Tsujiru

Pinging this treat again to say that I HIGHLY recommend the ABMGG laboratory fellowship experience. It was everything I'd hoped for and more, and spoke to a lot of what I'd wanted in grad school (more clinical relevance, opportunities to publish, genuine mentorship...). I don't check this forum super often since finishing my PhD, but feel free to message me if anyone wants more specifics/advice. I believe these fellowships are harder and harder to get, but if you are passionate about this are and lucky enough to nab one I recommend you go for it!

Hi Fallen, I too am very interested in these ABMG postdoctoral positions. I get the sense that they are very competitive (only 1 or 2 spots a year at about 40 places) and that maybe fellows that are accepted already have prior postdoctoral experience. Also, frustratingly for me since I am getting a PhD, when I've written to several program directors they have told me that a) they are only accepting MDs because they can charge billable hours in the clinic and generally do better on the ABMG exam or that you will need to secure your own salary/funding before applying. Still though, if it's what you really think you want to do (as I do) it is worth pursuing. I recently organized a panel at my school on medical genetics, with one medical doctor, one genetic counselor, and one PhD cytogeneticist. As they told me, sure, these postdocs are competitive but they still need good people so give it a shot. Let me know if you have any other questions (or recommendations) and I'm probably going through a similar process to you at this point. Good luck! Tsujiru

Hi guys, So basically I'm debating whether or not to enter this video contest for current GRFP fellows. On the one hand, I feel like it's good to give things things a shot, even when they seem like a long shot. It is generally good practice to talk about your work to the general public and it would be awesome to win some travel funds. On the other hand, unlike most written applications, this one involves putting your face online. I don't have any particular video production skills, so even if my science comes across well I think the video would look very amateurish. And considering I have a thesis committee meeting coming up right around the corner, can I really justify the time it would take? Just curious about other people's reasons for participating/ not participating this year. Thanks for your opinions!

OK, so I just got my official award letter from EAPSI and it says the award period goes until May 31, 2013. Does this mean I cannot accept EAPSI and GRFP funding, even if I had planned to wait on GRFP until September? I want to do the ethical thing, but I'm also hoping to get a new car soon and boy it would be nice to have that 5k. Thanks for your thoughts!

Thank you! No I gave up facebook eons ago, but maybe for the sake of EAPSI I will rejoin

Yeah, we don't need visas as long as we don't stay longer than 90 days. Well, I guess I'll write them. Anyone know who our contact for JSPS is?

Hey guys. So still no reviews up yet, but I do have a question. At the orientation they talked a lot about traveling either before or after the 10 week period. It sounded like it was fairly common and they didn't have a problem with it so long as it didn't interfere with research and we didn't overstay 90 days. But when I went to go book my ticket there was all kinds of language about how if we wanted arrival/departure dates different from those defined by EAPSI we would have to seek permission from both JSPS and our host researcher. Honestly, I feel a little silly writing to my very busy host just to say, "Hey so I'd like to visit some friends in Tokyo before orientation starts, are you cool with that?" I sent a question off to Elena but I wonder how others have dealt with this? Thanks!

Hello cogpsy, I've heard many, many examples of reviewers alternating between she/he and him/her all within a single review. In my own reviews there wasn't anything too funny. One person clearly excerpted parts of my essays and maintained the original capitalization and grammar from my activities list, as in "applicant has been a Science Correspondent". They also stated that I was fluent in Japanese and ASL, when in reality I am fluent in Japanese and Spanish, and still a student of ASL and Portuguese (neither Spanish nor Portuguese were mentioned at all by the reviewer). There was a fairly confusing line in my IM review, though I think I got the general gist of it, which was "The apparent preliminary studies have confirmed use of RNAi in aim 1 will be critical to evaluate behavioral-molecular relationship." My references were meant to convey that RNAi is a well established technique in my model organism, but clearly you can't expect reviewers to have time to seriously study your references.

