March 5, 2021 • 49 mins
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke’s Building Up the Nerve is a podcast for neuroscience trainees that takes you through the components of a grant application with successful awardees. We know that applying for NIH funding can be daunting, but we’re here to help—it’s our job!
In this episode, our grantee guests discuss how they involved their mentor(s)/sponsor(s) in the application process to ensure the training plan reflects their individual needs and the mentor is able to provide the appropriate level of support and expertise to achieve those training goals.
Featuring Jaroslaw Aronowski, PhD, Professor, UTHealth McGovern Med School; Alexis S. Mobley, MS, PhD Candidate, UTHealth McGovern Med School; Anna Majewska, PhD, Professor, University of Rochester; Monique Mendes, PhD, Postdoctoral Researcher, Stanford University; Mark Wu, MD, PhD, Professor, Johns Hopkins University; Margaret Ho, PhD, Postdoctoral Fellow, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Transcript available at http://ninds.buzzsprout.com/. This episode has been edited since its original publication.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Lauren (00:02):
Welcome to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and
Stroke's Building Up the Nerve, a podcastfor neuroscience trainees that takes
you through the components of a grantapplication with successful awardees.
We know that applying for NIH fundingcan be daunting, but we're here to help.
It's our job.
Marguerite Matthews (00:22):
Hello, I'm Marguerite Matthews, a scientific
program manager, at NINDS.
Lauren Ullrich (00:27):
And I'm Lauren Ullrich a program director at NINIDS.
And we're your host today
Marguerite Matthews (00:32):
in today's episode, we'll focus on the mentor
and sponsor statement section.
We have a slightly different formattoday, as we have invited mentor
and mentee pairs to talk about theirprocess, we will discuss how they ensured
that the training plan reflected theindividual needs of the trainee, and
that the mentor was able to providethe appropriate support and expertise
(00:52):
to achieve these trainings goals.
Lauren Ullri (00:55):
And as always, our disclaimer still applies everything we
talk about may only be relevant for NINDS.
So if you're applying to a different NIHInstitute or center, it's always best
to check with them about their policies.
Marguerite M (01:12):
And for our guests today, we have Alexis Mobley and her
mentor Jarek Aronowski, Monique Mendes,and her mentor, Ania Majewska and
Margaret Ho and her mentor, Mark Wu.
So let's get started withintroductions, Alexis you're up.
Alexis Mobley (01:30):
Awesome.
So my current institution is theUniversity of Texas MD Anderson
Cancer Center, UT Health GraduateSchool of Biomedical Sciences.
What I focus on and the lab is lookingat the communication between ILC2s and
microglia and the aged brain between malesand females, and trying to understand
(01:54):
what ways that ILC twos either maintainor downregulate their cytokine signaling
to microglia and how microglia respond.
I'm using mouse models so far,I've gotten the supplement.
I'm working with Dr. Aronowski,and I've also been awarded an F 31.
That'll start in January.
Oh, and my career stage, I'm sorry.
(02:15):
I'm a fifth year PhD student and aneuroinflammation at the graduate school.
One of my hobbies and passionsoutside of work is just being in the
community, um, in different facets.
So I'm currently singing with thechoir, international voices, Houston,
which right now we're doing a bunch ofvirtual programming, but I'm also one
of the co-founders of Black in Immuno,So I've been using that stage and
(02:37):
platform to help advocate and celebrateand support black voices in immunology.
Marguerite M (02:42):
That's so awesome.
Black in Immuno has beensuch a delight to just watch.
I don't know anything about immunology,but I very much enjoy seeing you all
just be so wonderful and share yourscience along with many of the other
black in STEM groups that are popping up.
It's awesome.
So congratulations forbeing a part of that.
Alexis Moble (03:01):
Thank you so much.
Yeah.
We have a lot of fun and we have a lot offun with the other black groups as well.
So it's nice getting tokind of have a party.
I call it a, an extended familyreunion for all of us, just to
be able to celebrate each other.
Jarek A (03:15):
Hi, i'm Jarek Aronowski I am a professor and the vice chair of
neurology at university of Texas healthscience center, McGovern medical school.
I am here for past 35 years.
So it is a quiet quite awhile.
I have a long experience of ainteracting with students from graduate
(03:36):
students to fellows over the years.
And I have a super pleasure to have ainteracting with Alexis, probably one
of the smartest students we have here.
She is fantastic.
And when it comes to my past, Imean, I'm mainly interested in
the neurological supravasculardiseases, including ischemic stroke.
(03:59):
And intracellular hemorrhage and tryingto understand how actually those diseases
exist in the background of age, aswell as the other comorbidities, we
are trying to develop translationalapproaches to actually come up with
idea how to treat those diseases.
Uh, when it comes to my hobby,probably a sport jogging is something
(04:23):
that I can safely exercise thisday when the COVID is around.
Being sometimes lonely in thepark makes you feel fairly good.
Otherwise I love classical music and alot of other intellectual challenges.
Lauren Ull (04:38):
We definitely have a lot of runners and a lot of musically
inclined people on this podcast.
So I'm wondering if there areparticularly popular hobbies
among scientists for some reason.
Monique Mendes (04:50):
Hi everyone.
My name is Monique Mendes.
I am currently a postdoc in Dr. MarkSchnitzer's lab at Stanford university.
I applied and received the F99 K00 grant.
And I am a member of the second cohort.
I'm actually smiling from ear to earright now because you don't usually
(05:11):
run into like other neuro monologiststhat study microglia and hearing
like Alexis talk about microglia,I was like, yay, go microglia.
In Dr. Ania Majewska's lab atthe university of Rochester,
where I did my F99 work.
I focused on understanding andlearning about microglia ontogeny,
(05:35):
how microglia are born and how theymature in the adult mouse brain.
And we use advanced imagingtechniques such as in vivo to photon
microscopy, to really track thesemicroglia and understand how they
are interacting with other cells, howthey are maturing in the adult brain.
And my work in Dr. Mark Schnitzer'slab at Stanford is now focused on
(05:59):
another type of glial cells known asastrocytes and how they participate in
hippocampal network function and behavior.
And in terms of a hobby kind ofgoing with the theme as well.
I love classical music.
I play violin.
I love music.
And most recently I've picked up alittle bit of tennis since the weather
is really beautiful here in California.
(06:21):
So yeah, I'm really excited to be here.
Thank you.
Marguerite (06:25):
I play string bass.
So I feel like we're going to need to gettogether to have a little string quartet.
We got to find a fewother, a few other players.
Monique Mendes (06:33):
Yes, we have to
Ania Majewska (06:35):
Ania Majewska, I'm a professor at the, um,
university of Rochester andthe department of neuroscience.
I also direct our neurosciencegraduate program and my lab is
really interested in how, uh, thebrain changes with experience.
Uh, so mechanisms of plasticity, bothin health and disease and largely
focused on how different cell typesinteract lately, particularly how
(06:58):
microglia and neurons interact.
And, um, as for a hobby, I havethree boys between the ages of
five and 15, and they are my hobby.
There's pretty much nothing elsein my life except driving them
to all their various activitiesand having fun with them.
So
Lauren Ullrich (07:15):
To think like, especially in the pandemic, you
probably have your hands full.
Margaret Ho (07:18):
Hi everyone.
My name is Margaret Ho.
I'm currently a postdoc fellowat Johns Hopkins in Baltimore,
Maryland, and the school of medicineand I work with Dr. Mark Wu.
The grant that I applied forsuccessfully is the K 99 under the
brain initiative and my research aimsto study the functional and genetic
heterogeneity of astrocytes in the flybrain and their role in sleep behavior.
(07:41):
And so I'm really excited to actually,so many of us are studying glia.
That's a great cohort.
So astrocytes are representing a largeportion of cells in the brain, but they're
not as, um, studied as well as neurons.
People have shown that they'reimportant for formation and
modulation of neural circuits.
And there's lots of evidencethat they play roles in signaling
(08:01):
and behavior in the brain.
Um, and the goal of my research is tosystematically investigate genes related
to astrocyte heterogeneity and diversity,and to study the local astrocyte neuron
interactions, regulating sleep andarousal using imaging and behavior.
