Continuing with my theme of tagging posts by others that I have interest in:
This post on giving a 20-minute job talk is something to re-read when I start visiting other institutions.
I like to keep in mind the different teaching styles, and this post talks about several.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Saturday, March 21, 2009
NCAA Tourney Live!
Well, I thought I'd be putting more hoops thoughts to electronic paper this winter, but I guess it didn't happen. Maybe later I'll add a separate post about my thoughts on this year's seasons.
First, though, last night was the first time I had been to a NCAA tournament game. OSU was sent to the Dayton field, so we figured "why not?". Tickets were available on StubHub, but of course there was a huge markup. $65 face value...to ~$165 asking price. Plus the StubHub fees led to a total cost of ~$360. Good thing I had a $100 StubHub credit.
On the day of the game (3/20/09), it was an easy drive to Dayton. No traffic until we got off the interstate and waited in line for a while to park right next to the interstate (and the arena). Going from the parking lot ($5 to park?? shocking!), we had to squeeze through a gap in the fence (or go the LONG way around). After the games, there was quite the logjam, with jokes rampant about crossing over into a new country.
The Dayton Arena had an interesting profile...easy to see where the "upper deck" was at.
MEDIA!! (surprise, surprise)
The court had some interesting sightlines. Certainly on a smaller scale than some 'big' arenas that I've been to (Illinois, Iowa, PSU, OSU, ....). I liked how right upon entering the building, you had views of the court from the corners.
From a side view, looking across the court, the "lower bowl" (A-section) and "upper bowl" (B, C-sections; all red seats). We were about 15 rows from the top, in C, on the side opposite what is seen here.
The BIG BOYS, Louisville, are warming up before their game with Morehead State, who won the "play-in" game. I don't like the play-in game - if a team wins their league, they should start the tournament when everyone else does. One less bubble at-large team won't hurt the field...but, yeah, some Big 6 conference team will have a greater risk of a sub-par season. Oh well...money sells!
Requirement to host NCAA games: "luxury" suites: CHECK! (Morehead State fanbase in the foreground.
With 4 minutes left in the first half, Louisville is wondering how it can get rid of pesky Morehead.
At half, we wondered, could we witness a miracle? Could Morehead State actually beat Louisville? Wouldn't that be awesome? But, in the back of our minds, we knew Louisville would run away with it...
Kenneth Faried had an active game, hustling for rebounds and getting some nice dunks. His free throw form, though? ugh! Leaning backwards with the wrong foot forward. No wonder he shoots below 60%.
After Louisville pulled away and won the game by 20, Morehead got a standing-O from the fans during the post-game hand-shake.
----------------
Game 2, what we were there for: 8th seeded Ohio State against 9th seeded Siena. With the game in Dayton, barely an hour from Columbus, it was filled with OSU fans. (there were a ton of locals, proudly wearing their Dayton gear - their allegiances seemed to sway easily - at first for the home state, but later pulling for the small school) When the O-H-I-O chant went around the arena, everyone knew there was no neutrality.
But, for a matchup between the mascots, who would win? The Saint Bernard from Siena, or the Nuthead (Brutus Buckeye) from OSU? You'd think a dog would crack that nut, but the Buckeye was much more active during the game, strutting and knocking around his oversized head.
Evan Turner is a stud. I like his silky-smooth game. Too often the OSU offense would bog down, and the team could only look to get him the ball. He'd create, driving and whirling to the basket for either a shot or a nice pass to an open player. His stat line was fantastic: 25 points (18 shots - 2-2 3pt, 7-8 FT) with 9 boards, 8 assists, 2 blocks, 2 steals but also 5 turnovers (all were team leaders. I'd take him in a second on my team.
OSU was in control for most of the game, or at least they seemed to be. Siena's star, Kenny Hasbrouck only had 1 point at half, and didn't do much in the second half until taking over late. But, Siena stepped up their pressure, which OSU didn't handle well, and started hitting shots. When BJ Mullins missed two FTs late, there was a feeling that Siena could make it interesting, and they did, tying it up. I missed that, but I got OSU's failed attempt to win the game, with 8 seconds remaining. Turner got a good shot off, but it didn't fall.
As OT started, Siena seemed to have the momentum, scoring the first 4 points. But, OSU came back and took the lead. Until this sequence to end the OT.
In the second overtime, both teams went back and forth. Siena took a late lead. With around 30 s left, OSU had the ball, and Evan Turner made a tough shot with 10 seconds left to tie. But, did he go too early? I had a feeling, and Siena made them pay...
OSU's final shot came close but didn't go, and the Siena crowd started their celebration.
Although this isn't a good shot (taken while moving towards exit), the still-celebrating Siena crowd and final score can be seen.
It was an expected traffic jam getting out. There were a lot of unhappy Buckeye fans, including this guy with the over-decorated Jeep. Love the writing on the spare - "I don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan."
It was a lot of fun going to the event. It had the feeling of a high school basketball tournament, with different sections of fanbases. Some groups becoming fans of others, and plenty of neutral fans pulling for the underdog. While I was pulling for Ohio State, I'm glad that I wasn't fully invested, as that would have been pretty depressing to lose like that...and then have a 3 hour drive from 12:30 am until 3:30 am before getting to bed. Yeah, that was a long night.
First, though, last night was the first time I had been to a NCAA tournament game. OSU was sent to the Dayton field, so we figured "why not?". Tickets were available on StubHub, but of course there was a huge markup. $65 face value...to ~$165 asking price. Plus the StubHub fees led to a total cost of ~$360. Good thing I had a $100 StubHub credit.
On the day of the game (3/20/09), it was an easy drive to Dayton. No traffic until we got off the interstate and waited in line for a while to park right next to the interstate (and the arena). Going from the parking lot ($5 to park?? shocking!), we had to squeeze through a gap in the fence (or go the LONG way around). After the games, there was quite the logjam, with jokes rampant about crossing over into a new country.
The Dayton Arena had an interesting profile...easy to see where the "upper deck" was at.
MEDIA!! (surprise, surprise)
The court had some interesting sightlines. Certainly on a smaller scale than some 'big' arenas that I've been to (Illinois, Iowa, PSU, OSU, ....). I liked how right upon entering the building, you had views of the court from the corners.
From a side view, looking across the court, the "lower bowl" (A-section) and "upper bowl" (B, C-sections; all red seats). We were about 15 rows from the top, in C, on the side opposite what is seen here.
The BIG BOYS, Louisville, are warming up before their game with Morehead State, who won the "play-in" game. I don't like the play-in game - if a team wins their league, they should start the tournament when everyone else does. One less bubble at-large team won't hurt the field...but, yeah, some Big 6 conference team will have a greater risk of a sub-par season. Oh well...money sells!
Requirement to host NCAA games: "luxury" suites: CHECK! (Morehead State fanbase in the foreground.
With 4 minutes left in the first half, Louisville is wondering how it can get rid of pesky Morehead.
