Nautilus

The NatureJobs Source Event career fair will be taking place in London on 26 September 2008. This dedicated science career fair combines a dynamic exhibition with conference and workshop sessions. The event will promote the UK and the rest of Europe as a great place to pursue a career in science, be it in industrial research, research organizations or academia. It will present the best opportunities from the best organizations: public, private, national and international.
Jobseekers will be able to meet with potential employers who are offering hundreds of vacancies. The plenary and workshop sessions will provide a unique opportunity to meet high-profile scientists and gain careers information and advice.
Several of the invited speakers have kindly agreed to answer career-related questions in advance of the meeting, at Nature Network. The Nature Network Question & Answer session with some of the meeting’s speakers is now "live". The NatureJobs team invites you to ask the speakers about their backgrounds, career paths, advice for getting in to a particular field or sector, relevant or important skill sets, and so on. The relevant speaker(s) will post responses, and factor the questions into their presentations at the event.

The following speakers have kindly agreed to participate:
• Jim Loftus, Research Recruitment Manager, Pfizer
• Matthais Haury, Coordinating Manager, EMBL International Centre for Advanced Training
• Zonya Jeffrey, Biomedical Scientist, Central Manchester and University Hospitals NHS Trust
• Stijn Oomes, Assistant Professor in Human–Computer Interaction, Delft University of Technology
• George Schlich, Chartered and European Patent Attorney & founder of Schlich & Co
• Jonathan Yearsley, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne.

Already in the Nature Network Source Event forum there are questions and answers about moving from academia to industry, what participants hope to gain from the event, which recruitment and other companies will be exhibiting, how to upload your CV, and more.
Please join this free Nature Network group to ask your questions and to obtain further careers advice from the panel of experts.
The Question and Answer sessions are here.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on June 25, 2008
Categories: Careers, Partners | Permalink | Comments (0)

Frontiers of cellular, developmental and molecular biology, Nice; 30 August – 2 September 2008.
The seventh international congress of the European Life Scientist Organization (ELSO) returns this year to Nice on the French Cote d’Azur. Promoted for the first time in collaboration with the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO), the ELSO meeting offers a broad palette of top-notch international molecular life science mixed with informative and practical events to promote the career development of young researchers.
From the conference information pages: Plenary session speakers this year include: systems biologist Ursula Klingmueller; cell biologist Graham Warren; stem cell biologist Andreas Trumpp; developmental biologist Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz; tissue engineer Donald Ingber, and proteomics expert Matthias Mann. The 21 minisymposia and the poster sessions cover topics ranging from entry of pathogens into cells, through epigenetics to computational biology and all stops en route. Around 180 speakers, 600 posters and 80 commercial exhibitors will provide four full days of exciting and topical life science. Abstract submission deadline is 15 June.
If you are looking for advice on what to do next, whether it be a postdoc or a junior group leader position in another country or a move into a career outside academia, ELSO’s career development events can give you the inspiration to try something new and challenging and the practical help to put your plans into practice. At this year’s meeting there will be mentoring and mobility sessions, first-hand accounts of careers outside academia, as well as a new career enhancement workshop looking at your own personality, CV, interview techniques, and so on. Not to be missed if you are planning a career move soon!

Posted by Maxine Clarke on June 09, 2008
Categories: Careers, Conferences, Partners | Permalink | Comments (0)

In many countries funding agencies have set up dedicated funding schemes to help the plight of young principal investigators. But is the playing field level for all qualified scientists? This question is asked in the June Editorial of Nature Cell Biology (10, 629; 2008), and we welcome your views here.

