In preparing for my faculty position interview (see post below), I got a lot of great help and advice from both male and female mentors in my field. The best help I got though, was from a young female professor who is committed to establishing and participating in an "old girls network" to help women succeed in science (and academia in particular). Although we live > 1000 miles apart, she called me and went through my seminar slides in great detail, and really helped me see the differences between a technical research seminar and an interview seminar.
I am pointing this out because 1. it was awesome and 2. I feel that despite the competitive nature of academia, people have really been bending over backwards to help me out.
I am also committed to the idea of this "old girls network" and am eager to pass on what I have learned.
In addition, I have realized that a lot of the big dreams/goals and ambitions of my youth have come to fruition. Basically, I have done a lot of what I set out to do. I am in a period where I am developing new goals and dreams, and it is now occurring to me, especially as I consider a faculty position, that it would be great to have some of my new goals and dreams shaped and inspired by students (hopefully including female students), because I will soon be in a position where I can help out by creating exciting research opportunities, etc, as my mentors did for me.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Processing the IN-PERSON interview
Wow am I exhausted. I just returned from a 2.5 day interview for a faculty position at a very highly ranked public university- the same one I had the phone interview with.. (guess I didn't completely bomb the phone interview). The interview started when I got off the plane. I was picked up by a faculty member and taken to dinner. The dinner was a nice, casual way to begin the interview.. took away some of the nervousness. The following 2 days I was scheduled from 8am to ~ 9pm for 1-on-1 meetings with faculty (about 1 per hr), group lunches with grad students and postdocs, more dinners with faculty, my seminar, and a breakfast meeting with the dept. chair. at night in the privacy of my hotel room, I practiced my talk for the seminar and I read articles and abstracts by the faculty I knew I would be meeting with. This meant that I slept < 5 hrs per night. It was a very intense experience, and while I am a very intense person, the intensity level was higher than my normal. I could not maintain that level of intensity for more than 3 days or so.
If any other young scientist ever reads this, I can attest that the format and questions I got from everyone were consistent with what is listed as "typical" on the career prep. pages of Science Magazine, for example. There were really no surprises. I did however get two kinda inappropriate comments, and that is also listed as something that women typically experience during interviews. So I supposed I can conclude that my experience was typical, and really great.
Especially now that the interview is over, I can look back and say I had a great time. I really loved the department and I think I would fit in well. I also think I did well in the interview, especially considering it was my 1st one. I got a lot of positive comments and feedback from students and faculty.
This leads me to my new insight: departmental fit. It is only now really sinking in to me how important this is. I mean, I know it sounds obvious that ideally one should somehow fit in to a department, I am only now starting to get what that means and how important it is, especially given my field of environmental related work where there is a lot of collaboration and interdisciplinary work.
I think one reason the interview went so well is that they were advertising for someone like me (ie someone with my specific research interests, backgrounds and skills). When I looked into the history of the department (via the webpage, talking to faculty both in and outside the department before and during my interview), it was clear to me why they wanted to hire someone like me. They had someone like me previously and this person retired. This made the interview a lot easier than if I had convince people that my research is important. This department knew my research was important, and that was a nice feeling. Having been places where I have not felt valued (i.e. now at my current postdoc), I am realizing how important it is for my success to be valued, in large part for developing collaborations.
I got one email already from a faculty member in the department about a potential collaboration, which I take to be a a very positive feedback!!
One thing that was really really nice about the interview was a dinner with the relatively young (new hires, un-tenured) faculty my last night, after my talk and I was all relaxed. I had a blast. They were funny, and I felt like they treated me like "an equal" (i.e. peer). This is a new experience for me.. even though I certainly do not feel "looked down on" or anything as a postdoc, it is still different to be "an equal" with faculty. I think I am in the transition period from postdoc to aspiring faculty member and I aim to enjoy it, stress level and all.
If any other young scientist ever reads this, I can attest that the format and questions I got from everyone were consistent with what is listed as "typical" on the career prep. pages of Science Magazine, for example. There were really no surprises. I did however get two kinda inappropriate comments, and that is also listed as something that women typically experience during interviews. So I supposed I can conclude that my experience was typical, and really great.
Especially now that the interview is over, I can look back and say I had a great time. I really loved the department and I think I would fit in well. I also think I did well in the interview, especially considering it was my 1st one. I got a lot of positive comments and feedback from students and faculty.
This leads me to my new insight: departmental fit. It is only now really sinking in to me how important this is. I mean, I know it sounds obvious that ideally one should somehow fit in to a department, I am only now starting to get what that means and how important it is, especially given my field of environmental related work where there is a lot of collaboration and interdisciplinary work.