At half, we wondered, could we witness a miracle? Could Morehead State actually beat Louisville? Wouldn't that be awesome? But, in the back of our minds, we knew Louisville would run away with it...
Kenneth Faried had an active game, hustling for rebounds and getting some nice dunks. His free throw form, though? ugh! Leaning backwards with the wrong foot forward. No wonder he shoots below 60%.
After Louisville pulled away and won the game by 20, Morehead got a standing-O from the fans during the post-game hand-shake.
----------------
Game 2, what we were there for: 8th seeded Ohio State against 9th seeded Siena. With the game in Dayton, barely an hour from Columbus, it was filled with OSU fans. (there were a ton of locals, proudly wearing their Dayton gear - their allegiances seemed to sway easily - at first for the home state, but later pulling for the small school) When the O-H-I-O chant went around the arena, everyone knew there was no neutrality.
But, for a matchup between the mascots, who would win? The Saint Bernard from Siena, or the Nuthead (Brutus Buckeye) from OSU? You'd think a dog would crack that nut, but the Buckeye was much more active during the game, strutting and knocking around his oversized head.
Evan Turner is a stud. I like his silky-smooth game. Too often the OSU offense would bog down, and the team could only look to get him the ball. He'd create, driving and whirling to the basket for either a shot or a nice pass to an open player. His stat line was fantastic: 25 points (18 shots - 2-2 3pt, 7-8 FT) with 9 boards, 8 assists, 2 blocks, 2 steals but also 5 turnovers (all were team leaders. I'd take him in a second on my team.
OSU was in control for most of the game, or at least they seemed to be. Siena's star, Kenny Hasbrouck only had 1 point at half, and didn't do much in the second half until taking over late. But, Siena stepped up their pressure, which OSU didn't handle well, and started hitting shots. When BJ Mullins missed two FTs late, there was a feeling that Siena could make it interesting, and they did, tying it up. I missed that, but I got OSU's failed attempt to win the game, with 8 seconds remaining. Turner got a good shot off, but it didn't fall.
As OT started, Siena seemed to have the momentum, scoring the first 4 points. But, OSU came back and took the lead. Until this sequence to end the OT.
In the second overtime, both teams went back and forth. Siena took a late lead. With around 30 s left, OSU had the ball, and Evan Turner made a tough shot with 10 seconds left to tie. But, did he go too early? I had a feeling, and Siena made them pay...
OSU's final shot came close but didn't go, and the Siena crowd started their celebration.
Although this isn't a good shot (taken while moving towards exit), the still-celebrating Siena crowd and final score can be seen.
It was an expected traffic jam getting out. There were a lot of unhappy Buckeye fans, including this guy with the over-decorated Jeep. Love the writing on the spare - "I don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan."
It was a lot of fun going to the event. It had the feeling of a high school basketball tournament, with different sections of fanbases. Some groups becoming fans of others, and plenty of neutral fans pulling for the underdog. While I was pulling for Ohio State, I'm glad that I wasn't fully invested, as that would have been pretty depressing to lose like that...and then have a 3 hour drive from 12:30 am until 3:30 am before getting to bed. Yeah, that was a long night.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
D-day come and gone
Yesterday (3/10) was my PhD defense. After several years of research, months of dissertation writing, then a final week of reviewing my material, it did feel anti-climactic. The talk went smoothly, and the following near-two hours of "closed door session" with my committee went pretty well. It was less of the grilling session we're sometimes conditioned to fear and more of a conversation about my research, the mechanisms, how the system works, the relevance of my work, and re-explaining points from my talk. After getting kicked out for a 10 minutes, it was nice coming back in and receiving hand-shakes and congratulations. But, I was expecting it. Yes, I was confident - I knew my stuff and almost felt on autopilot during the open talk. In the session, while I couldn't answer every question, at no time did I feel out of my realm or frustrated. :) And then it was over and I talked for an hour with my advisor, reviewing the discussion and talking some about the future. I was pretty much fried by that time, after 3 hours of being on my feet, pacing, pointing, talking, thinking, and staying on my toes. And, my quads were aching, too. A long, tiring day that I wish had started with my defense at the beginning instead of at 3pm. But, I can't complain, as I PASSED!
Now, it is on the rapid down-hill slope towards graduation. Just a few minor changes to my dissertation, along with incorporating a few final "towards manuscript submission" changes to the aim 3 paper/chapter. That won't take much time. It'll probably take more pain to deal with some bureaucratic screw-ups that have to be cleared up before the school will graduate me.
Now I need to start seriously thinking about the future. My advisor and I have had more "future" talks - he's trying to get me a post-doc slot within our center so that I don't have to be covered under a grant of his. And, collaboration opportunities with other PIs are opening up. But, the big question is how long I want to stay here. Of course, my PI pointed out that plenty of PhD graduates continued with a post-doc here before obtaining a tenure track position elsewhere. This is a top program within my discipline with excellent name cache and a structure that is very hard to compete with. It wouldn't be hard to show separation from my advisor while benefiting from staying at the same place. At the minimum, I've got to go visit the location that interested me last fall - again my advisor brought up the option to commute between the two places. It is only ~2 hours apart. While a daily basis would get old quick, a couple of days a week could happen. Now is the time to start seriously considering my options.
It sure would be nice to be somewhere warmer, though....springtime and still in the 40s. ugh!
Now, it is on the rapid down-hill slope towards graduation. Just a few minor changes to my dissertation, along with incorporating a few final "towards manuscript submission" changes to the aim 3 paper/chapter. That won't take much time. It'll probably take more pain to deal with some bureaucratic screw-ups that have to be cleared up before the school will graduate me.
Now I need to start seriously thinking about the future. My advisor and I have had more "future" talks - he's trying to get me a post-doc slot within our center so that I don't have to be covered under a grant of his. And, collaboration opportunities with other PIs are opening up. But, the big question is how long I want to stay here. Of course, my PI pointed out that plenty of PhD graduates continued with a post-doc here before obtaining a tenure track position elsewhere. This is a top program within my discipline with excellent name cache and a structure that is very hard to compete with. It wouldn't be hard to show separation from my advisor while benefiting from staying at the same place. At the minimum, I've got to go visit the location that interested me last fall - again my advisor brought up the option to commute between the two places. It is only ~2 hours apart. While a daily basis would get old quick, a couple of days a week could happen. Now is the time to start seriously considering my options.
It sure would be nice to be somewhere warmer, though....springtime and still in the 40s. ugh!
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Dissertation is DONE....
...well, not exactly. But, on Tuesday I sent it off to my guidance committee members. We are required to send it out 10 days prior to our defense, but my advisor suggested that I do it 2 weeks ahead of time. I was in good shape prior to then, but, as expected, I got some final comments from my advisor on Tuesday. It wasn't bad getting through them, but then I had a lot of end-game formatting to do, which was tedious - page numbers, line spacing, etc. It felt great to get it off. I'm feeling pretty good about my defense. I gave a "practice defense" talk at the end of January. Probably 75% or more of my defense slides won't change from that talk, and I've already gone through the remainder, thinking about what I need to update. I know my stuff and am looking forward to defending (and getting past that hurdle).
