Atlanta BEST Magazine Winter 2017 (Issue 7) by Atlanta BEST Magazine

Atlanta

BEST

Magazine

Winter 2017

Table of Contents Letter From the Editor 3 Career Paths... 4-6 Broadening Experiences and Striving to Change Academic Culture 7-11 BEST Retreat 2016 12-13 8 Tips to Make the Most of Your Next Conference 14-15 On Finding Your Home Base in Graduate School 16-17 Maximizing Mentorship 18-24 Resources 25 And Now Back to Your Regularly Scheduled Programming... 26-27 Information About Informational Interviews 28-29 Keck Graduate Institute 30-31 Forays into Science Policy 32-33

Letter From the Editor The Fall 2016 semester has come and gone, a new year has been ushered in, and â&#x20AC;&#x153;winterâ&#x20AC;? has given way to spring-like weather here in Atlanta. Meanwhile, the Atlanta BEST Program is bustling like a well-oiled machine offering numerous workshops, events, and tutorials to a brand-new cohort of BEST trainees. In August, Atlanta BEST, in collaboration the with Atlanta Society of Mentorship (ASOM), launched a series of workshops for faculty members to explore promising mentorship practices. In September, Atlanta BEST welcomed its 4th cohort of trainees with its annual BEST retreat. In October, representatives of the Atlanta BEST Program joined representatives from the other 16 BEST programs nationwide (www.nihbest.org) as well as NIH officials for the annual BEST Meeting in Bethesda, MD. And, in October and November, Atlanta BEST and ASOM launched a parallel mentorship series for PhD students to compliment the faculty series launched in August. In this issue of the Atlanta BEST Magazine, we hear from several cohort 4 BEST trainees about the impact BEST has already had on their graduate experience. We also hear from seasoned BEST trainees from earlier cohorts about advice, lessons learned, and the ever-changing path to the academic finish line. In what is becoming a new tradition for the Atlanta BEST Magazine, we again feature several articles contributed from BEST trainees in other BEST programs, including Wayne State University, Boston University, and Rutgers University. These articles range from an overview of the annual BEST Meeting to information on informational interviews to experiences in science policy.

Editor-In-Chief Kylie Ainslie

Associate Editor Darcie Cook

Editors Tami Hutto Motunrayo Kolawole, PhD

Design Kylie Ainslie Darcie Cook Tami Hutto Motunrayo Kolawole, PhD

The cooler temperatures and shorter days have done nothing to slow down the activities of BEST Programs nationwide. This issue highlights only a small fraction of those activities. Enjoy! Sincerely, Kylie Ainslie Editor-In-Chief PhD Candidate Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Rollins School of Public Health Emory University

3 Photo credit: Vicki Ainslie

Career Paths... winding,

branching, & unexplored. By Sarah Takushi, Emory University, Cohort 4 BEST Trainee

“What would you do if you had to find a job right now?” I leaned earnestly across the bus aisle to

needing to switch labs. I figured I would be able to gracefully transition into a new lab and start a new, the woman immediately facing me whom I knew to be potentially even more exciting project. I thought I was a fellow graduate student. “Where would you look? What being given a chance to tweak my PhD experience with are you good at? What do you want to do for the rest of new wisdom and insight that I had lacked as first years of grad school. your life?” Despite my original expectations, my transition into a new lab was not graceful. In fact, it has been a stuttering, start-and-stop affair that in many ways is still on-going long after my old PI officially left Emory. Weeks wore into months as I cast an ever wider and wider net looking for a lab with that perfect trifecta of an ideal This was not the first person I had or would accost about working environment, a project I found interesting, and their life’s ambitions on public transit. A few days prior an opening to take a student. Conscious of how my peers I was waiting at a bus stop with a complete stranger, were making meaningful strides towards graduation, I and burst into tears while telling him I was tired of grad felt ever-increasing pressure to make something work. school and academics. I pleaded with him to tell me At the same time, I was acutely aware that whatever lab about his job and whether he liked it or not. Another I joined would either be my home or my prison for the day I literally ran after a lab equipment sales rep I saw remainder of my twenties. outside to ask her, sweating and out of breath, whether she saw herself doing the same job in another five years. The feelings of burn out crept up on me more and more If my approach to career exploration seems maniacal or with each day, and the question of “why do this at all?” even desperate, well, that’s because this past semester loomed ever larger. After all, I had passed my qualifying has been all about finding options even while feeling exam, which meant that I could take a master’s degree and leave. Furthermore, in exploring different career intensely stuck. options open to PhDs, I discovered that many do not As a third year PhD student, I had finished my classes technically require a doctoral degree. “Oh,” the woman laughed nervously, “I don’t know.” I could tell she was taken aback and slightly perturbed to be subjected to such an intense line of questioning on a 7:30 AM bus ride to school. “I have lots of time to figure that out.”

and passed my qualifying exam, but found myself

I began updating my resume, looking through online job listings, and going to more career development events. Somedays I would tell myself I was not actually going to drop out of grad school, I was just curious to see what else was out there. Other days I was certain that I would leave. While contemplating whether or not to leave graduate school, I have discovered there is an academic taboo against seriously discussing dropping out of graduate school.

hovered around 63 percent for over a decade. Granted, this data was published in 2008, but I find it hard to believe that today we live in times of total perfection in PhD student retention rates.

“...I cast an ever wider and wider net looking for a lab with that perfect trifecta of an ideal working environment, a project I found interesting, and an opening to take a student... I was acutely aware that whatever lab I joined would either be my home or my prison for the remainder of my twenties.”

People tend to give you a knee-jerk response such as “Cut loose now! I would if I could!” (an older, jaded graduate student) or “Are you crazy? I wouldn’t wipe myself with a master’s degree!” (an older, wizened staff scientist). But few people who I have questioned on the subject seemed to have given the option serious thought. To me, this is surprising given that the national statistics on the completion rate of life science PhD programs

Also of interest, I found that the people who could give thoughtful responses to questions like “What are you good at?” and “What would you do if you had to find a job right now?” were either at the very beginning of an academic program or the very end. It seems that for the steps in between we academics find it easiest to put on the blinders and stay focused on the tasks at hand.

Am I saying that I am dropping out of graduate school? No. But am I comfortably settled into a lab? No. The solution that I have created is to take a leave of absence from school. I felt that I needed to take a full step out of academia, and see if a PhD was really something that I wanted. I am taking at least a semester off to explore two careers that interest me and neither of which necessarily require a PhD (though many in the field do hold PhDs).

