Comments on: What constitutes a real job in biomedical science?

By: Dr. Feelgood

Dr. Feelgood — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:06:43 +0000

I am a drug abuse/neuroscience researcher. I was initially promoted from within. I went from post-doc to asst prof after I got my first grant then got promoted to associate with tenure after a second. Then a year later, I moved to a new place and got promoted to full professor after only 20 months as an associate. I have been at the second place for about 4 years now, and I am about to take a job at another tier 1 research university as a department chair. I have done this with decent research, well cited but not in CNS level journals. You just have to learn how to write a grant (I have had 4 NIH grants not including fellowships over the past 10 years) and make yourself indispensable from within. Then when you get what you want, sell yourself somewhere else. Just work your shit baby.

By: bikemonkey

bikemonkey — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 06:50:49 +0000

You know the DM decamped for greener pastures, right?

By: BB

BB — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:25:12 +0000

Sorry I didn’t see this post sooner. Sometimes the non-tenure track folk are that way because they are part-timers holding VA appointments (me for instance). They are certainly eligible for NIH grants (I have one).

By: Routes to Independence: Beyond Ye Olde Skool Tenure Track Assistant Professorships « DrugMonkey

Sat, 07 Jul 2007 06:30:53 +0000

[...] funding (not just fellowships) as a Principal Investigator. I’ve been advocating postdocs to look beyond the traditional route to independence, i.e., applying for hard money salary, tenure track assistant professorships (with [...]

By: drugmonkey

drugmonkey — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 20:06:51 +0000

Sure. Thought I'd expand a bit on nontraditional paths, the short version is , promoted from within, offer contingent upon getting a grant funded.

By: PhysioProf

PhysioProf — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:17:58 +0000

“My thought is that most trainees think the OldeSkool way is the ONLY way and it is demonstrably not.”

I am increasingly becoming convinced that this is the case, and I will begin to try to incorporate this concept into my mentoring. Drugmonkey, if you personally have taken a “non-OldeSkool” route, would you mind summarizing your path?

By: drugmonkey

drugmonkey — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 13:38:54 +0000

One thing that I’ve found interesting to do is to really read Biosketches for the grants I review and also CVs circulated for seminar speakers. Not just for current appointment but with an eye to that persons’ history. This is one way, for example, to disabuse yourself of the notion that one “must” move to a different city at each stage to be taken seriously. One subplot of the nontraditional route is often a “promote from within” circumstance in which one does not leave one’s postdoctoral University/Institute.

With regard to new hiring, I’m sure that there are departments, maybe even whole subfields or strata of Universities that have distinct practices. Some OldeSkool and some a little more as I describe. My thought is that most trainees think the OldeSkool way is the ONLY way and it is demonstrably not.

By: PhysioProf

PhysioProf — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 02:21:08 +0000

“Second, because this step puts one in a substantially better position to acquire a tenure track job, if desired.”

In all of the job searches I have taken part in at my institution for entry-level tenure-track positions, the possession of non-fellowship grant funding by the applicant–R01 or otherwise–has never played any positive (or negative) role in the perception of the applicant. It just hasn’t been considered relevant.

By: PhysioProf

PhysioProf — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 02:13:37 +0000

That is very enlightening. I have come through the traditional grad school -> post-doc -> tenure-track assistant professor track. And so have pretty much all the PIs at my current institution (which is a well-respected, well-funded Ivy League university).

Your comments really point out the limitations of my own perspective.