In the meantime, I've had a few tabs open on my Firefox browser, waiting to be "bookmarked" in a posting for future reference:
-I liked this commentary on how people read graphs. The tips of good color schemes and reducing extraneous text/markings are things I've tried to follow. Here's hoping I can make PPT slides that are effective at getting my point across and are not boring to look at.
-This discussion on how grad student productivity follows the "hockey stick" growth curve hit home. Coming in with a Masters, I expected to be productive my first year...there were times that I was, but in the end most of that work went nowhere. Luckily, I pushed things, and had my "research growth" start at the end of my first year...though I have observed others who don't have it start until years 2 or 3. And, there are those who have peaks at 2-3 years, then periods of inactivity, before later peaks return.
-I've got to say that this methodology of ranking presentations is classic: PISSOFF. I've found myself coming back to some of the points in recent talks I've attended. Funny stuff...and I agree - I hate wasting my time by sitting through a poor presentation. I always try to sit in a location that makes it conducive for me to do a little work without being too obvious, if I should choose to.
-And, this follow-up post at another location had a funny suggestion - gonging people who are clearly wasting others time. What a great addition that would be to some of our lab meetings!
...back to semi-work!
In the meantime, I've had a few tabs open on my Firefox browser, waiting to be "bookmarked" in a posting for future reference:
-I liked this commentary on how people read graphs. The tips of good color schemes and reducing extraneous text/markings are things I've tried to follow. Here's hoping I can make PPT slides that are effective at getting my point across and are not boring to look at.
-This discussion on how grad student productivity follows the "hockey stick" growth curve hit home. Coming in with a Masters, I expected to be productive my first year...there were times that I was, but in the end most of that work went nowhere. Luckily, I pushed things, and had my "research growth" start at the end of my first year...though I have observed others who don't have it start until years 2 or 3. And, there are those who have peaks at 2-3 years, then periods of inactivity, before later peaks return.
-I've got to say that this methodology of ranking presentations is classic: PISSOFF. I've found myself coming back to some of the points in recent talks I've attended. Funny stuff...and I agree - I hate wasting my time by sitting through a poor presentation. I always try to sit in a location that makes it conducive for me to do a little work without being too obvious, if I should choose to.
-And, this follow-up post at another location had a funny suggestion - gonging people who are clearly wasting others time. What a great addition that would be to some of our lab meetings!
...back to semi-work!
Friday, February 6, 2009
Defending is on the horizon
I am still progressing well towards finishing up. My dissertation is taking decent shape - the Introduction chapter is probably better than 90% done, after getting a thumbs-up from a key advisor. Just add a figure and I'll write that off. I've been a little stymied by my third paper. It has been slow going putting together the results and discussion sections, as I parse through the data. Objectives shifted slightly across experiments, so some outputs weren't collected in the same manner. And, there's an experiment or two that aren't consistent with the others. My advisors had initially said: put the results together and we'll see if another experiment is needed. To me, shooting for a certain significance level is a bad idea: this aim isn't showing that one thing is necessarily significantly better than another, but that it can be accomplished. So, adding experiments could improve the numbers, sure, but I could get more outliers which just make it worse. In my opinion (granted, not worth a lot in the big picture), I have shown a functional output. Certain comparisons are signficant while others are not - but that my results are similar while not being worse are key to me. So, I haven't been as quick to "put together the numbers" while working on other sections...as my committee was very pleased with my results, I should be able to force the issue of not having another experiment by having time pass. I just have to make sure that the arguements are strong in the paper for the relevance of the work. That's where some of the wording has slowed me down. So, rather than move slowly on one thing, I've been flying through other sections of the dissertation. Of the 6 appendix sections I'll have, three are now finished, or > 95% done. A fourth one will be an easy pasting of a setup diagram already created. The last two will be brief and shouldn't take long. So, I'm happy with that progress, along with the praise I've received for the Introduction.
And, to help push things, I have scheduled my defense. March 10th. Barely a month away. Prior to the defense, I have to distribute my dissertation two weeks ahead of time....by February 24th. So, that now leaves me with 2.5 weeks to finish my dissertation. And, to make things a little interesting, the talk I was scheduled to give last Wednesday that was canceled by snow has been rescheduled for February 25th. Good thing I'll be repeating a talk I already gave, using material I'll have just pored over for the dissertation.
My goals for the weekend are to get the remaining 3 appendix sections to >= 90% done and to get a new, improved draft of the third paper done. That paper will be the sticking point on my dissertation, with my advisor, I'm sure. Hopefully after this version there will just be one more reviewed version prior to sending out the dissertation. Then, the other chapter needing work is the Discussion, which is just in a ~3 page outline right now. Translating sections from the Introduction and the discussions of each paper should cut down on a lot of the work time.
Unusually, I have plans each day this weekend, which will limit how much work time I've got. Tonight I'm picking up a new grad student to the lab at the airport - where he's flying in from Germany. I'll take him to his temporary hotel and probably out to eat. Tomorrow afternoon/evening is a surprise birthday party with my girlfriend. Sunday I'm going to an alumni event for several hours in the afternoon. Here's hoping I can be productive Saturday morning and Sunday evening!
And, to help push things, I have scheduled my defense. March 10th. Barely a month away. Prior to the defense, I have to distribute my dissertation two weeks ahead of time....by February 24th. So, that now leaves me with 2.5 weeks to finish my dissertation. And, to make things a little interesting, the talk I was scheduled to give last Wednesday that was canceled by snow has been rescheduled for February 25th. Good thing I'll be repeating a talk I already gave, using material I'll have just pored over for the dissertation.
My goals for the weekend are to get the remaining 3 appendix sections to >= 90% done and to get a new, improved draft of the third paper done. That paper will be the sticking point on my dissertation, with my advisor, I'm sure. Hopefully after this version there will just be one more reviewed version prior to sending out the dissertation. Then, the other chapter needing work is the Discussion, which is just in a ~3 page outline right now. Translating sections from the Introduction and the discussions of each paper should cut down on a lot of the work time.
Unusually, I have plans each day this weekend, which will limit how much work time I've got. Tonight I'm picking up a new grad student to the lab at the airport - where he's flying in from Germany. I'll take him to his temporary hotel and probably out to eat. Tomorrow afternoon/evening is a surprise birthday party with my girlfriend. Sunday I'm going to an alumni event for several hours in the afternoon. Here's hoping I can be productive Saturday morning and Sunday evening!