Beyond that, I have also had some fantastic informational interviews, a job shadow, and have found opportunities to work and volunteer both during and after my leave of absence. But perhaps the greatest rewards have been those squishy intangibles of connecting with other students and seeing how other people are navigating their way through the academic experience.

“Perhaps the greatest rewards have been those squishy intangibles of connecting with other students and seeing how other people are navigating their way through the academic experience.”

The first is a career as a staff scientist in a university Core Lab facility. I am interning in the Emory Integrated E l e c t r o n Microscopy Core and hope not only to learn valuable techniques in microscopy, but also see if a career that rewards technical expertise and customer support rather than grant writing would be more up my alley. Second, I have arranged an internship with Gold Star Medical Communications to explore the world of contracted medical writing.

I feel lucky to have the opportunity to take a leave of absence for reflection and career exploration. I am currently only a week into my leave of absence, but already I am learning all sorts of new lessons relating to both technical skills and business practices.

At the same time, I already miss being a graduate student. I hope that after a semester off I will return revitalized and committed to finishing what I started in graduate school. There is also a chance that I might find a different calling, and if so, I must ultimately do what is best for me. In either case, I think I will come out The BEST program has been a tremendous help in both of this experience wiser and with greater conviction in the thought process and the action steps that I have taken my goals. At the very least, I have learned that a “career this last semester. Some of this help was very concrete: I path” is often a winding, branching, and sometimes have had help fixing my resume, updating my LinkedIn unexplored road. profile, getting a professional headshot, and picking up the contact information to valuable connections.

Broadening experiences and striving to change academic culture: The BEST grant places nonacademic careers in the limelight By Lauren Tanabe, PhD, Wayne State University In 2014, Science reported that only about 15% of biomedical PhD researchers secured a tenure-track position, leaving 85% to figure out how to best apply their skills and training to “alternative” career paths. The NIH’s Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training [BEST] grants are designed to help universities expose graduate students and postdocs to non-academic researchrelated positions in domains such as policy, biotech, teaching, or science communications.

This past October, the 17 awardees of the BEST grant came together in Bethesda, Maryland for their fourth annual conference to discuss how to successfully inform the growing population of biomedical and life science graduate students and postdocs about careers beyond the traditional scope of tenure-track research. (A full description of each BEST awardee’s program can be found on the NIH-BEST site.)

career paths. “The funding is set up to provide faculty time to build a program, so after the 5 years of NIH support, hopefully the university will be committed to running this,” said Dr. Patricia Labosky, Program Leader at NIH’s Office of Strategic Coordination.

While the mission of the BEST grant seems straightforward enough, it poses a serious challenge to the scientific training culture The NIH created the BEST grant in in academic institutions which 2012 to help recipient institutions has tended to view nonacademic train scientists for “nontraditional” careers as a lesser choice and failed

to provide students and postdocs with information about other viable options. As a result, many doctoral students are often confused about their possible career trajectories once they make decisions to depart from the tenure-track route.

Over 50 years ago, Clark Kerr, president of the University of California, in a speech entitled The Uses of the University (1963), explained how historical forces have shaped the role of the university in society. The university was no longer cloistered, but now “a Where did this scientific training prime instrument of national culture come from, and how can purpose,” with its job to produce we help transform it to benefit the “new knowledge,” which was academic labor force while serving “the most important factor in the scientific research enterprise? economic and social growth.” He noted the deficiencies of sprawling An Academic Pyramid universities, which included large Scheme? classes that made researchers too

busy to teach. He also warned of the possible negative impact of federal influence. Paula Stephan, professor of economics at the Andrew Young School of Policy Studies at Georgia State University and Science magazine’s 2012 Person of the Year, referred to the current graduate and postdoctoral training system as a “pyramid scheme” that uses young aspiring scientists as sources of cheap labor for grant-funded research, yet fails to reciprocate in the form of career opportunities.

Melanie Sinche, director of education at The Jackson Laboratory and author of Next Gen PhD: A Guide to Career Paths in Science, surveyed just over 8,000 PhDs who graduated between 2004 and 2014: »» 22% were in tenure-track faculty positions and 13% in non-tenure track positions, leaving a whopping 65% in so-called “alternative” careers. »» Nearly 68% completed one postdoc and 27% two distinct postdocs (4% engaged in three or more). »» Maybe even more disconcerting, only 28% of the sample employed outside of the tenure-track felt the postdoc was required or preferred for employment in their current position (80% believed the PhD was necessary). BEST Trainee delgates who attended the annual BEST Meeting in Bethesda, MD.From left to right: Lauren Tanabe, Katherine Degen, Heather Clancy, Kathleen Hefferon, Natalie Cain, Tatyana Makushok, Kylie Ainslie, Dorothy Yamamoto, April Kusowski, Alessandra Agostinho, Ada Weinstock, Lorena Infante. Photo credit: Lorena Infante.

In How Economics Shapes Science, Stephan argues that federally funded academic research squashes innovation by probing “safe” questions. According to Science, “She shows why the demand for low-cost graduate students and even lower-cost postdocs is perpetual, insatiable, and out of proportion with subsequent career opportunities.”

As was clear at the NIH-BEST meeting this October, not only policy change, but cultural change will be required to prevent the current system’s implosion. Additionally, these changes will be needed to produce innovative research and cultivate an atmosphere of reciprocity. As Stephan notes in the Science article, now is the perfect time to discuss “the need to provide students with good information and Stephan’s work is an assessment of the help them explore alternatives early culmination of those circumstances in their graduate career.” – historical, economical, and otherwise – that have brought us to At the NIH-BEST meeting, PhD this point. Despite her rather grim students and postdoc delegates observations, however, there is an from BEST awardee institutions optimism inherent in the growing discussed their impressions of this acknowledgement of the situation. culture and the “countercultural”

influence of the BEST program in an open and frank conversation. Many praised the program for being a lifeline in an atmosphere where expressing interest in anything beyond the academic career track is still disparaged. The NIH already acknowledges that federally funded students and postdocs should be actively engaging in career development. A clarification published in 2014 by the NIH’s Office of Management and Budget states that “this dual role is critical in order to provide Post-Docs [and graduate students] with sufficient experience and mentoring for them to successfully pursue independent careers in

research and related fields.” This is a stipulation of all those supported by NIH grants. The problem is that in most training settings, little mentorship or direction outside of the traditional career trajectory that assumes a future academic position is provided. Waiting for the “switch to flip”

