Sorting out your career is nobody else's job

People have started asking my opinion on job searching recently: Here's what I had to say to King's Graduate School on their blog...

I’m sorry to break it to you, guys, (and this is something I only really realised recently) but there is no-one out there that will be able to tell you exactly what job you should be doing and how to get it: that includes careers consultants. (Clearly they can help with your thinking and the processes of applying and so on but read on….)

About a year ago I started to realise that maybe the career in industrial research that I’d planned for the last 10 years wasn’t what I wanted. I confess it was partly initiated by the difficulty in getting a job but the more and more I thought about it, the more I realised I probably didn’t want the jobs I’d been applying for anyway.


Phew. Bullet dodged. Now what?

Well, first I started to complain. "My supervisors have never talked to me about what other careers are available", "No-one wants to talk about jobs outside of research", "I haven’t been given the opportunity to do anything else", I whined to the very nice careers consultant at KCL. I was quite whiny at this point, looking back on all the missed opportunities during my PhD and PostDoc and basically blaming other people.

Then I went to the Nature Careers Expo last September and realised things had to change. Every presentation I went to seemed to start with, "So I created this forum..,", or "I started this blog" and I sat there thinking "I can barely use my phone for email, how the hell am I going to blog?". It was at this point that the penny dropped: if I wasn’t going to take responsibility for getting myself a new career path, why should anyone else?

So I started a blog on my career search. I write down what I found out and shared it with other people. Almost every link and image I uploaded for the first month was broken and I’m still convinced that only my mother reads this but it gave me a start that lead to a free place at a SciComm conference, new contacts (yes, networking), a new understanding of the field around research and the jobs therein, a chance to blog on Speakers of Science, involvement in ScienceGrrl, the opportunity to do some public engagement with schools, joining twitter…but not necessarily in that order. Fundamentally, if you don’t know what you want to do, that’s fine: but you’re the only one who can find out.

During your PhD you can easily feel like you don’t have time for extra things but you will never get less busy, I promise you. The wonderful thing about your PhD studies is that there are lots of things you can try for free and if you don’t like doing them, you can stop. Here are some examples of things you can try…

1. Offer to write your PI’s research paper or review, even if it’s not on your specific area of work. This will help you decide if you want to do medical writing, where you have to summarise other people’s work, clinical trials and even the inserts that go in medication. I’ve written (and published) two papers this year and have two more underway. This is helping me get the most out of my PostDoc and making me practise my scientific writing.

2. Enter writing competitions to see if you like writing about science for a mainstream audience. I entered Access to Understanding with an article on arthritis (not my area) and got lots of feedback from friends and family.

3. Write news articles about cutting-edge science and submit them to the university paper/a blog/your boyfriend to see if they’re any good, to see if you like doing this and to see how long it takes you. I wrote something on antibody-drug-conjugates (sort of my area) in application for an internship at The Economist.

4. GO ON COURSES They’re free for many students, you probably have to go on some and you’ll definitely never have access to so many experts. I did a public speaking masterclass, public engagement course with King’s, science journalism at The Guardian and science writing at OBR. I paid £50 for the Guardian course, but the rest were free and it was a great way to meet like minded people for advice and support.

5. Talk to new people at every conference, meeting and seminar. If you’re absolutely awful at this then a job that requires networking is probably not for you. If you’re good at this then you will have made new contacts that could be invaluable. I ended up at a ScienceGrrl brainstorm, teaching kids about oxidation and sitting in on meetings about Science Museum lates all because of ‘someone’ I met ‘somewhere’ – not through my supervisor.

6. Read some patents. Properly. Is this something you find interesting? Patent law is a popular and competitive choice for graduates. It’s not easy so you should know what you’re getting yourself into. (I worked for a patent company as a chemistry consultant for a bit as part of my PhD – I’m pretty certain I find this dull)

7. Seriously think about how much money you’d like to earn and how little you will settle for: this will have a massive impact on what jobs you will apply for. My current job (which I love) is less than half my PostDoc wage and less than my PhD stipend.

8. Start a Twitter account or blog for yourself or your research group This is a great way to see what’s going on outside your research institution. If you do this for your research group you MUST ask permission from your superiors/head of department.

9. Plan something complicated from start to finish. A work party, a conference, a hen-do, a football tournament. The organisation this requires will tell you if you’re cut out for planning or project management and if you like doing it. I got married during my work search. I’m pretty sure I can now organise the hell out of most things. (Disclaimer: I’m not suggesting you get married purely for the project management experience, maybe just an engagement party…)

10. Apply for some jobs.  Even if you don’t know what you want to do. At least browse the job boards to see what’s out there. Some applications that I made steered me towards positions that I was better suited to. If you want a wake-up call, check out the picture below. It’s a screen shot of my ‘Applications’ folder. It doesn’t include those applications that were speculative or required only an online form…there are over 60 individual applications in less than a year. Don’t moan, just do something.

