-year period from 1985 to 1986 inclusive. We will then use as the number of individuals eligible to be included in the Ph. D. group the number of Canadian citizens and permanent residents who graduated in the years 1991 to 1996 with a Ph. D. in physics. As for the M. Sc. group, the number for the year 1996 was assumed to be the same as for 1995. The number of individuals with a Ph. D. and who are eligible to respond to the questionnaire is then 565 and the response rate for the Ph. D. group is roughly 40%.

Many additional assumptions have been made in these very approximate estimates, but they do not justify further discussion. The increase in response rate for the advanced degrees probably reflects several factors; better records for contact information, greater interest in the goals of the study and better access to the questionnaire, either through Physics in Canada, or electronically. We shall make frequent comparisons to extensive data pertaining to the employment of physicists in the United States, both to illuminate our own results for Canada and to make comparisons.

The total sample size of 945 is sufficiently large for reasonably good precision* relative to similar studies. The participation rate for those whose last degree was the Ph. D. degree appears to be high, given that no attempt was made to contact those who did not initially respond in order to encourage more responses. The response rate for those whose last degree was the B. Sc. or the M. Sc. was lower. In this case, consideration must be given to the role of systematic, error arising from the possibility that some subsets of the sample population will almost certainly be better represented than others; i.e., those more easily reached, those working in physics and those who still consider themselves part of the Canadian physics community. In this case the accuracy* may be worse than that indicated by any calculation of the precision.

These factors may then affect the accuracy of particular responses, such as the fraction of graduates who remain unemployed, those who have left physics and work in other disciplines, and those who have left the country, particularly for the B. Sc. and M. Sc. degrees.

Of the 945 graduates who provided valid responses, 166 (18%) were female. For comparison, of those who graduated with a physics or astronomy B. Sc. in 1996 from universities in the U. S. 18% were also female. [3] The distribution of graduates who are female in this study by degree is 18%, 20% and 15% for the B. Sc., M. Sc. and Ph. D. respectively. A follow-up study of 1995 graduates from U. S. universities showed that the fractions of B. Sc., M. Sc., and Ph. D. graduates who were women were 17%, 17% and 12%. [6] These numbers probably reflect the tendency of women to be less likely to continue their physics education into graduate school than are men (the so-called leaky pipeline effect). It may also reflect the slow but continued growth over time of the fraction of physics students who are women, as shown by AIP studies. For instance, the number of physics graduate students who are women has increased in the U. S. from 6% in 1975 to 16% in 1995. [4]

The Canadian figures are averaged over the period 1985 to 1996. They include a small number of individuals whose degree was in astrophysics (3.6%) or space physics (3.2%) but none specifically designated as "astronomy". The aforementioned AIP report also provides separate numbers for astronomy. [3] Thirty-eight percent of B. Sc. graduates from astronomy programs in the U. S. are female. We will assume that the responses to this study do not include any individuals with an astronomy degree and that the percentages given in the U. S. data for physics graduates, not including those with degrees in astronomy, are appropriate for comparison with the averages obtained in our present study. We then conclude that the fraction of physics graduates who are female is slightly higher in Canada than in the United States. The reasons would be very difficult to determine, but various NSERC programs that encourage women to consider a career in science may be able to claim at least part of the credit.

The survey was directed at "Physics Graduates from 1985 to 1996". Only those graduates who’s B. Sc. was awarded during that time period were included in the analysis. However, some may have responded who obtained a graduate degree in physics during that time, but whose B. Sc. was not in physics, or whose B. Sc. was designated as other than a degree in conventional physics. Of those who responded, 15% said that their B. Sc. was in engineering physics. Only 0.5% said their degree was in chemical physics, and 6% mentioned other areas, leaving 78.5% as having their first degree in "physics".

For those with a graduate degree, the aforementioned individuals with degrees in astrophysics and space physics total 6.8% and might be best associated with GSC 17 (Space and Atmospheric Physics). Biophysics and medical physics make up 1.4 and 4.9% of the sample respectively. Some of these individuals may be associated with research funds from other granting agencies as well as from NSERC. We will include them here as being associated with GSC 29 (General Physics). The other category of graduate degrees from our study who should be included as part of GSC 29 is obviously "general physics", with 18% of the total, giving GSC 29 thirty-one percent of the respondents with graduate degrees. GSC 28 (Condensed Matter Physics) forms the largest group with 36% and GSC 19 (Sub-atomic Physics) accounts for 12%. Twenty-one percent of those with graduate degrees listed the area of their degree as "other".

Table 1 shows the current employment status of the respondents according to highest degree and by gender.

* F, female; M, male; C, combined.