At the NIH-BEST conference, a panel comprising graduate students and postdocs from the BEST awardee institutions discussed their impressions of academia, their experience with the BEST program, and what they perceived to be the biggest obstacles in eradicating the taboo associated with considering careers outside of academia. The discussion was enlightening, frank, and oscillated between palpable frustration and burgeoning hope.

forcefully her perception changed when she got into graduate school: “I was blindsided … I really couldn’t understand why people weren’t giving me the information I was seeking. In some cases, the [principal investigators (PIs)] One graduate student from a couldn’t help me. They’re trained Midwest institution, who had to help people who want to go into previously worked in industry and academia.” She continued, “Our who wanted a PhD to advance her mentors, throughout our training, career, discussed how swiftly and are PIs. Even if they want to help, they don’t think they can teach us anything more than academic careers. This is what makes us think that it’s either an academic career or not. Our mentors are paving the path for us down that one way.”

You might wait a long time for that switch to go and then when it doesn’t, you’re playing catch up.” Waiting for the switch to flip oftentimes leads to procrastination. Students, believing that eventually they’ll want to follow in the footsteps of their mentor, delay considering other options and pursuing career development opportunities. Ada Weinstock, a postdoc from NYU, suggested that high achievers who may be unsure of their options in the sciences go on to graduate school and postdoc positions in order to put off making a life decision for fear that it will be the wrong one. She noted that, “We are so afraid of failing that we don’t want to make Natalie Cain, a postdoc from UC a decision … Give people tools to Davis, spoke of her experience as help them make a decision.” Heather a graduate student and the hope Clancy, a graduate student from the that she would one day acquire the University of Colorado, summed up desire to pursue an academic career. the problem perfectly: “You don’t Cain noted that, “The people above know what you don’t know.” you are telling you that this is what you’re supposed to do and you’re Yet resistance to programs such as just hoping that at some point the BEST is perplexing. Scientists are switch will flip and you’ll say, ‘Yes, taught to evaluate all reasonable I do want to work in a university.’ possibilities when designing and

Photo credit: Tami Hutto

interpreting experiments, but they seem to possess blind spots for applying the same rationale to their own lives. Maybe herein lies the psychological crux of the problem: PhD programs attract dynamic overachievers who are both openminded and perfectionists, searching for validation from mentors that may never come. Couple this with the natural propensity for scientists to evaluate all information before making a decision. The paucity of said information, as well as the robust disparagement of searching for it, creates a perpetual procrastination loop and a plume of postdocs unsure of where to funnel their energies. Although a topic for another article, it is worth mentioning that the panel of BEST delegates at the conference was entirely female. Perhaps this was coincidental, but it may reflect the general frustration, unrest, and urgency that many women in STEM fields experience, who not only carry the burden of the under-funded and under-mentored academic system, but also the additional obstacles of unconscious bias and multitasking in the face of other life choices, such as motherhood. The Postdoc Holding Pattern

Oddly enough, the so-called “alternative path” is actually the dominant route taken by most. This is not due to a failure to “cut it,” but in most cases, a realization that one’s desired life path may be incompatible with what an academic career entails, as well as wanting to avoid the overwhelming uncertainty of securing sufficient funding and tenure in the future.

The numbers overwhelmingly corroborate the emergence of students deliberately veering away from academia (see inset). Work presented at the NIH-BEST conference in October by Melanie Sinche, director of education at The Jackson Laboratory and author of Next Gen PhD: A Guide to Career Paths in Science, led to the conclusion that a primary goal of the BEST program must be to discourage PhDs from using a postdoc position as a “holding pattern,” and to encourage them instead to engage in career decision-making earlier in their training.

who decide to stay in academia will be at the forefront of the cultural change.These future professors and lab directors will not foist their own career template on future generations of young scientists, but hopefully guide them to resources to help them make their own fulfilling life decisions.

“We need programs like BEST to change the culture.”

Programs like BEST offer students and postdocs additional insight into other viable career options and help them to identify and cultivate transferable skills, the significance of which is often overlooked. It also turns the abstract “someday” into something real. It forces busy scientists to take the amorphous “future plans” off of the back burner (in a lab environment where it is often difficult to plan beyond the next experiment, committee meeting, or grant deadline) and thrusts it into the forefront.

In the meantime, current and future PhDs may find solace in Ms. Sinche’s survey, which found that the majority of PhDs are quite happy in their present positions (academic or otherwise). As I listened to the panel of inspiring and determined women at the conference, I knew that each would eventually find her own route even if she has to blaze through stagnant convention to get there.

As the program wound down, one student said, “This has been a long time coming. It is going to take a huge overhaul. The mindset will still Not everyone who enters the be there in years to come, but we BEST program decides against need programs like BEST to change academia. One postdoc from the culture.” Indeed, it will have UCSF on the conference panel no choice but to change, fueled by had her desire to become a tenure- programs like BEST, and inspiring track faculty member confirmed people like the ones I met at this while participating. She may be enlightening conference. a member of the most important contingent of BEST, because those

“Build a boat … out of cardboard?

By Jessica Petree, Emory University, Cohort 4 BEST Trainee When the words “team building exercise” are uttered, some groan. Yet, at the BEST retreat weekend, team building was what we were there to do. It was an effort to teach us about ourselves, each other, and how we work together. We learned how to maximize our potential and communication skills until we functioned as a honed unit. Being an introvert, I was not at all eager for most of these exercises. Little did I realize that the event I was the least excited about would end up teaching me more about myself and others than I had learned all year.

team members’ weights. The boat should only sink 4 inches! “That can’t be right,” I thought. “The equations must be wrong.” I was shy about using the duct tape at first, but as time marched on and we had only 30 minutes left, I began duct taping furiously with the rest of my team, trying to finish our design before the clock ran out. We all pitched in with everything we had. My focus narrowed to tunnel vision. There was nothing but the boat. The last 5-10 minutes were insanity itself. We had to furiously duct tape the plastic tablecloths to the outside to keep the cardboard watertight. We weren’t sure we were going to finish it in time. While the team rushed to finish, I realized everyone had forgotten to make the paddles, which we would definitely need. In a fury, I began making them, duct taping bits of tablecloth around pieces of cardboard. Finally, time was called, and we were done. Our boat looked like a patchwork quilt from the fair. I feared the front was too low. Nevertheless, we marched down to the pool with our boat held high ready to try our luck in the water.

