BISC800 Basic skills for a career in science Fall 2010 Julian Christians [email protected] Course website:

BISC800Basic skills

for a career in scienceFall 2010

Julian [email protected]

Course website:www.sfu.ca/biology/faculty/christians/bisc800

Who am I?

Who are you?

Course scheduleDate Topic

September 27 Course introductionGrant, scholarship and fellowship applications, CVs

October 4 Giving good talks

Long break!November 1 Being a scientist + student presentations

November 8 Writing Abstracts and Introductions + student presentations

November 15 Writing Methods, Results and Discussions

November 22 Preparing posters + Publishing and reviewing papers

AssessmentAssignment Due on

Write NSERC Contributions and Statement

Wednesday, October 27

Ten minute presentation with powerpoint

Presented in class November 1 and November 8

Write an abstract of a paper provided in class

Monday, November 15

Write an introduction to an NSERC Discovery Grant proposal

Monday, November 22

Review two proposals from peers

Monday, December 6

Scientific writing

• Thesis• Grant/fellowship applications• Papers• Letters (job applications)• CVs• Popular articles • Abstracts (conferences)• Emails

General structure

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Theses, grant applications, papers, abstracts

All background knowledge + question(s)

Step-by-step description of work

What are results are, without interpretation of meaning

Consideration of results in relation to question posed

1. Avoid focus 2. Avoid originality and personality 3. Write long contributions 4. Remove implications and speculations 5. Leave out illustrations 6. Omit necessary steps of reasoning 7. Use many abbreviations and terms 8. Suppress humor and flowery language 9. Degrade biology to statistics 10. Quote numerous papers for trivial statements

How to bore your readers

Sand-Jensen 2007 Oikos

1. Avoid focus

2. Avoid originality and personality

The solutions

Spell out your question/hypothesis

The experiment was conductedor

We conducted the experiment

Use the active voice as much as possible

3. Write long contributions

4. Remove implications and speculations

The solutions

Shorter is always better

The height of men was great than the height of womenor

Men were taller than women

Relate your results to an important problem, but be modest with speculation.

7. Use many abbreviations and terms

The solutions

Just don’t do it !

The BCL-2-like protein CED-9 of C. elegans promotes FZO-1/Mfn1,2-and EAT-3/Opa1-dependent mitochondrial fusion

CED-9 promotes mitochondrial fusion in C. elegans.

9. Degrade biology to statistics

10. Quote numerous papers for trivial statements

The solutions

Always ask yourself: ‘Would the reader know what I’m working on?’

The correlation was significantly positive between the two variables tested.or

Male interest increased with female attractiveness.

Unless Darwin said it, it can be rephrased!

Getting grants and scholarships

Upcoming deadlines

• NSERC – October 6 (to department)

• CIHR – doctoral – October 15 (at CIHR)

• CIHR – master’s – February 1 (at CIHR)

Grants and scholarships

• What’s the difference?

• Where to find them

• Why applications are rejected

• How to write a good application• The project• You

What’s the difference?

ScholarshipsGrants

• Research support

• Project description most important

• Committee looking for reason NOT to fund you

• Student support

• Student track record most important

• Committee looking for reasons to fund you

Novelty & feasibility Achievements

Finding sources of money

• International• Federal• Provincial • University GFs & Private

ScholarshipsGrants

http://www.biology.sfu.ca/degree/graduate/financialhttp://www.sfu.ca/dean-gradstudies/scholarships_and_awards/

• Research councils• Government agencies• Corporations• Foundations & charities• NGOs

WebSupervisorOther studentsScientific societies

Two scholarship sources to note

• Awards made on basis of academic merit• minimum criterion for eligibility CGPA ≥ 3.5• one-semester awards• $6,250 • application deadline : 15 April

http://www.sfu.ca/dean-gradstudies/scholarships_and_awards/graduate_fellowships/

Graduate fellowships

Two scholarship sources to note

http://www.sfu.ca/dean-gradstudies/scholarships_and_awards/internal_awards/

• Often department or field-specific• Various eligibility criteria• Various deadlines: Jan, March, April, May, Sept

Private awards

Private awards – Sep 30 deadline!Graduate Award

Eligible Graduate Program(s) (see Terms of Reference)

Number of Awards Available

Value per Award

Glen Geen Graduate Scholarship in Marine Biology

Biological Sciences 1 $790

H.R. MacCarthy Graduate Bursary Biological Sciences 1 or 2 $3,800 or

$7,600

J. Abbott / M. Fretwell Graduate Fellowship in Fisheries Biology

Biological Sciences 1 $4,000

Mutual Fire Insurance Company of BC Graduate Scholarship in Biological Sciences

Biological Sciences 1 $4,600

Phyllis Carter Burr Graduate Scholarship in Developmental Biology and Cell Biology

Biological Sciences, Molecular Biology & Biochemistry, Biomedical Physiology & Kinesiology

2 $2,350

Sidney Hogg Memorial Graduate Scholarship Various programs in Faculty of Science 1 $700

Sulzer Pumps Inc. Graduate ScholarshipVarious programs in Faculty of Science or Faculty of Applied Science

2 $1,000

Once you’ve found a source

• Current guidelines• That the granting body funds the kind of project you have in mind or people like you• Eligibility criteria – that you fit ALL of them• The deadline!

