UF had this chance today to have Alan Dove, PhD (for those who are unaware of Dr. Dove: http://alandove.com/content/) with us for a tete-a-tete. Humility, simplicity, utter wisdom rflected from his frail but active and intelligible physical looks in the formals (not to mention- the baggage he had carried straight from airport to the McKnight Brain Institute to deliver a talk to the UF Academia). Courtesy- Office of the Postdoctoral Affairs [http://postdoc.aa.ufl.edu/] and Assistant Provost and Director of the Office of Postdoctoral Affairs [Ms. Kim M. Kitagawa Pace] that I could capture this once-in-a-life-time opportunity to hear him LIVE !
I was inspired from the circulating Email in the campus, so was prepared, did not get the snaks that was on offer (to keep me attentive), had a bottle of water and yeah, a small notebook for notes- and grabbed one of the front line seats to have a better view of him, his words (no mics there!) and his visions. I never heard about his before, but now feel that he is someone one can look up to- and get messages from his wisdom or follow him to do what he has achieved ! But, being a "average Postdoc" with limited dreams, I believe in doing non-conventional things- and then thinking, why not choose to write, advertise, analyze science and scientists than only doing science in a 4 walled office/ laboratory. Thus, the drive to attend his lecture.
In short, the talk was 'damn practical', full of humor, interesting stories and yes, a BIG Take home message. And, let me first put the strong take home message first: In his words "The world needs more scientists- is a big BULL SHIT".
One of the first PDF screen shots were showing- the 'well-known' "academic pathways" from "birth, to school, to K2, to undergraduate, to PhD, to Postdoc, and Tenure Track, to Asst. Prof. to Professor, to DEATH! And then just about the time, I felt like yawning to this so-many-times-heard simily of academic perills, suddenly he leaves you with his amazing creations and outright humour ! He says "and recently to this academic pathway, a SHUNT pathway has been hypoethesized, and discovered, and there exists this ALTERNATIVE career, but that too eventually leads to death, but then by-passes the Tenure, Asst. Prof (= the academic fights!)". OMG ! Reality bi(y)tes ! And, at that time, Alternative Careers in Industry was treated somewhat like "bullshit", but then it is norms and with a steady increase with !20-30's trained doctorates embarking in the Industry business doing research !
Slide: 2: In 1973, after finishing a PhD most (~50-60%) were assured of Tenure Track Positions, and this stats have fallen to as low as 10% only in 2006 (the data based on NSF/ NIH studies), with another 10 % into "out of labor force" (the worse part!), while the %age of Postdocs have risen significantly since them from an odd ~10% to about 40-50% at our times. Alarms- in my head, in many grads in the lecture hall, but truth rings louder, is not it ? He was spot on and hence, convincing with this statistics. In this slide, he reaffirms the fact that in ~early 2000s when we had the NIH funding "doubling", had NO EFFECT on increase/ rise in TT positions. Hmmm, a fact reflecting saturation in "that are being trained" and "deserving positions for the trained".
The out-of-labor force (the worse situation to face after unsuccessful stints as grad students and myraid of Postdocs!) can be beneficial to the concerned individual in realizing "parenthood" is not it ? This was convincing to some extent.
In the Alternative Career options I was more convinced about moves to professional Schools as Lawyer (Intellectual property rights- Patent attorneys) or for an MBA for a more demanding industry needs. But then he emphasized that, in "industry as you get promotions, you get less and less into research" is not that obvious ?
He draws attention to the fact that "there are people who are immersed (excelling) in science, but are poor in communication" and he himself, was the opposite prototype and honed his skills to be in there, where he is right now. He, in a nutshell, described, how he started his life in science media after a PhD, followed by a paid internship at New York Office of Nature Biotechnology for the news sections and then moved on. He did say about his initial NY city shared apartment deals and so on.
The image and dimensions of media has changed from "old to new" where Podcasts, peer review, "Science Fans" (people who are NOT trained in science, but are really really into it: his words!), public relations (journals and universities have them equally). I would have never know what "science fans" meant until he explained this to us, and that a virology related story being followed by a "long distance trucker" as a science fan.