In many countries it is possible to obtain one's first position as principal investigator within five years of a first postdoc, and funding policies that encourage this fast-track route are all the rage. In the UK, for example, the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust offer generous Career Development Awards of up to £1 million — enough to effectively kick-start a successful independent career. However, both specify a narrow time-frame (three to six years' postdoctoral experience), which markedly restricts the number of candidates. This reflects the international funding landscape; for example, in Germany the 'Junior Professor' scheme is also capped at nine years of postgraduate research.
Some of the most promising candidates who follow a less linear career path run the risk of disqualifying themselves from vital funding. An investigator who has gone through multiple postdocs to learn different skills in diverse disciplines may be better equipped for innovative and independent research than fast-track, inexperienced principal investigators. Clearly, it is good to encourage early independence, but not at the expense of researchers who delay the move for the right reasons. Such principal investigators may actually find themselves between a rock and a hard place: they may have been awarded a coveted university position but be unable to apply for start-up funding and have to compete for programme grants with senior researchers who have established groups of a dozen people.

Continue reading "Is there a loophole in start-up funding?" »

Posted by Maxine Clarke on June 01, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Making discoveries, part II of Jonathan W. Yewdell's How to succeed in science: a concise guide for young biomedical scientists, is published in the June issue of Nature Reviews Cell and Molecular Biology (9, 491-494; 2008). "Making discoveries is the most important part of being a scientist, and also the most fun", writes Dr Yewdrell. "This article provides practical advice to young scientists on choosing a research topic, on designing, performing and interpreting experiments and on maintaining their sanity in the process."
Part I, Taking the plunge, was published in May.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 29, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (1)

James Butcher, publisher of the eight Nature Clinical Practice journals, is giving a talk on careers in scientific publishing at this year’s Young Physiologists’ Symposium, on Sunday 13 July 2008, at Cambridge, UK. James writes: "The Young Physiologists’ Symposium is a fabulous meeting that is well worth attending. 10 years ago I helped to organise a YPS meeting at the University of Bristol, where I was a PhD student at the time. The internet was still in its infancy in the late 1990s and I don’t think we even had a website to promote the conference, but somehow we managed to get together young physiologists from all over the UK who had an interest in cardiovascular physiology. I’m really pleased to be attending again, this time as a speaker rather than as an organiser."

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 26, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

If the United States is losing its competitive edge in science and technology, as some indicators show (see Nature 453, 133-134; 8 May 2008), how can that trend be reversed? As well as various recent welcome recommendations to increase funding, graduate stipends, research facilities and teaching, May's Editorial in Nature Structural and Molecular Biology (15, 425; 2008) identifies the importance of more funding for high-risk, highly innovative projects. Although 40 European funding agencies have programmes that support such "novel" projects, the main funder in the United States is the National Institutes of Health. Its EUREKA program is for investigators "testing novel, unconventional hypotheses or are pursuing major methodological or technical challenges". Another initiative is the Grand Challenges Explorations, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. As the Nature Structural and Molecular Biology Editorial puts it: "If these programs in Europe and the United States lead to even a few discoveries like those of Archimedes—who, when he stepped into his bath and realized he could calculate the volume and density of an object by submerging it in water, leaped out of the tub and dashed outside without clothes on crying, "Eureka! I have found it!"—the monies will have been well spent."

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 19, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Is scientific progress being stifled by a lack of support for researchers who aim to change research directions? This is the question asked in Nature Cell Biology's May Editorial (10, 499; 2008).

At a time when cell biologists are exposed more than ever to diverse fields of research, it is notable that we are not seeing a parallel increase in researchers moving into new areas. There are certainly compelling examples of cell biologists who have successfully maintained more than one research focus or shifted the direction of their laboratory entirely — but not as many as one might expect. Perhaps people really do have a healthy obsession with their particular research focus, but is there also a fear of failure that is being compounded by the current funding and publishing process?