BEST Retrea

“Build a boat … out of cardboard? That could hold two people?” Those were our instructions. We were given 80 minutes. Standing there with the other BEST trainees listening to the instructions, I felt overwhelmed. Such a task was not possible, I thought. Nevertheless, we weren’t given much time to contemplate it. We picked . our teams and were off! I was on a team of five rather quiet, introverted people, rather than leader types. While the others began designing the boat and drawing it out, I decided to busy myself with the buoyancy equations we were given. After marking out how big the boat was to be, I entered the dimensions into the equation along with our chosen

Trying out the boats was an amazing experience – would anything we or the other teams built so haphazardly have a chance? Two boats were raced across the length of the

Photo credit: Tami Hutto swimming pool at a time. The first two went and one sunk. Its sides were too low and stability was a problem. The other boat took off for the other side at a fast pace, reaching it in good time. We just wanted ours to float. Every step amazed us. We put our boat in the water and it actually floated! Then our team members stepped carefully in, holding precariously onto the side of the pool and other team members. Still, the boat remained afloat, but sank into the water about 4 inches! I was dumbfounded that the equations had been correct! As the word “Go!” was yelled, we cheered crazily for our boat. To our amazement, it remained floating and dashed over the water with the help of the paddles. Everyone looked amazed. We ended up winning the boat race with a time of 33.6 seconds, compared to the next best time of 37 seconds. We couldn’t believe our good fortune. We were grinning, cheering, jumping up and down, and yelling like mad.

at 2016

One of the leaders, Jeff, gave us a pep talk afterward. He said, “You’re all introverted people with no natural take charge types on the team. Despite this, you each pitched in with all your heart and look at the result! Don’t underestimate yourselves and what you can do, because if you do it in a setting like this, you’ll do it in a real world setting as well.” That thought gave me pause. In a way, he was right. I do tell myself negative things

about what I feel I can do. I had thought this boat building task impossible, but when we all worked together, we managed to win the race! Through this activity, I felt empowered for greatness and was impressed with the contributions of each team member. Even though this event was the one I had dreaded the most, it became my favorite story of the retreat weekend. The BEST retreat weekend was an amazing experience of crazy activity mixed with snacks, laughter, and fun. We learned about each other, about what it takes to make a good team, how to communicate more effectively, and listened to each other’s stories. Hearing everyone’s stories made me realize that I wasn’t the only one with struggles. Each of us was different. We all came to the BEST program for different reasons, but all had the same passion to understand how to improve our working relationships, learn about careers, and make career goals. Forged through the fires of activity and close proximity, we were able to develop closer relationships in a shorter time than we would ever have in weekly meetings over the rest of the year. I highly recommend the BEST retreat weekend to everyone in the program!

8 tips to make the most of your next conference By Vanessa Cox, Georgia Institute of Technology, Cohort 2 BEST Trainee

Conferences are great experiences for grad students. You get to network, share your research, or take a short break from bench work, but a few strategic decisions can transform your experience from good to great. Whether your goals include finding a job, identifying potential collaborators, or expanding your professional network, here are some tips to make the most out of your next conference.

Do a practice run before you go A practice run a few weeks before the conference is the ideal opportunity to work through any nervousness and get feedback from colleagues. If possible attend a university-sponsored or local symposium, but a few brutally honest friends will still help. Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t stop there! Use that feedback to revise your poster before the conference. Not only will your poster improve, but you will know your talk forward and backward which will make it easy to engage new people as they walk up at the poster session.

Practice fielding questions

Every conference has a few aggressive questioners and knowing how to handle them politely and without letting them derail the dialog is a valuable skill. Doing a practice run will help you plan your responses. Another tip, if someone makes a comment, rather than asks a question, it is perfectly acceptable to reply, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Thank you for sharing that,â&#x20AC;? and then move on to someone else. With practice, you can control the conversation with aplomb.

Learn to present to researchers in different fields

Especially if you are looking to change fields, you will need practice talking to people in that field. Priorities, interests, and background knowledge will change, so consider going to a conference in your new field. Not only will you meet professionals to network with, but you will also have a chance to practice tailoring your talk for your new audience.

Job offers beyond the career fair

Career fairs at conferences are a mixed bag, but recruiters and even professors will troll poster sessions looking for potential new hires or postdocs. How much this happens depends a lot on the conference, but you could have better success during the poster session than the career fair.

5 7

Reconnect (and network!) with old friends

At conferences, you have the opportunity to run into prior classmates, professors, coworkers, even roommates who might have a professional network worthy of your envy. You can (and should!) orchestrate these meetings by looking people up and visiting their presentations and their students’ poster sessions. Another tip, don’t forget to network with your PI’s collaborators. You might want to work with them in the future!

Get excited (again) about your research Research can be a frustrating experience, but when you step outside your lab, you might find lots of people who are really excited by it! With luck, you’ll remember why you were originally interested in your project and leave the conference feeling reenergized.

Hear about other conferences Each conference has a distinct personality. Some conferences are known as a good venue for graduate students and postdocs to find jobs. Some conferences will be thrilled by your research and others will be lukewarm about it. This information, while well-known, is not well-advertised. Talk to others about your research (especially anyone presenting a poster near you); someone may suggest a conference you had not considered.

Gain confidence to graduate and move on

Conferences can be used to gauge your progress toward become a fully-fledged PhD if you know how to read the signs. Did your undergrad professor ask where you were planning to postdoc? Did someone offer you a business card for their company? Is another presenter particularly interested in your research? If people are asking about your next step, it might be time to take that next step.

