Post-doc position: Canada

Posted by on July 28th, 2011

I currently have an opening in my research group for a post-doc to investigate the development of the vertebrate skeleton.  Our lab studies the development of the neural crest derived skeleton in a comparative manner in chicken and fish embryos (zebrafish and Mexican tetra).   This position will focus on the signals involved in the patterning of skeletal elements in one or more of these animals and the interactions between neural crest and mesodermal tissues.  Applicants who have recently completed a PhD, have experience in molecular biology, developmental and cell biology are strongly encouraged to apply.  

MSVU is an undergraduate university on the East Coast of Canada in beautiful Nova Scotia.  Although a small university, I have a large research group.  This position offers opportunities to interact with a growing research group of undergraduates and graduate students in a well equipped CFI funded lab.  In addition, opportunities to teach, train undergraduates/graduate students and to help manage my lab will be available.  

If you want to hone your teaching and management skills, as well as engage in exciting research then this position might be for you!  Please email a CV, a one page statement of your research experience and interests, and the contact information for three referees to:

Dr Tamara Franz-Odendaal    Tamara.franz-odendaal@msvu.caBiology Dept, Mount Saint Vincent University,

166 Bedford Highway, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3M 3E4,CANADA
GD Star Rating
loading…
Share

Tags , , , , , , , ,
Category Careers, Jobs | No Comments »

Job posting: Executive Editor for the journal Development

Posted by on July 13th, 2011

We’d like to draw your attention to one of the current job postings, even if you don’t normally look at the job ads page.



After 8 very successful years with Development, Dr. Jane Alfred has decided to leave her position as Executive Editor. If you have editorial experience and are looking for a challenging role on a prestigious journal this position may be of interest to you.
GD Star Rating
loading…
Share

Category Careers, News | No Comments »

Keeping an Open Mind – A Scientist’s Quest for Positive Change

Posted by on July 12th, 2011

I am the founder and CEO of DataGiving. I founded DataGiving whilst completing my Ph.D. in Genetics at the University of Cambridge. I have always been passionate about helping people. After completing my Bachelors degree in Psychology, I worked as an Assistant Psychologist at St Marys Hospital in London, helping adults with severe mental health disorders. Since I was a teenager I had aspired to become a Clinical Psychologist, but as much as I admired the great work Psychologists do, I didn’t feel that my desire to reach out and make a positive change would be fully achieved in this role. I returned to academia, as I had long been intrigued to learn more about the biological basis of human behaviour and cognition. I completed a Masters degree in Cognitive Neuroscience, at Imperial College London, which included a laboratory based research project at the Hammersmith Hospital, investigating the genetic basis of Parkinson’s Disease This research sparked my passion for genetics, and specifically the field of Epigenetics. I went on to be awarded an MRC scholarship, to undertake research into the imprinting regulation of Gsα in the laboratory of Dr Gavin Kelsey at The Babraham Institute, Cambridge.

Whilst at Cambridge, I was determined to fully participate in both academic and social life Cambridge University had to offer, and I served on my College graduate committee, was editor for the Graduate Union Bulletin, and was responsible for raising sponsorship for the Cambridge University Entrepreneurs Society (CUE). At Cue, I learnt about what was required to develop successful businesses, and met fellow students interested in entrepreneurship. I also worked for a while for a biotech, identifying collaborative opportunities with research labs around the world.

I have long been an advocate of harnessing creative and innovative technologies, to facilitate change for the common good. After a period of teaching myself basic computer programming, myself and a team of fellow Cambridge graduates won the TedxCam 2010 Open Data Challenge Hackathon, with a web data mashup named Ventropy (www.ventropy.org). Described by the BBC as “jaw-dropping”, Ventropy impactfully communicates the needs of grassroots businesses in mainly developing countries looking to raise funding through the microfinance site Kiva. Ventropy received high-praise from leaders from both the technology/web and charity fields, and is featured in the Kiva app portal. I was invited to speak about the inspiring idea at The Guardian Activate 2010 Summit, Technology, society and the future: Changing the world through the internet.

