How honest should one be with their students when talking about the realities of academia?

I am a student so this is coming from a student's perspective.

I think you should be honest with them regarding what going into graduate school entails. For my case, none of the professors I initially talked to encouraged me to go to graduate school, and for good reason. Each of them stated what the cons were to going to graduate school and how the academic job market is now much more competitive than when they were a fresh Ph.D. graduate. Was this discouraging at first? Yes. However, it also helped me in cognitively organizing why I wanted to go to graduate school and I was able to set a firm goal and stick with it.

Those professors often told me that the reason why they would encourage students to take a gap year and think long and hard about the next step is precisely because students often make the assumption that Ph.D. is the obvious 'next step' when it very well might be the exact opposite of what they wanted.

Coming from a student's perspective, I appreciate honesty from professors because it helps me to realize the reality of going into graduate school and potentially what kind of sacrifices I need to make (e.g. a good chunk of my youth, vacation time, etc.). However, I never found it appealing when a professor, who I aspire to be like, tells me that I'm not good enough to ever do what they do without additional feedback.

In my case, when I first approached those professors about my plans to go into Ph.D. to become a professor, my main advisor looked at my records and told me what to expect, where I currently stand, and what I can do to improve should I wish to stay on that path. I think the last bit is the most important piece of feedback I received. The first two parts can help me in deciding if this is the correct next step for me, but the third part is what will help me achieve that step despite the challenges.

So all in all, if I were one of your students, I would appreciate honest commentary on my goals as well as the additional feedback on what I can do to improve so that the choice of pursuing a Ph.D. is still ultimately my decision. This also helps students to develop and mature, I think.

While I don't have a definite and complete answer, there are a few points I would like to make.

• I consider part of my duty to help students get the right information to choose their path, and in France, it is actually listed in our official duties (this is relatively recent, was added less than a decade ago). So honesty is in order, really.

• Before speaking the brutal truth, one should look into oneself for possible prejudice. One might overrate the importance of one's lecture because one feels it is the most important thing in the universe, while excellent grades in other lectures might make the student's record not so bad. One usually is influenced by common prejudice in our societies, and should be careful not to discourage female, working class or visible minorities students more strongly than wealthy white men. In some rare occasions, one might even find relevant to actually encourage some students who feel they can't do it while they are extremely bright and doing great (our students are usually subject to the same prejudice as we are, and it might be directed against themselves).

• That said, given the toughness of the market to get a permanent position in academia, I now give the following advice to all but the very very brightest students, even if they do stand a chance: assume you enter graduate school, do a very good PhD, and then don't get a permanent position. Would you be ok with that, or would you regret spending these years in academia? If you can accept to move on after PhD, you may try it. If you'll regret it in case you don't land a job, I strongly advise you search another path. I give the same advice after PhD to young people deciding whether they should take post-docs (and how long they try): only take the post-doc you will be happy to have worked for itself.

• It is also part of our responsibility, when we sit on admission committees or when asked to supervise a PhD (note that the system is different in France than in the US), to decline applications we do not believe firmly in. In France, there is relatively little recognition of the PhD in the private sector, and because of this I actually think we currently train too many PhDs.

I think you need to balance brutal honesty with treating students with respect.

If I find a student who will have a difficult time in getting into grad school, I would tell them that I believe they will have a challenging time finding a graduate school to accept them based on their current credentials. I would also attempt to explain what I think would make her case stronger, without being too harsh in describing the situation. You can also describe your own situation and the realities in the academic community as a whole in a similar manner.

Ultimately, it boils down more to how you say it, not so much what you say.