Um, and my plan is also to usethese experiments to generate
genetic tools that allow me to studyspecific astrocyte populations.
(08:25):
So this was my first applicationever for an NIH grant, and I've
helped former PIs write NIH grantsbefore, but this is my first time
as an applicant, but I have appliedfor other awards, like the NSF GFRP.
And one of my favorite things to dooutside of work is just go outside and
go running on trails and be in nature.
I love that.
Marguerite M (08:46):
Wow, we've got the neuro immuno crew and the running crew.
Lauren Ullrich (08:51):
I know it wasn't even on purpose.
I swear.
Uh alright Mark last but not least.
Mark Wu (08:57):
Hi everyone.
I'm Mark Wu I am a professorof neurology at Johns Hopkins.
So, uh,you know, my lab is interested
in studying the molecular andcircuit basis underlying sleep.
We use a fruit flies in miceto study these questions.
In addition to running a basic sciencelab, I'm also a practicing physician.
(09:18):
So I see patients in sleep medicineclinic on a weekly basis, ranging from
things like narcolepsy and hypersomniato restless leg syndrome to sleep apnea.
And I also attend on the neurologywards in the hospital two to
four weeks out of the year.
And so that was an interesting experiencethat summer when I attended and it was
during the pandemic and it was a verydifferent experience than normal in
(09:39):
terms of NIH awards that I've received.
I guess I've gotten awards throughoutmy, uh, sort of career trajectory.
When I was a graduate student, Ihad an F 31, and then when I was a
post-doctoral fellow with Amita Sehgal,I applied and obtained a K08 award.
And then as a PI, I havegotten multiple R01 awards.
Um, in terms of my hobbies orpassions, I think it's pretty
(10:03):
much in the same boat as Ania.
Uh, we have two small childrenwho are seven and four.
And so pretty much when I'm notdoing work or seeing patients, I'm
basically doing stuff for them.
For example, this fall.
Um, my daughter did soccer for thefirst time and I was the coach, although
I had never played soccer before.
So I had to, like, I had to buy likesoccer for dummies, read it and then learn
(10:23):
all the rules and then coach the kids.
So that took a while, butit was a fun experience.
And we did have a, likea seven and one record.
So I just wanted to point that out.
Lauren Ullrich (10:32):
Nice!
Mar (10:34):
It wasn't due the coaching.
We just had some excellent players.
Oh, that's great.
So let's start big picture.
We were talking about thementor and sponsor statement.
What are we trying to achieve withthis statement with what is its purpose
within the larger context of the grant?
Alexis (10:56):
So I think when it came to my mentor and sponsorship statement,
it was really important for me tohighlight that not only was I doing
the work, but in cases where I maynot be prepared to do the work, how
my mentors and sponsors were going tohelp me bridge the gap between point
(11:16):
a and point B, but not only that withscience, how they were going to support
me academically career wise and make mea whole well-rounded scientist overall.
And so I really try to focus on whatthings did I need to be a scientist
and what I felt like I needed, howmy mentors were going to be able to
(11:37):
supplement that, but then also makingsure that my mentor saw any holes in my
training, which sounds a little rough,but, you know, we, hindsight's always
20/20 And as Dr. Aronowski mentioned,I mean, he has 35 years of experience.
And so he's able to see where I'mat as a young developing scientist
(11:58):
and get me to where I need to beand where I want to be long-term.
Mar (12:03):
So I was just going to say, yeah, from the mentor perspective about
the mentor statement, what I try to dois really personalize it to highlight
the particular strengths of that person,because every, uh, you know, every person
has special strengths and special skills.
And, and so I try to really tailorit to their particular situation.
(12:24):
I'd like to try to tell the story alsoof the narrative of their training and
how they got to where they want it to be.
And I want to also emphasizethe, the commitment and the
passion they have for science.
And then I agree that it's also importantto talk about how we will, as mentors
provide the training and the backgroundto kind of get to where they need to go
(12:47):
to highlight those areas where they candevelop and then how we can provide that
with very specific and detailed points.
I think that's an important point tomake, which is that when you write
these things both as the mentorand the mentee, you want to be
specific, you want to provide details.
You don't want to just say,Oh, so-and-so loves science.
You want to show how they lovescience, which is kind of a common
(13:10):
point about good writing, which isthat you want to show and not say.
Um, but yeah, I think those are some ofthe basic things I would kind of comment
on in terms of the mentor statement.
Jarek Aronows (13:20):
So if I could add anything, I had a, actually the
opportunity to sit on the F31 studysections for approximately seven years.
So reviewing applicantsthat are similar to Alexis.
And one thing that actually transpiredfrom that is that all of those
kids are just incredibly smart.
(13:42):
And right now, in order to makesomeone who you try to promote , the
fuel has to be presented assomewhat better and or different.
Otherwise it's very difficult forsomebody to differentiate them
during the review process and whenit comes to the scientific point,
I mean, obviously project has to bevery interesting and I believe that
(14:06):
the grant should be written well.
However, it very often helps when yousee in the ground that basically it
is being done by the students, by theapplicants, not necessarily by the mentor,
otherwise personalize as you have heard.
Generic statements are very boringand not necessarily very convincing.
Marguerite Matth (14:28):
I think that's a great point to bring up about
not having generic statements, butI think that can be hard, right?
When so many graduate students arehaving a very similar experience
in terms of expectations set bythe graduate program, expectations
about rigor and reproducibility.
If you all would talk about how youwork together, both the trainee and
(14:50):
the mentor to ensure that you'reon the same page and you're not
crafting a generic mentor statement.
Margar (14:58):
Yeah, I think in general it seems like the most effective mentor
statements are ones that really like echothe detailed plan that, that the applicant
themselves has has actually come up with.
So they shouldn't be echoing likethe detailed plan, the goals and the
steps that need to be taken for thetraining of the applicant and the
support that's needed to make it happen.
Yeah, it's very much nota generic boilerplate.
Ania Majewska (15:23):
But I will say that there are things that are
common to all graduate students.
Like you said, so starting off with ageneric statement where this, these are
the points that every graduate studentneeds to have in their experience.
We need to hit all ofthese different things.
Um, now how your path throughthem might be very different.
So I do think that sort of evaluatingstrengths and weaknesses and having a
(15:44):
plan for building on the strengths, notjust saying, "hey, you're really good
at that, so we're not going to focuson it" because you can always do more
with strengths and really develop them.
But then also addressing the weaknesseshead on and saying, you know, you
haven't had as much experience inthis, and this is an area of growth.
You don't have to have it be a weakness.
You can you can phraseit much nicer than that.
And, um, therefore focusing the planon different areas and supporting
(16:06):
some areas more than others.
But I think starting off with the genericplan is actually a great place to start
and then individualizing from there.
Alexis Mobley (16:15):
Yeah.
I think also as a graduate student,it's important to have these constant
conversations with your mentor.
And I think that's what made my mentorshipstatement easily personalizable.
That's not a word, but, you know, becauseI mean, even from the jump when I met with
Dr. Aronowski for my rotation, I mean thevery first conversation we had was what
(16:36):
do you want out of your graduate degree?
And I think having that idea from thebeginning really helped me set the stage
for anything in the future and let mehave my goals to completing my degree.
And so even if you may not knowuntil you're writing your grant of
like, Oh, what do I want from this?
It's still a journey of understanding whatyou're trying to get out of your training.
(17:00):
And if you still haven't had thatconversation with your mentor, it's
important to start them becauseit's, you can start setting goals
so that in the end you have reachedwhatever metric you want for yourself.
Because even though we have, you know,the cookie cutter qualifications for
any program, you still are able topersonalize it for your goals because
(17:22):
we aren't all going to end up in thesame areas and the same expertise.
So just understanding yourself and howyour mentors can get you to that endpoint.
Moni (17:31):
I'm actually like nodding.
So like vigorously over here to Alexis.
Like, I completely agreewith what she said.
I think early on, even before Aniaand I, about the F 99, we had these
conversations, like on your Ania,I wanted to apply for like an F
grant of some kind very early on.