I went on to be awarded an UnLtd HEFCE Social Entrepreneurship Catalyst Award to develop the idea of Ventropy into a data visualisation app that translates the charitable impact of any amount of money, this can be seen at www.datagiving.com.

I am passionate about inspiring social entrepreneurs, and earlier in the year I was invited to speak to students at Cambridge University interested in ethical careers at the Beyond Profit flagship event, ‘From dream to reality - funding and support for social enterprise’, alongside UnLtd CEO Cliff Prior. I was also invited back to The Guardian Activate Summit in 2011 to take part in a stimulating panel debate discussing the power of data to save the world.

My scientific training has equipped me with an analytical mindset and curiosity that I’m able to apply in wider contexts of innovation. I am still very much passionate about biological science and in encouraging innovation in this field. I recently came runner up in an Open Innovation competition organised by MedImmune and Cambridge University Technology Enterprise Club, and I have since been asked by MedImmune to develop an Open Innovation strategy for MedImmune and the University of Cambridge.

My career to date has taken unexpected and unconventional twists and turns, but I’ve enjoyed every moment. Keeping an open mind and carving out your niche can be hard work, but incredibly rewarding.
GD Star Rating
loading…
Share

Tags
Category Careers | No Comments »

How fate determined my career as a science journalist

Posted by on June 21st, 2011

If I shut my eyes, I can still picture  the young boy dressed as a gravedigger. He’s taking centre-stage, flourishing a spade and cheerily telling his audience that if they don’t practise safe sex, they will die of AIDS and boost his business. It’s not the sort of thing you expect from a Sunday school play.

It was February 2002 and I was in Kenya, covering a story for New Scientist magazine about how traditional African theatre could help teach local people about HIV, food hygiene and environmental threats such the pollution of nearby Lake Victoria. The science conveyed in the plays was basic, but it had the power to transform people’s lives.

That reporting assignment, which also took me to Nairobi’s slums and into the African Rift Valley to meet the Maasai people, is probably the most challenging of my career. It taught me how much you can achieve with nothing more than a notebook, pen and a pocket camera. It also sealed my conviction that sharing scientific knowledge is as valuable an enterprise as generating it.

I certainly didn’t start out with the idea of becoming any kind of journalist. The developmental biology bug bit during my undergraduate degree and I decided to pursue a career in research. Funded by a Prize Studentship from the Wellcome Trust,  I joined Helen Skaer’s lab, then at the Department of Human Anatomy in Oxford, in 1995. Under Helen’s excellent tutelage, I started work on finding out how the cells of the Drosophila renal system, the Malpighian tubules, decide their fate.

But while I was happily dissecting embryos, two things changed the course of my career. The first was a science communication course run by the Wellcome Trust for its Prize students. One of the course tutors, Peter Evans, a science radio journalist for BBC Radio 4, encouraged me to try my hand at student radio. Before long, I was a writer and presenter for The Frontier, a science magazine show on Oxygen 107.9FM, the UK’s first student station with a full FM radio licence.

I have no idea how many listeners  The Frontier team had, but producing a live half-hour show every week, whilst also studying for our degrees, was both hugely stressful and immensely fun. It planted the idea that this might be something I could do in future. To test the waters a bit more, I entered a number of science writing competitions, and was a runner up in the Wellcome Trust / New Scientist Essay competition.

This prompted the second career-changing event: as I was writing up my doctoral thesis, I applied for an internship as a subeditor at New Scientist. I succeeded in getting the job and joined the magazine as soon as my lab work was complete.

Working on a magazine was worlds away from counting Malpighian tubule cells, but the experience of working on The Frontier, as well as the writing competitions, did help—both in terms of doing the job and getting it in the first place.

So if I could only give one bit of advice, it would be this: if you want to get into science journalism, just do it. Take every opportunity you can—blogging, writing competitions, student newspapers or radio, writing for trade or academic publications, working as an intern—to flex your writing muscles and build a portfolio of examples to show prospective employers. Plenty of people say they want to be science journalists, but far fewer demonstrate the initiative and nous required to make it happen.