Any of the extra things on your CV will make you seem more well-rounded and not just another fed-up researcher. I was told on a forum that I was just another ‘desperate PostDoc that couldn’t make it in academia’ – you need to make sure your CV shows that that’s not the case and that you have other skills! And remember, if you try something new and you don’t like it or you’re rubbish at it, that’s fine, just stop and try something else. Then you can also add ‘perseverance’ to your CV.

I was ridiculously busy during all of this but I’m now at a job I love. I work for Sense About Science, a charity supporting projects that equip the public to make sense (get it?) of science. We create guides for the public, run events for researchers to train them in the best way to talk about their work, address bad journalism and put writers in touch with scientific experts whenever we can to make sure that science is clear, well-represented and useful for the public and policy-makers alike. It’s fast-paced, responsive, dead-line driven and no-one has cried for the whole eight weeks I’ve been here. So far, it’s wildly different to academia.

A version of this post was first hosted on the King's College London Graduate School blog. If you're affiliated with King's I strongly urge you to check them out as they are really helpful.

Bloody hell, that was intense!

It’s Tuesday, I’m back in the day-job and people keep saying ‘How was the conference?’ and ‘What did you get out of it?’ The first answer is easy – ‘It was great, there were tappy-tap-tap badges!!’ The second answer is taking a bit more thought. 

I could now write a detailed description of all the sessions I went to, explaining the goals and motivations of the panel, the attendees and ending with profound ‘take home’ message from each session. But I won’t. Mainly because a lot of people are already doing this and also because I was told that all bloggers are basically narcissists and only really write from their point of view so I thought I’d add fuel to that flame. Realistically though, this blog is supposed to be my take on finding out about new careers, so I’ll try and keep it personal.

I went out the night before (not a great idea, but it was with a very good friend!) so I missed the StoryCollider (although I intend to catch up via Storify, blogs etc.) so I was a bit tired, but very enthusiastic, when I arrived with no idea what to expect. I received my Blendology badge, which you tap with each new person to share contact information, got a speedy cup of tea and entered the conference… 

The first session, I can say without fear of exaggeration was ‘brilliant’. Salvatore Mele from CERN discussing how they work at one of the most famous ‘labs’ in the world and how they publish their data. Might sound a bit ‘meh’– but he was an excellent raconteur! He was really enthusiastic about his work, comparing the attention around the recent Nobel prize announcement to a football match and commenting on publishing papers with so many contributors.

Some excellent moments/quotes were:

His précis of a paper with 3000 authors 

'The small greenish bump tells you that the Boson is there-you don't need to read the rest...' Mele on CERN's paper! #solo13
— lauren tedaldi (@LaurenTedaldi) November 8, 2013

His take on an awful lot of data analysing their site usage...

Physicists- 'on average, at 2am, they give up'. Excellent quotes throughout this keynote! #solo13
— lauren tedaldi (@LaurenTedaldi) November 8, 2013

Describing the previously baffling Higgs field with a cartoon video  – still a bit baffling but at least I have a cool link I can send to people now.

And the fact that you can make a Lego version of their particle accelerator!

Instructions here

If you're still a sceptic, you can watch the presentation here

Then I attended two sessions that have blurred together in my mind – one on open access journals and one about peer review. These are rather hot topics in the field with the general 'ScienceGist' being – when we are fundamentally funded by the public and then published, the material we write should then be physically and mentally accessible by the public. The peer review session was looking at organisations and newer publications such as F1000, Frontiers, Rubriq and Peerage of Science that are attempting to change peer review. This is the standard current process adopted by most journals by which our colleagues must ‘approve’ our work before it’s accessed by the rest of the world. Currently the system is under scrutiny due to a number of critiques ranging from misconduct, retractions, time-delays and ‘it’s simply not the best way to do this in a modern world’. I’m tempted to agree but, as with most things, I think it’ll take time to change the status quo. There is still a lot of prestige (and funding) tied in to publication in the high-end peer-reviewed journals.

After lunch there was talk of a revolution involving such choice life advice such as:

If you want to demonstrate in the streets you do need permission from the police... #solo13
— lauren tedaldi (@LaurenTedaldi) November 8, 2013

Make your point, but make it quickly...Not a bad slogan for life. Thanks @alokjha #solo13
— lauren tedaldi (@LaurenTedaldi) November 8, 2013

'I work within the law... Up to now...' Competing with Mele for quote of the day #solo13
— lauren tedaldi (@LaurenTedaldi) November 8, 2013

MT @lexbwebb: Tips for (life): Wake up and become active. Make an effort. Speak to people and hear what the have to say. #solo13
— lauren tedaldi (@LaurenTedaldi) November 8, 2013

All interspersed with ponderings on just how Alok Jha keeps his hair so voluminous?