I think one reason the interview went so well is that they were advertising for someone like me (ie someone with my specific research interests, backgrounds and skills). When I looked into the history of the department (via the webpage, talking to faculty both in and outside the department before and during my interview), it was clear to me why they wanted to hire someone like me. They had someone like me previously and this person retired. This made the interview a lot easier than if I had convince people that my research is important. This department knew my research was important, and that was a nice feeling. Having been places where I have not felt valued (i.e. now at my current postdoc), I am realizing how important it is for my success to be valued, in large part for developing collaborations.
I got one email already from a faculty member in the department about a potential collaboration, which I take to be a a very positive feedback!!
One thing that was really really nice about the interview was a dinner with the relatively young (new hires, un-tenured) faculty my last night, after my talk and I was all relaxed. I had a blast. They were funny, and I felt like they treated me like "an equal" (i.e. peer). This is a new experience for me.. even though I certainly do not feel "looked down on" or anything as a postdoc, it is still different to be "an equal" with faculty. I think I am in the transition period from postdoc to aspiring faculty member and I aim to enjoy it, stress level and all.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Processing the interview
I am trying to let go and recover from my 1st faculty interview of any kind, which I experienced yesterday. It was a preliminary phone interview, and was pretty uncomfortable. I don't think I made a great impression. I prepared a lot for the interview. I made note cards of most of the faculty in the dept. so I could talk about who I would like to collaborate with, etc. I knew which classes I would want to teach. I knew what resources I would need to get started, and I had a clear, outlined 5 yr research plan, as well as longer term, 10 yr goals. I had practiced responses of why they should hire me, and why I would fit in to the department. I had questions prepared for them. So what went wrong? I think I was expecting a very hostile, "you must prove yourself and convince us that you are good enough" atmosphere, and I prepared with that expectation in mind. I was thrown off guard then, when the interviewers were actually friendly, and instead of being hostile, they just wanted to get a feel for who I am and how would I see myself fitting in, etc in a broad sense. I had a very hard time answering their questions, even though they were the ones I was prepared for, because the tone was so different than what I had prepared for. I found myself confused and stumbling, words would not come to my head. Worse yet, I very clear, excellent responses to their questions came to my head after my initial responses, and I was too shy to attempt to correct myself or go back to a previous question.
I think a very positive outcome of this experience is that I now have some frame of reference for what the experience will actually be like, so I won't make out to be so horrible in my head. This will make me much more relaxed and sure of myself for the next time around. I think I missed an opportunity to really communicate, but I have to look at it as a learning experience. I will do better next time for sure. I won't prepare for it like it is going to be a hostile investigation, but rather a friendly "get-to-know-you" Q&A among colleagues.
One really big difference in the tone was that I really expected to have to convince them that I would fit in and be valuable, but they asked me instead what they had to offer that I would not find elsewhere in another dept. that would compliment, add to my research. I was to taken off guard by how that question was phrased. I think it is a good lesson.. every "one" (in this case, every dept.) wants to be valued right? I was so focused on having to justify my own research value that I forgot consider the "value" of the dept.
Also, one more somewhat minor mistake. I should have posed a question to the students who were sitting in on the interview, rather I directed all my questions to the faculty. I know in person I would not have done that. It was hard to remember given the nature of the non-in-person interview.
I think a very positive outcome of this experience is that I now have some frame of reference for what the experience will actually be like, so I won't make out to be so horrible in my head. This will make me much more relaxed and sure of myself for the next time around. I think I missed an opportunity to really communicate, but I have to look at it as a learning experience. I will do better next time for sure. I won't prepare for it like it is going to be a hostile investigation, but rather a friendly "get-to-know-you" Q&A among colleagues.
One really big difference in the tone was that I really expected to have to convince them that I would fit in and be valuable, but they asked me instead what they had to offer that I would not find elsewhere in another dept. that would compliment, add to my research. I was to taken off guard by how that question was phrased. I think it is a good lesson.. every "one" (in this case, every dept.) wants to be valued right? I was so focused on having to justify my own research value that I forgot consider the "value" of the dept.
Also, one more somewhat minor mistake. I should have posed a question to the students who were sitting in on the interview, rather I directed all my questions to the faculty. I know in person I would not have done that. It was hard to remember given the nature of the non-in-person interview.
Friday, April 4, 2008
Fire.. hehehehe... fire..
Recently I did my 1st real experiment for my new postdoc, which is a decidedly different research topic from my MS, PhD and last postdoc, although pretty much in the same sub-field if you look at it like I do.. hahaha. I am now working with solids and gases rather than aqueous solutions!