Subeditors are unsung diamond-polishers of the publishing world; their job is to edit prose for clarity, good grammar and style and then write eye-catching headlines. Being a trainee sub taught me a great deal about how to write well and fueled my desire to become a reporter / writer myself. I started writing pieces for the magazine and within a few months, I had wangled a job as a reporter in New Scientist’s news section.

I stayed in News for about 18 months before finding my métier as a feature writer, and eventually I became a features editor. Features are longer articles that give you the time and space to explore ideas in more depth and craft an article into more of a story, both of which appealed to me. In 2005, I left New Scientist to join Nature as a senior reporter and editor, where I focused on developing the biology features in Nature’s news section.

While this was all happening, I had been using my annual leave to train scientists in science communication skills, with my marine biologist husband, Jon Copley. There is an increasing demand for researchers to communicate with the public and to demonstrate the impact of their work. So Jon and I founded a company called SciConnect to offer training courses in these areas to scientists who need them.

By the time I had been at Nature for two years, the demands of SciConnect were growing. What’s more, I found that I was spending most of my time editing rather than writing. Much as a enjoyed working at Nature, I decided to leap into the unknown and become a freelance science journalist and full-time managing director of SciConnect. After I handed in my notice, I lay awake all night, fretting about whether I had just made the worst mistake of my career.

I need not have worried. Running my own company and freelancing as a writer has been terrifying, exhilarating, overwhelming, and empowering, in turn. It demands a whole new skill set and the learning curve has been precipitous. But it has its rewards: SciConnect has now equipped more than 1600 scientists, from PhD students to Profs, with the skills to share their work with the world.

There are days of doubt, of course. Every now and then I fish a sozzled fruit fly out of my Rioja, dry its bright wings and feel a pang of nostalgia for the lab. Or I’ll encounter a snotty academic dinosaur (thankfully a rare species) who thinks that “journalist” means “imbecile” and that leaving the research track somehow equates with failure or “dropping out”.

At times like these I remember the jolly little gravedigger and remind myself that science is not just about making discoveries, but also holding science to account and making sure those discoveries reach beyond the lab.

If anyone is contemplating making the leap into journalism, check out the career information on the Association of British Science Writers’ website.

Alternatively drop me a line via email (info@sciconnect.co.uk), on Twitter (@ClaireAinsworth) or my blog and I’ll do my best to help.
GD Star Rating
loading…
Share

Tags , , ,
Category Careers | No Comments »

Round-up of alternative careers stories

Posted by on June 8th, 2011

In December we asked people to share how they moved from research to a career away from the lab bench. Since then, we’ve heard from a number of people, and a few stories are still coming in. Here’s the list so far, with current affiliations:

Keep up and blog on - my route to the Node
Eva Amsen - Community manager for the Node and Online Editor for Development

A career in publishing - a developing story
Jane Alfred - Executive Editor for Development

Educational game designer: where biology, games, and technology meet
Nicole Husain - educational game designer at Spongelab Interactive

From the bench to the science centre
Sarah Gibb - Science and Interpretation Officer at Glasgow Science Centre

A career as editor
Vivian Siegel - Director of the Center for Science Communication at Vanderbilt University, and Editor-in-Chief of Disease Models and Mechanisms.

My transition to patent law
Michael Belliveau - Patent Attorney at Clark & Elbing

My journey to scientific editing
Kara Cerveny - scientific editor at Cell

My journey from bench scientist to clinical ethicist
Michael Szego - fellow in clinical and organizational ethics at the University of Toronto Joint Centre for Bioethics

How fate determined my career as a science journalist
Claire Ainsworth - science journalist

Keeping an open mind - a scientist’s quest for positive change
Sobia Hamid - entrepreneur
GD Star Rating
loading…
Share

Tags
Category Careers | No Comments »

My journey from bench scientist to clinical ethicist

Posted by on June 1st, 2011

Four and a half years ago I was introduced to the field of clinical ethics while nearing the end of my Doctorate in Molecular Genetics at the University of Toronto. After attending a talk given by Kerry Bowman, a clinical ethicist at one of the University teaching hospitals, I approached him with some additional questions. The ensuing discussion led to a productive working relationship. Initially, I helped him perform an ethics analysis of a complicated genomics project. He then invited me to participate in some of his other professional responsibilities, opening a door into a new profession. This foray into clinical ethics had a lasting effect; in short order I decided to retire my pipette and pursue a career in clinical ethics.