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 13, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Choices in neuroscience careers are discussed by Tamas Bartfai, Tom Insel, Gord Fishell and Nancy Rothwell in the Viewpoint in the May issue of Nature Reviews Neuroscience (9, 401-405; 2008).
What factors should young scientists (PhD students and postdoctoral researchers) consider to ensure they choose wisely when selecting their field of study, place of study, laboratory and mentor? Most students and postdoctoral researchers aiming for a successful career in neuroscience ask themselves these questions. In this article, Nature Reviews Neuroscience asks four successful neuroscientists for their thoughts on the factors one should consider when making these decisions, with the hope of creating a useful resource for junior neuroscientists who have to make important and sometimes difficult decisions that might have long-lasting consequences for their careers.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on April 30, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sherry Towers, a particle physicist who is now a statistician, reports a study using public databases to study the career paths of 57 former postdoctoral researchers from Fermilab who worked on the Run II Dzero experiment to examine if males and females were treated in a gender-blind fashion on the experiment. Dr Towers's results are highlighted in a Nature news story this week (23 April 2008) .
Female researchers were on average significantly more productive compared to their male peers, yet were allocated only one-third the amount of conference presentations based on their productivity. The study also finds that the dramatic gender bias in allocation of conference presentations appeared to have significant negative impact on the academic career advancement of the females.
Nature contacted some physicists to ask them their views. Some are sceptical, arguing for example that one of the criteria used in the study, internal papers, are not necessarily a direct measure of productivity, and that the small number of physicists surveyed is not enough to prove systematic bias. But even those expressing scepticism do not doubt that females suffer gender discrimination. Several female physicists contacted by Nature said Towers's data matched their personal experiences of institutional sexism in physics. According to the news story, Fermilab did undertake a review of its policies after the complaints of gender bias.
Various points of view are expressed in the comment thread to the Nature story, to which you are welcome to add your experiences and/or views.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on April 24, 2008
Categories: Careers, Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

Haihong Ye wrote a fascinating post on Action Potential, the blog of the journal Nature Neuroscience, last month, on the amazing changes in Chinese neuroscience over the past decade. He writes: "Over the past 10 years, especially the last five, the whole world has been amazed by the Chinese economy. To me, however, the improvement in biological science research in China is much more amazing. In the summer of 1998 I left Beijing and went to the US to pursue a PhD in neuroscience. In 2007, after nine years of graduate study and post-doc training abroad, I came back to Beijing, seeking opportunities for further career development. What a difference some strong funding and visionary directives, not to mention a decade, can make."
Please visit Action Potential to read on and to discuss this stimulating article about the driving forces behind the country's neuroscientific achievements, the problems in maintaining progress, and how things look for the future.
For those interested in reading more on the topic, Chinese neuroscience was featured in Nature Neurocience's March editorial (11, 1; 2008).

Posted by Maxine Clarke on April 09, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

From a Feature by Barbara Nasto in Nature Biotechnology 26, 283 - 288 (2008):

Europe's biotech sector has tripled in size over the past decade, expanding to include 2,350 companies in 2006 compared with the 700 that existed ten years ago. At the highest political echelons, the European biotech industry enjoys the endorsement of its leaders, as demonstrated by the creation of the EU Life Science and Biotechnology Strategy in January 2002 and the Lead Market Initiative for Europe, announced early this year. But the difficulties that companies face in negotiating the EU's bureaucratic machinery, the poor availability of risk capital, the lack of harmonized fiscal and legal systems, and the slow evolution from a patchwork of largely uncoordinated national initiatives to more coordinated efforts across the continent mean that European biotech remains a work in progress.

Europe is home to a potpourri of initiatives to support the biotech industry. Implementation of European-wide, national and local policies to support the industry help to create several unique environments not only within countries but also within regions and even individual cities. Many of its organizations, both governmental and private, are well aware of ways to further improve the environment. The overall trend is toward the increased adoption of technology and the creation of greater market uniformity within Europe. Growth in the sector promises to continue as all the nations have agreed that a knowledge-based economy is the way forward for Europe and biotech is a part of the endeavor to reach the goals laid out in the Lisbon Agreement.