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Talking over Writing
Another week has flown by in my quest for the diploma. It would be nice to get this week back, as it wasn't as productive as I would have liked. The primary reason was that I was scheduled to give two talks this week - on Wednesday and Friday. There is some cross-over in the audiences, but as the two were at very different locations (hospital 10 miles from campus and in department building on campus), I planned on just giving the same talk twice. As I am still working on being a confident public speaker, I spend a lot of time putting my slides together, and rehearsing them. By the time my presentation comes around, I can go through the talk slide by slide in my head. That helps when I want to practice in the shower. :) But, that means I'm working less on other things. I looked at these talks as defense-practice talks, which means I'll save time later in a lot of the prep...but that'll be saving time after dissertation completion which I won't need as much as I do now. So, Wednesday comes along and I know my stuff like the back of my hand. And, a blizzard of snow also blows into town. From talking to people on Tuesday, I knew that attendance would be down on Wed, as some would just go to the easier-to-attend Friday talk. I left twice as early Wednesday morning, but still was stuck in barely moving traffic for the first 25 minutes of drive time. With my arrival on time being questionable, I gave the center a call to make sure the talk wasn't getting canceled (or to know before I got too far). It sounded like the roads around the hospital were terrible, and I was going to ring back with my progress in 10 minutes as my route was clearing up as traffic spread out. Before I could call back, the organizer called me and said that they were canceling the talk. Apparently there was very little attendance at the investigator meeting prior to my talk, and the roads were still terrible. Luckily, I got the call before making it to the interstate, and didn't have too much trouble turning around and just going home to work for the day. But, it stuck turning around after already spending about an hour driving that morning, and having prepared early for the talk that day. Oh well.
The talk yesterday went smoothly. I think I rocked my stuff pretty well. The audience was mainly students with only a couple of professors and several post-docs. I only got one softball question. I was told that I explained everything well by several, but I still would have liked more questions. The two professors that usually grill students weren't there - one is on my committee and just saw most of my material two weeks prior.
Time to return to full-time number crunching and text writing. In my last experiment, last week, the results were less than stellar. I showed a clear difference between methods A and B, but method A results were no where near the phenomenal results from the first 3 experiments. With 5 total experiments in the bag and deadlines fast approaching, I really want to be done with experiments. My advisor, though is hedging on the need for another experiment, which is annoying. "Let's see if we have significance on the results" and "work on this figure and the paper" then we'll talk next week. Gah! I can put the results together in different ways to either show significance or not. And, another experiment has a risk of not working which just makes things more complicated. I know that my method works, but there are sometimes complications in the model that can't be prevented - in the two less-than-stellar experiments, the results can be explained. But, it just gets more difficult and obscures the good results by adding more experiments. And, working on that specific figure is difficult as some of the data inputs weren't collected in initial experiments when the objectives weren't aligned as they are now. Nothing like shifting over time - let's try this, this time - then pooling results from across experiments together.
Guess I need to stop complaining and buckle down for several hours of work on this cold Saturday. It is times like this that I wish I didn't have to drive an hour to see my girlfriend later today - seeing her is good, but I'd like to get that hour to do more productive things than sit in my car.
The talk yesterday went smoothly. I think I rocked my stuff pretty well. The audience was mainly students with only a couple of professors and several post-docs. I only got one softball question. I was told that I explained everything well by several, but I still would have liked more questions. The two professors that usually grill students weren't there - one is on my committee and just saw most of my material two weeks prior.
Time to return to full-time number crunching and text writing. In my last experiment, last week, the results were less than stellar. I showed a clear difference between methods A and B, but method A results were no where near the phenomenal results from the first 3 experiments. With 5 total experiments in the bag and deadlines fast approaching, I really want to be done with experiments. My advisor, though is hedging on the need for another experiment, which is annoying. "Let's see if we have significance on the results" and "work on this figure and the paper" then we'll talk next week. Gah! I can put the results together in different ways to either show significance or not. And, another experiment has a risk of not working which just makes things more complicated. I know that my method works, but there are sometimes complications in the model that can't be prevented - in the two less-than-stellar experiments, the results can be explained. But, it just gets more difficult and obscures the good results by adding more experiments. And, working on that specific figure is difficult as some of the data inputs weren't collected in initial experiments when the objectives weren't aligned as they are now. Nothing like shifting over time - let's try this, this time - then pooling results from across experiments together.
Guess I need to stop complaining and buckle down for several hours of work on this cold Saturday. It is times like this that I wish I didn't have to drive an hour to see my girlfriend later today - seeing her is good, but I'd like to get that hour to do more productive things than sit in my car.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Thinking towards tenure
I like these two recent posts at Pondering blather on working towards tenure. While the content of a tenure packet seems straight-forward, I like this listing of good things to keep in mind. And, it isn't a surprise that the number of publications is important...but the target itself is unclear and probably moving, even within a single department.
In the coming year my current advisor will be submitting his tenure packet. I see him as a shoe-in for tenure, given his solid research and funding record, as well as involvement in many teaching and service opportunities. Having students move towards graduation at a faster rate than peer faculty can't help. It'll be interesting to observe the process and learn as much as I can.
In the coming year my current advisor will be submitting his tenure packet. I see him as a shoe-in for tenure, given his solid research and funding record, as well as involvement in many teaching and service opportunities. Having students move towards graduation at a faster rate than peer faculty can't help. It'll be interesting to observe the process and learn as much as I can.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
States I've been to...
30 out of 50 isn't a bad percentage. All but WV and NV I've at least stayed overnight in - those two had plane lay-overs and drive-through breaks:
visited 30 states (60%)
Create your own visited map of The United States or try another Douwe Osinga project
visited 30 states (60%)
Create your own visited map of The United States or try another Douwe Osinga project
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Advisor Calendar!
I thought of another thing I'd like to do when I'm a professor. As a grad student, there are plenty of times where I just need a small thing or a signature from my advisor but I don't know when he'll be around. Or, there are other times when he's locked away for days (or weeks) on end working on a grant before the deadline. I can appreciate that he's very busy most of the time and it isn't his responsibility to be at my beck and call. But, it would be nice to have an idea of when he might be around or be available. Occasionally we'll get this info, during a lab meeting when we ask about an upcoming week or he gives us a heads-up about a deadline. I like what a professor that I TA'ed for does. He syncs his calendar schedule with the campus online calendar (I think some other labs here may make use of Google calendars). So, any Case person can look him up and see when he is booked or even double booked. It made it easy for him to agree on a meeting - just tell me to find an open time in his schedule. The contents of each slot were, of course, not available to me. But, I really liked having an easy access to this information. I think most students would appreciate having this extra bit of knowledge, and if I'm using the right software it shouldn't require any extra work on my part. As a fan of Office, I use Outlook and keep the calendar updated (which synchronizes nicely with my smartphone). I'll just continue doing this in the future, integrating something like Google calendar or the school calendar - whatever syncs up with the minimal involvement from me.
Thinking about a post-doc
I just had a good conversation with a NIH program officer. She liked my proposed research, saying it was clearly within their mission as opposed to several other centers. And, as expected from correspondence with other program officers, she was pushing me towards doing a F32 than a K01. Too bad that K's are dominated by applicants with several years of experience....and that I'm pretty swamped now working on dissertation materials that finishing a solid K app by 2/12 would be near impossible. Hopefully I can fit in the F32 deadline of early April with everything else I'll be finishing then. In a perfect world, I'll get the F and submit a K01 ~1.5 years later which will carry me into a tenure track position.