At the beginning of my PhD, my intention was to pursue a career as an academic scientist. Like many graduate students I experienced both euphoric moments when critical experiments worked and frustrating periods when experiments were not informative. While I enjoyed the scientific process, I had a nagging feeling that a scientific career was not the perfect fit for me. Accordingly, I tried to keep an open mind and got involved in extracurricular activities. I participated in student governance, got involved in science outreach and taught with a non- governmental organization overseas. I also regularly attended a life science career development seminar series meant to expose graduate students to careers outside of academic science. I first met Kerry when he talked about clinical ethics at one of these seminars.

What immediately captured my imagination was the interesting breadth of activities performed by clinical ethicists. In Canada, most large hospitals either employ their own clinical ethicist(s) or have access to a regional clinical ethics service. Clinical consultations are the bread and butter of most clinical ethics programs and are usually triggered by an ethical tension in the provision of patient-care. A conflict regarding a treatment decision or plan, complicated end-of-life decision making, whether to withdraw life support, consent and capacity issues, and disagreement about discharge planning are all examples of clinical cases that may benefit from clinical ethics support. On the organizational level, many ethicists are also involved in the development of hospital policy since good policies may help mitigate future ethical tensions. Teaching is another important facet of clinical ethics. Education serves to raise awareness about ethical issues and can increase the capacity of healthcare workers and researchers to deal with ethical issues in their practice. Many ethicists also conduct independent research and serve on hospital research ethics boards (the Canadian equivalent of research ethics committees).

After deciding on a career track, I knew I needed more education. To address my knowledge gap, I enrolled in a Bioethics Masters program at the University of Toronto. I was fortunate enough to get a scholarship and worked hard over the two year degree to immerse myself into the field of bioethics. I took a generalist approach and chose a course-based professional masters program, which allowed me to take more courses compared to the thesis-based program that was also offered. I completed the degree and am currently a fellow in clinical and organizational ethics at the University of Toronto Joint Centre for Bioethics. The fellowship program is analogous to an apprenticeship program in ethics. Each fellow rotates through the ethics programs of four partner healthcare institutions over the course of a year (3 months is spent at each site). This unique and wonderful experience has given me practical ethics experience that complements the theoretical knowledge I learned in graduate school.

How has a PhD in molecular genetics prepared me for a career in ethics? Interestingly, several of my patients and non-ethicist colleagues have asked about my background and only about half immediately appreciate why a background in genetics might be useful in ethics. The other half usually can’t get over the fact that most of my training is not in philosophy. I view my background in science to be of great relevance. I am able to understand the science behind many emerging technologies in medicine, which is critically important in order to discuss the ethical implications of new technology and recommendations on how to proceed. My science training also heavily contributed to the development of my analytic, writing and presentation skills, which nicely compliments my bioethics education.

The combination of science and clinical ethics training is still quite unusual and has afforded me some unique opportunities. For example, I have been embedded in a genomics centre at a large research institute to work on ethical issues in parallel with scientific innovation. I have also been invited to speak at several interesting venues on topics involving genetics and ethics. As my fellowship is drawing to an end, I am seeking out clinical ethics positions that will allow me to perform all the clinical activities I described earlier and also use my genetics knowledge in a research ethics capacity. I hope to continue working closely with scientists and work on the ethics of the new research as it is being developed. Although not yet employed as a clinical ethicist, I was recently asked to give a talk about clinical ethics at the same seminar series that first introduced me to the field. I graciously accepted and am looking forward to describing my exciting field to other life science students.
GD Star Rating
loading…
Share