(17:53):
She knew I wanted to pursue a post-doc inthe future when I was done with my PhD.
So having those conversations, makingsure we're on the same page, I think
that really helped us create the mentorsponsor statement, like very easily and
included a lot of the information ofwhere I see myself in like 10 years.
(18:14):
So I think one of the biggest things,and I will really echo what Alexa
said is having these conversationsreally early, making sure you have
this open communication with yourmentor so that they know, like, where
do you see yourself, what you'd liketo accomplish in your PhD and after.
Lauren Ullrich (18:30):
And so to that point of thinking about, you know,
building on my strengths and figuringout ways to mitigate any potential
weaknesses that might be there.
Uh, one of the things that we talkabout a lot in our offices, this is
quote unquote gap analysis approach.
So one of you that used this approachwant to explain what it is and you
(18:55):
might've used it without, withoutactually calling it that, but what it
is and why it's helpful as a framework.
Ania Majewska (19:03):
Sure.
I love gap analyses.
And I don't know that I usethem terribly formally, but I
think they're very, very useful.
The gap analysis is basically anevaluation of where you are right
now, a very frank evaluation of whatthings look like at the current time.
And then a very clear ideaof where you want to go.
So, as Monique said, what are you goals?
(19:24):
Where do you see yourself in afew years as you're finishing grad
school after grad school, what, whatdo you want to do in the future?
And then charting out a pathbetween where you are now and the
goals that you see for yourself.
And we've already touched on this,but as you go from where you are
now, you realize what things needto be done, what things are missing,
(19:46):
and you can chart a very specificplan for how to get to the future.
And I think that's, I think it needshonesty in both your view for the
future, both of your assessmentof where you are right now.
But I think that's where allthe power of it lies is where
you realize, well, I really willneed X and I just not there yet.
Um, and then you can write a veryspecific plan for what kind of
(20:08):
framing you need to get to your goal.
And I think those kinds ofspecifics and laid out goals,
milestones are really powerful.
And I think that's what really movesreviewers on these panels is if
you see that someone's thought itthrough very, very carefully and they
have a really good plan with very,very specific things and that will
(20:30):
get them to where they want to be.
And I think the other point Iwant to make about this is that
you are not beholden to the plan.
In fact, most of the reviewerswill not say, Oh my goodness.
You know, in your report a year out, she'sdoing something completely different.
This is not what we gave her money for.
People expect plans to change, butthey also want to see that you've
(20:50):
thought about things carefully,that you can make good plans.
And then if you haveto pivot, that's great.
So, you know, you don't have tofeel like you're really locking
yourself into something, but you'rejust showing that you're very
thoughtful about what you want.
Marguerite Matt (21:05):
And I think the thoughtfulness piece is what helps
separate a generic mentor statement andtraining plan from one that says, I know
that this person is going to do everythingelse these other graduate students are
doing in terms of expectations, butthis, this specific training needs these
things to strengthen their abilities,to become a stronger scientist.
So that's, uh, thoseare really great points.
(21:26):
Ania, thank you.
Lauren Ullrich (21:28):
Yeah.
And keeping your latter pointat that plans can change.
We did have an episode in seasonone where we talked about, you know,
where is the line between a naturalexpected change and a change that
might need a program director's inputit's um, if you have a substantial
change in your research direction islike, then you're going to want to
(21:51):
check in with your program officer.
But, but that happens too.
Sometimes people even change mentors.
And, and so if that's a situation thatany of our listeners find themselves
in, like, please go back to season one.
We did touch on that as well.
So thank you for bringingup both those points.
Ma (22:06):
So I think actually I didn't realize that we were doing a gap analysis,
but I think the way that Mark and whenwe have our meetings, it kind of ends
up being kind of like a gap analysis.
So, you know, we'll have some meetingsthat are very focused on data and
experiments of plans for those things.
But then we'll also have periodicallythese meetings where Mark will say,
these are some short-term goals, butthen like, what are your midterm goals?
(22:28):
And specifically, what doyou think you need to do?
Um, where do you actually needto put your effort to get there?
Um, so I think that's very, very helpfulto actually outline those specific steps.
So I didn't know that was doing gapanalysis, but when I looked up what
gap analysis was, I was like, yeah,that's actually what we've been doing.
Marguerite Matthews (22:45):
It doesn't matter what you call it, it's
that you're taking part in it.
And you're effectivelyevaluating yourself, allowing
others to evaluate you right.
And say, Hey, where doyou think I am on this?
Or I need to pivot because you might justneed a new set of skills to carry out a
different part, a different experiment.
Margare (23:03):
I think it's definitely very important because applying
for the K99, you really are.
I mean, the whole grant is kind of likea gap analysis in a way, because you're,
you're saying, you know, I'm here, I'ma mid or senior post-doc and you know,
I want to be at the stage where I wantto be an independent investigator and
what do I need to do to, to get there.
Marguerite Mat (23:21):
And Mark, do you have anything else to add in terms
of how you see the nest, the needfor finding these areas for growth?
What, what was your approach?
Was it trial and error?
Did you, did you figure this out asyou went along or was it something that
you yourself experienced as a trainee?
Mark (23:38):
You know, I think my take on this as far as gap analysis and
actually even related to the otherquestions is to be an effective mentor.
You have to kind of know your menteeand you have to care about them.
And I think that those are kindof the first two principles.
And so I tried my best and it getsharder as the lab grows in size
(23:59):
to get to know them as people tounderstand their kind of working
style, the way they think about things.
And it's because some peoplerespond better to certain approaches
and some people do better withother kinds of strategies.
So I think, I think that's really theheart of it is to get to know the the
mentee and then care about their success.
And then I think everythingkind of flows from that.
(24:20):
I mean, then it becomes thedetails of, okay, we need to
remember to sit down periodically.
I usually call them sort oflike what Margaret mentioned it.
I just sort of call them the sit-downs.
And I say at the beginning of thosemeetings that we're not going to
talk about your work or your science,but we're going to talk about your
career trajectory, your goals.
And I think NIH has all these thingslike IPP plans and things like that,
which I was kind of, I've kind of beendoing this before all these acronyms
(24:42):
and abbreviations came up, but it'sall really the same idea, which is just
meet and talk about their goals andplans and then sort of like, and get to
know them and really talk about that.
I think that that, that makes fora more effective mentor, mentee
relationship and open communicationand that, which I think helps.
So I guess that's kind of how Iwould respond to how I sort of look
at addressing these kinds of things.
Marguerite Matthews (25:03):
I love that
Jarek Arono (25:04):
One element that in my opinion, is tremendously important
in the training is interactingwith the other graduate students.
I think that very often we are beingtreated as someone who they have a little
bit of a distance door and thereforeprobably facilitating their ability
to interact with different places whobasically are aligned with their interests
(25:30):
or aligned with their projects andallowing them to learn new techniques or
new concepts is tremendously important.
Obviously all of that has to be undercontrol of the mentor, but I believe
that a lot of energy in graduatestudents, as well as the postdocs
comes from their ability to interactwith the right group of colleagues.
Lauren (25:54):
I don't think we really have touched on this yet, but, um, one of
the things that we recommend, includingin the mentor statement and sort of in
your role in general are milestones.
And so once you've established yourgoals, you need to find ways of measuring
whether you're meeting those goals or not.
So how did you approach establishingyour milestones and formulating them?
(26:14):
Did you feel like this was a relativelystraightforward and easy task, or was
it something that you struggled with?
Ale (26:20):
So I think something that's really good about their graduate school is
that we actually have a list of the cookiecutter milestones that we have to meet.
And we have to meet with our mentorseach year and get the signs and go over
it and having that cookie cutter typething, I was able to put in what I wanted
to do with each year to help me setthe goals that I wanted to, to reach.
(26:44):
Um, and so I think that was really helpfulwhen it came to just science in general.
Um, another thing that our graduateschool also incorporates is the individual
development plan or the IDP, and beingable to do that and also have those
milestones a little bit more objectively,I would say, um, is also nice.
Cause then you just kind of getthese reminders like, Hey, you
(27:06):
said you were going to do this.