The afternoon went by in a blur of saying NO to PDFs and deciding on some do’s and don’ts of Twitter before trundling off to the pub.

Science Showoff showed us that scientists do have a personality, as well as a love of chocolate, guitars, clocks, juggling and of disproving ghosts (or should that say LENS FLARE!).

The  next morning we were thrown in to a session on procrastination, ahem, I mean science games. They were all pretty cool, especially the game that lets you build up neuronal connections by ‘connecting the dots' to a snazzy 80s sci-fi theme tune. I have to wonder though, how many game-players are learning  and how many are just  scientists playing the game as it has less of a guilt-burden than Candy-Crush. I should stress, I honestly never play games on my computer/phone, but, after this session I’ll probably start.

Then… it was time…I had to do my session….Well, there’s the narcissism again, not my session but the session on blogging...

I introduced myself as the newbie I am, got through without getting into hyper-speed speech (too much) and mostly ‘got away with it’. I did get shot down once or twice but that actually helped things move along. We discussed what we blog on and why, who to and if we care what they think.

All the topic from today's discussion at #solo13blogs pic.twitter.com/15xaT2aAwl
— Beckie Port (@BeckiePort) November 9, 2013

The floor discussions were really useful for me to understand lots of emerging opinions in the area, as well as those I disagree with, such as ‘blog comments are dead’ (Thanks Roland Krause!). Personally, I would really appreciate someone leaving comments on this blog - this whole thing is a learning exercise so I’d love to know what people think about what I’ve said and how I’ve said it – I’ve been warned that the number of comments is usually inversely proportional to how useful they are though so keep it clean, people.

Here’s the video - Yes, I have watched it back (narcissists, remember?)

After our session there was a really interesting panel discussion about staying in research and doing scientific communication at the same time. I think I’ll add it to a full post when I ‘officially’ cover scientific communication careers but needless-to-say, it seems that you can ‘have your cake and eat it’ (although there was no cake) but you can’t (and perhaps shouldn’t) expect your institution to understand/be supportive, especially at the start.

The final session I attended covered the idea behind the XKCD comic Up Goer Five project. In this, a rocket scientist described his rocket or (Up Goer) using the ‘top ten hundred words people use most often’. As ‘thousand’ wasn’t in it, you can see how they start to immediately rewrite their description using simpler words – ‘door’ instead of hatch,  ‘people-box’ instead of capsule or cockpit and (my personal favourite) for the helium store – 'things holding that kind of air that makes your voice funny.' It sounds a bit pointless until you realise it’s a good way to stop using unnecessary words as ‘standard’. I confess, I’m really guilty  of this – I’ve already used the word raconteur today, but it’s a good exercise to go to their website and try it out. Try describing your job without the words ‘associate, manager, web, retail, engineer or project’ or spaghetti Bolognese without ‘cow’, ‘beef’ or ‘meat’

On the 'What did you get out of it' stream-of-consciousness, well, that's going to take some time but one thing that I found really interesting was the big idea of the conference: Impact. For those who don’t work in science and don’t have to write grants (lucky you, when you read 'grant' think ‘written begging for money’) nowadays scientists have to outline the ‘impact’ of their research. I write it like that because the impact of my research is often very limited at the start, but doesn’t mean it doesn’t matter.

For example, your average Joe isn’t ‘impacted’ by Bragg’s law, they couldn’t care less about X-ray diffraction, they don’t know who Rosalind Franklin, Francis Crick or James Watson are, but they probably know what DNA is, and their lives and education will have been shaped by the early fundamental science that lead to Bragg’s law. How does your average physicist assert the impact of an equation that could, someday, have enormous uses and ramifications?

Answer: They could use scientific communication.

They could make people ‘ooh’ and ‘aah’ at the seemingly magical function of a gyroscope. They could make chocolate mayonnaise to describe surfactants. They could enter schools and discuss the interesting facets of a career in science. They could blog about their research to the public. They could tweet from the lab or a conference. They could do all manner of things to show the funding bodies that they have IMPACT. They could go the extra mile to show that their research isn’t just a bunch of self-serving superiority-complexed people swanning around the corridors of their local institution. If we want, expect and need the government (i.e. taxpayers) to fund us then we need to be part of their lives as much as the local community centre, the playground, the museums and the art centres or, when it comes to chopping funding, who do you think will come first?

Where two worlds collide…

I’ve recently started using social media to investigate science, rather than just as an outlet for the more gossipy side of my nature and I have to say, I felt a bit like Alice through the looking-glass. There’s a whole world of research and opinions going on that the large majority of researchers simply aren’t aware of.