Tags , , ,
Category Careers | No Comments »

Awards presented at this year’s BSCB-BSDB Spring meeting in Canterbury

Posted by on May 31st, 2011

Each year, three medals to honour extraordinary research achievements in cell and developmental biology are awarded at the joint conference of the British Societies for Cell Biology (BSCB) and Developmental Biology (BSDB). Here on the Node, Eva has recently posted an interview with Carlos Carmona-Fontaine, to whom this year’s Beddington medal was awarded, for his PhD work in Roberto Mayor’s lab at UCL in London. Carlos’ talk on collective migration of neural crest cells was highly entertaining; Eva’s interview gives an impression of the entertainment value - I highly recommend having a look!

The BSCB’s Hooke Medal honours a person who has made an outstanding contribution to UK cell biology within the first 10 years of establishing his or her own lab. 2011’s recipient is Alex Gould (NIMR, London, UK). Together with his team, Alex determined the scheduling mechanism that terminates proliferation of neuroblasts in the Drosophila central nervous system at the end of development. Their second big discovery was uncovering the function of Drosophila hepatocyte-like cells, called oenocytes, which regulate fat metabolism in the fly. In his lecture he mainly presented their most recent research on organ sparing during nutrient restriction: Starvation of fly larvae slows tissue growth, except in the brain. Sparing of the brain is a phenomenon that is also known to occur in mammals. The Gould lab carefully characterised brain sparing in starved fly larvae and identified the molecular mechanism responsible for sparing growth of the central nervous system.

Finally, the BSDB’s Waddington Medal is awarded for outstanding research performance as well as services to the developmental biology community. The awardee is announced only at the meeting; this year it was Chris Wylie (Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, USA). His first comment when coming on stage was, “I feel like a dinosaur that’s just been dug out!” Yet, far from resembling a fossil, Chris gave a lucid seminar that described the broad sweep of his research career, which has been largely dedicated to understanding primordial germ cells, the embryonic precursors of gametes. Chris highlighted how the direction of his research has been heavily influenced by the arrival of technological advances over the years. Chris himself has made a major contribution to these advances, being the first to use morpholinos to knock down zygotic genes in the early Xenopus embryo. More recently he has developed an interest in post-natal development of vertebrae and presented some exciting new data on growth and differentiation of intervertebral discs after birth, making a strong case for this kind of research to tackle post-natal disorders.

Chris did not miss the opportunity to give some advice to younger scientists. In his opinion, we should be cautious about believing too strongly in any accepted dogma, since he has seen even the most well established models overturned. He also advises collaboration and, if possible, to find the “perfect partner” – a reference to his long-standing scientific collaboration with his wife, Janet Heasman. Finally, Chris believes we should never follow old scientists’ advice as they grew up in a completely different era - in his case an era when supervisors would allow their PhD students to publish single author papers! Instead, Wylie believes one can benefit from observing the careers of successful senior scientists and copying their methods.

ResearchBlogging.org

Maurange C, Cheng L, & Gould AP (2008). Temporal transcription factors and their targets schedule the end of neural proliferation in Drosophila. Cell, 133 (5), 891-902 PMID: 18510932

Gutierrez E, Wiggins D, Fielding B, & Gould AP (2007). Specialized hepatocyte-like cells regulate Drosophila lipid metabolism. Nature, 445 (7125), 275-80 PMID: 17136098

Heasman J, Kofron M, & Wylie C (2000). Beta-catenin signaling activity dissected in the early Xenopus embryo: a novel antisense approach. Developmental biology, 222 (1), 124-34 PMID: 10885751
GD Star Rating
loading…
Share

Tags , , , , , , , ,
Category Careers, Events, Research | 1 Comment »

My journey to scientific editing

Posted by on May 24th, 2011

Although I’m no longer working at the bench, I still think of myself as a scientist. During grad school and much of my post-doc, I assumed that I would follow the “grad student to post-doc to professor track” so that I could continue to be paid to learn for the rest of my life. I’ve come to find out that many alternatives to the traditional academic path, like my current job as a scientific editor at Cell, enable life-long scientific learning.