8 15

On finding your home base in graduate school By Kellie Vinal, PhD, Emory University, Cohort 2 BEST Trainee Navigating graduate school can be overwhelming at times, especially for those of us who entered our Ph.D. programs with a fuzzyat-best idea of where we see ourselves in ten years (or even in ten hours). Regardless of where our careers take us, it’s crucial to make sure we find ourselves in a best-case scenario home—a lab in which we can thrive, explore, and develop into both the scientists and humans we’re destined to become. So, how do you find the “home base” that’s the right fit for you? Of course, you want to like the subject matter that your project will be focused on, it’s ideal to like the people you’ll be working with, and it’s a good idea to have a firm understanding of what the day-to-day grind will be like. Overwhelmingly, though, I’ve learned that the factor you should take most seriously when choosing a lab is prioritizing a healthy, productive relationship with your mentor. After navigating a particularly stressful relocation to a new lab two years into my graduate program, I joined forces with a few of my classmates who, like me, had switched labs for various reasons. Together, we compiled a list of warning signs,

Photo credit: Tami Hutto resources, and advice in the hopes that we could help pre-empt and avoid unnecessary emotional turmoil for the next generation of students. Ultimately, we noticed some common threads in what our experiences taught us, and the advice we wished we could time travel to tell our past selves: During your rotation, interact with your PI as much as possible. You want to make sure that you and your mentor are on the same page. Ask them directly about their expectations (and communicate yours, too),

check in often about the status of your rotation project, and make an effort to get a feel for what working for them is like. Ultimately, you want your mentor to be on your team and supportive of your endeavors, and you want to be a productive contributor to their research as well. It’s a partnership! Ask questions about the lab you’re considering joining. Seek out the opinions of graduate students, post docs, technicians, and anyone else who is familiar with the lab you’re considering. Scope out the publication track record of the laboratory, as well as status of former students— did they finish their degree in this lab? What did they go on to do? What was their day-to-day experience like? Will you be supported? Are there existing grants or opportunities for grant writing that will ensure your work is supported? Does your advisor see long-term potential for your dissertation project? Is your advisor’s teaching style compatible with the particular flavor of guidance and emotional support you specifically need? And finally, If something doesn’t feel right, speak up. Everyone expects to experience stress from time to time in graduate school. However, if you’re experiencing chronic feelings of stress, being overwhelmed, or generally negative emotions, know that it shouldn’t feel this way. I suggest speaking up and seeking support from mentors, counselors, and friends to determine if you’re experiencing a problem that can be fixed, or if you need to make some changes. Most of all, know that you’re not alone. I’d venture to say that plenty, if not most, graduate students struggle with feelings of inadequacy or imposter syndrome at some point during their career. However, if what you’re experiencing goes above and beyond a “normal” amount of stress, know that there will always be people to support you—as long as you speak up. Confidence and communication are absolutely crucial as you navigate earning a Ph.D. Ultimately, ensuring that the lab you choose is the best environment for you sets you up for success as you foster your skills, chase your interests, and develop your career.

One of the most important decisions you will make as a graduate student is your choice of an advisor. The following criteria should be considered when evaluating potential advisors:

1. Likely production leading to publications.

What is the laboratory’s track record for publication? Are these publications in quality journals? 2. Support for the research. Is there a research grant, i.e., peer-reviewed funding, which can facilitate the purchase of necessary materials and services needed? How committed are funds toward other people and projects?

3. Nature, scope, and training to be provided by the dissertation project. How certain are

positive, publishable results? Is it likely that a breadth of techniques can be learned such that future development and versatility of the student is well served?

4. Seniority of advisor and laboratory environment. What is the depth and breadth

of the advisor’s training and research experience? How versatile and techniquewise are associate (technician, post-doc, student) personnel in a given research group? 5. Area of research. How interesting is the subject area to you? What are its ultimate directions and goals? 6. Communication. Can you communicate well with the advisor? Are clear expectations made of lab members, time in lab, protocol for lab meetings and lab notebooks, etc? 7. Student mentoring record. Does the P.I. have a positive track record of working with students? Does the P.I. have a reputation for supporting students’ career goals?

Maximizing â&#x20AC;&#x153;I will start providing mentees with IDPs, I will be more explicit in discussing expectations, and I will be (even more) mindful of how my words might be interpreted differently by my mentee depending on their potentially different background and lived experiences.â&#x20AC;? -- ASOM Workshop Faculty Participant

Photo credit: Tami Hutto

Mentorship The Atlanta Society of Mentorship Piloted a Faculty and Trainee 2016 Workshop Series aimed at providing A platform and community to discuss experiences and best practices in mentoring training. By Tami Hutto, Atlanta BEST Program Manager Universities have long been working towards supporting faculty and trainees in answering these kinds of questions as they engage in PhD training. There has always been successful mentorship initiatives at Emory and Georgia Tech, we the following pages are a summary and reflection of recent efforts to run programs and make resources more accessile to learn about the variety of mentorship tools and strategies out there.

The very nature of a PhD program is predicated on a student receiving guidance from a primary faculty member throughout their training. This training can require many years of sustained mentorship through the ebbs and flows of various academic, research, and life phases. The mentee and mentor both bring elements of their lives and mindsets into their work that can positively (or negatively) affect each otherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability

Faculty to effectively communicate, understand, and execute as expected.

own, but they might also stick around for years if they go unresolved. Accountability becomes something that needs to be addressed and tough situations can develop We all know effective mentorship is ultimately that both mentee and/or mentors are not always well dependent on the individual mentee and mentor. prepared to deal with. Yes, there are foundational elements needed for good mentoring relationships—but, there is no one size fits As a mentor or a mentee, when you are in a tough all approach that can be taught to ensure successful situation… outcomes for everyone. People simply have different interests, preferences, and expectations. Therefore, what > > What do you do? Who can you turn to? How have works for one mentee might not work at all for the next. others handled this situation? What are some tips?<< It is also the case that what worked well for a mentee on the last project, might not work well for that same In an effort to provide a space for faculty and trainees mentee on a different project. Assessing and adapting to have conversations about mentorship and explore throughout the relationship is critical. promising practices together, a group of us at Emory ran some pilot workshops in fall 2016. The Atlanta Society When the mentoring relationship clicks and things are of Mentorship (ASOM), Emory Chapter, organized working well, things get done and it’s almost effortless two series of workshops with the goal of helping to manage communications and expectations. This mentees and mentors gain perspective and awareness doesn’t mean effective mentoring doesn’t take effort, of resources. The pilot faculty series ran from Aug-Sept it definitely does, but it’s less frustrating and doesn’t 2016 with 8 workshops offered and 43 participants. A involve a lot of stress and misunderstanding. parallel series for PhD students ran from Oct-Nov 2016 with 7 workshops offered with 25 participants. When things aren’t working well, issues can linger and productivity suffers. Things can get very frustrating The following pages summarize and reflect on the lessons when a mentee or mentor isn’t delivering or has learned from the two mentorship series. different expectations. Issues might resolve on their

Faculty Series Assessment »» Strengths: . Thought Provoking . Beneficial to hear other perspectives . “There is a clear community need for this.” »» Weaknesses: . Many stated one hour wasn’t enough felt rushed . Need to design better case scenarios . Need to facilitate more focused conversations »» 100% of respondents said they have made, or plan to make, a change in their mentoring as a result of this training, such as . Use IDP more effectively . Set expectations and have more regular communcation »» 43 total participants, including facilitators . 44% Assistant Professor, 19 . 23% Professor, 10 . 14% Associate Professor, 6 . 14% Postdoc, 6 . 2% Instructor, 1 . 2% Research Professor, 1 »» 16 participants received a certificate (37%)

HOW DO YOU...