So anyway, I was shining some bright, broad spectrum light on my "solid" sample and I kind of started a fire! I never worried about starting a fire with my aqueous samples (which were easier to keep cool, etc)! I am trying to investigate certain environmentally realistic, photochemical processes, not super intense, concentrated light and heat driven ones. Of course the "signal" I was trying to observe on the instrument was off the charts, which suggested something was wrong, and sure enough.. there was smoke. I guess I found this whole thing kinda funny and cool, and it makes me realize I need to understand light, heat and black body radiation on a deeper level. So I shall work on re-integrating the whole electromagnetic spectrum into my consciousness. I should add that the biggest part of the fire problem was that the beam was "too" focused. Once that was adjusted, no more fire.
Note: image from NOAA
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Interview!
I just got my 1st request for a faculty search interview at a really good university! I am so nervous, I won't be able to sleep for weeks.
I must admit I have needed this "boost". It is like a nice pat on the back, and I'll try to focus on the excitement rather than being nervous.
Coincidentally, today when I did my first real experiment for my brand new postdoc, I was thinking that I am pretty ready to be less at the bench and more in the "leadership" position. One year ago, I swore I would NEVER feel that way, that I would always want to be doing the lab work and thus I thought academia was not for me. At this point, I still _love_ the lab work.. it was thrilling today to see the 1st measurement from this new experiment! But, it now feels I have the potential to make bigger advances (in my career, and science in general?) when I am writing papers, proposals, developing ideas, doing hard core analysis in matlab (with ES's help ofcourse), etc. I guess I wonder if I am in the early stages of transformation from postdoc at the bench to PI.
I must admit I have needed this "boost". It is like a nice pat on the back, and I'll try to focus on the excitement rather than being nervous.
Coincidentally, today when I did my first real experiment for my brand new postdoc, I was thinking that I am pretty ready to be less at the bench and more in the "leadership" position. One year ago, I swore I would NEVER feel that way, that I would always want to be doing the lab work and thus I thought academia was not for me. At this point, I still _love_ the lab work.. it was thrilling today to see the 1st measurement from this new experiment! But, it now feels I have the potential to make bigger advances (in my career, and science in general?) when I am writing papers, proposals, developing ideas, doing hard core analysis in matlab (with ES's help ofcourse), etc. I guess I wonder if I am in the early stages of transformation from postdoc at the bench to PI.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
My grad school essay
Recently I read a post by FSP on what to write and what NOT to write in a grad school essay. It bothered me for several reasons. The most obvious reason I was bothered is because I definitely wrote some of the things she specifically suggested not to in my grad school essays. It has been milling about in my head for a while and I think I am bothered by her suggestions because while they do seem very appropriate, sensible and even agreeable to me now, I know I could not have sincerely written something like that when I applied to grad school.
I now realize, as I have matured and experienced life, that my reasons for doings things have changed. I am now much clearer on the type of career I want (academic) in order to pursue my passions, as such I could now sincerely write the type of grad school essay recommended by FSP. But at the time I applied to grad school, I was clear on what I was passionate about and what the source of my motivations were, but I did not have a clear career path in mind. Rather, grad school was an opportunity that met, more than any other path, my unconventional goals.
With hindsight, I can now see that I have consistently pursued science, freedom, and adventure. So looking back, perhaps if I had confidence and clarity, I probably would have written something that included such ideas as:
I love the natural world, and want to investigate it on a chemical/molecular level.
I want to be a scientific explorer. I need to combine the adventure and challenge of field work with exciting, novel lab work to explain natural phenomena and to understand human impacts on geo-processes.
I aim to do all this following the style, success and inspiration of the likes of Susan Solomon, Richard Feynman, Earnest Schackleton, and R.F. Scott.
That sounds pretty starry-eyed and idealistic, but it is true. And most importantly, I feel like that IS what I do. I have been all over the world for field work, and I have used the sweetest instruments for experiments and sample analysis. I'm no Susan Solomon or E. Shackleton, but they do inspire me daily.
I don't remember what exactly I wrote for my grad school essay, I think it had some elements of the sentiments above combined with some standard stuff like lab experience, etc. I doubt an essay that included those sentiments would have gone over very well. I now have the sense not to write something like that for my faculty application research statements. I now realize that in order to get the job that allows me to continue on as a scientific explorer, I have focus on my scientific strengths and not my personal motivations (which have not changed!).
What I will look for in a grad school essay when I am a PI... ?? Will I expect young scientists to write letters that conform to my current thinking on why people should go to grad school and do research? Or will I be open to understanding that their views may change, as mine did?
I now realize, as I have matured and experienced life, that my reasons for doings things have changed. I am now much clearer on the type of career I want (academic) in order to pursue my passions, as such I could now sincerely write the type of grad school essay recommended by FSP. But at the time I applied to grad school, I was clear on what I was passionate about and what the source of my motivations were, but I did not have a clear career path in mind. Rather, grad school was an opportunity that met, more than any other path, my unconventional goals.
With hindsight, I can now see that I have consistently pursued science, freedom, and adventure. So looking back, perhaps if I had confidence and clarity, I probably would have written something that included such ideas as:
I love the natural world, and want to investigate it on a chemical/molecular level.
I want to be a scientific explorer. I need to combine the adventure and challenge of field work with exciting, novel lab work to explain natural phenomena and to understand human impacts on geo-processes.
I aim to do all this following the style, success and inspiration of the likes of Susan Solomon, Richard Feynman, Earnest Schackleton, and R.F. Scott.
That sounds pretty starry-eyed and idealistic, but it is true. And most importantly, I feel like that IS what I do. I have been all over the world for field work, and I have used the sweetest instruments for experiments and sample analysis. I'm no Susan Solomon or E. Shackleton, but they do inspire me daily.
I don't remember what exactly I wrote for my grad school essay, I think it had some elements of the sentiments above combined with some standard stuff like lab experience, etc. I doubt an essay that included those sentiments would have gone over very well. I now have the sense not to write something like that for my faculty application research statements. I now realize that in order to get the job that allows me to continue on as a scientific explorer, I have focus on my scientific strengths and not my personal motivations (which have not changed!).
What I will look for in a grad school essay when I am a PI... ?? Will I expect young scientists to write letters that conform to my current thinking on why people should go to grad school and do research? Or will I be open to understanding that their views may change, as mine did?
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Boot-licker
Last night my husband-Mr. Observant- told me that he sees me transform from alpha-female to boot-licker when asked to describe my career to friends, family and random strangers. I'm not sure why this is. I know I get nervous when asked this question by science and non-science people. I always think people want just a one-line answer like "scientist" but at the same time, I don't think I feel confident that I am a "real" scientist. I feel like I have to somehow explain that I am "just a postdoc" or something, and since-lay people don't generally know what a postdoc is, I generally don't say I am a postdoc, hence I get nervous identifying myself a scientist.
Perhaps one small, lingering aspect of it may be what I call the "9th grade phenomenon". In 9th grade, there was a transformation in "cool". Entering high school (9th grade) in hateful SC, I found out it was no longer cool to be smart, which was in contrast to some of my previous schools. At my high school, the average student who was good at sports was celebrated as a small town hero. It was not cool to stand out in any other way (i.e. with smarts). I totally defied that, but it was hard not to be influenced by it. This attitude was present at the big-10 university where I got my BS, although to a much smaller extent.
I really would like to think I am beyond influence of what is "cool" and what others think. I feel more confident now than I ever have. So I am truly confused about my I get so flustered when people ask me about my career.
Ah ha. I knew writing this out would help.. it's not the "9th grade phenomenon", and it's not exactly that I feel like a fake-scientist. It is that I don't want to make people uncomfortable. I perceive that people get uncomfortable when I tell them that I am a scientist. I happen to be pretty decent looking by the standards in our society, and then on top of it being a scientist sounds like I am super smart and successful. I know I have had the experience many times of responding to strangers when asked about my career and they find out I have a PhD and then they say "oh, well I'm just a bank-teller.." or something, and then I perceive that they seem uncomfortable and think I am looking down on them. FYI, I do not think I look down on people based on what their job or career is.. jeez, there are so many better reasons to look down on people!! (e.g. tan lines, choice in accessories.. etc).
Perhaps one small, lingering aspect of it may be what I call the "9th grade phenomenon". In 9th grade, there was a transformation in "cool". Entering high school (9th grade) in hateful SC, I found out it was no longer cool to be smart, which was in contrast to some of my previous schools. At my high school, the average student who was good at sports was celebrated as a small town hero. It was not cool to stand out in any other way (i.e. with smarts). I totally defied that, but it was hard not to be influenced by it. This attitude was present at the big-10 university where I got my BS, although to a much smaller extent.
I really would like to think I am beyond influence of what is "cool" and what others think. I feel more confident now than I ever have. So I am truly confused about my I get so flustered when people ask me about my career.
Ah ha. I knew writing this out would help.. it's not the "9th grade phenomenon", and it's not exactly that I feel like a fake-scientist. It is that I don't want to make people uncomfortable. I perceive that people get uncomfortable when I tell them that I am a scientist. I happen to be pretty decent looking by the standards in our society, and then on top of it being a scientist sounds like I am super smart and successful. I know I have had the experience many times of responding to strangers when asked about my career and they find out I have a PhD and then they say "oh, well I'm just a bank-teller.." or something, and then I perceive that they seem uncomfortable and think I am looking down on them. FYI, I do not think I look down on people based on what their job or career is.. jeez, there are so many better reasons to look down on people!! (e.g. tan lines, choice in accessories.. etc).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