† not applicable.

Those percentages given in cells relating to individual categories and separate gender are obviously of limited significance. However, some interesting trends are evident. Women are more likely to be self-employed or employed part time than are men. A higher fraction of females than men with Ph. D’s are in postdoctoral positions.

In order to compare these numbers with others based on the usual meaning of "percent unemployed", we should remove those still in the educational stream from the sample population. They total 28%, leaving a real unemployment rate for Canadian physicists who responded to this survey of 2.5%.

The AIP has published the results of a survey of graduates from U. S. universities with the B. Sc. and Ph. D. degrees and who received their degree in the 1994-95 academic year, carried out six months after the end of that academic year. It showed 8% and 4% unemployed for the B. Sc. and Ph. D. recipients respectably. [6] (Both of these values had decreased by one percent from the equivalent results for the previous academic year.) Although these values are higher than the level of unemployment found in this study for physics graduates, on average those individuals covered in this study have had much more time to find employment than have those in the American study.

The 1994 NSERC survey of all Postgraduate Scholarship and 1967 Science and Engineering Scholarship winners in all disciplines who received their scholarship in 1985 found an unemployment rate for this group between 2.2 and 2.8%. Our results show an unemployment rate for physicists with graduate degrees not measurably different from zero. Further, the unemployed are mostly female, in which case even this extremely low unemployment level may be the simple consequence of the biological imperatives of child rearing.

Of those employed (excluding students, postdoctorals), 45% worked in an educational institution, 32% in industry and 14% in government, leaving 9% giving responses as "other". When broken down according to degree, the major differences in employment locations between degree levels is that 41% of those with the B. Sc. as their last degree work in industry while only 26 of M. Sc. recipients and 23% of Ph. D. recipients work in industry, and that 37% of B. Sc.’s work in education, while 54% of M. Sc.’s and 53% of Ph. D.’s work in education.

The average salary of those physicists who are employed (excluding the unemployed and those still pursuing further education as students or graduate students or who are in postdoctoral positions), averaged over all degrees and years of graduation, is $41,200. However, the standard uncertainty for this figure is $28,600, suggesting large variation about the mean.

Table 2 shows the salary averaged over the M. Sc. and the Ph. D. for individuals associated with the four physics related GSC’s, using the assignments discussed in section 6. For the purposes of the Review of Academic Physics, GSC’s 17 and 29 were combined. Using the number of responses from each, the correctly weighted average for the combination is $42,500.

An attempt was made to shed some light on the reason that the average salary for those associated with GSC 19 is higher than for those associated with the other GSC’s. GSC 19 respondents were more likely (35.6%) to be involved in "Research and Development" than was the average respondent (25.8%) or in "Teaching" (28.8% for GSC 19 versus 24.1% for the average). Given the relatively small number of responses to this survey from those with graduate degrees associated with GSC 19, we are hesitant to draw any conclusions concerning either the salaries or the employment of GSC 19 respondents.

Table 3 shows the average salary by degree, gender, and by year of B. Sc. for all employed (as defined earlier) respondents. Individual entries are not significant, but overall trends emerge. Average salaries tend to increase with time since receipt of the B. Sc. degree at all final degree levels, as would be expected. Men tend to be better paid than are women, but not always. Some anomalous low results for women probably reflect part time employment.

* no data

The average time accumulated in a job is approximately 6.25 years less for those with a Ph. D. than for those with a B. Sc., and 2.2 years less for those with an M. Sc. It is clear from Table 3 that early salaries for those with advanced degrees do not reflect the time spent in graduate school. In the chapter of this document which discusses the economic impact of physics research in Canada, Paul Vincett argues from a variety of data that those with a Ph. D. in physics earn approximately $12,000 per annum more than those with a B. Sc. in physics, and those with an M. Sc. earn $5,000 more per annum than do B. Sc.’s, averaged over the earning lifetime of the individual.

We are also able to compare the current average salary of M. Sc. and Ph. D. graduates who received their graduate degrees in the same year. Our data show that the Ph. D. recipient starts employment with a significantly higher salary than does the M. Sc. graduate. For instance, the average current salary for those that graduated with an M. Sc. in 1996 is $23,000, compared to $39,000 for the Ph. D. graduate. The M. Sc. graduate from 1989 receives a salary of $47,000 compared to $63,000 for the Ph. D. graduate from the same year. However, for those who obtained their last graduate degree before 1987 the difference is small and for some years it is negative.

