Last week, I attended the Midwest Consortium’s annual conference.  The goal was to network with other scholars in the region to facilitate collaboration and development of potential grant proposals.  I got to meet Dr. Joyce Hunter, Deputy Director of the NIH National Center (soon to be Institute) on Minority Health and Health Disparities.  She gave a presentation on different funding mechanisms available at NIH, and described a timeline for applying for those mechanisms depending on where you are in your career.  Dr. Hunter emphasized that NIH is moving away from the path of R03 > R15/R21 > R01, and more toward career development awards (F32, K30, K99/R00) as a means of becoming an independent researcher.  She noted that her center now has a few R01 funding opportunities available, and that NIH has adopted a streamlining process for new investigators, so that they form a separate pool of applications.  Of the 20 R01 grants funded by NCMHD last cycle, 10 were from new investigators. Of those, 8 had had previous NIH funding (many through the Loan Repayment Program).

For those still trying to familiarize themselves with the seemingly Byzantine workings of the nation’s top funding agency, here are two videos from the NIH Center for Scientific Review on what happens at a review panel and advice for new applicants.

Click here to view the embedded video.

***

Click here to view the embedded video.

Also, check the NIH Office of Extramural Research for current funding opportunities, grant application basics, and information on forms and deadlines.

One of the tasks most postdocs end up doing a lot of is writing.  Articles from the dissertation, posters for conferences, the backlog of articles from your new PI, blog posts.  I went down an Internet rabbit hole a couple of months ago , as the semester was winding down and I had several writing deadlines on my calendar, looking for advice on how to write.  Translation: I’m not sure how I ended up exactly where I did, but I was happy with the result. Not how to string sentences together into something coherent, but more about the logistics of writing (I have a fellow postdoc friend who is convinced that this part of her life/career is all about logistics).  When is the best time to write? How much time out of your day/week should you devote to writing (as opposed to the hundred or so other tasks on your to-do list)? Is it better to write is short bursts, or to block out several hours or more to write effectively?

The answer to all of these questions is, not surprisingly, it depends.  On what the rest of your work schedule looks like, other commitments on your time, how much sleep you would like to get in the next two years. But, having said that, Anne Lamott’s Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life, is a nice guide/pep talk for budding writers.

I’ll admit, I skipped the sections devoted to fiction writing (chapters on plot, dialogue, and character), since my writing is primarily technical non-fiction. But most of the book applies to any kind of writing. In fact, the title comes from advice that the author’s father, who was also a writer, passed on to his procrastinating son, who had an elementary school report on our feathered friends due at the end of a long weekend. Having put the assignment off for several weeks, he was overwhelmed by the amount of material he was expected to cover and didn’t know where to start. Those who have written dissertations understand that feeling completely.  His father’s advice? “Bird by bird.” One piece at a time.

With chapters on short assignments (blog posts fit nicely here), shitty first drafts (everyone, no matter how good a writer they are, has them), how to know when you’re done, writer’s block, and publication, there’s a lot of advice for technical writers. For me, it’s still a luxury to have time to write. I end up squeezing it in around other deadlines, meetings, commuting, dishes, and taking care of the baby.  I’m taking the summer off from classes just to get the articles from my dissertation written. One down, two to go!  From my experience:

• Keep writing, even short pieces like blog posts put you in the writing frame of mind.
• Set deadlines, or work from ones that have been set for you, nothing like incentive to get the creative juices flowing.
• Have others read your work, except those shitty first drafts.

Summer’s here.  I capped off my semester with graduation. Even though I defended my dissertation last June, I was just over the deadline to graduate last Spring, so I got to graduate with two of my lab buddies, instead. Totally worth the wait.

That's me on the right, with another PhD (left) and master's candidate (center) from my grad lab.

***

The last few weeks of the Spring semester leading up to graduation were rough, trying to meet deadlines for coursework and other projects.  This semester I finished:

• Intro to Epidemiology (two exams, four quizzes, a final presentation and a paper)
• Grant Writing (a draft potential R03 grant)
• Biostats II (a final project)

and submitted:

• one project to IRB
• one grant proposal to a local foundation
• one application for a summer workshop
• one poster for an international conference
• one poster for the national meetings
• one poster for the departmental program annual symposium

My semester, especially towards the end, felt a bit like this

Except without the tutu.