The way it’s worked for me is that I’ve started following just a few people via Twitter and quickly been linked to blogs, articles (the difference is something of a contested issue) and research sites on a variety of topics. You get a constant (sometimes too constant) stream of suggestions and, from there, you decide what you want to read, watch or hear. 

The first thing that strikes you about the research promoted via Twitter is how concise you need to be. We’ve all pored over an abstract just to try and understand what a paper is about, only to come away none the wiser – Twitter gives you 140 characters (including your link) in which to get over a title that captures the readers’ attention enough for them to click on the link. This can be done with scientific language

Epilepsy and neonatal diabetes due to a compound heterozygous mutation in #IER3IP1 http://t.co/eQagDHbboL
— Ingo Helbig (@IngoHelbig) October 26, 2013

or, more commonly, a quirky by-line that you can’t ignore

Sewing...in SPAAAAAAACE. http://t.co/GUXoqRptwD HT @helenfields
— Ed Yong (@edyong209) November 5, 2013

and, before you know it, you’re reading an article on an area of science that you never would have read had you merely used your list of usual suspects of reading matter. 

This leads me to my second ‘huh’ moment regarding Twitter - You get an insight into much more varied information than via other means, as well as more varied ways of writing about science. Recently, I’ve learnt about reindeer eyes and lion-fish amongst the occasional cute squirrel picture.

Today's installment of squirrellishness...RT @BBAnimals Squirrel carrying her newborn baby pic.twitter.com/S4izzS4WkT
— Lou Woodley (@LouWoodley) October 28, 2013

This has reassured me that I do indeed find science fascinating and awe-inspiring and that perhaps my recent slump is more to do with the repetitive nature of reading dry documents, mainly within your own field, rather than ‘falling-out-of-love’ with science in general. It’s really refreshing to read an article and then feel the need to explain it, share it and dissect it with someone else. I think as scientists we could learn from the way blogs are written. Generally, they aim to keep the readers’ interest and not just educate them – can we take this approach and apply it to the reporting of core science? I’m not suggesting that the mechanism of the Heck reaction should (or could) be rendered jargon-less, but we could try to make it, at least, interesting to a broader audience where possible. There will always be ‘niche’ research that can’t be made ‘friendly’ but I think it’s all too easy to get lost in the tiny field in which you work and forget that there are other things going on outside of your lab, your field and, dare I say it, your discipline. We’re supposed to be professional ‘learners’ – learn something.  

Finally, and fundamentally I think, a blog about particular research can be read before the original article is printed and distributed. A tweet about the same article can be written quicker than someone can read the blog and it can be re-tweeted faster than...you get the idea.

Communication is now fast and science needs to keep up. Research has always been a pain-staking process, and I think sometimes it needs to be, to ensure all the necessary controls are carried out and the research stands up (see retractionwatch), but we need to get better and quicker at communicating our goals, research and results and it looks like the internet is now providing a conduit for this. The unregulated nature of blogs and tweets could be both social media’s downfall and its saving grace for the communication of scientific research and ideas- You don’t need peer-review for Twitter, you don’t submit a grant for Google+, you put your idea down and you wait. If people like it, you find out immediately. Is using social media for research a bit self-satisfying and narcissistic? Probably. Is it a scary way to get often brutally honest critique? Definitely. Could it be the start of a new way of dynamic and responsive communication between scientists? I think so, watch this space.

I’d like to end with a ‘reader-beware’. Keeping an eye on Twitter and blogs is a time-consuming affair if, like me, you try to make sure that you read everything that looks enticing. As more people use this method of communication to give readers a ‘sneak-peak’ into their research and the research they find interesting, I’m afraid that the information might start to fade into the ‘noise’. If we become bombarded by this head-line and that research topic every 3-4 minutes then, a. how will we know what is worth reading and b. how will we ever find the time to carry out the research! As a lab-based scientist, I spend very little time in front of a computer screen, I've generally liked it that way. How in the world, then, can I possibly keep up?

I don’t know, to be honest, but I’m going to try!

In at the deep-end...

As part of my ongoing investigation into 'life-beyond-the-lab', I'm attending SpotOn London 2013 this week. Hell, I'm going to be a panellist. This is scary for several reasons:

                           1. I've been blogging for a grand total of 2 months

                           2. I've no idea if I know enough to even be going to this conference

                           and 

                           3. Who the hell cares what I think?

Some back story I think...