And so that helps keep you accountable,but then it also helps you realize
like, okay, maybe I didn't hit thismilestone because of X, Y, Z. So
this is how we're gonna change theplan, or this is how we're going
to, you know, circumnavigate this.
And I think that's always important withscience is just being able to be flexible.
You can have everything perfectly writtenout and in some parallel universe it's
(27:28):
going to work, but we're here on thisearth and that's not always how it works.
And so, um, I think it's nice if youmay not maybe, you know, your graduate
school doesn't provide something likethat, but I think it's so easy if you
look at whatever's required of you.
Um, and then just set that to atimeline was always important.
And so that just keeps everybodyaccountable in the longterm.
Monique Mende (27:50):
So I think what I did in terms of making sure I was
on top of my milestones was that Iactually pointed out my training plan
that I sent into the NIH for my F 99.
And I expanded on that and I wouldcheck that like periodically, and that
was my internal like check to make surethat I was meeting all the goals that I
(28:13):
wanted to, in terms of my professionaldevelopment, the conferences I'd like
to go to the papers and the reviewsI'd like to send out for that year.
And I would also bring up any of thethings that I was having trouble getting
to that goal to Ania making sure like wewere both on the same page, but one of
(28:34):
the really nice things that I appreciatedtoo, was my committee meetings.
I feel like those were really a good placeto really put things into perspective
and having like a number of like expertsessentially in like your project and
Ania there was really helpful to giveyou an idea of you telling them, okay,
(28:55):
these are the goals I'd like to set.
And then kind of bringingyou back a little bit.
Making sure, you are actuallylike thinking about everything and
all the work that you have to do.
So that was really, really helpful for meto remain accountable and also to achieve
the goals that I set out for that year.
Marguerite Matthew (29:17):
I think it's great that they allowed you the
space to kind of just dream big and,you know, you can scale it back in
terms of what goes on paper, right?
Like what's actually submitted and even,you know, kind of keeping you on track.
Like, well, maybe that's a littleambitious in that sense, but not
telling you, you have to thinkrealistically about this, right?
Like it's a nice have, uh, a reallylarge scope, you know, you shoot for
(29:38):
the moon and then you sort of like,say, okay, well you start over here
is like a good place to, to actuallytarget for a takeoff, so to speak.
Ania Ma (29:48):
But I think it's really important when you do come up with
your milestones to, um, to think,realistically, I think that's something
that I see in study section all thetime is you want to strike this really
delicate balance between being ambitiousand doing lots of things that will
provide you with fantastic training.
And this is true for the training plan.
It's also true for thescientific plan as well.
(30:10):
So you want to do cool things and youwant to do a lot of things that will help
you in the future, but you don't wantto do so or propose so much that it's
actually taking away from your trainingand keeping you from publishing your
papers and getting your experiments done.
So there's a very, there'sa very tight balance.
And I think that's something whenyou're looking at your milestones,
you have to sort of get outside fromyourself and say, this is great,
(30:35):
but which are the most importantones what's going to be realistic.
What's going to be critical to mydevelopment rather than just sort of
more stuff that would be fun to do.
Margaret (30:45):
It's, it's interesting to hear how do you actually go about
achieving and making, making yourselfaccountable to all these milestones
because in the postdoc, it's not asstructured as the graduate program where
it's very clear, you're going to have atleast yearly committee meetings, you're
going to be accountable to having a lotof opportunities to present your science.
So I think with the postdoc, you have tobe a lot more intentional and actually
(31:06):
outline your specific plan for, you know,what conferences do you want to go to?
Where do you actuallyintend to present your work?
When are you going to meet withyour mentors, not only your
primary mentor, but also all yourco mentors and your advisors.
So I think, um, it's pretty importantto actually write that in the grant.
Like certain ones I will meet withthem every six months or if some
of them I meet with them monthly.
(31:26):
Yeah.
So being very specific about thosethings and finding the opportunities
that may be less intuitive like attendingand participating in the lab meetings
of your comentor or things like that.
I think having that constant feedbackon your science from a variety of
different places is going to behelpful to make sure that you are
progressing in a way that's efficient.
Marguerite Matthews (31:49):
I think that's a great point, especially
to your point about postdocs.
You're almost like the stepchildrenthat kind of get forgotten.
You don't really have any structure it'sreally kind of throwing you into the
fire and allowing you to really takecharge of how you want to be trained and
being able to communicate that with theperson you're training under and perhaps
other people at the university or inyour, in your department that, that are
(32:13):
going to help you achieve those goalsso that you can move into independence.
Margaret Ho (32:19):
Yeah.
It's hard when you don't havea set timeline, but you have to
kind of make it for yourself.
Alexis Mobley (32:24):
Yeah.
I'm, I'm actually like in the beginningstages of my post-doc month two.
So I know Margaret has more experience,but one piece of advice I got from
a postdoc, a senior postdoc wasthat very similar to what Margaret
said is you have to be deliberate.
You have to seek out, um, these meetingsand making sure you're presenting your
(32:44):
research and just checking on yourselfessentially to making sure you're
meeting those milestones over time.
Marguerite Matth (32:53):
So how did you all make sure that the mentor sponsor
statement is integrated with, um, andcompliments the rest of the grant and
that it all felt like one cohesiveapplication, especially since you, uh,
since the trainees are expected to writethe majority of this, how do you make
sure that it all looks like the showsthat you have really been thoughtful
(33:16):
about your research proposal, but alsoyour training plan and your mentor is
also thinking about all of these things.
Margaret Ho (33:23):
What I remember is that in terms of the order of
writing the grants, the writing, thementor statement was actually came
like on the later side of things.
So, I mean, we had conversations obviouslyabout the mentor statement before, but
it's really, after you have written yourresearch plan and after you've written
your training plan, that the mentor planactually comes in to it later, where it's
(33:44):
outlining, what's the mentor's role insupporting and assuring that the other
stuff happens if you do, after you'vewritten the training plan and have
decided on the training plan and theresearch plan, then the mentor statement
kind of just comes and surrounds it.
Ania Majewska (33:58):
I have a slightly different take on that.
I do agree that there has to bea last pass to make sure it's
integrated with the rest of the grant.
But I do think that basically givingyourself lots of time and that's not
something Monique and I did causewe, we submitted her grant very
quickly, but it really helps to giveyourself lots of time to revise.
(34:18):
And I think the sponsor statement shouldbe revised at the very last pass as well.
And I think that I found with otherstudents that their scientific plan,
when we write it might go in a slightlydifferent direction than we expected if it
wasn't quite as worked out ahead of time.
And then you have to add elementsthat that will provide the
training for that scientific plan.
(34:40):
So I think, you know, having everythingset and buttoned up and then giving
yourself a couple of weeks to gothrough it and make sure they all
the elements align and they're allin place is a, is the way to go.
I think few of us write grantsthat way, but that I think
would certainly help a lot.
Moniqu (34:57):
So I remember when I was writing through this grant, I felt like
I was constantly repeating myself, butjust saying things slightly different.
So make it tailored to whateverdocument I was writing.
I felt like it was a massive echochamber, but I think that's also important
because I know this was my first timeever writing a grant and everything
(35:20):
in the grad school had said, Oh, youknow, it's just a seven page document.
You have your specific aims and your sixpage research, you know, training plan.
I was like, Oh, that's great.
But then when you sit down andlook at it, it ends up easily, a
70 page document that has to gothrough so many different people.
And so having to keeptrack of all of that.
But I think even when I may not haveseen something for a long time, I knew
(35:44):
my story was cohesive because even ifI picked it back up, I was still able
to say, Oh, this was this portion.
And it still matches what I'm doing here.
So even though it mayseem very, very redundant.
I think if you have that echo chamber inyour head, it will continue to shine well
with your other documents, because thenyou know, that your story is cohesive
(36:08):
because you are saying the same thing.
Um, and so if there's any discrepancies,then you're able to kind of cross
check all of your documents andknow, Oh, well I missed this
portion or this part is lacking.
I mean, I think that was really helpfulin the end, just knowing that I had this
redundancy, but also was able to make thatsection shine really helped with writing
(36:30):
and making sure my story was consistent.