Read the article in full in the April 2008 issue of Nature Biotechnology.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on March 25, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Nature Publishing Group is looking for a dynamic, organized and creative science graduate with a background in structural biology to launch and maintain the forthcoming Protein Structure Initiative (PSI) knowledge base. The successful applicant will also have a keen interest in and ideas for making the site accessible to a broad audience of molecular and cellular biologists as well as geneticists.
Launching in 2008, the knowledge base will be an accessible online publication widely read by the research community. The site will encompass editorial content updated monthly on recent research, news and events, as well as databases and other information resources from the PSI. The Knowledgebase is an innovative publication of a type that is becoming increasingly important in academic publishing, and we are looking for someone who is eager to establish the Knowledgebase as a major information resource for researchers.
The Editor will take responsibility for site's content and high scientific quality, including writing summaries of key research developments. The editor will work as part of the existing teams in NPG’s Web Publishing department and at Nature Structural and Molecular Biology, and will liaise with the PSI. They will have, or will be shortly expecting to receive, a PhD in a structural biology-related discipline, and will have a broad interest and understanding of the structural biology field, including technologies and their applications. A sound knowledge of good web practice and a passion for the exploitation of the medium as a means of scientific communication are crucial.
Key personal qualities for this position include excellent writing skills, strong ability to communicate with leading scientists, an acute eye for detail, and the ability to work to firm deadlines.
The successful candidate will ideally be based in our offices in New York, although other localities may be possible.
To Apply: Send cover letter stating salary requirements and resume via email to admin@natureny.com (Nature Publishing Group, Human Resources Department) no later than 14 April 2008. Note “Online Editor” in the subject header. NPG is an Equal Opportunity Employer.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on March 19, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Paul Smaglik writes on Nature Network's NatureJobs careers advice forum:
Taking longer in grad school? Undergoing multiple postdocs? Waiting for independent-investigator status?

"Naturejobs diagnosed these symptoms four years ago and prescribed some solutions. But we’re seeing signs that the maladies hampering young scientists’ career progression might be getting worse. One underlying cause? The US National Institutes of Health has caught the budget-crunch bug since then. Funding has been flat the past five years. This chronic condition hits young scientists hardest. Over that time, new faculty have seen their grant success rates drops and the age to independence increase. Grant renewals have also been harder to come by over that time period—especially for younger faculty. Now the NIH has frozen postdoc stipend levels; for fellows, this is like coming down with a stomach flu when they already have a cold. I’m loathe to just point out a problem, without pointing to any solution. But I’d like to hear the health of your career at this stage. Is your career feeling under the funding weather? Or are you budgetarily healthy? Please let us know. And I’ll soon follow up with some bright spots and ways to boost your career’s immune system."
Please join Paul at the Nature Network forum, and let him know your views.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on March 13, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

In an editorial in Molecular Systems Biology (3, 158; 2008), Synthetic biology: promises and challenges,
Luis Serrano of the Centro de Regulación Genomica in Barcelona addresses wide-ranging and fascinating aspects of this nasent field. He asks why Europe is "lagging behind the US? Perhaps it is due to a general problem in Biology research and the way Europe has structured its research. In particular, Europe will need to take more and bolder initiatives in funding and building new institutes to create the necessary critical mass, and should raise its ambition for starting novel research areas. Competitive European groups in areas related to Synthetic Biology definitely exist, mainly amongst the very top EU institutes, where the system is more flexible and excellence is actively pursued. But these few world-class laboratories are usually small, scattered and in many cases have just entered into the field of Systems Biology and, therefore, do not have the capacity to fully embark into Synthetic Biology. As in many other fields, if Europe wants to stay competitive, we will need a major overhauling of the system, promoting excellence, flexibility and young investigators with new crazy projects. In this sense the European Research Council (ERC) initiative may represent a decisive step forward."

Posted by Maxine Clarke on March 11, 2008
Categories: Careers, Disciplines, Support | Permalink | Comments (0)