Seventy-eight percent of those physics graduates who responded to the survey reside in Canada. Of those who live and work outside Canada, the United States is the home of 45%, with 9% living in the United Kingdom and the remaining 41% scattered over the globe. As suggested earlier, the real percentage living abroad may be somewhat higher than indicated by this study because of possible sample bias arising from the difficulty in reaching those graduates outside Canada. Fully 70% of those living abroad would prefer to return to Canada if the opportunity presented itself.

Table 4 shows the distribution of graduates by degree and employment field. As might be expected, the involvement of physicists in research and development increases with the seniority of the last degree obtained. Concomitantly, the likelihood that a physicist will be involved in a non-physics field decreases with the seniority of the degree. There is no correlation between degree seniority and likelihood of being involved in teaching. Women are more likely to be involved in education except for those with a Ph. D.

Because of the need to keep the questionnaire short, we were not able to ascertain where this teaching takes place. Faculty members in universities may choose to define their field as "Research and Development" or as "Teaching". Most would be expected to be involved in both and the percentage involved in "Research and Development" and in "Teaching" in the case of Ph. D. graduates is undoubtedly higher than shown. Presumably, most of those who are teaching with an M. Sc. as highest degree are teaching in high schools or colleges. The field outside physics that has attracted the largest fraction of physicists at all levels involves various types of jobs relating to computing.

In drawing conclusions from Table 4, it is important to remember that the average number of years since last degree is roughly 6 for the B. Sc. and 3 for the Ph. D. The distribution of employment fields would probably be very different if we had surveyed all Canadian physicists, particularly at the Ph. D. level.

Respondents were asked to identify themselves as belonging to one of the following categories (a) they use their physics background directly in their employment, (b) they are not employed in a physics related job, but the skills and/or modes of thought provided by their physics background are useful in their employment, or (c) their physics education is neither directly nor indirectly related to their employment. These descriptions were carefully chosen to include all physicists working essentially as physicists within category (a) regardless of whether their job title includes the word "physicist". John S. Rigden, director of physics programs for the AIP, argued recently in Industrial Physicist that most physicists working in industry work under titles such as "senior design engineer" or "systems analyst", but nevertheless approach their work from the distinct perspective of the physicist. [7]

The results, according to degree, are given in Table 5.

When the respondents are separated according to last degree the results diverge markedly. For those with graduate degrees we find a larger fraction using their physics education directly and very few indicating that physics is not relevant to their employment.

Most of those who are involved in "Research and Development" and "Teaching" are presumably using their physics background directly in their employment. The sum of the percentages in Table 4 for these two categories is similar to the number who responded that they were indeed using their physics background in their employment. However, many who are in other employment areas, such as consulting and health sciences, may also use their physics directly and some in areas such as management and sales might also use it, but less frequently.

Of those who use skills and/or modes of thought provided by their physics background, the skills used may be some of those acquired directly in the pursuit of the research goals of their thesis project, such as advanced computer related skills, knowledge of methods of statistical analysis of data or equipment design skills.

The AIP study of current employment in 1996 of the cohort who received a Ph. D. in the 1994-95 year revealed that 46% were working outside the field of physics. [6]. Of those working outside physics 36% were in engineering, and 35% were involved in computing. Our results show only 32% of Ph. D. physicists working outside physics. The difference probably derives from the fact that the wording of the relevant question in our questionnaire was designed to include all physics jobs regardless of the whether "physics" appears in the individual’s job title, while the American questionnaire did not.

Our results are also averaged over a longer time period. The difference may then indicate that our results mask an evolution over time, with more recent graduates in both Canada and the United States more likely to be employed outside physics. On the other hand, they may indicate that Canadian employers have been slower than those in the United States have been to recognize the merits of inserting Ph. D. physicists into non-physics work environments.

A group of questions sought to determine the attitude of physicists toward their education and their career. Respondents were asked to rate the "usefulness of your physics education in obtaining your job" and the "usefulness of your physics education in performing your job" on a scale from marginal (1) to absolutely critical. (5). Because of our intention to keep the questionnaire as short as reasonably possible, the meanings to be assigned to the intermediate numbers between 1 and 5 were not defined and there may have been some variation in the interpretations used by the respondents, but we believe that we can safely assume that on average the median of 3 should be interpreted as "useful" and that numbers higher than that should be interpreted as indicating degrees of strong agreement with the statement.

Respondents were also asked to rate "your degree of satisfaction with your university physics experience, on a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being highly satisfied. A similar question asked about degree of satisfaction with "your employment situation". The results for these four questions are presented in Table 6 for each degree level.

Those respondents with graduate degrees in physics, and who did not work directly in physics, but used skills and/or modes of thought provided by their physics education, also rated the usefulness of their physics education in obtaining and performing their jobs highly. M. Sc. and Ph. D. graduates rated usefulness in obtaining their job at 3.1±1.8 and 3.7±1.0 respectively. They rated usefulness in performing their jobs at 3.2±1.2 and 3.8±0.9 respectively.