After deciding to look into the area of science communication, journalism, outreach, whatever you want to call it, I came upon recurrent tweets on some fancy-pants science communication conference. Then I looked closer at the people tweeting about said 'fancy-pants' conference and noticed genuine excitement

Managed to snag a ticket for @SpotOnLondon! *Really* excited about attending next month. Super way to kick off 6 month sabbatical! #Solo13
— Malcolm M. Campbell (@m_m_campbell) October 4, 2013

and enthusiasm

Awww it's nice looking at the list of people going to @SpotOnLondon Now and thinking "2 weeks to go!" *waves at everyone*
— Tania (@CherryMakes) October 24, 2013

about the upcoming event. Then I noticed that the event is sold out every year and the tickets go out in batches (nod to Glastonbury there - I'm imagining shady characters in sports-coats selling and buying extra tickets in the Bloomsbury area) to ensure people get a chance to go. 

This was not your average 3 key-note speakers, old-boys-club-during-the-tea-break followed by one- awkward-glass-of-wine-before-I-leave conference - people seemed to actually want to go!

I ummed and aahed about buying my ticket during the first two ticket sales slots - at £100 I wasn't sure I should risk buying my ticket before asking my boss and I wasn't sure if he'd allow me to go during work hours (I'm currently trying to save my days off for potential interviews so was in a bit of a pickle). 

With each sales slot, the tension mounted due to the clever use of Twitter by the organisers to let us know that the tickets were dripping away...

Half of the final batch of tickets have sold out for @SpotOnLondon - get yours here https://t.co/cqMYUgMSXn #solo13
— Laura Wheeler (@laurawheelers) October 18, 2013

then, I grew a pair (metaphorically, of course). I decided that I should buy a ticket, in fact, I needed to buy a ticket - who knows what I might learn! 

On my way to work the next day I was deciding on the best way to convince my boss that I should go to this, scanning the morning Twitter-feed, I stumbled upon a tweet that suggested that maybe I could get a ticket to this thing for free (and hopefully then know someone there!). 

I'm taking part in a #solo13 session on sci-2-sci communication. We have 1 free ticket for a bright young thing. http://t.co/Krsad2optV
— Jean Adams (@jeanmadams) October 17, 2013

Ticket cancelled with <6 minutes to go!

So, a hasty read of a blogpost,  an (hopefully not too desperate) email and a cancelled ticket reservation (I wasn't too hopeful I'd get a reply, so I hedged my bets) later I was rewarded with not just a place but a chance to help organise a session!

The generosity and helpfulness of this crowd really knows no bounds!

Now, here I am, looking forward to a new challenge, meeting new people and seeing just what people think about blogs and more 'casual' online communication between scientists. I think this is what we need to get past - the fact that because blogging, tweeting and the like are not peer-reviewed or mostly even regulated in any way, that they can't be 'valuable' or for 'proper' science.

We've had one Skype meeting, across three countries and come up with two GoogleDocs. I've realised that almost all people feel variations on my opening three points, about most things, particularly on blogging, science and speaking at conferences, so I'm going to throw myself into this! We're going to create a Storify of the event and I'm sure there'll be follow up blogposts.

I'm also attending the Science ShowOff 'cabaret' of science on the Friday night, although that may involve more gin and less learning.  Or more gin and more learning. Definitely more gin.

I'll probably have more questions than answers, but now I've realised that it's in the British Library and not the British Museum, I know I won't be all alone, next to the big lion statue thinking it's just me that has lots of questions about the value of science going all 'business-casual' online.

Wish me luck?

#2:Scientific Communicators...

Updated March 2014: I've updated the statuses of my 'favourites', where necessary, and added some new people to the list...

Last October I started looking in to scientific communication, using Twitter, Blogger, Facebook and Google+ to learn as much as possible about who was saying what and how. I had no idea where to start but I quickly built up a selection of people whose tweets and work I liked. I thought it would be useful to list this somewhat random bunch, in order to help anyone else out there who fancies skulking around ('following' on Twitter) these people to see how they communicate their opinions and ideas. And the occasional picture of something cute/funny.

Something that I've noticed is that there is definitely an in-crowd in this 'anti-the-in-crowd' crowd. For example, there's a distinct inner-circle of avid bloggers and science journalists who cover a lot of ground between them, re-tweet each-other's work and all manner of interesting stuff. 

If you're looking around with scientific communication in mind then, as somewhere to start, I would start a Twitter account and follow these people, see what they tweet, WHEN they tweet, what they cover and how they write. Their tweets will lead to articles, events and some really useful blogs. Some people have short blogs of a few paragraphs whilst others lean towards my rambling style. As I said, this is my opinion, to which I hold firmly, whilst being completely aware that it may, in fact, be wrong.

In no particular order I like...

On Twitter...