From a recent Editorial in Nature (451, 869; 2008):
"Seven years ago, Mitiko Go, a biophysicist then at Nagoya University, told Nature about a disturbing experience she had had at a meeting of the university's Division of Biological Science (see Nature 410, 404–406; 2001). The academics were considering a female applicant for a vacant chair, and one male member said: "I'm sorry to have to say this in front of Dr Go, but one woman is enough."
Go thought she might be scolded for relating the story (and indeed she says she was accused of "tarnishing the honour of the university"), but she was about to retire from the university and felt the time had come to say something radical.
Times have changed. Far from retiring, Go is now president of the prestigious Ochanomizu University in Tokyo and a member of the Council for Science and Technology Policy, the country's highest science body, which is chaired by the prime minister. Go and others have implored the government to do more in support of women. The science and education ministry has responded."
Read the rest of this free-access Editorial here, which addresses the questions of why, when Japanese science needs its women more than ever, it does not treat them accordingly.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on March 05, 2008
Categories: Careers, Education | Permalink | Comments (0)

The digital edition for the Nature Events directory 2008 is available. Now in its ninth year, the directory is full of conferences, meetings, courses and symposia being held during 2008 across all scientific and medical disciplines. From each entry in the Nature Events listings, you can click directly to the conference website for further information.
If you prefer a PDF version of the directory, you can obtain it from the Nature Events main page. Whether via the directory or its regularly updated database, Nature Events aims to offer a comprehensive resource that will help researchers identify the right event to attend.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on February 21, 2008
Categories: Careers, Communication, Conferences | Permalink | Comments (0)

Nautilus has featured many posts about gender issues in scientific research, as can be seen at this link. The question of opportunities for women is one that endures: hard on the heels of two studies in EMBO Reports last November comes a Feature in February's issue of Nature Geoscience, Gender imbalance in US geoscience academia, by Mary Anne Holmes, Suzanne O'Connell, Connie Frey and Lois Ongley (Nature Geoscience 1, 79 - 82; 2008). From the article:

"We could wait for the pipeline to supply more women by having more women enter our programs, but the wait will be a long one: the proportion of women on the faculty will never equal the proportion receiving PhDs if we do not intervene to stop women's exodus from academia. The problem is not only the supply of women into geosciences majors, but the continual loss as more women drop out and head for other fields or other careers instead of tenure-track jobs and tenure. The processes by which our students complete a PhD and go on to achieve tenure may not be selecting for all traits that can contribute to the best science and teaching. We assert from our own experiences and acquaintances that the ongoing loss of women from the geosciences is not 'best selection', but a brain drain."

The full Nature Geoscience article is available here.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on February 05, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Managing Editor - Nature
Nature is the world's leading scientific journal and is the flagship publication of Nature Publishing Group. With its authoritative journalism and opinion, a leading position in its science research content, and worldwide influence and engagement, Nature stands ready to undertake a period of further investment in both print and online formats. The publisher and the Editor-in-Chief of Nature wish to employ a senior manager who will take direct responsibility for the implementation of the publishing programme and for key aspects of publishing and editorial management.
Applicants must have a demonstrable familiarity with the scientific landscape, a strong commercial drive, and the ability to manage projects and to achieve demanding goals in a way that stimulates and inspires the colleagues on whom they depend. The job is based in the London offices of the Nature Publishing Group (NPG), and involves close interactions with colleagues in other parts of Europe, the United States and the Asia-Pacific.
Candidates should have prior commercial and editorial experience, preferably in scientific publishing. They should be comfortable with print and online media and have had experience of running projects and managing teams. Contact details: please send your CV, a summary of relevant experience, and your current salary, quoting reference number to NPG/LON/815, to Geetika Juneja, Personnel Assistant, at londonpersonnel@macmillan.co.uk All candidates must demonstrate the right to live and work in the UK to be considered for the vacancy. Closing Date: 14 February 2008.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on February 01, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

In an editorial in EMBO Reports this month, The pipeline (EMBO R. 9, 1; 2008), Frank Gannon writes that the number of scientists, technicians and engineers that the European Union needs to keep up its current rate of growth is often estimated to be 700,000 by the year 2010. He writes: "the European economies face a huge deficit of the trained people needed to sustain modern knowledge-based economies". He goes on to discuss some of the reasons for this deficit, concluding that "We need to support and encourage young students and help teachers to communicate science in an exciting and inspiring manner, even as early as primary school. In fact, the scientific community has a lot to do and it needs to start soon if we are to avoid the deficit of skilled scientists and engineers predicted for the coming decade."