Margaret Ho (36:34):
Yeah.
Doing that last check of seeingit was a very recursive document
referring to itself over and over.
But just doing that last pass whereyou check that everything's internally
consistent is really important because thereviewers will notice if it, if it isn't.
Marguerite Matthews (36:48):
Oh yeah.
Lauren Ullrich (36:49):
Yes, they will.
Jarek Aronowsk (36:51):
One thing that I would probably like to chime in is
that, uh, obviously it depends on thestage, but probably every single stage.
And very often it applies even toourself is to understand the big
picture and actually simplify it.
So very often graduate students arejust simply chopped that they know a
little bit here, a little bit there.
(37:12):
And, and the time when it comesto writing your grants, you need
to basically see where it belongs.
And so you can actually present it asa piece that is missing and it, that
you do understand where it belongs.
So I think that being able to explainand allow the students and post-docs to
(37:34):
simply where they are when it comes toa, the grant moving, in the big picture
is very important, then go to details.
I also believe that obviouslywe all know that there is
something like grantsmanship.
So we all know that there has to be somesort of a elements of novelty and novelty
to just simply realize may come from thescientific point of view, but also kind
(37:58):
of come from the technical point of view.
And actually both are very important.
So if you a using this advancein the very novel project, what
sort of tools are you using?
I mean, you may have a choice touse this or the other technique.
And so often using technique obviouslyuses the past, but also at the same time,
trying to maybe go ahead and propose thetechniques that are being challenging
(38:24):
and recognize that new and more assuring.
So the component of novelty, I thinkis very important, especially for
projects for postdocs and graduates.
Lauren Ullric (38:37):
Yeah great point.
Marguerite Matthews (38:41):
All right.
Well, thank you all for sharing yourwisdom with us and our audience today.
Can I ask each of you for one lastpiece of parting advice for future
applicants and for the mentors who will beassisting in some of these applications?
Monique Me (39:00):
I think it's already been stated, but be honest with
yourself and be honest with your mentor.
Um, it may seem scary.
I know graduate students are still kind oflearning their place in the hierarchy if
you will, but the grant is really the timeto kind of establish that and establish
who you are on a national platform.
And so even though you may not fully knowthat it's a great time, you know, I felt
(39:24):
a lot closer to my mentors just becausewe went through this grant writing process
and being able to really map out myfuture and put it in writing, um, and get
that recognition for better, for worse.
You know, once you get your scores,it's all up in the air, but I mean,
it's, it's a really cool process.
It's stressful, but when you get throughit, then I feel like, you know, so much
(39:46):
more about yourself and your science.
So even though it may be daunting, justdo it and learn to use your words and your
platforms and your conversations to shapewhat you want out of your not only grant,
but like what you want out of your degree.
Alexis (40:03):
I'll follow up on that.
I would say one piece of advicewould be to communicate with your
mentor, communicate early, make surethat you both are on the same page.
And I would say, yeah, that's likethe biggest thing I would say that
really helped, um, us write the F99K00 and also a really important thing
(40:27):
is to set milestones and realisticgoals for yourself that, you know,
you can accomplish during this period.
And one thing that Ania and some othermentors mentioned it's that the research
is a big portion of the grant, butcreating a balanced, like approach to your
grant, including professional development,writing papers and so on is also important
(40:51):
aspects of your training on your career.
And yeah, that's all I have.
Ania Majewska (40:57):
I can go, I guess I have two pieces of advice.
One just from serving on these studysections for the last few years, I will
say that the standards keep changing.
I think that applicants, bothsponsors and mentees are getting
more and more sophisticated aboutthe kinds of grants they put in.
So if you're going to look at successfulexamples when you're looking at
(41:18):
something from five years ago, thatmight no longer be a successful grant.
So look at things that are more recentand for applicants, it is, it is brutal.
There are so many talented,talented applicants like you.
And if that's a that's great news forscience, it's fantastic, but it is really
(41:39):
tough to get funded and don't give up.
I have had some fantastic studentsin my own lab who have had to
put in their grants two or threetimes before they were successful.
And, um, they are now, you know, verysuccessful scientists in their own rights.
So don't, don't get too disappointedwhen you don't get funded.
(41:59):
Just try again.
Marga (42:02):
Uh, I'll add, um, I mean, you guys gave me great advice already,
but I'd also add that, you know, startingearly and getting comfortable with having
a lot of revisions and not being toowedded to all the specific components
in your grants is maybe one lessonthat I learned throughout this process.
So, you know, as you're writing thegrant, you might be, you might love
(42:24):
like a specific aim, but actually ifyou just, if you just show your grant
to a lot of different people, you'llget a lot of great comments and also
try to send your, give your grant to,to other people, to read people who are
not necessarily in your direct field.
Maybe other people who are say likealso neuroscientists, but aren't
specifically working in your model systemor working on your specific concept.
(42:45):
I think that's very helpful.
I definitely use the, we have aninternal, I guess, internal review panel
at Hopkins that my grant went through.
And that was very helpful becauseyou definitely get comments from
people who are not so intimatelyfamiliar with your specific topic.
Um, that's that reflects more thetype of people who are going to review
your grant, not just you and youradvisor and your little echo chamber.
Jarek Aronowski (43:08):
I think it's a really great idea to start
from this specific aim page.
And there were even some studiesdone by NIH when they have this
trigger grounds versus the specificaims to some group of specialists.
And default was actually theidentical that the same grants
(43:29):
almost been supported based on thespecific aims versus the whole grant.
So by basically reviewing grants forpast 20 years, I can tell you that
the climate that you will produce byreading specific aim page is going
to last for all the remaining pages.
So either the impression of thegrant from the very beginning
(43:52):
is positive and you learn a lot.
It is so much easier to besupportive for the remaining pages.
So I think that that's alsohelps to clarify your ideas and
to prioritize your experiments.
And then if you do have the specificaim idea and then select the experiments
(44:16):
and, and provide the background forus so much easier to keep up with a
remaining portion of the grant and theright that then the more faster and
concise and clear way and there is lessdistraction because you already have some
template of what you want to achieve.
So the remaining seven pagesor six pages, you have to
(44:37):
write are much simpler for you.
Lauren Ullrich (44:42):
Certainly if you have a good framework and a good
first impression, it certainlymakes things a lot easier.
I was, uh, just gonna address,I guess, what is our advice for mentees
who are having challenges talking about,you know, some of these issues or training
plans or things with their mentor.
So at Hopkins, I also serve on thepost-doctoral fellow advisory board
(45:05):
where we deal with the trainingand the welfare of all postdocs
across the school of medicine.
And so this issue comes up sometimeswhen, for example, uh, trainees or
mentees that have decided that they wantto pursue a diverse career path and not
necessarily an academic scientific path.
And sometimes, unfortunatelythe mentors are not supportive.
(45:27):
And so my advice in those situationsis basically the trainees should not
be afraid to have direct and opencommunications with their mentor at early
stages, even when you're rotating really.
If, for example, if there's a graduatestudent who is not sure that they want
to do academics and is interested indifferent paths that you talk to your
mentor and just be direct about it, oryou could directly ask the mentor, how
(45:50):
will you support me if we do write a Kgrant or something like that together.
And, and then if it turns out that youguys that the mentee and mentor have
sort of different goals and differentpaths, then maybe it's not the best
fit, you know, and that's better alwaysbetter to figure out early than later.
Marguerite Matthews (46:06):
Lauren, do you have any advice for audience?
Lauren Ullr (46:11):
I'll just reiterate something we talked about earlier, which
is that this plan that you put in yourapplication doesn't have to include
every single thing that you're doing.
You can do more thanwhat you put in there.
So you really want to think about likepresenting the reviewers with a very
nice, well thought out, easy to read,easy to understand justified story.
(46:39):
And it's okay if you're planningon doing other things that you
don't include in there because theyreviewers might think that they were
a distraction or over ambitious.
So just, um, definitely takeMargaret's advice and give it to
lots of people to read and, and taketheir feedback seriously and, and
make sure that your grant is justwrapped up with a nice little bow.