He then underscores some of his own recent achievements (rather highlights) in terms of what he has written recently- in Science "Microbiomics: the Germ Theory of Everything", "one of his written piece from New York Academy of Science (Academy eBriefings)", "his writings in "This Week in Virology" and by this he shows us how the "advertiser supported models are more viable in longer runs than the subscriber supported models". An anecdotal example that he cites is Nature Methods (supported by the industrial partners for maintenance and publishing). His examples, showed, how the modern world of science journalism amalgamates different aspects of an event into one "web-news" (by merging of pictures, write-ups, Podcasts, links, social networking, iTunes, RSS feeds onto one platform) leading to wider and more active audience participation than we had ever before.
Then he quickly says, the "print world of science journalism has moved to the WEB".
Coming to the self-raised question on "how much money' does he make, he explained in terms of "adjusted profit", much smartly, than anyone anticipated in the audience, to come out successful, without answering it directly and still answering it to the smart ones !
He concludes, that he did not have a "formal journalistic training, but now has 15 years of vast experience", but the science journalism now has various forms such as - news and web editors, audio/video producers, PR folks, research editor, staff writer and so on. So, opportunities are ample, but one has to find the suitable one.
Finally, he says, "writing is not art, but a craft" and should be honed gradually with passing time- not to be worried too much about writing skills, abilities and forms in the beginning. He said he loves to work on "1-3 assignments" at a time, but can sometimes painstakingly be 5-7 at a particular point of time". And to write well, his 'gem of a advice'" "be a loner" (keeps repeating). Also that "self-discipline is required for free-lancing' and one "has to set hours to be able to do writing as a profession in a successful way".
I tried to ask him a question, unsure, that probably, I did not put it in right context/ wordings- "I am tempted to write all the time- but how to determine if what I am writing/ about to write qualifies for a good scientific review, a commentary, a letter to editor (all technical writings), a blog post, or simply a comment to a bigger scientific article, a popular article or stays forever on my desktop" ? So, I followed it up with the clue- "if the themes rules or the structure is more important than the outcome". His terse reply was "it would be a blog, as long as none is willign to pay you"- to a muffled laughter from the audience, but I wished he answered me more (I understood the 10s of curious raised up hands for other questions!). But, even that would have been my take-home-message as long as I was trying fit myself in his shoes/ similar profession. But, seems I am not yet ready. Earning by writing ? NAH. I am far from it as of now. But, yes, I do love to write on various aspects of "science, scientists, inventions, discoveries, updates" and so on.
To conclude, I did learn BIG TIME. I did learn about the alternative paths a lot. Especially, when he drew similarity between the "bacterial growth [same media, small population of bacteria grow to a log and then flat curve followed by death" with PIs/ Positions", and then he says, as money is limited, and so are positions, so does not matter how much PhDs and Postdocs we have trained, all are not going to be successful. The competition is tough in the present day and many many are BOUND to MISS OUT from positions and opportunities. I immediately correlated this to my PhD supervisors statement that "publishing quality is also suffering from this cut-throat competition to find positions". It was a memorable experience with Alan, one that I can cherish for a long time, a true "philosopher" (esp. when he shares a poignant family pic of his, showing his wife and daughter- that the checks he had been paid were all for his "adjusted profit" and how much is enough for a life?") in his own world, and been able to affect and touch the lives of a diverse number of scientists and a "science fan" like me.
There is a funny note as we were about one in the audience- Sofia (that is how she introduced herself at the meeting) and had noted some questions in a snacks plate ! To this end, Alan cunningly quipped "so you do in fact have a plateful of questions" ! In fact, the questions were very practical and good ones that were eventually answered.
Owing to hectic Postdoc schedules, I was bound to miss on the following dinner meeting (on offer from UF) or lunch meeting (the next day) with him ! Beyond the meeting, I had to run to my laboratory back, to see my protoplasts are ready to be subjected to mass-spectrometry analyses or not ! But, i swear, I would again be in his audience sooner and would not miss that chance again for a one-to-one exchange of ideas in order to learn more on my shunt-pathway of life.
Note: Sorry Alan, if I have misquoted you anywhere, or have lingual/ spell mistakes. But, it is all in good spirits, that I have tried to summarize what I could gather during the talk, and re-write them the next day, based on the small notes I had taken and some unforgettable memories and mental-images".
[Thank you Alan for the Picture available from your Website!]
I was inspired from the circulating Email in the campus, so was prepared, did not get the snaks that was on offer (to keep me attentive), had a bottle of water and yeah, a small notebook for notes- and grabbed one of the front line seats to have a better view of him, his words (no mics there!) and his visions. I never heard about his before, but now feel that he is someone one can look up to- and get messages from his wisdom or follow him to do what he has achieved ! But, being a "average Postdoc" with limited dreams, I believe in doing non-conventional things- and then thinking, why not choose to write, advertise, analyze science and scientists than only doing science in a 4 walled office/ laboratory. Thus, the drive to attend his lecture.
In short, the talk was 'damn practical', full of humor, interesting stories and yes, a BIG Take home message. And, let me first put the strong take home message first: In his words "The world needs more scientists- is a big BULL SHIT".
One of the first PDF screen shots were showing- the 'well-known' "academic pathways" from "birth, to school, to K2, to undergraduate, to PhD, to Postdoc, and Tenure Track, to Asst. Prof. to Professor, to DEATH! And then just about the time, I felt like yawning to this so-many-times-heard simily of academic perills, suddenly he leaves you with his amazing creations and outright humour ! He says "and recently to this academic pathway, a SHUNT pathway has been hypoethesized, and discovered, and there exists this ALTERNATIVE career, but that too eventually leads to death, but then by-passes the Tenure, Asst. Prof (= the academic fights!)". OMG ! Reality bi(y)tes ! And, at that time, Alternative Careers in Industry was treated somewhat like "bullshit", but then it is norms and with a steady increase with !20-30's trained doctorates embarking in the Industry business doing research !
Slide: 2: In 1973, after finishing a PhD most (~50-60%) were assured of Tenure Track Positions, and this stats have fallen to as low as 10% only in 2006 (the data based on NSF/ NIH studies), with another 10 % into "out of labor force" (the worse part!), while the %age of Postdocs have risen significantly since them from an odd ~10% to about 40-50% at our times. Alarms- in my head, in many grads in the lecture hall, but truth rings louder, is not it ? He was spot on and hence, convincing with this statistics. In this slide, he reaffirms the fact that in ~early 2000s when we had the NIH funding "doubling", had NO EFFECT on increase/ rise in TT positions. Hmmm, a fact reflecting saturation in "that are being trained" and "deserving positions for the trained".
The out-of-labor force (the worse situation to face after unsuccessful stints as grad students and myraid of Postdocs!) can be beneficial to the concerned individual in realizing "parenthood" is not it ? This was convincing to some extent.
In the Alternative Career options I was more convinced about moves to professional Schools as Lawyer (Intellectual property rights- Patent attorneys) or for an MBA for a more demanding industry needs. But then he emphasized that, in "industry as you get promotions, you get less and less into research" is not that obvious ?
He draws attention to the fact that "there are people who are immersed (excelling) in science, but are poor in communication" and he himself, was the opposite prototype and honed his skills to be in there, where he is right now. He, in a nutshell, described, how he started his life in science media after a PhD, followed by a paid internship at New York Office of Nature Biotechnology for the news sections and then moved on. He did say about his initial NY city shared apartment deals and so on.
The image and dimensions of media has changed from "old to new" where Podcasts, peer review, "Science Fans" (people who are NOT trained in science, but are really really into it: his words!), public relations (journals and universities have them equally). I would have never know what "science fans" meant until he explained this to us, and that a virology related story being followed by a "long distance trucker" as a science fan.