For the last several weeks, I was jumping from one deadline to another, having just a few days between to work on the next project on the list.  Not surprisingly, I’ve felt the need to have a way to keep more on top of things: projects, due dates, meetings. While I was writing my dissertation, I had used LifeBalance, but decided against upgrading because their iPhone app apparently has issues, and I had stopped using the desktop version over a year ago because it just wasn’t working for me and I didn’t want to pay for the update.  I downloaded the trial version of Things, but decided it didn’t fit my current (lack of) workflow, and required adaptations that didn’t really work for me.  Same for Midnight Inbox. I settled on OmniFocus instead, personal task management software based on David Allen’s Getting Things Done.  ProfHacker has a nice series of posts on applying the concept as an academic, including an Introduction, Contexts and Academic Work, Mind-sweeping, and Managing Project Files.

I’ve slowly been adding projects, setting contexts and due dates. I’ve been using OmniFocus for about three weeks, but I haven’t completed a mind-sweep yet, partly due to lack of time (cleaning up from the end of semester crazy), partly because I’m still in the process of learning the system (reviewing podcasts, screencasts, and blogs about implementation), and partly because I’m a little afraid to have all of my commitments down on paper. I’m still figuring out exactly what should go on the list. Everything? Or just those out of the ordinary things that I might forget if I don’t write them down? Most of what I have set up so far are work projects, and I feel already like I have a better idea of where things are and what needs to be done next.

That’s good, because my summer is shaping up to be very busy, even without taking classes.  Right now, the project list looks like this:

• resubmit proposal to IRB
• write three articles from dissertation
• write/contribute to other articles as assigned
• write book chapter
• help with PI R01 submission
• present research idea to local partner organization
• meet with biostatistics re. R03 proposal
• develop syllabus/course description for potential class
• plan analysis of samples from PI’s current R01
• create a career development plan

It feels really good to be finishing up the first year of my postdoc, despite feeling like I’m eating an apple while juggling knives balanced on a rickety table sometimes.  I’m hoping GTD and OmniFocus can alleviate some of that end of semester panic in the future.

For the other postdocs out there, what strategies/tips do you have for task management?

–

Image credit: Graduation photo courtesy of lab buddies. Knife juggler photo Creative Commons licensed by peter.bryant via Flickr.

I, along with several of my postdoc friends, spent last week in Albuquerque, New Mexico, at the national AAPA and HBA conferences.  As a grad student, I attended these conferences several times, a couple of times with my oldest daughter in tow.  She was 6 when our department hosted the national meetings, and 12 when we went to Philadelphia.  This is the first year, however, that I went to the conference with an infant. That adds a whole new level of complexity to the experience.

Greetings from Albuquerque

Now that we’re home and reasonably rested, it seems like a good time to share a few tips for having a successful conference experience with little ones along (noting that all of these depend on your personal circumstances/budget).

• For getting on and off the plane, a baby sling is wonderful.  We have an Ergo, so Charlie rode strapped to my chest while boarding, disembarking, through baggage claim, and on shuttles. And I still had my hands free to carry stuff.
• If possible, have your spouse come along.  Having a dedicated caregiver makes those poster sessions a little less stressful (the sling comes in handy here, too, since he could walk around with her while she napped), and made it possible for me to attend some podium sessions uninterrupted.
• Rent a car.  And a car seat.  Waiting for a shuttle is tedious enough without a fussy baby. And by renting the car seat you don’t have to worry about yours being damaged in transit.
• Since we’re still breastfeeding, I tried to take breaks from conference activities every 3-4 hours to feed her. The conference hotel had a nice sitting room off the ladies restroom, which was frequented by several breastfeeding moms, but many of us also breastfed during podium sessions if necessary (and if our babies we’re being disruptive).  I just sat near the door in case she got cranky.
• Take naps. On most days, we’d all be strung out by around 3 pm, so we’d head back to our room and rest for a while before dinner.
• Baby proof your hotel room – unplug unnecessary items (lamps, phones, clocks) so baby can’t chew on the cords, put trashcans out of reach,  close the bathroom door, block the dresser drawers with a chair or suitcase to prevent pinched fingers, and give your baby a safe place to explore while you catch up on work or have a little siesta.  One thing I wish we had done, bring some outlet covers for the wall sockets.
• Get a cheap umbrella stroller – you can gate check it, and it’s lightweight and small enough to get around in restaurants or while playing tourist.
• Make friends with the other moms.  We gravitate towards each other, anyway, but the conference moms know exactly the level of crazy you’re dealing with, and may have some useful strategies for handling it while still being professional.