(46:59):
And Marguerite what about you?
Marguerite Matth (47:02):
Yeah, I'd like to also amplify what has been said
previously about the relationshipbetween mentor and mentee.
It's an opportunity to, to reallyget a chance to show your interest,
but also where you think youneed to improve and where your
mentor thinks you need to improve.
I think that's something we do naturally.
(47:25):
You just want to hit the ground running.
And as a PhD student, Ithink many of us can relate.
We're so ambitious and we want to doit on our own and show how, how great
we are and thinking about a weaknessas something that has to be a negative,
but really it's just an opportunityto grow and mature as a scientist.
And that shouldn't happenin isolation, right?
(47:45):
This should be something that you areconstantly working on with your mentor.
And I think putting together theapplication and particularly the mentor
statement, it gives you an opportunity tobe very frank about what the expectations
are, what the desire is to move forward.
And it should be something that ifyou aren't able to have that sort of
(48:06):
conversation, that it may be a signto find another training opportunity.
And sometimes that doesn't, it doesn'tsound like a great thing, but I
think to Mark's point earlier, it maybe something that has to happen in
order for you to be able to have thebest training experience possible.
Um, and I think that's one of the greatthings about many of these training
(48:27):
opportunities is that you're sortof forced to now think about these
things that maybe you can easily justsweep under the rug, because you're
just going through the motions,going through your program as normal.
Um, and this really brings to lightyour own interests and how those
aligned with that of the mentor.
So,
Laur (48:45):
Good point [music playing] So that's all we have time for
today on Building Up the Nerve.
So thank you to our guests this week forsharing our expertise and thank you to
NINDS program director, Dr. Bob Riddlefor composing our theme song and music.
We'll see you next time.
(49:05):
When we talk, letters ofrecommendation and letters of support.
Marguerite Matthews (49:09):
And you can find past episodes of this podcast
and many more grant applicationresources on the web at NINDS.NIH.gov.
Email us your questions atNINDSnervepod@nih.gov and make sure
you subscribe to the podcast on Applepodcasts or your favorite podcast
app so you don't miss an episode.
(49:30):
We'll see you next time.
Welcome to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and
Stroke's Building Up the Nerve, a podcastfor neuroscience trainees that takes
you through the components of a grantapplication with successful awardees.
We know that applying for NIH fundingcan be daunting, but we're here to help.
It's our job.
Marguerite Matthews (00:22):
Hello, I'm Marguerite Matthews, a scientific
program manager, at NINDS.
Lauren Ullrich (00:27):
And I'm Lauren Ullrich a program director at NINIDS.
And we're your host today
Marguerite Matthews (00:32):
in today's episode, we'll focus on the mentor
and sponsor statement section.
We have a slightly different formattoday, as we have invited mentor
and mentee pairs to talk about theirprocess, we will discuss how they ensured
that the training plan reflected theindividual needs of the trainee, and
that the mentor was able to providethe appropriate support and expertise
(00:52):
to achieve these trainings goals.
Lauren Ullri (00:55):
And as always, our disclaimer still applies everything we
talk about may only be relevant for NINDS.
So if you're applying to a different NIHInstitute or center, it's always best
to check with them about their policies.
Marguerite M (01:12):
And for our guests today, we have Alexis Mobley and her
mentor Jarek Aronowski, Monique Mendes,and her mentor, Ania Majewska and
Margaret Ho and her mentor, Mark Wu.
So let's get started withintroductions, Alexis you're up.
Alexis Mobley (01:30):
Awesome.
So my current institution is theUniversity of Texas MD Anderson
Cancer Center, UT Health GraduateSchool of Biomedical Sciences.
What I focus on and the lab is lookingat the communication between ILC2s and
microglia and the aged brain between malesand females, and trying to understand
(01:54):
what ways that ILC twos either maintainor downregulate their cytokine signaling
to microglia and how microglia respond.
I'm using mouse models so far,I've gotten the supplement.
I'm working with Dr. Aronowski,and I've also been awarded an F 31.
That'll start in January.
Oh, and my career stage, I'm sorry.
(02:15):
I'm a fifth year PhD student and aneuroinflammation at the graduate school.
One of my hobbies and passionsoutside of work is just being in the
community, um, in different facets.
So I'm currently singing with thechoir, international voices, Houston,
which right now we're doing a bunch ofvirtual programming, but I'm also one
of the co-founders of Black in Immuno,So I've been using that stage and
(02:37):
platform to help advocate and celebrateand support black voices in immunology.
Marguerite M (02:42):
That's so awesome.
Black in Immuno has beensuch a delight to just watch.
I don't know anything about immunology,but I very much enjoy seeing you all
just be so wonderful and share yourscience along with many of the other
black in STEM groups that are popping up.
It's awesome.
So congratulations forbeing a part of that.
Alexis Moble (03:01):
Thank you so much.
Yeah.
We have a lot of fun and we have a lot offun with the other black groups as well.
So it's nice getting tokind of have a party.
I call it a, an extended familyreunion for all of us, just to
be able to celebrate each other.
Jarek A (03:15):
Hi, i'm Jarek Aronowski I am a professor and the vice chair of
neurology at university of Texas healthscience center, McGovern medical school.
I am here for past 35 years.
So it is a quiet quite awhile.
I have a long experience of ainteracting with students from graduate
(03:36):
students to fellows over the years.
And I have a super pleasure to have ainteracting with Alexis, probably one
of the smartest students we have here.
She is fantastic.
And when it comes to my past, Imean, I'm mainly interested in
the neurological supravasculardiseases, including ischemic stroke.
(03:59):
And intracellular hemorrhage and tryingto understand how actually those diseases
exist in the background of age, aswell as the other comorbidities, we
are trying to develop translationalapproaches to actually come up with
idea how to treat those diseases.
Uh, when it comes to my hobby,probably a sport jogging is something
(04:23):
that I can safely exercise thisday when the COVID is around.
Being sometimes lonely in thepark makes you feel fairly good.
Otherwise I love classical music and alot of other intellectual challenges.
Lauren Ull (04:38):
We definitely have a lot of runners and a lot of musically
inclined people on this podcast.
So I'm wondering if there areparticularly popular hobbies
among scientists for some reason.
Monique Mendes (04:50):
Hi everyone.
My name is Monique Mendes.
I am currently a postdoc in Dr. MarkSchnitzer's lab at Stanford university.
I applied and received the F99 K00 grant.
And I am a member of the second cohort.
I'm actually smiling from ear to earright now because you don't usually
(05:11):
run into like other neuro monologiststhat study microglia and hearing
like Alexis talk about microglia,I was like, yay, go microglia.
In Dr. Ania Majewska's lab atthe university of Rochester,
where I did my F99 work.
I focused on understanding andlearning about microglia ontogeny,
(05:35):
how microglia are born and how theymature in the adult mouse brain.
And we use advanced imagingtechniques such as in vivo to photon
microscopy, to really track thesemicroglia and understand how they
are interacting with other cells, howthey are maturing in the adult brain.
And my work in Dr. Mark Schnitzer'slab at Stanford is now focused on
(05:59):
another type of glial cells known asastrocytes and how they participate in
hippocampal network function and behavior.
And in terms of a hobby kind ofgoing with the theme as well.
I love classical music.
I play violin.
I love music.
And most recently I've picked up alittle bit of tennis since the weather
is really beautiful here in California.
(06:21):
So yeah, I'm really excited to be here.
Thank you.
Marguerite (06:25):
I play string bass.
So I feel like we're going to need to gettogether to have a little string quartet.
We got to find a fewother, a few other players.
Monique Mendes (06:33):
Yes, we have to
Ania Majewska (06:35):
Ania Majewska, I'm a professor at the, um,
university of Rochester andthe department of neuroscience.
I also direct our neurosciencegraduate program and my lab is
really interested in how, uh, thebrain changes with experience.
Uh, so mechanisms of plasticity, bothin health and disease and largely
focused on how different cell typesinteract lately, particularly how
(06:58):
microglia and neurons interact.
And, um, as for a hobby, I havethree boys between the ages of
five and 15, and they are my hobby.
