Tag Archives: grant

Reshaping the research landscape

Posted on by

A 12 April report from the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine offers ideas for reshaping the landscape of life-science research across all career levels in the US biomedical research pipeline.

laboratory-2815640_1920

The proposal from the advisory body in Washington DC calls for more career counselling at the graduate and postdoctoral levels, better data on career outcomes at those levels, three-year caps on postdocs under principal investigators and new non-tenure track academic research positions, among other changes. To implement all the proposals would require a US$2 billion increase to the US National Institutes of Health (NIH)’s budget, as well as subsequent budget raises to prevent future funding bottlenecks.

Continue reading →

Abandon ship, or learn to swim: the gamble young scientists must make

Posted on by

For scientists, there’s nothing more frightening than a major grant rejection. With the scarcity of funding at the forefront of everyone’s thoughts, it’s time to talk about options, says Atma Ivancevic.

Job stability and a career in research are rarely put together. Science is a windy, grueling, uphill climb that might end abruptly at the edge of a cliff. Halloween is a particularly scary time for Australian scientists, as it signals the release of #NHMRC project grant results. Right now, many laboratories are facing difficult decisions due to rejected funding for next year. It’s not a surprise — we see it everywhere — yet it’s a shock that affects the entire scientific community. For early career researchers across the globe, it’s a timely reminder to carefully consider and plan for the future.

So, what are your options?

 

fritsahlefeldt

Continue reading →

Human Pipettes: Scientific training and education in biomedical research

Posted on by

David Rubenson and Paul Salvaterra share their thoughts on a damaged and damaging research system

A recent cancer research symposium displayed a familiar asymmetry. 90% of the attendees were PhD students or postdocs sitting obsequiously in the rear and asking 10% of the questions. 10% of the attendees were front-sitting faculty providing 90% of the inquiries.

A simple case of youthful hesitancy and opaque presentations requiring years of experience to comprehend? But did individual Principal Investigators (PIs) meet with conference planners before advising their students to attend? Did conference planners consider the likely audience and ask speakers to modify their talks? And did faculty members attend the related trainee poster session?

 

Are junior scientists little more than human pipettes?

Are junior scientists little more than human pipettes?{credit}Paper Boat Creative/Getty{/credit}

Continue reading →

ERC grants competition opens

Posted on by

The European Research Council (ERC) in Brussels, an independent funding body supported by the European Commission, has announced €1.86 billion (US$2.2 billion) in four types of 2018 grants for early- and mid-career principal investigators (PIs).

piggybankApplications for two grant schemes open on 3 August, including ‘Starting’ grants of up to €1.5 million for up to 5 years for PIs who earned their PhD within 2-7 years ago; and a new collaborative programme, the ‘Synergy’ grant, which will fund 2-4 PIs in a cross-disciplinary project. The Synergy scheme, which awards up to €10 million for 6 years, was piloted in 2012 and 2013. The deadline is 17 October for Starting grant applications and 14 November for Synergy applications.

Applications for ‘Proof of Concept’ grants will be accepted starting in September, and for ‘Consolidator’ grants starting in October.

The 2018 grant programme will collectively fund about 900 PIs and is estimated to support 6,000 PhD students, postdocs and other lab members. ERC’s grant-success rate is 10-15%.

To apply for a Starting grant, click here . For a Synergy grant application, click here.  Good luck!

 

On academic job insecurity and the ultimate tenure

Posted on by

Thoughts from Contract No. 17.

By Mila Petrova.

My latest mini-meltdown came after eight years in research employment, at the beginning of Contract No. 17. It came late. I’d lost a couple of thousand GBP from moving out hastily, lived for two months with my mum, moved far from the city of my university to use the affordable seaside lets in winter, and was about to live out of a suitcase in a youth hostel while my “permanent” accommodation became free. Three masters, PhD, top UK University and all. Most read paper of the month and a “will be delighted to hear about your ongoing work” letter from a senior parliamentary official in my inbox.

A coffee cup falling from chalkboard with formula of speed.

Continue reading →

Your best work might be just around the corner

Posted on by

A recent finding shows that a scientist’s career can peak at any age.

Ever wonder when you’ll publish that big paper that’ll win you the Nobel Prize (or at least a new research grant)? Turns out, it could be your next.

As Nature News reports, a new equation, developed by a team led by Albert-László Barabási at Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts, shows that papers published at any point in a scientist’s career have equal chance in becoming their most highly cited work. It might be sensible to keep that in mind the next time you’re struggling through centuries of data analysis, or when your thumb starts to bruise from more and more mindless pipetting.

You can watch a video explainer below, and find the paper here.

 

Suggested posts

How to get published in high-impact journals: Big research and better writing

Writing for international journals: tips and techniques

Nature Masterclasses: Writing for highly-selective journals

 

Bonding in Boston: The importance of networking in science

Posted on by

Naturejobs journalism competition winner Ashish Nair finds new hope at our Boston career expo.

A long time ago in a land galaxy far far away, there was a great gathering where those weary of the well-trodden trail of tenureships and grants repaired themselves. The gathering in question was the Naturejobs career expo, a free one-day event organized for students and scientists alike. Featuring some truly inspiring speakers, it gave a much-needed boost to my hope for a career in science that can be both emotionally and financially (yes, $$$) satisfying.

Continue reading →

Seeking out stronger science: An incomplete, non-systematic list of resources

Posted on by

Our reporter Monya Baker runs through some of the statistical tools she found when writing her latest story.

As I reported in a Nature feature published this week, I found more online courses that were being developed than were actually in place. Resources to help scientists do more robust research are set to expand quickly. For example, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences has a competitive program that awards funds to institutions to enhance graduate student training; of 15 such supplements awarded in 2015, a dozen involved data analysis, statistics, or experimental rigor. You can find more here, and that is only a fraction of what is available. Some courses are still being developed and piloted to select students; others are being offered only to those in a particular department or training grant. If you find one that interests you, it can’t hurt to ask.

data-science-industry

{credit}PW Illustration/Getty{/credit}

Continue reading →

Counting all the ways connections matter

Posted on by

New research shows that the size of a faculty member’s network predicts productivity, promotion, and probability of winning an NIH R01 grant.

Guest contributor Viviane Callier

Connections matter – in terms of productivity, in terms of obtaining grants, in terms of promotion and advancement, and in terms of retention in academic positions, a new Harvard-based study shows. Women and underrepresented minorities (URMs) have a smaller “reach” – a measure of second-order connections – and the discrepancy between the reach of women & URMs and that of white men is greatest at the junior faculty level. This discrepancy may account for differences in productivity, promotion, and retention of women and URMs in academia.

7822101134_6cbcbb435b_o

CREDIT: CC-BY-SA Atos/Flickr

Continue reading →