This has given me a chance to think more about post-doc-ing. I know, it should be a higher priority. But, graduation in May is paramount in my mind. Having an open opportunity to remain in the lab after graduation makes it easier to put off the post-grad plans. I finally had a brief talk with my advisor about it the other day - discussing some specifics instead of the vague comments that have been made. Short of me really changing my mind, I plan to remain in the lab for at least 9-12 months, continuing aspects of my PhD work - hopefully getting some clinical subjects. During that time I'll submit one or two post-doc grant applications and investigate post-doc labs elsewhere. By 2010 I should know whether I have funding to remain where I am or if another location has enticed me away. Aside from tying up loose ends of my grad studies, my focus while here will be to do experiments that aren't directly tied to my PhD studies. This should help minimize the "too similar to PhD work" risk that comes with staying at the same place, and working with the same mentor.
Speaking of post-doc thoughts, this was an excellent discussion on choosing a post-doc. And, here's a document that might provide a few pointers on obtaining a post-doc. Sometime I need to come back and review these TED blog posts about the funding of science, which will also affect my post-grad career.
In a few hours I'll have my (hopefully) penultimate PhD guidance committee meeting, in which I'll wow them with my progress, impress them with the new Aim 3 that I've done to replace a stagnant clinical study, and show them that I'm on track to defend in March. Fingers crossed....
This has given me a chance to think more about post-doc-ing. I know, it should be a higher priority. But, graduation in May is paramount in my mind. Having an open opportunity to remain in the lab after graduation makes it easier to put off the post-grad plans. I finally had a brief talk with my advisor about it the other day - discussing some specifics instead of the vague comments that have been made. Short of me really changing my mind, I plan to remain in the lab for at least 9-12 months, continuing aspects of my PhD work - hopefully getting some clinical subjects. During that time I'll submit one or two post-doc grant applications and investigate post-doc labs elsewhere. By 2010 I should know whether I have funding to remain where I am or if another location has enticed me away. Aside from tying up loose ends of my grad studies, my focus while here will be to do experiments that aren't directly tied to my PhD studies. This should help minimize the "too similar to PhD work" risk that comes with staying at the same place, and working with the same mentor.
Speaking of post-doc thoughts, this was an excellent discussion on choosing a post-doc. And, here's a document that might provide a few pointers on obtaining a post-doc. Sometime I need to come back and review these TED blog posts about the funding of science, which will also affect my post-grad career.
In a few hours I'll have my (hopefully) penultimate PhD guidance committee meeting, in which I'll wow them with my progress, impress them with the new Aim 3 that I've done to replace a stagnant clinical study, and show them that I'm on track to defend in March. Fingers crossed....
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Still writing
I'm making good progress on my dissertation. This past week had a lot of data analysis cranking as well as some writing. I need to get a first draft of my dissertation discussion to my advisor by Tuesday....just so we can say that we've reviewed it at my committee meeting on Thursday. The meeting is an important one in which I need to convince the committee of the importance of my new specific aim 3, that my progress is strong enough to only need one more experiment (regardless of its outcome) and that I'm on track to finish things in time to graduate in May. My advisor is on board with everything, so I'm confident. I also need to get back to updates to the dissertation Introduction and Chapter 4 - which will be my third paper. Write, write, rrrrite. :-P
Speaking of writing, I like this witty synopsis of the different stages of grant writing. I can feel the similarities to the writing I'm doing too. I also like this recent post and commentary on generating ideas...some good thoughts to keep in mind in the future.
Speaking of writing, I like this witty synopsis of the different stages of grant writing. I can feel the similarities to the writing I'm doing too. I also like this recent post and commentary on generating ideas...some good thoughts to keep in mind in the future.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Researching Defense?
I can't remember where I saw a link to this, but it has been sitting on my firefox tab list for a while waiting for me to link to it. This is hilarious: in the early 90s, someone did a study comparing "undergraduates" opinion of the better defense (hand-waving/stationary) against actual shooting accuracy for those defenses (and control of none). This is only an abstract, so I can't pull apart the methods like I would like to. Undergrads? Come on...everyone should know it is harder to see through a stationary object (wall) than a moving one (like looking through a fan)....except for whatever 140 people they polled. When playing, there's plenty of other moving distractions, aside from whatever your defender is doing, that good shooters don't notice the distraction. But, if you can't see the hoop, things get a little harder (duh):
I'm curious what is meant by the authors that opinions were independant of exposure to basketball. Watching or also playing?
Then, the shooting competition? Again, I wish I could see the full methods. For starters, though, what kind of shots are these (and who is shooting them) where the average FG% without any hand in the face was under 40%? Maybe they were recording shots during "game-action" but regular players should be able to hit free throw range and in well over 50% of the time, and I wouldn't expect them to test beyond the arc. But, if they had random people doing the shooting, I'd expect the variances to be much higher, showing a spread of abilities (the near similar values are fishy to me). Showing that it is "linear" for those "x-inputs" is pretty funny. ...at least the results meet what I'd expect as far as what has the higher percentage:
I've gotta look around the internets to see if I can find other work by these authors...
Well, at the lead-author's 2001 Arizona State research page, it says the (1993) abstract is in preparation. hmmm...
Looks like the lead author is still looking at interfering with shooting.
Given that this author is a researcher AND into sports, he's OK in my book. I'm sure that abstract has all kinds of details behind the scenes or it was an undergrad project...makes for good fodder for reading as-is. Plus, he's at the granter of my Master's degree, so that gives him another bonus. Go Devils!
I'm curious what is meant by the authors that opinions were independant of exposure to basketball. Watching or also playing?
Then, the shooting competition? Again, I wish I could see the full methods. For starters, though, what kind of shots are these (and who is shooting them) where the average FG% without any hand in the face was under 40%? Maybe they were recording shots during "game-action" but regular players should be able to hit free throw range and in well over 50% of the time, and I wouldn't expect them to test beyond the arc. But, if they had random people doing the shooting, I'd expect the variances to be much higher, showing a spread of abilities (the near similar values are fishy to me). Showing that it is "linear" for those "x-inputs" is pretty funny. ...at least the results meet what I'd expect as far as what has the higher percentage:
I've gotta look around the internets to see if I can find other work by these authors...
Well, at the lead-author's 2001 Arizona State research page, it says the (1993) abstract is in preparation. hmmm...
Looks like the lead author is still looking at interfering with shooting.
Given that this author is a researcher AND into sports, he's OK in my book. I'm sure that abstract has all kinds of details behind the scenes or it was an undergrad project...makes for good fodder for reading as-is. Plus, he's at the granter of my Master's degree, so that gives him another bonus. Go Devils!
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Publishing Gauntlet
Found this hilarious comic over at Lab initio. Pretty funny, even for my limited publishing experience...
Saturday, January 3, 2009
When I'm a PI....