For as long as I can remember, I’ve always loved learning about the natural world. When I went to college, I thought I wanted to be a medical doctor, but several summers working in labs and one summer studying animal behaviour changed my mind. I was bitten by the basic science research bug. My PhD thesis work focused on mitochondrial morphology and inheritance, but I also pushed myself beyond my cell biology and genetics comfort zone into areas like biophysics, biochemistry, and computational biology. Six years and three first author papers later, the Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation awarded me an opportunity of a lifetime. They funded my post-doc fellowship proposal on dissecting the connections between cell proliferation and differentiation in the zebrafish retina.

My post-doc was challenging – it stretched me emotionally, culturally, and intellectually. The transition from yeast cell biology and genetics to zebrafish developmental biology was more difficult than I had anticipated, but my lab mates, husband, and friends provided the support I needed to succeed. Deciding to leave the lab – my projects, my colleagues, and my friends – was one of the most difficult decisions I’ve ever made. When I talked with my advisor about the possibility of working as a scientific editor, he tried his best to be supportive but also tried to convince me to stay on in his lab. Unlike other post-docs who had moved onto non-academic positions, he (and many of my peers and colleagues) told me that I “have what it takes to be an academic researcher”.

Were they wrong? No. I actually agree with them. Intellectually and emotionally, I am suited to academic research. I delight in thinking and discussing biological questions; I enjoy working collaboratively as well as individually; and I am keen to share my knowledge with others by teaching and mentoring. I am, however, not well suited to the uncertainty that comes with tight funding and shrinking university budgets.

Near the end of the third year of my post-doc, with fellowship money running out, I began to worry that my research, while important and interesting to me, wasn’t likely to make into the high-profile journals (this is something that I never really thought about before; I always just wanted to do the best research in an area that interested me). I applied for several research/teaching assistant professorships back in the US, and I received very nice rejection letters. Around this time, I also began to notice that many scientists whom I respected were struggling to secure funding and spending much of their time carrying out administrative duties. Together, these events motivated me to think about what I was really doing in academic science. Was there something besides being a professor that would satisfy my desire to learn and share my enthusiasm for scientific discovery?

Throughout grad school and my post-doc, I participated in scientific outreach events – hosting high school students in the lab during the summer, working with non-scientists to explain our work to the public (you can listen to the result of one of my favorite collaborations, “Fish Eye/Fix Me”), visiting local schools and science fairs, and even starting my own blog called post-doc perspective. After participating in the 2010 Santa Fe science writers workshop, where I met fantastic people interested in learning about the best ways to communicate scientific knowledge and scientific discoveries, I thought I might use my talents to become a science editor/writer. When the job offer from Cell came, it was a no-brainer.

Some people were happy when I told them I would be starting a job as a scientific editor of Cell, a few of them even tried to become my new best friend. Others were horrified, asking how I could dream of leaving science. I explained that I didn’t see it as leaving science at all, simply as participating in a different aspect of the scientific process.

I began my scientific editing career with the hope that I would be able to facilitate the communication of scientific breakthroughs with integrity, honesty, and fairness. I’ve been an editor for less than a year, and in that time I’ve come to appreciate that scientific editing is a very challenging job; it comes with great responsibility, but it is also a lot of fun, especially for someone like me who loves to learn. At this stage of my career, I can say with confidence that this is the right place for me. I love the intellectual challenges that come with being an editor at Cell, and my husband is thankful that I’m no longer frustrated by experiments not working. I enjoy working with authors and reviewers to ensure that the scientific studies we publish are accurate and at the forefront of their respective fields, and I am thrilled to be part of a team of scientists, writers, and illustrators who work hard to communicate scientific discoveries in the best way possible. If you enjoy reading and writing and learning about biology from reading papers and attending journal clubs, scientific editing might be a good fit for you.