In summary, then, 60-70% of M. Sc. and Ph.D. graduates use their physics directly. Of the remainder, almost all still use the skills and modes of thought learned and consider their education to be very useful in performing their jobs. Only 3% consider their education not relevant to their employment.

When all responses concerning satisfaction with "employment situation" were broken down instead according to employment sector, responses varied from a low of 3.7 for those employed in education to a high of 4.1 for those listing "other" as their employment sector.

Further evidence that a physics background is valuable in non-physics related employment is provided by an AIP study of individuals for whom the highest degree was the M. Sc. [8]. Of those who had in common a B. Sc. in physics and who now described their field of employment as "manager", 69% of those whose M. Sc. was also in physics answered in the affirmative to the statement "If I had a chance to do it all over again, I would get a degree in the same field" while only 45% of those whose M. Sc. was in Administration answered in the affirmative. Of those who had in common a B. Sc. in physics and gave as their current position "engineer", 74% of those whose M. Sc. was in physics answered in the affirmative to the same question, while only 62% of those whose M. Sc. was in engineering did so. Also, 79% of those with both degrees in physics but which were in the position of manager, and 87% of those with both degrees in physics but who were in the position of engineer agreed with the statement "Physics education provided a solid background for my career." Large percentages of those who obtained an M. Sc. in engineering after a B. Sc. in physics also agreed with the statement; 88% of those who were now managers, and 83% of those now working as engineers.

Respondents were asked to rate their agreement with the statement "From my experience, those instructors involved in an active research program were better able to fulfill their role as instructors of elementary level physics than instructors who were not actively engaged in research would have been." with 5 implying strong agreement and 1 implying strong disagreement. A similar question was asked about "upper level undergrad physics classes" and "graduate level physics classes". The results are presented in Table 7 for each degree level.

That those instructors involved in research are seen as being better able to fulfill their role as instructors of higher level classes is expected. However, the results for elementary level classes show that those at all degree levels tend to be neutral or to respond slightly negatively toward the statement that those involved in an active research program are better able to teach lower level physics classes. There is some agreement with the statement as it applies to upper level undergraduate classes. However, both M. Sc. and Ph. D. graduates strongly support the statement as it applies to graduate level classes. (We note that the opinion of those for whom the B. Sc. is the highest degree, on the ability of those teaching graduate level classes, would in most cases not be a particularly well-informed opinion.)

These results support the argument that research and teaching reinforce each other within the university environment, somewhat at the senior undergraduate level and strongly at the graduate level. The presence of research activity within a university may also affect the quality of education received by students from non-researchers in that university, but this is not proven. We note that quality undergraduate education seems to exist in universities in Canada where research is not strong, and in many four-year undergraduate colleges in the U. S. Nevertheless, instructors in these institutions often have access to research environments in nearby institutions.

Our results confirm that physicists experience very low levels of unemployment. One reason appears to be that they find many paths to a fulfilling career available to them, and not just those paths to the traditional physics related workplace [9]. An AIP study focused on M. Sc. recipients has reached a similar conclusion. [8] Regardless of where physicists find themselves working, they value their educational experience highly, as has been shown by both this study and the aforementioned AIP study. Several authors have argued convincingly that physicists are able to contribute the skills and/or modes of thought provided by their physics education to areas not normally associated with physics. [5, 9, 10, 11] Our own results show that physicists are also well paid, but we are not able to make comparisons between the salaries of physicists and that of those associated with related scientific disciplines in Canada. However, American data show that physicists in the United States are the best paid among those in the physical and natural sciences in that country [11] which provides objective confirmation of the high value placed on their education by physicists themselves.

This survey of physics graduates, carried out as part of the current Review of Academic Physics, should be seen as a first step to an understanding of the employment patterns of Canadian physicists. It has identified trends and raised issues of interest to prospective students, to those who provide physics education and to employers of physicists. It has not attempted to analyze these trends in depth.

However, similar trends have been identified elsewhere, and they have been the subject of much discussion. "Physicists tend to ….approach an application in terms of a few physical principles that can integrate and synthesize what often appear as unrelated aspects of a problem." (John Rigden in the Industrial Physicist. [7]) "…..physicists have a universal goal of understanding deeply whatever they are studying……Professionals from other disciplines, by contrast, do not share this goal…" (Joseph Pimbley in Physics Today. [10]) "Employers are willing to pay premium salaries to gain the problem-solving skills physicists are able to apply to their companies’ needs." (Brian Schwartz in APS News. [11]) These are clearly subjective opinions but they invite further study into the role of physicists in non-physics related places of employment.