...as in principle investigator, and thus (hopefully) in a tenure-track academic/professor position, there are a variety of things that I'd like to do. From time to time I notice things that PIs are doing, or are not doing but could, that I'd like to try and remember to do when I've got the opportunity.
-Have weekly lab meetings with all personnel, where key lab-related items are discussed, students can touch on points where they'd like others input, and general research-type advise can be dispensed. My lab has this now, though it didn't start until well into my 2nd (or was it 3rd?) year. It is good to have when experiments involve multiple lab personnel and for the many weeks when it is the only hour that we'll see our advisor.
-Once a month, have a lab member give a ~15 minute presentation on current research progress. IMO, students need as many opportunities as possible to talk about their research in front of an audience. It is one thing to have a discussion with one or two advisors, but putting together a planned talk in front of even a small group is a good practice. We don't do this in a group setting, in my lab, although the research centers that I'm affiliated with give one opportunity per year for each student to give a talk. That is great, for a larger audience filled mainly with student peers and several PIs. But, a greater number of opportunites would be an even better thing, I think, especially in the controlled environment of fellow lab-mates who are more likely to ask questions and know the subject better.
-I've thought of a few things that'd be cool to give as PhD-completing gifts, but only one is coming to mind right now. As a kid, I was an AVID baseball (and to a lesser extent basketball) card collector, amassing a collection of well over 20,000 cards. So, things along those lines catch my eye. I like the current NCAA marketing push to show NCAA athletes as going pro in some 'non-sport', especially the sports-card commercial (yes, I know it is very hypocritical, given the major $$$ that are made by the "not for profit" NCAA during the big money sports) that is playing now. That led me to the thought that it'd be cool to give a set of 10 or so "player cards" for a person. The front could be an "in-action" research picture. On the back would be a head shot from their early days in the program. Vital stats could include publications, conference presentations, any awards, and special work in the lab. I think this would be a nice little "souvenir" of grad school that would be easy to pull out down the road and look at.
-Another good potential PhD-completing gift would be a book for the next career stage. There are many potential good ones. My parents are (supposedly) ordering for me The Academic Portfolio as a late birthday gift. Other books on my wish list that may be appropriate include The Graphic Syllabus and Outcomes Map, At the Helm: A Laboratory Navigator, or a science-ethics book like Cantor's Dilemma or Biomedical Ethics for Engineers.
-And, on the lighter side, PhD completing gifts or prizes for completing research projects or grants could be science-related t-shirts. Examples include: Recycle Ideas t-shirt from PhD Comics, the "Research" shirt from PhD Comics, or "Research Tool" also from PhD Comics, I'm going to try Science t-shirt from XKCD, and the "Doctor...of philosophy" shirt from PhD Comics - I received one of these for my birthday, and can't wait to wear it for the first time after I get my degree.
I guess my mind is busy with getting gifts (it is the season) and finishing my degree. ha. There are a bunch of other "as-PI" things I've thought of, but they are all currently hiding in the recesses of my mind. I'll throw them on the blog as I think of them...
-Have weekly lab meetings with all personnel, where key lab-related items are discussed, students can touch on points where they'd like others input, and general research-type advise can be dispensed. My lab has this now, though it didn't start until well into my 2nd (or was it 3rd?) year. It is good to have when experiments involve multiple lab personnel and for the many weeks when it is the only hour that we'll see our advisor.
-Once a month, have a lab member give a ~15 minute presentation on current research progress. IMO, students need as many opportunities as possible to talk about their research in front of an audience. It is one thing to have a discussion with one or two advisors, but putting together a planned talk in front of even a small group is a good practice. We don't do this in a group setting, in my lab, although the research centers that I'm affiliated with give one opportunity per year for each student to give a talk. That is great, for a larger audience filled mainly with student peers and several PIs. But, a greater number of opportunites would be an even better thing, I think, especially in the controlled environment of fellow lab-mates who are more likely to ask questions and know the subject better.
-I've thought of a few things that'd be cool to give as PhD-completing gifts, but only one is coming to mind right now. As a kid, I was an AVID baseball (and to a lesser extent basketball) card collector, amassing a collection of well over 20,000 cards. So, things along those lines catch my eye. I like the current NCAA marketing push to show NCAA athletes as going pro in some 'non-sport', especially the sports-card commercial (yes, I know it is very hypocritical, given the major $$$ that are made by the "not for profit" NCAA during the big money sports) that is playing now. That led me to the thought that it'd be cool to give a set of 10 or so "player cards" for a person. The front could be an "in-action" research picture. On the back would be a head shot from their early days in the program. Vital stats could include publications, conference presentations, any awards, and special work in the lab. I think this would be a nice little "souvenir" of grad school that would be easy to pull out down the road and look at.
-Another good potential PhD-completing gift would be a book for the next career stage. There are many potential good ones. My parents are (supposedly) ordering for me The Academic Portfolio as a late birthday gift. Other books on my wish list that may be appropriate include The Graphic Syllabus and Outcomes Map, At the Helm: A Laboratory Navigator, or a science-ethics book like Cantor's Dilemma or Biomedical Ethics for Engineers.
-And, on the lighter side, PhD completing gifts or prizes for completing research projects or grants could be science-related t-shirts. Examples include: Recycle Ideas t-shirt from PhD Comics, the "Research" shirt from PhD Comics, or "Research Tool" also from PhD Comics, I'm going to try Science t-shirt from XKCD, and the "Doctor...of philosophy" shirt from PhD Comics - I received one of these for my birthday, and can't wait to wear it for the first time after I get my degree.
I guess my mind is busy with getting gifts (it is the season) and finishing my degree. ha. There are a bunch of other "as-PI" things I've thought of, but they are all currently hiding in the recesses of my mind. I'll throw them on the blog as I think of them...
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Recent good reads
Finally getting to some of the interesting reads that I've kept open on my Firefox tabs...
I need to schedule weekend time (ha) to review the career advice published by Science. Looks like some good stuff in the homestretch of my grad "career." [hat tip]
Good things to keep in mind for post-doc training and keeping myself on task.
It is nice seeing what challenges lie ahead for first-year professors.
Reading through the comments on this post, it is interesting seeing the variety of publications that make up a dissertation across different disciplines. For me, in biomedical engineering, we're required to have one publication accepted and another publication submitted. When writing the dissertation, students write Introduction and Discussion chapters (and usually have several appendices) with middle chapters filled by the relevant publications verbatim. This is usually 3 chapters, with the final chapter in-prep for publication during the dissertation-submission stages. I'm in good shape, with two chapters done and a third one in second review with my advisor (but pending 2 experiments). I've got the Intro at about 80% ready for a first advisor-review and a solid outline of the 5 potential appendices that will probably be culled to 3. That reminds me...I should be writing!
I need to schedule weekend time (ha) to review the career advice published by Science. Looks like some good stuff in the homestretch of my grad "career." [hat tip]
Good things to keep in mind for post-doc training and keeping myself on task.
It is nice seeing what challenges lie ahead for first-year professors.