He then underscores some of his own recent achievements (rather highlights) in terms of what he has written recently- in Science "Microbiomics: the Germ Theory of Everything", "one of his written piece from New York Academy of Science (Academy eBriefings)", "his writings in "This Week in Virology" and by this he shows us how the "advertiser supported models are more viable in longer runs than the subscriber supported models". An anecdotal example that he cites is Nature Methods (supported by the industrial partners for maintenance and publishing). His examples, showed, how the modern world of science journalism amalgamates different aspects of an event into one "web-news" (by merging of pictures, write-ups, Podcasts, links, social networking, iTunes, RSS feeds onto one platform) leading to wider and more active audience participation than we had ever before.
Then he quickly says, the "print world of science journalism has moved to the WEB".
Coming to the self-raised question on "how much money' does he make, he explained in terms of "adjusted profit", much smartly, than anyone anticipated in the audience, to come out successful, without answering it directly and still answering it to the smart ones !
He concludes, that he did not have a "formal journalistic training, but now has 15 years of vast experience", but the science journalism now has various forms such as - news and web editors, audio/video producers, PR folks, research editor, staff writer and so on. So, opportunities are ample, but one has to find the suitable one.
Finally, he says, "writing is not art, but a craft" and should be honed gradually with passing time- not to be worried too much about writing skills, abilities and forms in the beginning. He said he loves to work on "1-3 assignments" at a time, but can sometimes painstakingly be 5-7 at a particular point of time". And to write well, his 'gem of a advice'" "be a loner" (keeps repeating). Also that "self-discipline is required for free-lancing' and one "has to set hours to be able to do writing as a profession in a successful way".
I tried to ask him a question, unsure, that probably, I did not put it in right context/ wordings- "I am tempted to write all the time- but how to determine if what I am writing/ about to write qualifies for a good scientific review, a commentary, a letter to editor (all technical writings), a blog post, or simply a comment to a bigger scientific article, a popular article or stays forever on my desktop" ? So, I followed it up with the clue- "if the themes rules or the structure is more important than the outcome". His terse reply was "it would be a blog, as long as none is willign to pay you"- to a muffled laughter from the audience, but I wished he answered me more (I understood the 10s of curious raised up hands for other questions!). But, even that would have been my take-home-message as long as I was trying fit myself in his shoes/ similar profession. But, seems I am not yet ready. Earning by writing ? NAH. I am far from it as of now. But, yes, I do love to write on various aspects of "science, scientists, inventions, discoveries, updates" and so on.
To conclude, I did learn BIG TIME. I did learn about the alternative paths a lot. Especially, when he drew similarity between the "bacterial growth [same media, small population of bacteria grow to a log and then flat curve followed by death" with PIs/ Positions", and then he says, as money is limited, and so are positions, so does not matter how much PhDs and Postdocs we have trained, all are not going to be successful. The competition is tough in the present day and many many are BOUND to MISS OUT from positions and opportunities. I immediately correlated this to my PhD supervisors statement that "publishing quality is also suffering from this cut-throat competition to find positions". It was a memorable experience with Alan, one that I can cherish for a long time, a true "philosopher" (esp. when he shares a poignant family pic of his, showing his wife and daughter- that the checks he had been paid were all for his "adjusted profit" and how much is enough for a life?") in his own world, and been able to affect and touch the lives of a diverse number of scientists and a "science fan" like me.
There is a funny note as we were about one in the audience- Sofia (that is how she introduced herself at the meeting) and had noted some questions in a snacks plate ! To this end, Alan cunningly quipped "so you do in fact have a plateful of questions" ! In fact, the questions were very practical and good ones that were eventually answered.
Owing to hectic Postdoc schedules, I was bound to miss on the following dinner meeting (on offer from UF) or lunch meeting (the next day) with him ! Beyond the meeting, I had to run to my laboratory back, to see my protoplasts are ready to be subjected to mass-spectrometry analyses or not ! But, i swear, I would again be in his audience sooner and would not miss that chance again for a one-to-one exchange of ideas in order to learn more on my shunt-pathway of life.
Note: Sorry Alan, if I have misquoted you anywhere, or have lingual/ spell mistakes. But, it is all in good spirits, that I have tried to summarize what I could gather during the talk, and re-write them the next day, based on the small notes I had taken and some unforgettable memories and mental-images".