–

Image credit: K. Beaty

So we’re coming to the end of February, and I’m still reading Darwin’s Sacred Cause, having rechecked it from the library – twice.  Not able to get as much pleasure reading done as I had planned, especially this semester.  I’m taking three classes (Epidemiology, Biostats II, and Grant Writing), plus developing my own research projects and participating in a faculty development program.  I’m also in the process of prepping for two conferences this Spring, and writing up portions of my dissertation for publication (looks like 4 articles). All great things that I’m thoroughly enjoying, but I still have a couple of chapters to go on January’s book.

Not that I haven’t gotten any reading done.  I have a bit of a commute, so I’ve tapped into the audiobook offerings at my local library, and this month I listened to Emma by Jane Austen, and Full House by Steven Jay Gould.  I wish more of the books for this year’s book club were available in audio format, as it would make better use of my time.

Going forward, I think what I’ll do (at least until summer) is choose two books for the month, and pick one to read.

The picks for March are:

Remarkable Creatures: Epic Adventures in the Search for the Origin of Species

Lives in Science: How Institutions Affect Academic Careers

***

Speaking of Spring conferences, the first one is coming up next week.  I’ll be tweeting from the Interdisciplinary Exploration of Migration (#kumigration).

To make the most of the postdoc experience, it’s imperative to take advantage of all the resources available. Being a postdoc is an opportunity.  To receive additional skills and training, develop a career track, and establish a network of colleagues to facilitate your research.

Your institution may have an Office of Postdoctoral Affairs.  This serves as a clearinghouse for information relevant to postdoctoral researchers, providing professional development activities and networking with others at the same stage of career development.  In addition, your organization may be a sustaining member of the National Postdoctoral Association. If they are, you are entitled to a free affiliate membership in the NPA. The National Postdoctoral Association provides advocacy, resource-development, and community for postdocs in the US.

In March, the NPA is hosting an the National Summit on Gender and the Postdoctorate in conjunction with their annual meeting. The purpose of the summit is:

• To examine the unique challenges faced by women as they seek to make the transition from postdoc to faculty.
• To consider the key factors influencing postdoc women’s decisions to pursue a career in academic science and engineering.
• To share promising practices and success stories for retaining postdoc women in the academic pipeline.

The keynote speaker at the annual meeting is Dr. Francis Collins, head of the NIH and former director of the Human Genome Project.

The NPA also has resource page, with information on tax issues, career planning, conflict resolution, and retirement. I’m starting a page of helpful postdoc links, which will be regularly updated as I come across new information.

–

Image credit: The “Gold Guys” Blog

I’ve had a few colleagues ask me if Biostats I was a useful class, given my statistics background in grad school.  It’s a requirement for the master’s degree program I’m pursuing, so I have to take it, but I have found it to be a nice refresher of the Biometry course  I had years ago.  Maybe I just know more about statistics now, so it makes more sense; or maybe it’s just explained better in this course, so I have a better grasp of the material. When I started grad school, statistics felt like Farsi. But not now.

Take Type I and Type II error, for example.  In study design, you have to try to minimize both. Type I error is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when it is true. The acceptable Type I error rate is determined by alpha, which is generally fixed at 0.05 or lower in the analysis phase of a study.  Type II error, or beta, is the probability of failing to reject the null hypothesis when the alternative hypothesis is true.  While I understood these concepts empirically, the relationship between them had never been explained.  What I had were random facts, with no framework to pin them on.

The relationship between alpha and beta.

This plot represents a one-tailed Student’s t-test of the difference in means between two independent samples, both with a sample size of 75  and with alpha set to 0.05. The probability of accepting the null hypothesis is represented by the red line, while the probability of accepting the alternative hypothesis is in blue.  Notice that the null hypothesis distribution is centered at 0, meaning that you’re testing the hypothesis of no difference between means, and that the two distributions overlap.  The area under the red curve which overlaps the blue curve is alpha, the chance of rejecting the null hypothesis when it is true.  The area under the blue curve which overlaps the red curve is beta, the chance of failing to reject the null hypothesis when the alternative hypothesis is true.

Notice also, that you can’t change the value of alpha without affecting the value of beta. Here’s the same t-test with alpha set to 0.01.

Changing alpha affects beta.

Reducing alpha increases the critical value for rejecting the null hypothesis (from t=1.6552 to t=2.3518), thus increasing the likelihood of failing to reject the null when the alternative hypothesis is true. And the rest of the blue curve, which equals 1 – beta?  That’s power, or the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when the alternative hypothesis is true.

That’s the framework I was missing. The biostatistics course was worth that alone.

–

Images generated using G*Power 3.