I can't really help on the length (except that it seems they want it short). Some people are better at writing up their research concisely than others, so they may even be suggesting you make it the length you're most comfortable with. More likely, they didn't read what they had previously written carefully when updating this year. In any case, I doubt they would reject your year summary because of a length requirement. As for "for the public" they really do mean absolutely as little jargon as possible. I was just at an NSF orientation where they had us completely rewrite the title of our accepted projects. (I might add, this was especially hard on some of the chemists, sorry about that...). They want it written the way you would describe your work to your grandmother. Another question in return, would you have to wait for your GRFP to run out before being eligible to apply for a DDIG?

Thanks Pauli! Guess I'll be patient.

Since some people have asked about whether it is worth applying in your 2nd year if you didn't get an HM your 1st year, I thought I'd post my reviews. Last year: No award or HM (IM/BI) VG/F G/VG Reviewer 1 basically asked me to explain my techniques more in my proposal (If only there were the space!) and then said that I wasn't specific enough in my BI. Reviewer 2 docked me for not discussing my controls or alternative hypotheses (again, space!) but was pretty generous on BI. But that Fair from reviewer 1 really was the bee under my bonnet that got me rewriting my essays right away (because frankly, I am totally the type of person that dedicates a lot of energy to BI activities and I was dismayed that that didn't come across in my original essays). This year: Award (IM/BI) E/E G/E E/E Reviewer 1 called my academic background outstanding and said that I come with the highest recommendations of my mentors. Reviewer 1 also lauded the specificity of my BI. Reviewer 2 got into the details of my proposed research and said it was an interesting idea but that I don't have the key evidence to support my hypothesis yet (totally agreed, it is my "risky" project, but also the one that I'm most excited about, which is why I wrote about it for the NSF). Reviewer 2 wrote my favorite comment in BI saying, "Sometimes an applicant has come to appreciate the value of outreach almost naturally. This applicant seems to be such a candidate - maybe partly due to a family situation, but I sense mostly because applicant truly sees the value of outreach and the importance of having a broader impact. In such situations the individual continues the ’give-back’ in various, and numerous, ways." Reviewer 3 said that I would benefit from more opportunities to present my research at symposia and conferences (also, totally agreed, but my PI seems to think that any time away from the bench is essentially "vacation" so I have a hard time convincing him to let me leave, even for something scientific. Maybe now that I have my own funding (including travel funds) I can make a more compelling argument ). Reviewer 3 mentioned my global awareness and outreach. Still feels like I'm dreaming but I guess a lot of fellows probably feel like that. To those that didn't get it this year, good luck in the years to come!

Anacron, the official link probably won't be open for another few months. They just finished deciding this years fellows so they are probably taking a well deserved break. Hey, does anyone know how we can see our reviews for EAPSI? I just read mine for the GRFP and I'm dying to know if the EAPSI reviewers agree with my GRFP reviewers (for similar, though not identical, proposals). Thanks!

As many others have stated, I was in disbelief when I checked my email this morning and found I had received an award. I'm a 2nd year graduate student, didn't even get an HM when I applied last year, and was discouraged by the email title... and then the good news! So no, for those of you still eligible to apply next year, I would not give up just because you didn't get an HM this year. In my case, I was crushed last year when I got really negative feedback from one reviewer and it motivated me to start rewriting my essays as soon and I saw the reviewer comments. My scientific interests also matured during that year and all together I think I was able to assemble a more compelling application my second go-around. So congratulations to all of you for having the guts to put yourself out there, and even if you don't get the award this year it is a valuable experience that will put you at an advantage next time you apply for anything. Also, I was glad that last night when I got home the internet was out (it's spotty at our house). Personally, I feel these things are better faced on a full night's sleep. Incredibly lucky also that the other person from my cohort who tried for this also got it. No need to feel too guilty.

Take a deep breath Christa. You will be OK. It's always scary to take a leap and feel like your closing off other options, but at some point that's exactly what you have to do. Believe it or not, Canada has a lot to offer (I'm not in CS, but in my field at least there are lots of well respected programs in Canada, not to mention it can be a very nice place to live). Good luck and try not to be too hard on yourself.

Well, I know they don't like it, but if it is what is best for you yes you can defer and apply and attend elsewhere. I have a friend who deferred when she won a Cambridge-Gates, and then in England she applied to a couple other PhD programs and ended up attended one of those instead. For her, it was in large part because her preferred mentor moved and she followed him. Everyone understood.