Check:

Remember!

• Awarded (usually) on the basis of merit, not need!

• Rejection rates can be very high

(50-80+%)

Why are applications rejected?

You dropped the ball

• Deadline not met

• Guidelines not followed


Weak project

• Project predictable, routine or repetition

• Unrealistic budget/ timeframe/ workload

• Necessary resources not available

• Applicant/ team not suitable


Good project, but weak presentation• Objective unclear• Proposed methods unclear• Not enough detail in budget• Potential obstacles not discussed• Insufficient literature review• Insufficient knowledge of field• Poor writing: long, repetitious, ambiguous• Biased position

Why are applications rejected?Biased positionGrant submitted to SSHRC: Detrimental effects of popularizing anti-evolution's

"intelligent design theory" on Canadian students, teachers, parents, administrators and policymakers.

Committee’s response:The committee found that the candidates were qualified.

However, it judged the proposal did not adequately substantiate the premise that the popularization of Intelligent Design Theory had detrimental effects on Canadian students,teachers, parents and policy makers. Nor did the committee consider that there was adequate justification for the assumption in the proposal that the theory of Evolution, and not Intelligent Design theory, was correct.

http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2006/04/canadian_sshrc_.html

Who are the reviewers?

• Unlikely to be experts in your exact subject area – but will usually be scientists

• Assume they are uninformed, but infinitely intelligent

• Often 2-3 reviewers per proposal

• Often 100 proposals per reviewer!

?

Writing the application: about the work

• Read the instructions!• If outline of sections is provided, follow it.• If not, you should have:

– Title– Summary (10%)– Justification (background) (20%)– Aims (10%)– Methods (30%)– Outputs (15%)– Budget (10%)– Time schedule (5%)

Title

• The reviewer’s first impression• Clever, catchy, clear and informative but not cute• If it’s a question, make sure your data will answer it• Avoid acronyms, scientific names, and jargon• Use words/expressions found in the mission of

your target funding body

Examples

A study of the correlates of the distribution of

Microspathodon chrysurus

What determines the distribution of the endangered

yellowtail damselfish?

BAD GOOD

Biodiversity of amphibians in Tanzania

Does the umbrella species concept work? A test with

Tanzanian amphibians

Do divers break coral when looking at seahorses?

Charismatic fish and diving tourism: impacts on corals

Examples – successful CIHR Master’s awards

• Colour Perception in Children with Autism • Characterizing the Roles of Cytochrome P450 Isozymes in

Breast Cancer • The neural correlates of marijuana addiction: Differences in

drug and emotional stimulus processing in addicted versus healthy controls.

• The Structural and Biochemical Analysis of the BAM complex in Escherichia coli

Summary (abstract)

• The reviewer’s second impression

(and sometimes the only thing s/he’ll read!)

• It should answer 4 questions:– Why is the work important?

– What has already been done?

– What do you intend to do?

– How are you going to do the work?

• Write it last

Justification (background)

• Start with the general area and narrow it down to focus on specific project

• Include brief literature review (key references)• Explain the problem (including lack, knowledge

gaps)• Give reasons for undertaking this particular

research• Indicate why you are well placed to undertake

the project

Justification (background)

• Pitch it to make it fit the mission (within reason!)

• Remember who the reviewers are

• Clear, logical, explicit

• Avoid overkill and hyperbole

Some no-no words

• Critical

• Dramatic

• Tragic

• Hopeless

• Desperate

Readers don’t want to be told how to feel!

Aims/ objectives• One sentence for overall objective• Then provide 2-4 specific objectives

(which are achievable!)• Know the difference between

– Aims– Objectives/ goals– Predictions– Hypotheses– Theories

Example

AIM: The aim of this project is to assess the damage to corals caused by divers seeking fish such as seahorses and frogfish (S/F).

OBJECTIVES: More specifically, I will: (1) compare coral damage at S/F and control sites; (2) record diver behaviour at S/F and control sites; (3) quantify the spatial extent of coral damage; and (4) evaluate the rate of recovery of S/F sites.

ExampleLong-term goal of project: To study the genetic basis of variation in

virulence in A. fumigatus and A. nidulans to identify previously-unknown genes, or to identify new roles for known genes.

Specific objectives:

1. Develop molecular markers spanning the A. fumigatus genome at sufficient density to allow linkage and QTL mapping.

2. Construct a linkage map for A. fumigatus based on these molecular markers by genotyping a panel of progeny from a cross between two strains.

3. Map quantitative trait loci (QTL) that affect virulence (i.e., identify genetic regions containing virulence genes) using the markers and linkage map developed from Objectives 1 and 2.

Methods

• How, when and why

• Describe all activities to be undertaken, the methods for each and when the work will be done

• Link clearly method to objective

• Indicate how data will be analysed

• Justify unorthodox methods

What not to forget

• Details (e.g. no. of transects, transect length, no. of individuals to be observed, for how long, source of reagents, organisms if not standard, etc.)