Carl Zimmer - Writes books, articles for the New York Times and Slate, blogs for National Geographic (often cross-referencing his articles - clever use of directing traffic to his articles) and tweets on all things science-related. Definitely a 'biology' man with lots of books published on evolution but also more esoteric topics like science tattoos of the science-and-pain-loving! 'Revered' is a strong word but he is highly respected, it seems, by all in the community.

Ed Yong - Science writer, blogger at National Geographic and prolific tweeter. He has a very irreverent style that is always informative, often quite funny and regularly takes the piss of science and people he deems 'sub-standard'. He tweets A LOT, often in quick succession and his tweets can be a good running commentary and 'thermometer' on the community. I often wonder how he has time for anything else. His name seemed to get dropped at all classes, courses and workshops I've attended recently.

Virginia Hughes - Another science writer and blogger at National Geographic. She has a more 'serious' tone compared to Ed and tends to tweet on a wider variety of things, including art/photography, travel and conferences. Like her NatGeo writer mates, she uses Twitter to heavily promote all of the writing that she does, as well as the work of others at the same publications as her.

Laurie Winkless - My brother recommended this physicist SciComm-er and, after following her on Twitter and listening to her interview on Speaking of Science (see below), I can see why. She's became the Editor for Nobel Media at just 30 and I think this is really impressive. She's working at a prestigious world-renowned organisation, bringing them into social media circles and spreading their message to a much younger, more dynamic audience than it had before. She's got a book coming out in 2016 called 'Science and the City' which I'll be keeping an eye out for as I love to see scientists drawing attention to the science in everyday life.

Laura Wheeler - Recommended by a marketing professional as 'someone-to-learn-from' in the SciComm community. In the few months since I first wrote this post she's moved from the Communities Co-ordinator at Nature and is now the Community Manager for Digital Science. Watch and learn.

Lou Woodley - She's involved in all things science-social-media-online-technology related, it seems. You can find more info on her blog here. I started following Lou after seeing a lot of her tweets re-tweeted by the people above (further evidence of the 'inner-circle' effect). I've found out about lots of online resources, articles and events through her twitter feed. She's recently started the excellent MySciCareer site with Eva Amsen (see below) which I've lost many hours to, browsing the different career paths of those who started out with science degrees. 

Athene Donald - Physics professor at Cambridge, blogs via Occam's Typewriter. I really like the way she writes about life as a scientist, life as an academic and, well, life.

Hope Jahren. I gave her whole name a sentence because I like her a lot. She's a research scientist, working in Hawaii who writes interesting, inciteful and often tear-jerking prose. She also gets to work in HAWAII. I was lucky enough to spend a couple of weeks hopping around the islands last year and the thought of someone who gets to be this good a writer, a scientist and a resident of this freakishly beautiful part of the world makes my heart hurt. Keep an eye out for the resurrection of @TotalGrasshole. Trust me, it's hard to explain why the tweets of an aggressive grass are so funny, but they are. 

Dean Burnett, aka @GarwBoy (Say, garoo-boy) is a Welsh neuroscientist, comedian, blogger and generally interesting guy. He writes regularly for the Guardian in a style that is thought-provoking, topical and, ultimately, very funny. By the by, he does NOT like Hitler.

Kate Whittington draws wonderfully detailed illustrations. You can find them on her blog here. I also like the way that she writes, peppering anecdotes about saving a bee with species identification and rolled-up-newspaper-threats from her dad (for the bee, not her. I think). 

Eva Amsen is the Outreach Director at F1000Research, serial blogger, co-founder of MySciCareer, pro-open access publishing and regular speaker at SciComm and careers seminars. I was once at a seminar where she got narked at the eternal question 'How do you find the time?' Her response was 'I've never seen the Wire or Breaking Bad, I do other stuff instead'. It's fair to say, I like her attitude to just getting shit done, although she may have a clone, as I'm sure she still manages to do more than most. Oh yeah, she also likes investigating the links between science and music at MusiSci. Like I said, she does lots of things. 

Anonymous tweeters and bloggers have received some attention over the past few months- have a look at this blog post and subsequent comments for some interesting thoughts. I will say that I've often been asked if I'm concerned about potential employers reading this (loosely) careers-based blog and finding it imperfect/wrong/rude/desperately job-seeking. The simple answer is 'Yes', but I do it openly because it never occurred to me that I should do otherwise. Sometimes, I do think of things that I would like to write/rant about but I try and keep myself 'on track' and occasionally this does mean I'm not able to talk about what I want. Anyway, my recommendations for some anonymous tweeters and their blogs has a place here as I feel that, rightly or wrongly, this allows a different level of honesty that would be difficult in the first person. In this spirit, check out BioChemBelle, Dr24hours, Dr. Isis and InBabyAttachMode

Miscellany...

Lush green grass at a friday afternoon - Ignoring the strange grammar in the title of this blog leads you to an interesting set of blogs that are used to 'express and share some of our thoughts about the current state of science, its place in society and our lives within this continuously changing discursive environment' - Sounds hard-core, but it's well written (by two people) if only for this candid blog on working in a lab where prior work gets retracted.

Speaking of science - This is an interesting site run by Julie Gould, the Naturejobs web and advertorial editor at Nature Publishing Group. The site acknowledges the myriad ways in which you can be a 'science communicator' and aims to be a repository for interviews (some written, some audio) with people who work in Science Communication - Ed Yong and Laurie Winkless are featured, amongst many others.

Julie Gould has also recently launched a network of science bloggers called Speakers of Science that brings together new people in the SciComm community to try their hand at blogging on different science-related topics. Using cartoons, pictures, videos, text and handy hints for new SciComm attempts, it's ace! (Dislaimer: I am one of the new bloggers and am indebted to Julie for getting me involved!)

PSCI-COM - I can't really complete this post without mentioning this huge site, chock-full of threads, conversations and requests related to all things around 'the public communication of science and public engagement with science'. The most useful thing about this site is that it's a JISCMAIL that you can subscribe to. It's somewhere between a forum and a huge e-mail list where everyone can speak to everyone very easily about anything they need. Generally people abide by etiquette and don't just use it to promote themselves. So far I've learnt of loads of different events and applied for numerous jobs that I heard of through this. It's moderated by Jo Brodie, a veritable font of job adverts, SciComm info and helpful advice on the forum and Twitter. 

In updating this post I've found many more new people to 'follow', websites to scour and blogs to read, but will only add them to this list once I feel that I know a bit more about them. I'll be adding to this post regularly, I hope. In the interest of keeping things as concise as possible I haven't included major organisations such as museums, research councils, festivals etc., you can work that out for yourself.

For all the Twitter sceptics, I posted on my early interactions with this new 'Twitter-verse' and 'blogosphere' (you've got to love the cheesy terminology, if nothing else) and tried to convince you that it's not all just pictures of people's dinner/pets. Although there is a bit of that. And I like it.

---

Potentially useful fact:

It's worth mentioning that at the time of me writing this (Oct 2013), there was a somewhat stormy time going on in the world of SciComm. I only include it here as, if you do intend to look in to this field, then you should know that this has gone on...

It 'started' with the removal of a post from a black female blogger (DNLee) who wrote about being called a whore for not wanting to blog for free - causing a massive backlash questioning whether she would have been expected to work for free, or her post deleted, if she'd been a white male scientist - (answers on a postcard). For a whistlestop tour of the ensuing fiasco see here and here.

The shady behaviour of the editor in question (now fired) and the response from what was supposed to be a higher power (Scientific American took her post down) resulted in a name being added to a year-old post about sexual harrassment. This has caused a complete bombshell as the man in question (Bora Zivkovik) is (was?) a heavyweight in the blogging community, loved and respected (there was a twitter hashtag #IhuggedBora for a while) and quite, quite powerful.

Ok so, rewind. There've been a huge number of posts on this, I'm new to the whole area and couldn't/wouldn't comment on what's going on. The gist of it, as I see it is... in a field that is friendly and often revolves around a very casual and social manner, there are a number of people who seem to think that this is a great opportunity to behave inappropriately towards potential writers. This seems mainly to happen when a young or new writer approaches an established member of the community and, as someone who is looking at maybe moving in to this field, I'd honestly say that it's given me pause for thought. It seems like this goes on a lot but the massive uproar this has caused between supporters/victims and everyone else has probably opened a few eyes to what's, at best, pretty shitty behaviour. As I said, I won't go into detail, most of the blogs about this are pretty heated, but the original posts are here:

This happened: Monica Byrne

This happened: Bora Zivkovik

What I will say is that if, like me, you were initially tempted to think this was bad behaviour but put the huge rhetoric down to a (little) bit of over-reaction then check out #ripplesofdoubt on Twitter to see the impact this can have - it really opened my eyes. 

----

Before I Die...

I know I promised a post on medical writing and it is on it's way, but I might have the opportunity to pop to a company to check out what they actually do in person, so I'm waiting until I've been there before I give you the low down.

Meanwhile...

I was strolling down Borough High Street during my lunch break last week (a heady mix of students, foodies and busy people) when I saw that they've installed the chalk board below. The idea is that the general public add their own take on the starter 'Before I Die...' Whilst I thought it was quite cool and more than a little bit beautiful in a 'ten-year-olds-left-with-the-blackboard-whilst-teacher-leaves-the-room' way, I also (without looking for it) came across the musings on the below right. 
                  
                    'I want to be a scientist'. It takes all sorts, I suppose. 

 

In other news...