There's pretty much nothing elsein my life except driving them
to all their various activitiesand having fun with them.
So
Lauren Ullrich (07:15):
To think like, especially in the pandemic, you
probably have your hands full.
Margaret Ho (07:18):
Hi everyone.
My name is Margaret Ho.
I'm currently a postdoc fellowat Johns Hopkins in Baltimore,
Maryland, and the school of medicineand I work with Dr. Mark Wu.
The grant that I applied forsuccessfully is the K 99 under the
brain initiative and my research aimsto study the functional and genetic
heterogeneity of astrocytes in the flybrain and their role in sleep behavior.
(07:41):
And so I'm really excited to actually,so many of us are studying glia.
That's a great cohort.
So astrocytes are representing a largeportion of cells in the brain, but they're
not as, um, studied as well as neurons.
People have shown that they'reimportant for formation and
modulation of neural circuits.
And there's lots of evidencethat they play roles in signaling
(08:01):
and behavior in the brain.
Um, and the goal of my research is tosystematically investigate genes related
to astrocyte heterogeneity and diversity,and to study the local astrocyte neuron
interactions, regulating sleep andarousal using imaging and behavior.
Um, and my plan is also to usethese experiments to generate
genetic tools that allow me to studyspecific astrocyte populations.
(08:25):
So this was my first applicationever for an NIH grant, and I've
helped former PIs write NIH grantsbefore, but this is my first time
as an applicant, but I have appliedfor other awards, like the NSF GFRP.
And one of my favorite things to dooutside of work is just go outside and
go running on trails and be in nature.
I love that.
Marguerite M (08:46):
Wow, we've got the neuro immuno crew and the running crew.
Lauren Ullrich (08:51):
I know it wasn't even on purpose.
I swear.
Uh alright Mark last but not least.
Mark Wu (08:57):
Hi everyone.
I'm Mark Wu I am a professorof neurology at Johns Hopkins.
So, uh,you know, my lab is interested
in studying the molecular andcircuit basis underlying sleep.
We use a fruit flies in miceto study these questions.
In addition to running a basic sciencelab, I'm also a practicing physician.
(09:18):
So I see patients in sleep medicineclinic on a weekly basis, ranging from
things like narcolepsy and hypersomniato restless leg syndrome to sleep apnea.
And I also attend on the neurologywards in the hospital two to
four weeks out of the year.
And so that was an interesting experiencethat summer when I attended and it was
during the pandemic and it was a verydifferent experience than normal in
(09:39):
terms of NIH awards that I've received.
I guess I've gotten awards throughoutmy, uh, sort of career trajectory.
When I was a graduate student, Ihad an F 31, and then when I was a
post-doctoral fellow with Amita Sehgal,I applied and obtained a K08 award.
And then as a PI, I havegotten multiple R01 awards.
Um, in terms of my hobbies orpassions, I think it's pretty
(10:03):
much in the same boat as Ania.
Uh, we have two small childrenwho are seven and four.
And so pretty much when I'm notdoing work or seeing patients, I'm
basically doing stuff for them.
For example, this fall.
Um, my daughter did soccer for thefirst time and I was the coach, although
I had never played soccer before.
So I had to, like, I had to buy likesoccer for dummies, read it and then learn
(10:23):
all the rules and then coach the kids.
So that took a while, butit was a fun experience.
And we did have a, likea seven and one record.
So I just wanted to point that out.
Lauren Ullrich (10:32):
Nice!
Mar (10:34):
It wasn't due the coaching.
We just had some excellent players.
Oh, that's great.
So let's start big picture.
We were talking about thementor and sponsor statement.
What are we trying to achieve withthis statement with what is its purpose
within the larger context of the grant?
Alexis (10:56):
So I think when it came to my mentor and sponsorship statement,
it was really important for me tohighlight that not only was I doing
the work, but in cases where I maynot be prepared to do the work, how
my mentors and sponsors were going tohelp me bridge the gap between point
(11:16):
a and point B, but not only that withscience, how they were going to support
me academically career wise and make mea whole well-rounded scientist overall.
And so I really try to focus on whatthings did I need to be a scientist
and what I felt like I needed, howmy mentors were going to be able to
(11:37):
supplement that, but then also makingsure that my mentor saw any holes in my
training, which sounds a little rough,but, you know, we, hindsight's always
20/20 And as Dr. Aronowski mentioned,I mean, he has 35 years of experience.
And so he's able to see where I'mat as a young developing scientist
(11:58):
and get me to where I need to beand where I want to be long-term.
Mar (12:03):
So I was just going to say, yeah, from the mentor perspective about
the mentor statement, what I try to dois really personalize it to highlight
the particular strengths of that person,because every, uh, you know, every person
has special strengths and special skills.
And, and so I try to really tailorit to their particular situation.
(12:24):
I'd like to try to tell the story alsoof the narrative of their training and
how they got to where they want it to be.
And I want to also emphasizethe, the commitment and the
passion they have for science.
And then I agree that it's also importantto talk about how we will, as mentors
provide the training and the backgroundto kind of get to where they need to go
(12:47):
to highlight those areas where they candevelop and then how we can provide that
with very specific and detailed points.
I think that's an important point tomake, which is that when you write
these things both as the mentorand the mentee, you want to be
specific, you want to provide details.
You don't want to just say,Oh, so-and-so loves science.
You want to show how they lovescience, which is kind of a common
(13:10):
point about good writing, which isthat you want to show and not say.
Um, but yeah, I think those are some ofthe basic things I would kind of comment
on in terms of the mentor statement.
Jarek Aronows (13:20):
So if I could add anything, I had a, actually the
opportunity to sit on the F31 studysections for approximately seven years.
So reviewing applicantsthat are similar to Alexis.
And one thing that actually transpiredfrom that is that all of those
kids are just incredibly smart.
(13:42):
And right now, in order to makesomeone who you try to promote , the
fuel has to be presented assomewhat better and or different.
Otherwise it's very difficult forsomebody to differentiate them
during the review process and whenit comes to the scientific point,
I mean, obviously project has to bevery interesting and I believe that
(14:06):
the grant should be written well.
However, it very often helps when yousee in the ground that basically it
is being done by the students, by theapplicants, not necessarily by the mentor,
otherwise personalize as you have heard.
Generic statements are very boringand not necessarily very convincing.
Marguerite Matth (14:28):
I think that's a great point to bring up about
not having generic statements, butI think that can be hard, right?
When so many graduate students arehaving a very similar experience
in terms of expectations set bythe graduate program, expectations
about rigor and reproducibility.
If you all would talk about how youwork together, both the trainee and
(14:50):
the mentor to ensure that you'reon the same page and you're not
crafting a generic mentor statement.
Margar (14:58):
Yeah, I think in general it seems like the most effective mentor
statements are ones that really like echothe detailed plan that, that the applicant
themselves has has actually come up with.
So they shouldn't be echoing likethe detailed plan, the goals and the
steps that need to be taken for thetraining of the applicant and the
support that's needed to make it happen.
Yeah, it's very much nota generic boilerplate.
Ania Majewska (15:23):
But I will say that there are things that are
common to all graduate students.
Like you said, so starting off with ageneric statement where this, these are
the points that every graduate studentneeds to have in their experience.
We need to hit all ofthese different things.
Um, now how your path throughthem might be very different.
So I do think that sort of evaluatingstrengths and weaknesses and having a
(15:44):
plan for building on the strengths, notjust saying, "hey, you're really good
at that, so we're not going to focuson it" because you can always do more
with strengths and really develop them.
But then also addressing the weaknesseshead on and saying, you know, you
haven't had as much experience inthis, and this is an area of growth.
You don't have to have it be a weakness.
You can you can phraseit much nicer than that.
And, um, therefore focusing the planon different areas and supporting
(16:06):
some areas more than others.
But I think starting off with the genericplan is actually a great place to start
and then individualizing from there.
Alexis Mobley (16:15):
Yeah.
I think also as a graduate student,it's important to have these constant
conversations with your mentor.
And I think that's what made my mentorshipstatement easily personalizable.
