Postdoc research plan

Just as rare are programs designed to help doctoral students and postdocs learn how to create a research plan. We interviewed and corresponded with faculty and research scientists who have served on hiring committees. From your immediate point of view, the purpose of a research plan is to help get you research plan, however, serves another, very important function: it contributes to your development as a scientist. As will become apparent later in this document, one of the functions of a research plan is to demonstrate your intellectual vision and aspirations. It's possible to function quite well as a postdoc or grad student while giving little thought to your future. Writing a research plan casts your gaze forward and prompts you to begin planning for when you have your own laboratory. And if you've already started to think about your own lab, it will help you to refine your plans. So take a stab at writing a research plan, even if you don't expect to be on the job market for a while. The aim of your research plan, then, as of the rest of your application, is to assure the hiring committee that life with you will be do you do this? Provide the committee a compelling, reassuring, believable image of what their life will be like when you are working down the them a story--a believable, credible story--about what your lab will be like 5 years from now: well-funded, vibrant, productive, pursuing a valuable, ambitious but realistic research agenda that meshes well with the department's mission and with the other research going on in the don't misunderstand: you shouldn't tell them this ("in 5 years my lab will be vibrant, productive, and well-funded ... Rather, you need to lead them to believe it by describing a research agenda that persuades them that you will succeed. If the research you plan is not compelling, no rhetorical skill will make it compelling to a committee of smart scientists. If the research you propose is not manifestly, obviously important, if you don't know why it's important, or if you can't convey its importance effectively, convincing the committee to hire you won't be easy.

It isn't easy to change gears midcourse, but getting yourself into an important area of research will be well worth the effort in the long term--to your hirability, to your fundability, to your tenurability, and also to your career satisfaction. Do another postdoc if you n for your work is a necessary, but insufficient, condition for capturing the attention of hiring committees. Curing cancer is not a suitable goal for one individual's research plan--exciting, yes, but much too big to be believable. That kind of research] can travel down several different mechanistic routes," this respondent says, "i. Angiogenesis, breakdown of extracellular matrix, gene activation, induction of molecules involved--it can use different models--implanting tumors, using different tumor models, in vivo, in vitro, etc. The combination of a manifestly important goal with manifestly interesting, feasible approaches is the foundation of the research specific is not the same thing as including loads of detail. Superfluous details are not just unnecessary, they are often the hallmark of a poor plan. Constructing a research plan along these lines strengthens your application in three ways: you avoid alienating the committee by boring them; you tell the committee precisely what you intend to do; and you show that you have a subtle mind and a deep knowledge of your 't do this yet? And by all means have several people--preferably senior colleagues who have served on hiring committees--critique your research there were two parts to this, remember? You not only have to tell a good story--you also have to make it seem real, to make them expect it to come do i make my research plan seem real? If you want to get a job at an institution that takes its research seriously, you'll have to convince your future colleagues that you've gotten past the young, impressionable phase, where every idea glitters with promise despite the fact that it isn't feasible and isn't likely to work. Show the committee that, although your high ideals remain intact, your years of graduate and postdoctoral study have helped you to know the difference between good ideas and good intentions. In the words of one scholar, "you can tell a 'building castles in the sky' research plan.

One of my sources was unequivocal on this point: "does the research question build on the preliminary data the person has generated? No matter how knowledgeable you are, no matter how well considered your research plan, you can't predict the future. Think of it as a continuum: at one end sit well-established researchers with strong research records, many first-author (or last-author) publications, and their own research funding. Most candidates for entry-level tenure-track faculty jobs at institutions that require research (that is, most of the people who write research plans for job applications) are somewhere in the middle. You probably won't get hired anywhere if you aren't well prepared to start a productive research program at a scale appropriate for the these days some institutions and departments are looking for more than that. Increasingly, especially in the biomedical field, universities are hiring established researchers, even at the "entry" (assistant professor) level. Increasingly, senior postdocs are being promoted to research associate or research faculty positions during what the grantdoctor calls the "postpostdoc" phase of their research career. In that position, they write research grants in their own names and their host institutions sponsor them. Very often these folks have an r01 before they begin applying for a tenure-track key objective if you’re applying to one of these institutions is securing research grants: if you have a grant in your own name, you'll be a strong candidate; if you don't have your own grant, you are less competitive. It's a cynical cop out on the institution’s part, really, taking a pass on the difficult job of evaluating talent and capitulating to the reality of big-time biomedical research: it's all about the cash. Indeed, second-tier research institutions tend to expect the most experience; harvard and johns hopkins do not expect you to have your own research grant. Few people applying for tenure-track jobs have had the opportunity to start their own research programs. As not, all your data were collected in someone else's lab, as a part of someone else's research agenda.

One respondent said it beautifully: "the best plans usually build on the prior experience of the applicant but are not direct extensions of their postdoctoral work. M going to type that phrase again, it's so important: the best plans usually build on the prior experience of the applicant but are not direct extensions of their postdoctoral you're one of the select few applicants with lots of experience leading your own lab, that's the key to your rhetorical strategy. That's the outline of the story you must tell: "i did this work as a grad student/postdoc and it was important and it was great. It's different enough to be original, but similar enough that your years of training aren't r respondent wrote, "most candidates (95%) stick to extensions of what they are most familiar with, but the key is, have they figured out some rather creative new directions for the research and have they done a good job convincing us that they can do it based on what is already known? Once we have a short list of candidates," writes yet another source, "the research proposals are looked at more carefully for imaginative ideas that differ from the candidates’ ph. Decide what turf is his or hers, what turf is yours, and what story you intend to tell in your research plan and his or her letter of recommendation. Talk to your adviser about carving out your own research niche within the larger research effort, where you do work motivated by your own original ideas, something related but oblique to what your adviser is doing in the rest of the the research plan more important in the screening phase or late in the game? General, research plans are weighed more heavily later in the game, with more readily comprehensible evidence (especially pedigree, letters of recommendation, impact factor of journals, etc. Being weighed more heavily in the early r, your research plan must be designed to serve more than one purpose. One person i spoke to said that a research plan should be "about three pages of 1. Some will think it's a bit too long, others a bit too short, but no one will throw it out because of its er that we said that a research plan needs to help you through initial screening and withstand careful scrutiny in the later do you make a good first impression? The idea is to present, up front, in half a page or so, the information that the committee is most likely to be looking for in the early, screening phase of the search: clearly stated research goals, the most compelling motivation, and the general approach you intend to attention to the layout. A research plan should tell how great the science is, not how great you are.

Focus on contributions to scientific knowledge, not research experience and expertise," writes one obvious mistakes. In her list of fatal errors, one respondent wrote: "poorly covering or misstating the literature, grammatical or spelling errors, and, near the top of the list, writing research plans that ask for too much effort on the part of the reader--they should be clear and concise. You want the value of your research to speak for itself--avoid exaggerated claims of its importance. Is it big enough, but with answerable individual questions so that the question generates a research path that could be followed for some time? Your research plan should be coherent, with a theme common to all your work, but not so close that they seem to be shades of the same ize your research plan to the institution you're applying for. It's pretty obvious, but you wouldn't send the same research plan to johns hopkins university and to swarthmore college. And speaking of swarthmore: research plans sent to predominantly undergraduate institutions should be carefully designed to coexist with substantial teaching loads and to benefit from the participation of undergraduate ts, suggestions? 4, implant trials spur ethical l centers spearhead china's pharma zing head of house science panel to s rewrite cholera's global story. To other american chemical society websites:American chemical g the research plan for your academic job g the research plan for your academic job jason g. Research plan is more than a to-do list for this week in lab, or a manila folder full of ideas for maybe someday—at least if you are thinking of a tenure-track academic career in chemistry at virtually any bachelor’s or higher degree–granting institution in the country. A perusal of the academic job ads in c&en every august–october will quickly reveal that most schools expect a cover letter (whether they say so or not), a cv, a teaching statement, and a research plan, along with reference letters and transcripts. Research plan is a thoughtful, compelling, well-written document that outlines your exciting, unique research ideas that you and your students will pursue over the next half decade or so to advance knowledge in your discipline and earn you grants, papers, speaking invitations, tenure, promotion, and a national reputation. More specifics i only really knew for my own institution, hope college (a research intensive undergraduate liberal arts college with no graduate program), and even there you might get a dozen nuanced opinions among my dozen colleagues.

So i polled a broad cross-section of my network, spanning chemical subdisciplines at institutions ranging from small, teaching-centered liberal arts colleges to our nation’s elite research programs, such as scripps and mit. More senior advisors and members of search committees may have gotten their jobs with a single research project, conventional wisdom these days is that you need two to three distinct but related projects. But even the safest project must be worth doing, and even the riskiest must appear to have a reasonable chance of closely connected should your research be with your past? In most subdisciplines, you must be sufficiently removed from your postdoctoral or graduate work that you will not be lambasted for clinging to an advisor’s apron strings. You also must be able to make the case for why your training makes this a good problem for you to study—how you bring a unique skill set as well as unique ideas to this research. The five years you will have to do, fund, and publish the research before crafting your tenure package will go by too fast for you to break into something entirely outside your realm of mistry is a partial exception to this advice—in this subdiscipline it is quite common to bring a project with you from a postdoc (or more rarely your ph. It is also wise to be sure your advisor tells that same story in his or her letter and articulates support of your pursuing this research in your career as a genuinely independent scientist (and not merely someone who could be perceived as his or her latest "flunky" of a collaborator. Also beware of presuming you can help advance the research of someone already in a department. Some places will view collaboration very favorably, but the safest route is to cautiously float such ideas during interviews while presenting research plans that are exciting and achievable on your do you show your fit? The research plan that you target in the middle to get you a job at both harvard university and hope college will not get you an interview at either! Not that my colleagues and i at hope cannot tackle research that is just as exciting as harvard’s. However, we need to have enough of a niche or a unique angle both to endure the longer timeframe necessitated by smaller groups of undergraduate researchers and to ensure that we still stand out. If something you are planning to say is contingent on something you read on their web site, find a way to confirm it!

The research plan is not the place to articulate start-up needs, you should consider instrumentation and other resources that will be necessary to get started, and where you will go for funding or resources down the road. Research plan should show the big picture clearly and excite a broad audience of chemists across your sub-discipline. So having at least the introduction and executive summaries of your projects comprehensible and compelling to those outside your discipline is highly science, written well, makes a good research plan. As you craft and refine your research plan, keep the following strategies, as well as your audience in mind:Begin the document with an abstract or executive summary that engages a broad audience and shows synergies among your projects. Provide sufficient details and references to convince the experts you know your stuff and actually have a plan for what your group will be doing in the lab. Give details of first and key experiments, and backup plans or fallback positions for their riskiest aspects. This may fit well into your executive summary show how you will involve students (whether undergraduates, graduate students, an eventual postdoc or two, possibly even high schoolers if the school has that sort of outreach, depending on the institutions to which you are applying) and divide the projects among students. While this is especially important at schools with greater teaching missions, it can help set you apart even at research intensive institutions. This is especially true if there is doubt about how you plan to target or "market" your research. Otherwise, it is appropriate to hold off until the interview to discuss this , how long should your research plan be? In my opinion, ten pages total for your research plans should be a fairly firm upper limit unless you are specifically told otherwise by a search committee, and then only if you have two to three distinct lly, this question has answered itself already! Your research plan needs to be a well thought out document that is an integrated part of applications tailored to each institution to which you apply. So add “write research plans” to this week’s to do list (and every week’s for the next few months) and start writing up the ideas in that manila folder into some genuine research plans.

After a short postdoctoral traineeship at vanderbilt university, he joined the faculty at hope in 2004. He has received the dreyfus start-up award, research corporation cottrell college science award, and nsf career award, and is currently on sabbatical as a visiting research professor at arizona state university. Professor gillmore is the organizer of the biennial midwest postdoc to pui professor (p3) workshop co-sponsored by acs, and a frequent panelist at the annual acs postdoc to faculty (p2f) tips to help engage (or at least not turn off) your readers include:Avoid two-column formats. Use color as necessary but not ional schoolcollege planningchemistry olympiadproject seedundergraduatestudent chaptersattending acs meetingsundergraduate researchinternships, summer jobs & coopsstudy abroad programsfinding a mentornetworkingin chemistrytwo year/community college studentsgraduateacs directory of graduate researchgraduate & postdoc magazinegrants & fellowshipscareer planninginternational studentsplanning for graduate work in rds & there, or gone to get coffee??? Your security, this online session is about to end due to you do not respond, everything you entered on this page will be lost and you will have to login remaining: 00: to the online to the online ch plan research plan should be structured following the instructions given below. Please make sure that your research plan provides answers to the questions raised in the text part of the research plan (items 1–9) can be no more than twelve pages (times new roman 12 pt or equivalent). Also, make sure that the research plan remains legible after you convert it into pdf ure and content of the research application will be reviewed by international experts. Rationale in icance of the project in relation to current knowledge: how is the project linked to previous international and national research? Is the project linked to previous research by the pi/the research team, or to some other research? Scientific ives of the project and their theoretical and methodological eses or research ed research results and their anticipated scientific impact, potential for scientific breakthroughs and for the renewal of science and research. Effects and impact beyond and potential utilisation value of the research beyond the scientific -assessment of the expected societal impact of the research in the long or short term. Publication for publishing of research results, dissemination and communication to the scientific community, potential end-users and the general public, including open access issues. Research methods and material, support from research ch methods, described so as to explain how they will contribute to answering the research questions/confirming the hypotheses, or how they will support the chosen ch material to be used and its significance for the research project; justification for the research material and description of how the data will be collected and used.

Enclose a separate data management plan outlining data management, storage, access and kind of tangible support will the project receive from local, national and international research environments? Of research infrastructures, description of how the project benefits from such use (the infrastructures are also entered in the online application under infrastructures). Ethical governance procedures, informed consent, anonymity of subjects, withdrawal from research) concerning the chosen topic, methods and data, as well as any research permits or information on pending permit applications. Costs that do not pass through the books of the site of the research must not be included in the total and tasks of project staff, and their salary costs (with justifications) included in the application to the academy. If the names are not known, enter research projects (academy projects, projects in programmes), also include: estimate of the pi’s working hours on the funding (max. 12 months) is applied for to cover the pi’s salary: give clear, research-specific reasons for the the pi does not have a permanent employment relationship, include a salary plan for the pi for the entire funding period. Research team and collaborative of research team members that are relevant to the national and international collaboration, and its significance for project implementation (partners are entered on the online application under partners). Research careers and researcher ing the research career of the applicant (or other researchers to be funded). Mobility plan for the funding ption of researcher mobility from finland (or to finland or between organisations in finland) that has already been agreed, including information on the objectives and duration of visits. Also, justify how the visits or work periods elsewhere contribute to the implementation of the research plan. This information is also entered on the online application under mobility, with invitations appended to the application under t the research plan into pdf format and append it to the online application under appendices. Name the attachment file as follows: yoursurname_research ed 29 june modified 14 aug ibe to our me@ts & invoicing ». To the online to the online ch plan research plan should be structured following the instructions given below.