– communicate expectations? – manage different styles and needs? – approach productivity issues? – hold others & yourself accountable?

“I realized some of the ways my PI and I don’t always communicate about the same thing, even though we both think we’re on the same page.”

“I had {a} conversation with my advisor and based off of what I learned in the workshop series, I was able to communicate what I need to be successful in their lab.”

Trainees

Pilot Series for Biomedical PhD Mentees at Emory University By Sonia Laurie & Elizabeth Littauer, Emory University Training grants, the Atlanta BEST Program, and the Initiative to Maximize Student Development (IMSD) are all initiatives that have aims to improve the overall health and effectiveness of mentoring relationships in PhD training for both mentors and mentees, with the goals of better preparing and increasing the diversity of the U.S. biomedical workforce.

sessions. Participants were nominated by their peers who felt that these individuals have shown an ongoing commitment to student development and played a leadership role in their graduate program. Ultimately, we wanted to create an environment for exploring and discussing how to define and communicate expectations in mentor-mentee relationships.

ASOM provides the opportunity for students in the broader scientific community who are not committed to these specific NIH development programs to contribute to, and benefit from, ongoing conversations regarding mentorship and training in biomedical research. A core group of senior Emory PhD students that have been involved in ASOM for some time set out to design a forstudents-by-students workshop to increase awareness and share resources about being a “good” mentee.

Approximately 26 third- to fifth-year graduate students and postdocs met every Wednesday for 6 weeks to discuss their mentorship experiences and strategies for optimizing their advisor-advisee relationships. • All GDBBS programs had at least one participant, additional programs included Biomedical Engineering, Chemistry, and Psychology. • Postdocs came from a variety of departments Cell Biology (1), Physiology (1), Microbiology and Immunology (1) and Global Health (2).

These graduate facilitators then targeted participants who have been active in their graduate programs to create a small pilot cohort of attendees for the Fall 2016

Additionally, participants in the pilot program were running our second annual workshop in the fall of 2017, given access to the Birkman Method and using student input and insights from the Personality Assessment, which 2016 pilot series to make it better. provided each student with a “I realized personalized description of Finally, the organizers and their preferred mentorship participants of this workshop that running into styles and their structural series would like to take this misunderstandings and emotional needs within opportunity to thank Tami their work environment. with your PI is not unique Hutto the program manager Each session was designed of the Atlanta Broadening to me, and that it is not to be interactive and Experiences in Scientific encourage self-reflection. Training (BEST) program. inappropriate as a grad We wanted to encourage Without Tami’s incredible student to initiate a mindfulness, leading hard work and dedication, this from the middle, and a conversation to resolve workshop series would have sense of agency within one’s never made it off the ground. the problem.” mentorship environment. We are indebted to her for her kindness, leadership, encouragement, This pilot series helped to bring and enthusiasm. Thank you, Tami! together a community of students and start conversations about being a good mentee. Some students left empowered to help design and facilitate more mentoring PhD Student Series Assessment best practice workshops. The student facilitators and participants from this pilot »» Strengths: series are now actively working with faculty . Thought Provoking and staff to design more workshops, with . Beneficial to hear other perspectives some being designed for joint attendance . Ideas shared in the sessions by both faculty and students in Spring »» Weaknesses: 2017. We are also looking forward to . Need more concrete concepts

Join the List Serve: atlmentors@emory.edu Website: http://www.atlantamentors.org/

. Need better mis of discussion- and lecture -based sessions »» 45% of respondents said the Self-Awareness Workshops were the most successful »» 78% found value in having the same participants every week (cohort model was beneficial) »» Having joint sessions with faculty and students was a common theme during discussions »» 26 participants . All GDBBS programs had at least one participant. »» 10 participants receveived a certificate (38%)

Resources Emory Student Health Resources: »» Student Health Services . 3 main offices on campus http://studenthealth.emory.edu/ . Offers a variety of services, including mental health counseling and referrals, health education, wellness programming, and individual consultations . Located at 1525 Clifton Rd »» CAPS: Counseling and Psychological Services . Offers one-on-one counseling and programming (first 10 sessions are free) . Appointments are scheduled by calling (404) 727-7450 . Located at 1462 Clifton Rd, suite 235 (Old Dental School Building) »» Office of Health Promotion . Offers proactive programming for students on living a balanced, positive life on campus »» Ombudsperson . The Ombudsperson is an individual to whom students may speak regarding a problem, conflict or concern. The office is neutral and

Georgia Tech Student Health Resources: »» Georgia Tech Counseling Center . Offers free mental health counseling services to all currently enrolled Georgia Tech students, as well as psychoeducational testing services, stress management and wellness workshops, and in-house focus groups to help clients connect over shared experiences. »» Health Promotion Department: . Health Promotion provides learning opportunities designed to empower the Georgia Tech community to make healthy decisions, including topics such as stress management, yoga, and nutrition. »» Campus Recreation Complex (CRC): . Campus Recreation inspires and promotes a healthy lifestyle through diverse, quality recreational opportunities and services to enrich mind, body, and spirit while enhancing lifelong learning. Program offerings include: Aquatics, Competitive Sports, GIT FIT, Healthy Lifestyle Programs, and Outdoor Recreation. »» Women’s Resource Center: . Offers programming and resources about a range of topics such as