• Field/lab assistants, local help and contacts

• Relate to your relevant experience• Any ethical issues your work entails• A CONTINGENCY PLAN!

Outputs

• Also called ‘Significance’

• What about negative results?

• What will come out of this project in terms of:– Advancement of science– General benefit to people or species– Data dissemination

Budget

• Be realistic

• Stay within the range usually granted by your target funding body

• Provide a clear breakdown of items and costs

• Justify everything

• Build in some ‘fat’

• Mention other sources of funding

Time schedule

• Can be just a line or two in the methods or

• A small table showing when specific tasks will be carried out

May-June 09 Habitat assessment on dived and control sites

July 09 Observations of diver behaviour

Aug-Sept 09 Data analysis and write-up

Style tips

• Clear and simple• Short sentences, short paragraphs• Font no smaller than 11pt (Times)• Leave spaces (e.g. paragraph indents)• Avoid right justification• No jargon• Avoid ‘this’, ‘that’, and dangling participles

– E.g., Stopping every 5 m to record tree density, 20 transects will be run in total.

More tips

• Avoid spelling mistakes

• Use point form

• Use subheadings, bold or italics (sparingly)

More tips

• Give yourself time

• Read and re-read it (and get your friends to read it too)

• Good proposals are hypothesis-driven

Writing the application: about you

• Highlight your accomplishments in a clear and unambiguous manner

• Sell yourself but don’t exaggerate your contributions

• Where possible, provide objective criteria, e.g., journal impact factors

• Check the criteria to know what to emphasize

Accomplishments

•Published papers in peer-reviewed journals• Productivity and journal rank count• Sole authored papers are valuable• In multi-authored papers, state the role that you

played

•Papers in review• Show that you can complete projects

•Invited talks

Accomplishments

• Unsolicited talks/posters• Demonstrate ability to complete projects

• Technical reports

• Grades

• Awards

Extracurricular stuff

• Mentoring junior students (e.g., undergrads, newbie grad students)

• Teaching •Lecturing•TAing

• Academic admin •Student representative on a Department or University committee

• Career-related volunteer work

What about non-academic stuff?

Getting letters of reference

• Ask for them early

• Provide information• Terms of reference of grant/scholarship• Your proposal• Your CV

• Make sure they know you well

How could you sell your project?

NSERC

The application

• Form 200

• Proposal (=1 page)

• Contributions and statement• MSc: 1 page• PhD: 2 pages• PDF: 4 pages

The process

• Applications assessed by 2 reviewers

• Grade assigned from 10 – 99%

• 50% of PDFs eliminated

• Applications presented by reviewers

• All members grade

• ~5 min per application

• Toxicological risk of nanomaterials in freshwater• Parasites and metallothionine production in fish• Population connectivity in large ungulates• Stability in food webs• Bioamplification of POPs• Polyandry in field crickets• Landscape genetics of wild cats

Subjects Isabelle was asked to review

The criteria: evidenceAcademic excellence

Research aptitude and potential

• Grades (last 2 years), Honour rolls & Dean’s lists• Academic awards

• Proposal and papers• Research awards (e.g. USRAs)• Letters of reference

Communication, interpersonal & leadership abilities• Conferences (esp. awards)• Involvement• Letters of reference

The criteria: weighting

AE

RAP

CILA

MSc PhD PDF

50% 30%

50%

20%

70%

30%

30%

20%

The likelihood of success(if you made it to competition week in 2009)

MSc

PhD

PDF

~70%

~60%

~20%

General things that increase your chances

• Follow instructions (esp. about max length)

• Choose your referees carefully

• Get your application read by someone else

• Make things obvious/easy to find

• Write down ALL of your accomplishments

• Emphasise extracurricular activities

Specific things that increase your chances

1. Proposal

• Write a proposal, not a general area of interest• Needs to have:

• Hypotheses/predictions• Details of methods• Significance

• PDFs: (Slightly) new direction is better than same

as PhD• No jargon


1. Proposal

• Justification of location of tenure (esp. PDF)• Good justification should have:

• Person• Facilities and support• Opportunities for research collaborations• Other opportunities


2. Research aptitude and potential

• Papers, papers, papers (but not just

quantity)• Average # papers in 2008 applications

• PhD applicants: 2.2 (range: 0-10)• PDF applicants: 5.0 (range: 0-24)

• Give impact factor of journals (esp. if high)


2. Research aptitude and potential

• Awards: apply for everything you can!• Report $ obtained• NSERC USRAs


• Don’t underestimate• Present with clear headings• What to do:

• Conferences• Oral presentations• Teaching experience (TA, outreach)• Involvement in academic and wider community• Organise events/people• Extracurricular breadth

3. Communication, interpersonal & leadership abilities


• Make sure the referee knows you• Make sure the referee can say positive things about you• Important to mention:

• Rankings • Info pertinent to project• Info pertinent to RAP and CILA (with evidence)

Letters of reference

Documents

BISC800 Basic skills for a career in science Fall 2010 Julian Christians [email protected] Course website: