Grad School- a Primer

An essential trait I have picked up in grad school that I also forsee being a major handicap later in life is the ability to seamlessly pick up and assimilate information, and carry on as if I have know all along. I catch myself reciting the off-handed responses by my coworkers as if they were bio 101 knowledge. It is essential, because our classes no longer take the time to dissect information- we hear it, we learn it, and we know it all in one breathe. I hope you can forgive me if I occasionally pull this routine on my family- especially with regards to the process of grad school. Who besides a grad student has access to this information?

Without further ado- your primer on grad school- namely graduating from it.

What is the title of your dissertation?
I mentioned before that I don't get to graduate until I discover something, and I am starting to suspect that this discovery IS the title- so, I don't really know yet. However, it will probably be something about finding small molecules that inhibit virus replication (not drugs, not treatment, just has to work in a tube). We've got some good leads, and I can now DO all the assays I can envision wanting to do to wrap this up, just need to get it done.

When will you graduate?
Although this depends on the success of the above discoveries, the better question is HOW. I only just learned this, but I think I've told 3 ppl like I wrote the policy myself. First, I need admission to candidacy- this is to say that I've finished the formal requirements for my program, and am transitioning to 'writing.' The catch is that this process (or form with signatures from my committee), must be complete 1 YEAR before I actually defend. At this point I will be ABD (all but defense). This is the soonest I could graduate, not a deadline- a person could languish in ABD purgatory for years without good advising. The first step usually comes with copious string attached- 'you can go ABD, but don't start writing until you have these experiments done and this paper published.' Second, I actually write a thesis (~200 pages, double spaced with generous formatting), which is presented to the public and defended privately with the committee. THEN I can graduate.

And at graduation, PhD candidates don't 'walk.' They get hooded.

Who is this committee?
I assembled my committee of 5 people, including Dr. Boss and Dr. Rockstar, who are smart folks with some interest in my research. Most of them are not experts in my field, but for whatever reason they like me and what I do- I selected people who think I am smart, and deserve a PhD. This is their most endearing trait, really. I have talked to them enough to know that they think I should have 2 (first author) publications on hand before I graduate. For those keeping count, I currently have none, but am arguing for (ie writing) my first.

What will you do after you graduate?
I recognized sometime ago that the obvious thing to do with a PhD, is to do more post-doctoral training so you publish more papers so you can get a faculty position. You can do lots of things with more post-doc training, and it is a really easy track to get on. Then you end up like my post-doc coworkers who've been post-docing for many years and STILL are in a training position, at low pay ($40K isn't much for someone with that much education), few benefits and grueling hours. I have been considering other options, and the current front runner (not winner, just the current top of my stack), is to work in public policy. The world at large needs help understanding science, research scientists don't have time to explain it, hopefully they hire me to help develop informed opinions so they can, for example, make intelligent legislation. I get to learn about new things, teach without giving grades, advocate for things I believe in and really serve in a way that I would be valuable. This dream may be bigger than curing cancer. And more vague.
I also need to work on cracking into this system- namely, how does a person with no policy training get this type of job? Well, AAAS has fellowships that place recent PhDs into government offices to act as science liasons and get some experience. There are several programs like this, and it currently seems like a very viable option. For reference, the application deadlines for these things are in winter.

You just posted this on a BLOG. Does your boss know all this stuff?
He does now. Earlier this week I had a conversation about all this with Dr. Boss. He graciously acknowledged that many people will serve science and help science to serve in a variety of non-faculty ways. That made me feel good, but we had previously discussed graduating in 2012- and I want to be done way before then. I pressed him a bit- "there are these fellowships, see, and I have to be completed my PhD requirements before I apply... and do you think I have to wait until 2013?" We walked through my sort of idealized timeline- paper #1 this winter, teach bioethics fall 2010, paper #2 next winter (2011), then write and defend and move to the new job by the fall 2011. And he didn't say it was stupid or unrealistic! He actually said to do that, we need to be sure that I need admission to candidacy at my next committee meeting in March. So yeah, the rest of the committee needs to get on board, and then I'll have 'just a couple more' years to wrap up, but the most important person to convince agrees with me, and I am taking a LOT of satisfaction from that.

____
Women in Science Careers met tonight to talk about work/life balance. This was a great topic, and lead us to what I hope will be a new series of topics that will go from changing attitudes in science about careers (because when 70% of graduates are in 'alternate careers,' it is demeaning to call it a fall back), developing positive working environments, and being a good mentor.

Also, Matt and I leave this weekend to fire the Wood-Fire Kiln which is the highlight of this semester's ceramics class. The process takes about 60 hrs of active work, and we won't see the results until the next weekend. Wish us luck!