And now, back to your regularly scheduled programming… By Darcie Cook, Emory University, Cohort 2 BEST Trainee

is December 19th, 2016. I’ve been back in the United States since Thanksgiving after spending the last year in New Zealand on a leave of absence from graduate school. The last month has seen me traveling all over visiting various family members and friends, catching up. The time has been lovely, but my hourglass is running out of sand and I’ll be back in grad school at the beginning of January. I’ve spent the morning trying to get a password reset, so that I can complete all of the necessary trainings to get back into the lab. I really wasn’t looking forward to doing these trainings to begin with, but now I have the added impediment of contacting various departments and having them tell me they don’t have the capacity to reset my password, or they don’t understand why I’m incapable of logging in. I’m not even back

in the lab yet and I’m already dealing with “science time”. Those of you familiar with science time are nodding your heads. If you’ve never heard this term before, it is how we scientists refer to the black hole that we seem to enter when we start a project or experiment that should only take a reasonable amount of time and then somehow takes at least three times that. The simple solution that will only take 15 minutes to make, takes an hour; the three hour experiment turns into your whole day; you tell yourself you’ll be leaving lab by 6 pm, but at 1 am, you’re inexplicably still there. That, is science time. This past year, science time was replaced by vacation time— an equally distressing timerelated phenomenon wherein the time flies by with little heed to my cries of “SLOW DOWN!” Time has a peculiar way of feeling like it’s passing slowly

26 Photo credit: Darcie Cook

in the moment, but suddenly months have gone by and you’re not sure what happened. My year off taught me a lot about myself and what to do with my time. Despite the fact that I am still absurdly out of shape and struggle to hike up a mountain, I know that I’m at my absolute happiest when I get to the summit. The sense of accomplishment, the stunning views, and (most importantly) getting to eat the chocolate I brought specifically for the top are what fuel me. Don’t worry, I’m not going to use the cliché comparison of comparing my PhD to climbing a mountain. Prior to traveling to New Zealand and Australia, the absolute happiest day of my life was the day I passed my qualifying exam. I studied for so long and stressed to the point where my hair was falling out, but it was all worth it because I rocked that exam. It felt incredible, but

it also seemed like everything went downhill from there. Grad school became a rain cloud that I just couldn’t shake. Even when I took a break, I felt guilty about all of the things I should have been doing. Even when I was on vacation, there was always an email to respond to, a paper to read, or data to analyze. It was never ending and I needed a way out. Cue the leave of absence. I left the States for 11 months. Ten of those I spent in New Zealand, the last one, in Australia. I can’t pinpoint the happiest day of my life anymore. I now have a happiest year of my life to look back on. I did so many new things and met so many interesting people, it’s hard to say which day was the happiest. There are certainly moments that stand out (skydiving over mountains and lakes, diving on the Great Barrier Reef, multi-day hikes through the most beautiful places I’ve ever been to, fascinating conversations with people from all over the world), but there isn’t a single one that takes the cake. I have an arsenal of great moments and people to call upon

to pull me out of a grad school-induced funk. I start back in the lab the first week of January. I’ve got a lot to catch up on. The lab has new people, new instruments, and new procedures. I’ve got a year’s worth of papers to read and I need to remember everything I have forgotten. It’s going to take time to readjust and get back into the swing of things, but I’m not concerned. The time off has given me perspective. I was worried I would miss lab work if I just walked away, but I also wasn’t sure I was even going to come back and finish my degree. I now know that I definitely don’t miss lab work, but I’m reenergized and given the time I’ve already invested, I want those three letters after my name. I know it won’t be particularly fun and there will still be bad days, but I have a much different outlook. I will make sure there are fun days hanging out with friends when I need a break or a good laugh. Before I left, I thought

maybe I could just suck it up and get it finished as fast I could. I’m not worried about finishing as quickly as possible anymore. If I start to get that overwhelmed feeling every grad student is all too familiar with, I’m going to set work aside for a bit and climb a mountain. It might take me a bit longer to get everything done, but I’m going to take time for myself. I’m looking for the rainbow in the rain.

Informational Interviews for By Annina Deleo, PhD, Boston University

Informational Interviews are conversations with professionals to gain knowledge about new careers and new fields. They are a way to get an insider’s perspective on jobs and potential employers.

Interview yourself Identify the most enjoyable aspects of your job. Ask colleagues what they like about their jobs. Think about features you want in your future work. Attend seminars offered in both academia and in industry. Learn about related fields through BEST programs. Learning what people enjoy in their jobs will help you focus on your values and the qualities you want. A useful book is Alternative Careers in Science, by Cynthia Robbins-Roth. Each chapter is written by a Ph.D. about careers Getting an informational interview outside academia. Talk to a career advisor to determine your strengths, 85% of jobs are filled through networking1. Informational goals, and options. Look into careers interviews expand and strengthen your network. Start by that include the positive aspects asking friends if they know anyone in your target area. you’ve identified. Universities cultivate an active alumni network; talk to your career advisor to get connected. Speak with others in your department they may have useful contacts. Search LinkedIn for potential interviewees. Look for mutual connections who can make an introduction. Contact that person directly if you don’t have mutual acquaintances.

Making contact Be polite and concise with everyone. Be upfront about asking for an interview. Include one sentence about yourself and highlight any shared connections. Send one follow-up if you don’t get a response, then reach out to someone else.

1. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/new-survey-reveals-85-all-jobs-filled-via-networking-lou-adler 2. http://www.bu.edu/best/files/2017/01/informational-interview-questions.pdf

Academics The interview Before your interview, do specific research on your contactâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work and their company. Show your contact your interest in their field. This will help you form a relationship and understand their professional environment. Ask questions to understand how that person derives meaning and satisfaction from their career. This will help you determine whether the work will meet your values, engage your talents, and help you realize your goals. Make a list of questions. There are many resources with sample questions2, to help you complete your list. This reference list will keep you focused, and can help you organize interview information. Print your questions with enough space for notes.

After the interview Thank your contact in writing for taking the time to talk to you. If they have suggested companies or careers to consider, or people to contact, investigate those options and report back. This is crucial to building relationships and could lead you to your new career. Stay resilient through the search for people and places who want your skills. There are people out there looking for someone with the training and critical thinking that comes with a Ph.D.