Posted by Maxine Clarke on January 15, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

For scientists who want to combine public outreach with research, a museum may be the perfect place to work, writes Ricki Lewis in Nature this week in a special report on science career issues and alternative jobs for scientists (Nature 451, 218-219; 2008). "Scientists who work in museums enjoy a dynamic mix of laboratory and field research, collection managing, outreach and education, and exhibition design. The primary advantage is research flexibility, says Kathlyn Stewart, a research scientist in palaeobiology at the Canadian Museum of Nature in Ottawa. "My work focus is a research programme of my design using museum collections," she says, contrasting this with universities, where teaching and advising students is the focus, or industry or government, where scientists may have little say in their research focus."
"Whether helping to start a new museum or just designing an innovative exhibition, museum work is most valued by those scientists hoping to make an impact with the public. "When I work on an exhibition, I realize that maybe a million visitors a year will see it," says John Flynn of the American Museum of Natural History. "That's an incredible opportunity." "

Posted by Maxine Clarke on January 14, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Nature Biotechnology's Data Page this month (Nat. Biotech. 26, 14; 2008) features a topic of perennial interest, that of salaries. Stacy Lawrence reports that life-science researchers in the United States earn more than their counterparts in Japan, Australia and, by quite a considerable amount, Europe. The United States also employs more life scientists in companies than anywhere else. Large biotechnology companies generate as much profit as smaller pharmaceutical firms—with only about half the staff. At the higher end of the scale, chief executives of US biotechnology companies earned an average of $350,000 last year and held an average 5.5% stake in their companies.
Tables of these data are available at Nature Biotechnology.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on January 10, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

"Any issue of Nature today has nearly the same number of Articles and Letters as one from 1950, but about four times as many authors. The lone author has all but disappeared. In most fields outside mathematics, fewer and fewer people know enough to work and write alone. If they could, and could spare the time and effort to do so, their funding agencies and home institutions would not permit it." So writes Mott Greene of the University of Puget Sound in his recent (single-author, naturally) Nature essay "The demise of the lone author" (Nature 450, 1165; 2007).
Professor Greene goes on to discuss how this practice is affecting, and will affect, the system of awarding credit for work done, predicting that "in those fields where multiple authorship endangers the author credit system, we shall soon see institutionally initiated restriction on the number of authors. Paradoxically, this is likely to be endorsed by all parties as preferable to cinema-style specification of who actually did what. Most will prefer full credit for a few papers to little or no credit for many, considering where it matters most: university committees in charge of tenure, promotion and salary increments based on scholarly production. Given Nature's role in determining, as well as chronicling, how science is reported (see Nature 450, 1; 2007), interested parties could watch these pages to see whether a trend towards more restricted authorship is emerging."

Nature's policy on author contribution statements is here, and was introduced in an Editorial here.
Professor Greene's article is also available on the beautiful website that celebrates the history of the journal Nature.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on January 10, 2008
Categories: Authorship, Careers, Quality measures | Permalink | Comments (1)

In a Commentary in the latest (January) issue of Nature Immunology (9, 3-5; 2008), Mentoring and networking: how to make it work, Laura Haynes and coauthors describe the importance and steps required for good mentoring and networking.
Mentoring is considered so important for the development of scientists that the National Science Foundation now requires its grantees to provide information on how they will mentor postdoctoral fellows. The Nature Immunology authors address why this function is crucial, how good mentors can be found, and outline the process and benefits -- "a mentor should equip the mentee with the necessary advice and tools to establish themselves as a researcher, while the mentee must be prepared to translate advice into action."
It is perhaps not so intuitively obvious why networking is important. Clearly, it is a useful skill in finding a new job, but as Haynes et al. point out, it is essential to continuing success in all aspects of a career, as it consists of making meaningful, long-lasting contacts to enhance a researcher's visibility in a field where other people are reviewing one's grants and publications, choosing speakers to invite to conferences and seminars, and providing job and award references. The authors write: "new and innovative ways to network have become available to the more technologically savvy researcher. One example is Nature Network, which is an online meeting place for local scientists to gather, talk and find out about the latest scientific news and events in their area. Among other features, the website allows researchers to create personal profiles and set up groups for labs, departments or institutions, and it allows each member to build a network of like-minded scientists."

