Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Schrodinger's Cat
I read this today.
And it reminded me of a meeting I had towards the end of
graduate school.
I spent most of graduate school thinking of career options
that would not involve research, or engineering, or science of any kind. In
fact, I used to think it would be awesome to just answer phones and organize
office supplies and schedule meetings for other people. Then my brother-in-law
told me he would never hire me to be his secretary if I had a PhD because I
would be over-qualified. And we’re family! Anyway, I digress.
Towards the end of graduate school I decided it was worth
giving research another try. I decided that maybe I didn’t hate research, maybe
I just hated…… some other things that would change if I found a great
postdoctoral position. FYI- the jury is still out three years later.
So I went to see some of my professors to get some advice
about what sort of postdoctoral position I should take. One professor put me through
the odd experience of a pretend postdoc interview. Maybe it was an odd
experience because he was a little odd? Anyway he asked me why there weren’t
any Darwins or Einsteins or Curies anymore. I told him it was because of the
way science has changed- we work in teams now. There are still Darwins and
Einsteins but they have a serious ‘et al.’ Apparently it wasn’t the best answer
he had heard but it was ok (!) he was just making sure that I didn’t say that
the reason there are no big names in research is because all the big
discoveries have been made.
If you’re still with me (Hello?? Everybody?? So glad to see
you!) its time to click on the link above. This guy wrote a book about
discovering the ignorance in science. He realized after teaching Neuroscience
from a really big textbook that students might start to think that we knew
everything there was to know already, which is patently not true. He felt that to
embrace science was to embrace the stuff we don’t know and to “search for a
black cat in a dark room” (not sure I got that entirely right but the gist is
there).
I know too many scientists looking for cats where there is
already catnip and cat poop.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
On the spectrum
I did not enjoy graduate school.
And I realize this statement puts me in good company.
Having worked in several different labs at this point in my
career I can testify that most graduate students do not enjoy graduate school.
I have seen students suffer from a serious lack of mentorship that left them
floundering for years. I’ve seen many students bear the consequences of their
PIs departing, forced or otherwise. I hear stories about postdocs bullying
technicians, about technicians sabotaging graduate students and about PIs
playing favorites. I’ve noticed that despite the wide range of institutions and
labs and PIs there is something uniquely universal about obtaining a PhD in the
life sciences. How else can you explain the popularity of this and this and of
course, this.
But it isn’t entirely universal because some people just
have an easier time obtaining their PhD due to circumstances beyond
intelligence. And our PhDs don’t come with a number that indicates difficulty.
In the same vein, some people develop a strong mentoring relationship with
their PhD advisor that gives them the confidence to launch their careers
whereas others feel disenfranchised and exploited by their PI. Why else would
we have this?
When I began my postdoc I promised myself I would put
graduate school behind me. I changed fields of study and I was in a place where
no one knew my graduate school colleagues. I didn’t want to share war stories.
But I find myself wondering where I fall on the spectrum of graduate
experience. I was depressed, overworked and discouraged, but how much of that
was the PhD experience and how much was my PhD experience?
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Golden Ticket
Three months ago I submitted a grant to the NIH for funding that would cover a few more years of training and give me eligibility to apply for funding to take to a new institution as a Primary Investigator of my own lab. In other words, it would make me a really strong candidate for Professorships because it would prove that I could successfully apply for funding. Although I have no news to report today, I did find out today what day my grant will be reviewed (nope, not sharing that here) and exactly who is reviewing it (don't even ask).
Lately it has occurred to me that trying to successfully begin a career as an independent scientific investigator requires two battles. The first battle is for the academic position itself and the second is for grants. The battle for the position itself is often based on whether the hiring committee thinks you are capable of winning the second battle. So I had a thought; why not just combine the two battles? in other words, why not create a national young investigator grant and anyone who wants to be a PI would apply for it and once you obtained such a grant you entered a pool of qualified candidates for Professorships. Universities could treat it like med schools treat residency programs and do a 'match' for research and geographical priorities. Universities would know that they were hiring people who could get funding because they would be showing up with their own money already.
If grant writing is the biggest hurdle, why not clear it up front?
Lately it has occurred to me that trying to successfully begin a career as an independent scientific investigator requires two battles. The first battle is for the academic position itself and the second is for grants. The battle for the position itself is often based on whether the hiring committee thinks you are capable of winning the second battle. So I had a thought; why not just combine the two battles? in other words, why not create a national young investigator grant and anyone who wants to be a PI would apply for it and once you obtained such a grant you entered a pool of qualified candidates for Professorships. Universities could treat it like med schools treat residency programs and do a 'match' for research and geographical priorities. Universities would know that they were hiring people who could get funding because they would be showing up with their own money already.
If grant writing is the biggest hurdle, why not clear it up front?
Monday, May 28, 2012
More rainbows and roses
I don’t plan on writing much about being a mom on this
reinvention of my blog (promise!) but every now and then some news item about
babies, pregnancy or childbirth catches my attention as both a mom and a
scientist and this weekend was one of those cases. So bear with me.
I read this in the Times about Ina May Gaskin and the
homebirth movement. I was struck by the writer’s story of her own birth
experience which has many similarities with other women I know, although for
the record it is entirely unlike my own experience. The writer’s labor simply
didn’t progress enough and after some back and forth with her doctor and her
midwife she had a c-section. I don’t pretend to understand all there is to know
about childbirth and for the record, I disliked hearing my prenatal yoga instructor
say “the universe won’t give you a baby you can’t deliver” (really?). But I do
have some thoughts on those women who simply have a stalled labor. I think as
mammals we are programmed to stall labor when we feel danger. Our bodies think
“wow! Maybe this isn’t such a good time for giving birth!” its kind of a
flight-or-fight thing and its completely subconscious. If you really want to
give birth vaginally and someone keeps coming in the room and tapping their
wrist you can see how your stress hormones might rise. I’m not suggesting that
we stop monitoring how labor progresses or that doctors should act like its
progressing fine or something. I just think maybe we should be a little less
scared of things overall. Less scared of pain and childbirth itself, less
scared of c-sections, less scared of imagining all the things that could go wrong.
And at the risk of sounding too rainbows
and roses (see previous post?) it would be nice if no one preached anything at
all about childbirth and allowed women to simply make informed decisions
without guilt.
I may not be heading to Tennessee anytime soon to give birth
but I think its great that the option exists. Yet simultaneously I wish Ina May
Gaskin’s book was not such a ‘must read’ for expectant Brooklyn women.
Friday, May 25, 2012
The skies are a bright canary yellow
I will be brief tonight.
I read this online today and I think it is wonderful.
I am a pessimist who goes by the term ‘realist’ and I’m
married to an optimist. I have always subscribed to low expectations; whenever
I apply to things (college? Graduate school? Jobs?) I figure it won’t happen
and that leads to pleasant surprises and few disappointments. My spouse does
not agree with this approach and recently I allowed myself to get excited,
maybe even optimistic, about an opportunity. And it didn’t pan out after all.
And I was disappointed. But after reading the article linked above, I think I
missed the boat a little.
The author describes an interview where the interviewer told
her she was naïve to think she could be hired given her professional
experience. She replied “If
I didn’t think I could do the job, I wouldn’t be here” and she got hired.
Optimism
isn’t just being hopeful, even extremely hopeful, that you will get what you
want, optimism is the sheer confidence that it will work out.
Happy
Friday before Memorial day weekend……….. I can’t think of many things better
than a sunny holiday Friday