Photo credit: Annina Deleo

n July, the American Society for Cell Biology and the Keck Graduate Institute (KGI) teamed up to offer a unique experience: a one-week intensive training course for PhDs interested in biotech business management. Fifty PhD candidates and postdocs from research institutes around the country traveled to Claremont, California for six days of MBA-style professional training and to learn about the biotech field. Networking lunches, a group consulting assignment, and keynote lectures from luminaries in the field rounded out the training. Students left with a By Vanessa Cox, Georgia Institute of Technology, Cohort 2 BEST Trainee greater understanding of the biotech world and how their skills can be applied to industry. Attendees also received concrete advice on the all-important question, “How do I get a job?” as well as the follow up, “How do I build a career?” For students passionate about bringing novel technologies to market, this six-day course gave them the basic understanding they need to think of science from a business perspective. During the week, mornings were spent with KGI faculty, many of whom have experience in industry, learning the basics of biotech business. Using Harvard Business Review case studies (the MBAschool gold standard) to supplement real-world data, faculty members introduced students to concepts including business development, market assessment, and business strategy. Students learned to evaluate questions centering on when to outsource or license new technology, the benefits and hazards of alliances and mergers, and the challenges of pricing in the biotech industry. N e t w o r k i n g lunches offered face-time with industry bioscientists representing the

Keck Graduate Institute

Photo credit: Jennifer Markovski gamut of careers in biotech, from patent law to clinical-regulatory affairs and everything in between. The week culminated in a group consulting project in which teams of five students generated a 3D-printed prototype and business analysis of a novel medical device currently in development. One of the best aspects of the program was that the information was concrete and immediately applicable. For example, the session on strategic networking offered data-driven advice on what type of network you need, how to build it, and how to leverage those connections. Everyone knows to network more, but learning how, when, and why was invaluable for students starting their careers. Along these lines, Judy Heyboer (former Senior Vice President of Human Resources at Genentech, Inc.) ran a workshop on how to get a foothold in the biotech sector. She offered information that was pragmatic and applicable, with the point-of-view only an insider could give.

KGI offers two professional programs for PhDs who want training specific to the biotech industry. Certificate in Bioscience Management: a 1-year program, introductory business classes on finance, accounting, and business strategy, offered on-site and online. Postdoc Professional Masters degree (PPM): a more in-depth 1-year program specific to the bioscience industry, offered on-site only. The PPM program includes »» Five MBA-style classes focusing on bioscience business and management. »» In-depth courses focusing on advanced business or technical training specific to industry career tracks such as clinical or regulatory affairs, entrepreneurship, or international business. »» A team research project sponsored by industry. The project may be more laboratoryor business-based depending on the company’s needs.

or the past few years, I have been exploring my interests in science policy, engaging in policydriven workshops hosted by the Eagleton Institute and the Rutgers University BEST program: Interdisciplinary Job Opportunities for Biomedical Students (iJOBS) Phase I. To hone my focus on science and health policy, I enrolled in iJOBS Phase II, which involved a course and shadowing component. During the fall semester, I enrolled in Introduction to Public Administration, an online class dedicated to understanding the structure of an administration system. While the bulk of policy work occurs in Washington DC, I had the unique opportunity during the first few months of this year to shadow Congressman Leonard Lance of New Jersey’s 7th district while he was in the state.

Forays in Science Po

My shadowing experi Congressman Leonard By Eileen Oni, Rutgers University

I began my shadowing experience by meeting the Congressman, his Field Representative Ben Colalillo, and District Director Amanda Woloshen at a local courthouse during a freeholder reelection announcement. We returned to one of Congressman Lance’s district offices, where we had meetings with local constituents, ranging from groups voicing specific concerns to individuals expressing support for the Congressman’s work. The main goal of the district offices is to maintain constituent relationships, by taking phone calls, coordinating town halls, and organizing other community outreach projects. These events were coordinated by Constituent Services Representatives Bonnie Abbate, Glenn Mortimer, John Malone, and Barbara Goodman alongside Scheduler Anna Pellecchia. Throughout my shadowing experience, my time was spent attending outreach events and sitting in during constituent meetings. Congressional outreach events are an excellent way to hear questions and create a dialogue with constituents. The locations of these events ranged from municipal halls to classrooms to industry offices. Many questions/ comments involved gun control, health care, election primaries, and homeland security, where one particular exchange concerning gun violence resulted in a follow-up meeting.

Outreach events at district schools began with a mini civics lesson taught by the Congressman which discussed the roles and structure of the branches of the U.S. government. Following the lesson, students asked informed and eloquent questions ranging from gun violence to immigration to ongoing primaries. These events were a great platform for students to interact with their local legislators.

nto olicy:

ience with d Lance

Left to right: Eileen Oni (iJOBS Trainee), James Mitchell (Chief of Staff), Congressman Leonard Lance, John Malone (Deputy Chief of Staff), Amanda Woloshen (District Director), Barbara Goodman (Constitutive Services Representative), and Glenn Mortimer (Constitutive Services Representative). Photo credit: Eileen Oni.

Congressman Lance is a member of the House Energy and Commerce committee, which is responsible for overseeing the regulations and laws affecting telecommunication and pharmaceutical companies. Additionally, the 7th district is home to many telecoms and is a prime opportunity for companies such as Verizon, Celgene to host site visits in order to initiate a dialogue. Visits included a site tour followed by a town hall with employees discussing updates from the hill regarding the current status of major

legislation. Follow-up questions ranged from taxes to the republican primaries, with many questions focused on the Congressman’s opinions of the candidates and possible election outcomes. Overall, shadowing a member of policy was an illuminating experience, giving me a thorough understanding of the roles of congressional members while in their home districts. Like many peers, I assumed that congressmen were on vacation while in their home districts, which is definitely not the case! As scientists, we tend to get frustrated with the various stances that legislators take, but may not realize the difficulty of legislating, where decisions affect not only the country, but local citizens. This is an important concept, considering the array of differing opinions and perspectives that any particular legislator can hear on any number of issues. This experience will stay with me as I carve a career within science policy. I have a new appreciation for the full diversity of perspectives, especially from those who end up with the final say in determining the funding of programs that will ultimately maintain the United States’ leadership in STEM.

“Shadowing a member of policy was an illuminating experience”

In closing, I would like to thank the members of iJOBS phase II staff, Dr. Kristen Labazzo and Susan Engelhardt, for setting up this opportunity. Lastly, I would like to thank Congressman Lance and his wonderful and welcoming legislative staff for providing me the opportunity to witness the day in the life of a member of congress. Background photo credit: www.newark.rutgers.edu

To Contribute Articles to the Atlanta BEST Magazine please contact: Tami Hutto: thutto@emory.edu Kylie Ainslie: kylie.ainslie@emory.edu