Reading through the comments on this post, it is interesting seeing the variety of publications that make up a dissertation across different disciplines. For me, in biomedical engineering, we're required to have one publication accepted and another publication submitted. When writing the dissertation, students write Introduction and Discussion chapters (and usually have several appendices) with middle chapters filled by the relevant publications verbatim. This is usually 3 chapters, with the final chapter in-prep for publication during the dissertation-submission stages. I'm in good shape, with two chapters done and a third one in second review with my advisor (but pending 2 experiments). I've got the Intro at about 80% ready for a first advisor-review and a solid outline of the 5 potential appendices that will probably be culled to 3. That reminds me...I should be writing!
2009 already?!?
Time has been flying recently. A run of experiments in November and December, holidays and traveling tends to run the days together. I went back to my parent's place for 10 days (including travel days). It was a good trip, of course. But, we were plenty busy, going to several family things...and doing last minute shopping (not me) and cooking. Now it is back to the grindstone. Day 1 of being back in town (Tuesday) was another experiment, which wasn't as successful as desired.
I'm not a resolution person - why should some single day push you to change your ways when you could have been doing something different long before? But, I do like to have goals.
This year, I will:
-get my PhD
-get published for a third time
-submit a NIH grant
-get a post-doc job
-take a trip post-graduation
-run a 10k and at least 3 5k races
I hope to:
-submit a 4th manuscript later in the year
-travel off the continent...for the first time.
-complete a 5k in under 22 min
-run at least a 10 mile stretch on my own
We'll see what the year brings. The past month has kept me busy enough that putting my thoughts on here hasn't happened too often. I'll try to do it more often, but it may be sporadic until after I (hopefullly/better) submit my completed dissertation in April.
I'm not a resolution person - why should some single day push you to change your ways when you could have been doing something different long before? But, I do like to have goals.
This year, I will:
-get my PhD
-get published for a third time
-submit a NIH grant
-get a post-doc job
-take a trip post-graduation
-run a 10k and at least 3 5k races
I hope to:
-submit a 4th manuscript later in the year
-travel off the continent...for the first time.
-complete a 5k in under 22 min
-run at least a 10 mile stretch on my own
We'll see what the year brings. The past month has kept me busy enough that putting my thoughts on here hasn't happened too often. I'll try to do it more often, but it may be sporadic until after I (hopefullly/better) submit my completed dissertation in April.
Monday, December 15, 2008
More Grad School Demotivators
Apparently I was the only one to submit demotivators to the contest. ha. Well, at least appropriate ones, as two submitted were apparently NSFW in one manner or another. No big deal, except the three previously noted were displayed during a grad student meeting. Thankfully, they didn't say who submitted each. The graduation one got a few chuckles, there was silence during the collaboration one (expected, though someone commented that people were busy reading it...doubtful) and there were plenty of laughs during the accuracy one, which was agreed to be "good."
In the week following that meeting, a few others have been thought up, in collaboration with others. First, several of us were discussing the collaboration one. I noted that I wanted to point to competing with the guy in the back of the image. We came up with this improved tagline:
While looking at pictures I had selected as potential demotivators, another student came up with the tagline for this one. I can only claim taking the picture, which we liked as it can be suggested that grad students are like rats, trapped with ideas (lit bulb) being sucked out of our brains by the administration (connections to head). Kinda funny:
Recently there was a hiliarious SNL music video. Using our juvenile humor, another student and I batted around potential demotivator taglines after he did a screen grab from the video. This demotivator is funny only if you've seen the clip....which made it too-NSFW for the competition. Oh well...we had fun making it.
Finally, when noting someone using wordle on their thesis (can't recall location), I got the idea that it would be appropriate for something like a qualifier exam. With all kinds of things flying through your head during a test, the different sizes and angles of a wordle creation were appealing. So, I grabbed text from my department's website about the qualifying exam and popped it into wordle.net. The first output is a simple one with just the text. I like the second one better, adding in the equations and drawings in the background with a little photoshopping. In the lower right hand corner is an image I found of a spanish inquisition torture...appropriate in a tongue-in-cheek way.
So, now I've got a bunch of submissions. ha...made for an interesting side thing to try and work on creativity with words.
In the week following that meeting, a few others have been thought up, in collaboration with others. First, several of us were discussing the collaboration one. I noted that I wanted to point to competing with the guy in the back of the image. We came up with this improved tagline:
While looking at pictures I had selected as potential demotivators, another student came up with the tagline for this one. I can only claim taking the picture, which we liked as it can be suggested that grad students are like rats, trapped with ideas (lit bulb) being sucked out of our brains by the administration (connections to head). Kinda funny:
Recently there was a hiliarious SNL music video. Using our juvenile humor, another student and I batted around potential demotivator taglines after he did a screen grab from the video. This demotivator is funny only if you've seen the clip....which made it too-NSFW for the competition. Oh well...we had fun making it.
Finally, when noting someone using wordle on their thesis (can't recall location), I got the idea that it would be appropriate for something like a qualifier exam. With all kinds of things flying through your head during a test, the different sizes and angles of a wordle creation were appealing. So, I grabbed text from my department's website about the qualifying exam and popped it into wordle.net. The first output is a simple one with just the text. I like the second one better, adding in the equations and drawings in the background with a little photoshopping. In the lower right hand corner is an image I found of a spanish inquisition torture...appropriate in a tongue-in-cheek way.
So, now I've got a bunch of submissions. ha...made for an interesting side thing to try and work on creativity with words.
Continuing the busy times
The past few weeks have continued the busy streak. Due to the timing, remaining work needed on my end, and higher priorities of my advisor (a major factor, from my point of view), we decided to not submit a F32 at the start of December. That lifted a huge load off my shoulders, after the writing I had planned to complete in November. Since then, I've been busy analyzing recent experiments and working on paper #3.
Paper 3 is progressing well. My advisor has pushed me to focus on the logics of the study, to make sure that it is solidly supported prior to an upcoming committee meeting. I put solid work into it, anticipating a review meeting before I (possibly) spend too much time going down the wrong path. My advisor says he'll review it...then spends the rest of the week locked away working on a grant of his own. ha. At least with the paper "off my desk" I was able to get a lot of data analysis work done. One thing that bugs me is that I've got a small number of successful trials in 2 experiments and a bunch in a 3rd experiment (which we may omit from the paper as it was in a slightly different model - save for next phase). I guess if my next two experiments go well, then there should be sufficient data for the paper/dissertation. It just doesn't feel like a lot. But, the results are MUCH BETTER than previously published results. And, there are two papers from a competitive lab for experiments in a different model which had a similarly "low" number of trials and experiments....though they always tack on the author list a long, long established researcher which seems to allow their papers to get published easier. Here's where a meeting with the advisor would settle any concerns I have...
Now it is on to working on my dissertation introduction. My (suggested) goal is to have it in good shape by the end of December. That's pretty do-able, considering it just needs to be a couple of pages and I have the Intro for a previous student's dissertation that has overlap with mine. I just wish there was more time between Thanksgiving and Christmas this year. I'm only going home for little over a week, but already that time is coming soon. And, when going home, my productivity falls off. I got work done over Thanksgiving...given more days at home during this upcoming break when I'm not traveling/doing something, I plan to be more productive.