For those who are interested, my undergraduate degrees in biology and chemistry (and summer research experiences) are from at Duke University. I earned my PhD in biochemistry, cell and molecular biology from Johns Hopkins Medical School, and I carried out my post-doctoral research at the University College London.
GD Star Rating
loading…
Share

Tags , , , , , , ,
Category Careers | 2 Comments »

My transition to patent law

Posted by on May 22nd, 2011

I am now a Patent Attorney at Clark & Elbing, a Boston boutique patent law firm specializing in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals. I have been at Clark & Elbing since 1998, and am now a partner.

Prior to becoming a Patent Attorney, I was a graduate student in Connie Cepko’s laboratory at Harvard Medical School. For my research, I studied intrinsic and extrinsic cell fate choices in the developing vertebrate retina. Even prior to attending graduate school, I had been interested in retinal development; during my undergraduate career, I worked in a laboratory studying development of the retina in teleost fish.

My time in the Cepko lab was fun and fulfilling. During my time there, several exciting discoveries were made by other lab members, including identification of a photoreceptor-specific transcription factor as well as several other genes assymetrically expressed in the developing retina. Additionally, we shared lab space and lab meeting with the members of Cliff Tabin’s lab. It was at this time that Cliff and his colleagues identified the Sonic Hedgehog gene.

I had been interested in patent law even before attending graduate school. Prior to attending Harvard, I had taken the LSAT law school admission examination. From discussions with patent attorneys, I learned that completion of a Ph.D. was nearly an essential requirement, so I delayed law school and instead pursued my doctorate degree.

During my final months in the Cepko lab, I explored the possibility of joining another lab as a post-doc. I interviewed in several prominent developmental neurobiology labs and was offered a position in each of them. In the end, my heart wasn’t completely committed to continuing with scientific research, and I chose to resume my pursuit of a career in law.

Fortuitously for me, Connie was working with a Patent Attorney at Clark & Elbing, who invited me to interview at the firm. Additionally, pursuing my own leads resulted in other interviews. In each case, the position for which I was interviewing was “Technology Specialist.” In the Boston area, and in other U.S. cities, law firms hire Ph.D. scientists who are interested in becoming Patent Attorneys, train them, and assist with the expenses of attending law school.

It was 1998 when I was transitioning from science to law. At that time, universities were not particularly supportive of their graduates pursuing “alternative careers.” There were no panel discussions of alternative careers, no events hosted by companies. Even joining a biotech company was frowned upon. But Connie and Cliff were always 100% supportive, as they were throughout my graduate tenure. Equally supportive were my new colleagues, who had made a similar transition from the bench and thus knew of the difficulties associated with the move.

What I do now as a partner is quite different from what I did as a Technology Specialist. In the early years, relied heavily upon my scientific knowledge. Having a broad knowledge base was important, as there were few patents relating to retinal development. My first projects at Clark & Elbing related to the production of transgenic fungus capable of efficiently producing antibiotics. Now, I rely more upon knowledge of the law than my knowledge of science, although the latter certainly remains important. The one aspect of my scientific training that has continuously served me well is the ability to critically analyze a collection of facts. The ability to do so is critical to the success of scientists and Patent Attorneys alike.

I am now the Hiring Partner at Clark & Elbing. It is my job to review resumes submitted by those pursuing a career in patent law. From my vantage point, it appears universities are more supportive of careers away from the bench. I am a frequent visitor to local universities as a participant in a discussion of career alternatives. What remains a challenge for the scientists is determining whether a career in law will be a fulfilling one. Certainly, I am exposed to science on a daily level. In some ways, the science is more fulfilling, as it is generally being applied to improving human health. The work environment is certainly different—suits and ties have replaced the shorts and sandals of my earlier days. How can a scientist considering a transition to patent law determine whether this career would be fulfilling? In short, there is no easy way. What was recommended to me, and what I recommend to others, is to talk with as many people as you can. Through these discussions, look to identify people who share your values. And feel free to write to me. As someone who made a similar transition (albeit quite a while ago), I’d be more than happy to help.
GD Star Rating
loading…
Share

Tags ,
Category Careers | 2 Comments »