Nature Blogs
Nature continues to provide a number of helpful blogs that I've been perusing this week

One on Career Transitions is particularly interesting: It covers people who've had unusual career paths after science degrees and PhDs, as well as people who've had lucky breaks!

Here are some choice quotes/advice lifted from the articles...

From a Post-Doc..

'There is pressure from a variety of sources to work longer and harder.'
'Social dynamics in a lab have a huge impact on the quality and creativity of the work produced.'
'Call your mom (or other non-scientist relation). Try to explain your work. It is very good practice.'

From a Medical Writer
'...communicating science is just as important as doing it.'
'You never know what you might learn when you listen to voices very unlike your own.'

From a PR specialist
'...go the extra mile by doing internships and attending events. Apply for writing competitions, training days and fellowships. You have nothing to lose!'


How to get a job in scientific communication is effectively a summary of one of the talks given at the Naturejobs Career Expo recently, including advice from a senior press officer, a science correspondent, a public astronomer and the director of the Parliamentary Office for Science and Technology (POST).

and

The dos and don’ts of communicating with editors and reviewers

This introductory 'abstract' is followed by three posts on submission for publication including How to write a cover letter, How to write a rebuttal letter and How to write an appeal letter

Miscellaneous from t'internet...

#IAMSCIENCE a twitter page dedicated to unusual career paths in science

This is what a scientist looks like a Tumblr page centred on scientists who work away from the bench

#Jobinaweek Top tips and advice for jobseekers

Eat my science Fellow blogger Andy Swale (btw, I don't know him, so this isn't a 'plug') writes about his experiences as he moves from bench to scientific communication

On Twitter...

@LauraWheelers - regular 'tweeter' on all things SciComm (Communities Co-ordinator at NPG)
@LaurieWinkless - Physicist tweeter, lots of SciComm stuff...


For some Australian inspiration

Baz Luhrmann puts some good advice with some good music. Urban Myth spoiler - this is NOT a real graduation speech,

This is...Tim Minchin's - 9 Life Lessons (I don't know why this clip is titled in Spanish, it's in English. I promise)


I'll be back soon with some Medical Writing stuff and summarising the variety of careers that are open to science PhDs using material I've picked up these last few weeks.

Pro-Blogue (like a Prologue, but for a blog, get it? Nevermind…)

With my life plan firmly mapped out, I finished my Chemistry degree at the University of Surrey (not particularly high on the league tables, but they’ve got a lovely lake on campus…) I did a PhD (which I loved) in synthetic organic chemistry (more cooking) at University College London (UCL), and then took up a PostDoc at King’s College London with a focus on medicinal chemistry (even more cooking, but with the idea that what you make has to actually do something).  I’ve been so convinced that I was going to be a Synthetic Organic Chemist in Industry I’ve not actually stopped in the last eight years to re-evaluate if a. I still want to do this job, b. I’m likely to get this job and c. I'm better suited to life away from the ‘bench’ (read-kitchen). So, what changed?

I’ll be honest, I’ve applied for 26 synthetic jobs in the last 18 months and achieved 2 (unsuccessful) interviews, 6 rejections and a staggering 18 ‘no replies’. Fundamentally, there are so many people applying for each post (around 100 per post, if not more) the companies can’t be bothered to e-mail those who haven’t been successful. This leaves those of us who are waiting for replies in a bit of a shaky ‘limbo’ – only finding out that we didn't get an interview if one of our colleagues managed to get one. We’ve all been there, ‘brave-facing’ it and congratulating your friend, all the while thinking ‘Why them – what’s bloody wrong with me?’ It’s not that you’re not pleased for them, it’s simply that it’s really tough out there at the moment, we’re all competing for the same scarce jobs. Not to mention that there is a huge reservoir of highly skilled scientists that have just been made redundant. So we’re also competing against people who’ve already been doing that job, are older, more experienced, wiser and dare I say it, better?

So this is where I start thinking about the skills I can offer that aren’t just chemistry-related. In the midst of my application ‘fun’, a friend and colleague recommended me to a school to present to a group of 15 year old girls for a day about ‘Careers in Science’. I thought it would be a nice diversion, a day out of the lab and then back to normal. The curve ball was that I absolutely loved it! I mean really loved it, I got home and bored the pants off my then-boyfriend-now-husband (did I mention I also got married recently). I loved talking about my work, loved engaging with some genuine enthusiasm, loved the immediate response you get from working with people and, perhaps most surprisingly, I found that I was good at it!

Since then I got married, went on honeymoon and generally forgot all about my career. Who needs a life plan when you’ve got a happy hour Mai Tai lined up? Now it’s time to take stock. Did I just enjoy my day out of the lab because it was different or am I destined to try something new?