GDR:
Lastly, there IS one way to experimentally test how much a PD is worth, at least to PIs, and you are promoting that test, whether you know it or not. And that is a PD strike. I would love to see you discussing how spoiled PDs are in between gel runs because your PD is really not there. I think 50K/yr wouldn’t sound that much then.
Go ahead dudes, you have nothing to lose but your chains.
The NIH removes requirement for standardized scores in pre-doc fellowship applications
July 10, 2015
Huh.
To align with recent changes in the fellowship biosketch format,this Notice eliminates the requirement for inclusion of scores from standardized exams (e.g., MCAT, GRE) in the fellowship biosketch from the following funding opportunity announcements, effective immediately:
For reference, from PA-14-147:
Note that scores for standardized exams (e.g., MCAT, GRE) as well as a listing of the applicant’s courses and grades must be included in the Fellowship Applicant Biographical Sketch, and NOT in this attachment.
Anybody seen a rationale for this one?
The overall thrust of the Investigator Biosketch revamp seems to be to brag even more highly upon personal accomplishments, rather than suitability for the specific proposal. Also to allow people with non-traditional (non-published, say) accomplishments to brag on those.
Doesn’t it seem like eliminating standardized scores works against this?
Can anyone think of why this would be a good thing for NIH to do?
Next point: I see where it says it is eliminating the requirement, not telling applicants not to include their scores. Fascinating.
First: If you have excellent standardized scores, I suggest you continue to put those in the pre-doc NRSA biosketch somewhere people.
Second: If you don’t put them in there, the reviewer who is fond of such measures of your aptitude is going to assume your scores are really bad. Right?
Third: I think this is more evidence of NIH changes that will throw chaos into the system rather than really improving much.
DrugMonkey 