A career as editor

Posted by on May 19th, 2011

I was a PhD student with Peter Walter, studying protein translocation across the endoplasmic reticulum. I did very well as a student, publishing six research papers during that time. After that, I was a postdoc with Christiane Nüsslein-Volhard and then with Yuh-Nung Jan, studying oogenesis and pattern formation in Drosophila. Throughout my training, people handed me their papers to read and asked me to attend their practice qualifying exams because I was always looking for the big picture, always needing to know why they were doing the experiments in the first place. Time and again, friends suggested I become an editor. I mostly laughed at them, in part because I wasn’t really sure what an editor did, and in part because there seemed to be so few jobs for editors that I never thought I’d get one. Anyway, I was good at the bench and I couldn’t imagine disappointing my father by not taking a job in academia.

In 1993-4, I went on the job market, looking at standard faculty positions. I received some offers, including one from Vanderbilt University, where I am now. But I was resisting accepting a position, and some friends – who were also on the job market at the time – sent me to a career counselor. The counselor’s husband was a bench scientist, so she had some sense of my career until that point, and asked me a very simple question, one that I had never asked myself: “If you didn’t have to worry about how much money you made, or what anyone else thought of you, what would you do?” What surprised me was that I knew the answer to that question: I’d be a student for the rest of my life.

When I said that, I realized that what I loved about being in science was knowing something today that no one knew yesterday, and that it didn’t matter so much if I learned it by my own hands, or over coffee with a friend. This calmed me down a lot about the idea of starting up a lab, as I had been worrying about going around claiming other people’s work as my own.

When I got back to the lab that afternoon, I went into our lunch room and opened an issue of Cell. Near the front cover, there was an ad for an editor, and they were looking for someone with expertise either in cell biology (my graduate training) or developmental biology (my postdoctoral training) – and I thought to myself that it seemed an awful lot like being a student, so I applied for the position. The short version of this story is that I got the job, and I was a full time professional editor for about a dozen years, including a few very exciting years as the Executive Director of Public Library of Science, before returning to academia to my current position at Vanderbilt University. I still spend most of my time as an editor, most notably as the Editor-in-Chief of Development’s newest sister, Disease Models & Mechanisms.

Being an editor is really very much like being a student. You encounter lots of interesting and new science every day in a broad range of fields. But, at least for those of us who decide which research papers to publish in high profile journals such as Cell, it is also about being able to judge science. As an editor, you will have to turn away most of the papers you receive, and explain your reasoning. I think that editorial decisions need to be timely, constructive, transparent, and fair – or at least as much as they can be, given the need to turn complicated issues and shades of gray into stochastic decisions, and the need to keep confidential information confidential.

Editors and journals can be important partners to science. Through editorial policy they can help scientists do the right thing, such as sharing information and reagents; and through publishing policies, such as leaving copyright with the author or providing free access to published work, they can contribute to accelerating science itself. Editors are both gatekeepers and guardians of our treasury of scientific information, and editors need to behave responsibly and ethically. Thankfully, the Committee on Publication Ethics, of which Company of Biologists is a member, helps editors know and do the right thing.

For any trainees interested in being an editor at a journal like Cell, I encourage that you participate in journal clubs. A lot of the work of an editor is to assume the best of all possible worlds – that the conclusions are justified by the data and the interpretations are reasonable – and then assess how important the conclusions are to and beyond the field. Journal clubs are great ways to practice this – but be careful not to miss the forest for the trees, and to get too focused on the weakest part of the paper, which may be tangential to the overall conclusions. Also, take the time to go to seminars and meetings and talk to scientists in other fields and at other institutions. A scientist too buried in his own experiments to pay attention to the exciting discoveries around him is unlikely to enjoy or succeed at an editorial career.

Oh, and when I told my father, he was delighted. You see, he’d wanted me to be a writer, and considered this an enlightened combination of my twinned loves of science and language. And he was right.
GD Star Rating
loading…
Share

Tags ,
Category Careers | 1 Comment »


Copyright 2010 - 2012 The Company of Biologists Ltd

Company of Biologists