Update: Corie Lok, Editor of Nature Network, writes here about why networking is good for your career, describing a talk she gave at the New York Academy of Sciences.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on December 19, 2007
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Fundamental research can yield unforeseen benefits of great value for society, but often this happens only many years after the initial breakthroughs have been made. Can society find a way to pay back this debt?
In a Commentary in this month's issue of Nature Physics (3, 824-825; 2007), Leon N. Cooper of Brown University, writes that "Money is required to do science and as systems become more complex, more people, equipment, and therefore more money is required for each new result. Naturally, people hark back with sentimentality to the good old days when results could be obtained on a tabletop. In fact, some results are still obtained on tabletops, but the tables are getting larger and the tops more expensive. More and more results come from huge collaborations demanding enormous resources. And this brings us inevitably to the questions of who pays, how and why."
After outlining some of the problems in supporting the fundamental research necessary for science to progress, Professor Cooper suggests three measures to improve the current system, involving investment, distribution, and a clear distinction between fundamental and applied research. Referring to the breakthroughs in superconductivity research, he writes: "No single method can solve all of our problems, but the measures outlined above would substantially improve our present system. I would hope that they would make it easier for some current gifted program officer to reach as wise a decision as was made in the Army Ordnance Office fifty years ago."
Read the full article, entitled "The unpaid debt", in the December issue of Nature Physics.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on December 05, 2007
Categories: Careers, Publishing, Support | Permalink | Comments (0)

Following on a successful inaugural year of Postdoc Journal, Naturejobs is pleased to announce the launch of an international competition to select new writers for 2008.
The Postdoc Journal gives four postdoctoral fellows the opportunity to each write a monthly journal entry for Naturejobs. These writers will chart their ups and downs over the course of a year and describe how their experiences shape their future career choices. Some occasional blogging may be requested as well.
We ask that applicants provide three things:
--A cover letter saying why you want to be considered and what would make you a good journal keeper. Include your institutional affiliation, general area of research, the focus of your graduate degree, and how long you've been a postdoc.
--A sample first entry, 250 words long, that introduces yourself, identifies the biggest career question you will face in the upcoming year and how you plan to search for an answer.
--Your CV.
Deadline for applications is 17 December 2007. See here for previous journal entries.
The applicants will be judged by a panel including Naturejobs editorial staff and past postdoc journal keepers. Applicants must commit to submitting monthly for one year regardless of any changes in student or employment status. Please email the cover letter, sample entry and CV as Word document attachments to this address..
In the subject line, write 'postdoc journal contest' and state the country you are based in and your discipline (example: postdoc journal contest, Canada, cell biology).

Posted by Maxine Clarke on November 28, 2007
Categories: Careers, Writing | Permalink | Comments (1)

If you could make one change to the way young scientists are taught and trained, what would it be and why? If you could make one change to the way scientists communicate their latest experimental results, what would it be and why? Corie Lok, Editor of Nature Network, asked some Boston scientists these questions. You can see thir answers in Corie's Network news article How would you change the way scientists are trained?. Here are a few of the points made by the scientists, who are at different stages of their careers:

"I think that at the very least, young scientists in training should know who founded their field, when, and why."

"The postdoctoral period seems to be getting longer and longer. This is a tough pill to swallow when you are in your early to mid-20s. If this continues, more and more talented scientists will leave the bench."

"I would make books like Jared Diamond’s Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed essential reading at the high school level."

"No one in their right mind would give competitors ideas that would expedite their research. This mentality is necessary to stay on top of the field and remain competitive for grants. However, the “secretive” nature of science drastically slows our progress."

For more answers, and to add your own thoughts on these questions, please visit the Nature Network forum.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on November 22, 2007
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)