After turning my wonderfully reviewed paper #2 back around quickly, it is back in the "in review" status with the journal. That's odd...I thought it was accepted pending minor revision. Perhaps they didn't like the fact that we didn't revise the manuscript for the single comment, but rather we provided a detailed answer and noted that in-progress research would address the question. It was a good point, but there wasn't really a good place in the paper to directly address the comment (without making part of the discussion disjointed), and my paper #3 does address the comment. It'd be nice to have it truly "in press" soon.
At the same time, I've got to keep part of my mind thinking about post-graduation plans. We're still planning to submit a K-award in February for me to stay here. And, even if I don't have a fellowship, I have been told that I'd be supported to stay here for a year or two. The alternate opportunity that I've got also sounds good. When the time comes to really approach the job market, this is an excellent post. Something to come back to in the future...
Paper 3 is progressing well. My advisor has pushed me to focus on the logics of the study, to make sure that it is solidly supported prior to an upcoming committee meeting. I put solid work into it, anticipating a review meeting before I (possibly) spend too much time going down the wrong path. My advisor says he'll review it...then spends the rest of the week locked away working on a grant of his own. ha. At least with the paper "off my desk" I was able to get a lot of data analysis work done. One thing that bugs me is that I've got a small number of successful trials in 2 experiments and a bunch in a 3rd experiment (which we may omit from the paper as it was in a slightly different model - save for next phase). I guess if my next two experiments go well, then there should be sufficient data for the paper/dissertation. It just doesn't feel like a lot. But, the results are MUCH BETTER than previously published results. And, there are two papers from a competitive lab for experiments in a different model which had a similarly "low" number of trials and experiments....though they always tack on the author list a long, long established researcher which seems to allow their papers to get published easier. Here's where a meeting with the advisor would settle any concerns I have...
Now it is on to working on my dissertation introduction. My (suggested) goal is to have it in good shape by the end of December. That's pretty do-able, considering it just needs to be a couple of pages and I have the Intro for a previous student's dissertation that has overlap with mine. I just wish there was more time between Thanksgiving and Christmas this year. I'm only going home for little over a week, but already that time is coming soon. And, when going home, my productivity falls off. I got work done over Thanksgiving...given more days at home during this upcoming break when I'm not traveling/doing something, I plan to be more productive.
After turning my wonderfully reviewed paper #2 back around quickly, it is back in the "in review" status with the journal. That's odd...I thought it was accepted pending minor revision. Perhaps they didn't like the fact that we didn't revise the manuscript for the single comment, but rather we provided a detailed answer and noted that in-progress research would address the question. It was a good point, but there wasn't really a good place in the paper to directly address the comment (without making part of the discussion disjointed), and my paper #3 does address the comment. It'd be nice to have it truly "in press" soon.
At the same time, I've got to keep part of my mind thinking about post-graduation plans. We're still planning to submit a K-award in February for me to stay here. And, even if I don't have a fellowship, I have been told that I'd be supported to stay here for a year or two. The alternate opportunity that I've got also sounds good. When the time comes to really approach the job market, this is an excellent post. Something to come back to in the future...
Monday, November 24, 2008
Busy Times
The last couple of weeks have been like a whirlwind. Sure I've had short breaks from time to time, but for the most part I've been swamped with work or attending commitments. My writing progress has taken a big hit, which I expected. The main cause of this business has been several experiments of mine, which really eat up time. The last two weeks, plus a third today, I've had experiments - each of which chews up a day-plus not counting time to prepare then one to two days afterwards to summarize, analyze and do "post-op" work. The positive note is that the experiments have been very successful so far! If today's experiment follows the same pattern, my advisor hinted yesterday (yes, we were both in on a Sunday) that I may have enough data to start writing up for paper #3! And, paper #3 is the last leg of my PhD dissertation, which has to be finished by the start of March for me to graduate in May. So, no pressure on today, of course. ha.
Another highlight is that the submission of my 2nd paper/manuscript to a new journal, after our first choice made a bad decision, was ACCEPTED with minor revisions. The reviews were VERY brief and positive. There was a single minor comment/question from the two reviewers and editor, which were outnumbered by comments like "well designed study," "Congrats, nice work," and "very novel work." Wow! That made my Monday last week. Unfortunately it took until Sunday to get to the paper, to make a few minor changes. It is funny how the reviewer process can be so different from journal to journal. Granted, this manuscript did get reviewed at another journal but we only addressed a couple of their comments and the new journal didn't know about the previous submission (no need). My first paper had somewhat similar issues as noted elsewhere, where in the second round of comments, the harshest reviewer asked for extra work that should have been raised in the first round. Sometimes it seems like such a crapshoot - get good reviewers (and/or brief ones) and the world is a happy place...get random comments from left field and the stress levels get ratcheted up a notch. Life in academia...
Also, something I'd like to keep in mind if/when I have my own lab to direct: making sure to integrate discussions about proper research conduct into regular meetings. We've talked about topics like this occasionally, but usually they get pushed aside by the daily/weekly items of note and the fact that most in our lab aren't planning to stay in academia and "don't care" as much - their loss. We aren't a poor-conduct lab by any means, but I like the method discussed in the link.
Time to finish preparations for today's experiment. Hopefully things go smoothly and I don't finish too long after midnight...I've got plenty to do tomorrow before leaving for Thanksgiving on Wednesday.
Another highlight is that the submission of my 2nd paper/manuscript to a new journal, after our first choice made a bad decision, was ACCEPTED with minor revisions. The reviews were VERY brief and positive. There was a single minor comment/question from the two reviewers and editor, which were outnumbered by comments like "well designed study," "Congrats, nice work," and "very novel work." Wow! That made my Monday last week. Unfortunately it took until Sunday to get to the paper, to make a few minor changes. It is funny how the reviewer process can be so different from journal to journal. Granted, this manuscript did get reviewed at another journal but we only addressed a couple of their comments and the new journal didn't know about the previous submission (no need). My first paper had somewhat similar issues as noted elsewhere, where in the second round of comments, the harshest reviewer asked for extra work that should have been raised in the first round. Sometimes it seems like such a crapshoot - get good reviewers (and/or brief ones) and the world is a happy place...get random comments from left field and the stress levels get ratcheted up a notch. Life in academia...
Also, something I'd like to keep in mind if/when I have my own lab to direct: making sure to integrate discussions about proper research conduct into regular meetings. We've talked about topics like this occasionally, but usually they get pushed aside by the daily/weekly items of note and the fact that most in our lab aren't planning to stay in academia and "don't care" as much - their loss. We aren't a poor-conduct lab by any means, but I like the method discussed in the link.
Time to finish preparations for today's experiment. Hopefully things go smoothly and I don't finish too long after midnight...I've got plenty to do tomorrow before leaving for Thanksgiving on Wednesday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