We find no reason to suggest that physicists working in a non-physics environment are any less or more valuable to society (and therefore any less or more worthy of support) than physicists working in a traditional physics environment and no reason to mourn their loss from directly physics-related employment because their physics education seems almost invariably to have been a valuable preparation for their work.

Our findings have implications for the education of physicists. If 40% of physics graduates find themselves using their physics background, but not in a physics related job environment, perhaps more attention should be given in their education to the application of the reasoning processes of physics to non-physics applications. Perhaps physicists could be even better prepared to integrate themselves into those non-science environments to which they bring their unique perspectives.

Although physics undoubtedly attracts individuals who enjoy problem solving and who seek deep understanding not only of nature but of any problem to which they wish to apply themselves, the value of such individuals to society is nurtured by their exposure to the rigour of a traditional post-secondary physics education at both the graduate and undergraduate level. Joseph Pimbley summarizes "Four decades ago, a liberal arts education was thought to prepare one well for any professional endeavour…..Physics is the liberal arts education for a technological society" [10] We strongly recommend physics as a choice for post-secondary education to any student.

References

[1] Highly Qualified Personnel; NSERC, January, 1994

[2] Highly Qualified Personnel (Draft); NSERC, May 1997

[3] 1996 Bachelor’s Degree Recipients Report; AIP Pub. No. R-211.28, June 1997

[4] Postgraduate Survey-1994; NSERC, March 1995

[5] 1995 Graduate Student Report; AIP Pub. No. R-207.28, September 1996

[7] Find the Hidden Physicist, The Industrial Physicist, pg. 52. John S. Rigden, Sept. 1997

[8] What are Masters Doing; AIP Pub. R-398.1

[9] Brewing the Perfect Pint, Physics Today, pg. 50. Jean Kumagai, Sept. 1997

[10] Physicists in Finance, Physics Today, pg. 42. Joseph M. Pimley, Jan. 1997

All personal information will be kept strictly confidential. Name and university are only for verification purposes.PLEASE NOTE: You do NOT need to answer every question! If you cannot answer a question, just skip it. We will be grateful for all information we receive.

Name ________________________________________________________

E-mail address for return of survey results ___________________________

Please circle the appropriate letter or fill in the space provided.

1. Highest degree obtained IN PHYSICS:

B.Sc.____ M.Sc. ____ Ph.D. ____ .

2. Gender M___ F___

3. Was your Bachelors degree mainly in (check or circle only one)

(a) Physics

(b) Engineering Physics

(c) Chemical Physics

(d) Chemistry

(e) In other area - please specify ______________________

Year received 19___ .

University ________________________________________

4. If highest degree is M.Sc. or Ph.D., then please indicate:

Was your graduate degree mainly in (check or circle only one)

(a) Condensed Matter Physics

(b) Space Physics

(c) Sub-Atomic Physics

(d) General Physics (e.g. optics, plasma physics, general relativity,

(e) Atmospheric physics

(f) In other area - please specify ______________________

Year received 19___ .

University ________________________________________

5. Current employment status: Are you now

(a) gainfully employed full time (excluding Post-Docs)

(b) gainfully employed part time

(c) unemployed. (If unemployed go to question 13)

(d) self employed

(e) grad student

(f) PDF

(g) continuing my education but NOT in physics.

please specify field ________________________

6. Please give annual salary to nearest $1K ____________

7. Country where you now reside? __________________

If outside of Canada, would you prefer to return to

work in Canada? ____

8. Can your job be classified as:

(a) teaching

(b) health sciences

(c) consulting

(d) sales/marketing

(e) R&D

(f) management/admin

(g) product development

(h) computing hardware/software/network development

(i) other (please specify)_________________________

9. Physics relevance: Which statement best describes your situation?

(a) You use your physics background directly in your employment.

(c) Your physics education is neither directly or indirectly related to your employment.

10. If employed, is your employer

(a) an educational institution

(b) government

(c) industry

1. other (please specify) ________________________

11. Rate the usefulness of your physics education in OBTAINING your job on a scale of 1 to 5 from 1 = "marginally useful" to 5 = "absolutely critical".

If you have any opinion about the effect of the

instructor's research activity on the quality of the

instruction in physics that you received as a student,

please respond to the following three questions.

15. On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 implies strong agreement, 1 strong disagreement):

16. On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 implies strong agreement, 1 strong disagreement):

17. On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 implies strong agreement, 1 strong disagreement):

18. Do you have any other comments about physics education?

___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________