That's not a word, but, you know, becauseI mean, even from the jump when I met with
Dr. Aronowski for my rotation, I mean thevery first conversation we had was what
(16:36):
do you want out of your graduate degree?
And I think having that idea from thebeginning really helped me set the stage
for anything in the future and let mehave my goals to completing my degree.
And so even if you may not knowuntil you're writing your grant of
like, Oh, what do I want from this?
It's still a journey of understanding whatyou're trying to get out of your training.
(17:00):
And if you still haven't had thatconversation with your mentor, it's
important to start them becauseit's, you can start setting goals
so that in the end you have reachedwhatever metric you want for yourself.
Because even though we have, you know,the cookie cutter qualifications for
any program, you still are able topersonalize it for your goals because
(17:22):
we aren't all going to end up in thesame areas and the same expertise.
So just understanding yourself and howyour mentors can get you to that endpoint.
Moni (17:31):
I'm actually like nodding.
So like vigorously over here to Alexis.
Like, I completely agreewith what she said.
I think early on, even before Aniaand I, about the F 99, we had these
conversations, like on your Ania,I wanted to apply for like an F
grant of some kind very early on.
(17:53):
She knew I wanted to pursue a post-doc inthe future when I was done with my PhD.
So having those conversations, makingsure we're on the same page, I think
that really helped us create the mentorsponsor statement, like very easily and
included a lot of the information ofwhere I see myself in like 10 years.
(18:14):
So I think one of the biggest things,and I will really echo what Alexa
said is having these conversationsreally early, making sure you have
this open communication with yourmentor so that they know, like, where
do you see yourself, what you'd liketo accomplish in your PhD and after.
Lauren Ullrich (18:30):
And so to that point of thinking about, you know,
building on my strengths and figuringout ways to mitigate any potential
weaknesses that might be there.
Uh, one of the things that we talkabout a lot in our offices, this is
quote unquote gap analysis approach.
So one of you that used this approachwant to explain what it is and you
(18:55):
might've used it without, withoutactually calling it that, but what it
is and why it's helpful as a framework.
Ania Majewska (19:03):
Sure.
I love gap analyses.
And I don't know that I usethem terribly formally, but I
think they're very, very useful.
The gap analysis is basically anevaluation of where you are right
now, a very frank evaluation of whatthings look like at the current time.
And then a very clear ideaof where you want to go.
So, as Monique said, what are you goals?
(19:24):
Where do you see yourself in afew years as you're finishing grad
school after grad school, what, whatdo you want to do in the future?
And then charting out a pathbetween where you are now and the
goals that you see for yourself.
And we've already touched on this,but as you go from where you are
now, you realize what things needto be done, what things are missing,
(19:46):
and you can chart a very specificplan for how to get to the future.
And I think that's, I think it needshonesty in both your view for the
future, both of your assessmentof where you are right now.
But I think that's where allthe power of it lies is where
you realize, well, I really willneed X and I just not there yet.
Um, and then you can write a veryspecific plan for what kind of
(20:08):
framing you need to get to your goal.
And I think those kinds ofspecifics and laid out goals,
milestones are really powerful.
And I think that's what really movesreviewers on these panels is if
you see that someone's thought itthrough very, very carefully and they
have a really good plan with very,very specific things and that will
(20:30):
get them to where they want to be.
And I think the other point Iwant to make about this is that
you are not beholden to the plan.
In fact, most of the reviewerswill not say, Oh my goodness.
You know, in your report a year out, she'sdoing something completely different.
This is not what we gave her money for.
People expect plans to change, butthey also want to see that you've
(20:50):
thought about things carefully,that you can make good plans.
And then if you haveto pivot, that's great.
So, you know, you don't have tofeel like you're really locking
yourself into something, but you'rejust showing that you're very
thoughtful about what you want.
Marguerite Matt (21:05):
And I think the thoughtfulness piece is what helps
separate a generic mentor statement andtraining plan from one that says, I know
that this person is going to do everythingelse these other graduate students are
doing in terms of expectations, butthis, this specific training needs these
things to strengthen their abilities,to become a stronger scientist.
So that's, uh, thoseare really great points.
(21:26):
Ania, thank you.
Lauren Ullrich (21:28):
Yeah.
And keeping your latter pointat that plans can change.
We did have an episode in seasonone where we talked about, you know,
where is the line between a naturalexpected change and a change that
might need a program director's inputit's um, if you have a substantial
change in your research direction islike, then you're going to want to
(21:51):
check in with your program officer.
But, but that happens too.
Sometimes people even change mentors.
And, and so if that's a situation thatany of our listeners find themselves
in, like, please go back to season one.
We did touch on that as well.
So thank you for bringingup both those points.
Ma (22:06):
So I think actually I didn't realize that we were doing a gap analysis,
but I think the way that Mark and whenwe have our meetings, it kind of ends
up being kind of like a gap analysis.
So, you know, we'll have some meetingsthat are very focused on data and
experiments of plans for those things.
But then we'll also have periodicallythese meetings where Mark will say,
these are some short-term goals, butthen like, what are your midterm goals?
(22:28):
And specifically, what doyou think you need to do?
Um, where do you actually needto put your effort to get there?
Um, so I think that's very, very helpfulto actually outline those specific steps.
So I didn't know that was doing gapanalysis, but when I looked up what
gap analysis was, I was like, yeah,that's actually what we've been doing.
Marguerite Matthews (22:45):
It doesn't matter what you call it, it's
that you're taking part in it.
And you're effectivelyevaluating yourself, allowing
others to evaluate you right.
And say, Hey, where doyou think I am on this?
Or I need to pivot because you might justneed a new set of skills to carry out a
different part, a different experiment.
Margare (23:03):
I think it's definitely very important because applying
for the K99, you really are.
I mean, the whole grant is kind of likea gap analysis in a way, because you're,
you're saying, you know, I'm here, I'ma mid or senior post-doc and you know,
I want to be at the stage where I wantto be an independent investigator and
what do I need to do to, to get there.
Marguerite Mat (23:21):
And Mark, do you have anything else to add in terms
of how you see the nest, the needfor finding these areas for growth?
What, what was your approach?
Was it trial and error?
Did you, did you figure this out asyou went along or was it something that
you yourself experienced as a trainee?
Mark (23:38):
You know, I think my take on this as far as gap analysis and
actually even related to the otherquestions is to be an effective mentor.
You have to kind of know your menteeand you have to care about them.
And I think that those are kindof the first two principles.
And so I tried my best and it getsharder as the lab grows in size
(23:59):
to get to know them as people tounderstand their kind of working
style, the way they think about things.
And it's because some peoplerespond better to certain approaches
and some people do better withother kinds of strategies.
So I think, I think that's really theheart of it is to get to know the the
mentee and then care about their success.
And then I think everythingkind of flows from that.
(24:20):
I mean, then it becomes thedetails of, okay, we need to
remember to sit down periodically.
I usually call them sort oflike what Margaret mentioned it.
I just sort of call them the sit-downs.
And I say at the beginning of thosemeetings that we're not going to
talk about your work or your science,but we're going to talk about your
career trajectory, your goals.
And I think NIH has all these thingslike IPP plans and things like that,
which I was kind of, I've kind of beendoing this before all these acronyms
(24:42):
and abbreviations came up, but it'sall really the same idea, which is just
meet and talk about their goals andplans and then sort of like, and get to
know them and really talk about that.
I think that that, that makes fora more effective mentor, mentee
relationship and open communicationand that, which I think helps.
So I guess that's kind of how Iwould respond to how I sort of look
at addressing these kinds of things.
Marguerite Matthews (25:03):
I love that
Jarek Arono (25:04):
One element that in my opinion, is tremendously important
in the training is interactingwith the other graduate students.
I think that very often we are beingtreated as someone who they have a little
bit of a distance door and thereforeprobably facilitating their ability
to interact with different places whobasically are aligned with their interests
(25:30):
or aligned with their projects andallowing them to learn new techniques or
new concepts is tremendously important.
Obviously all of that has to be undercontrol of the mentor, but I believe
that a lot of energy in graduatestudents, as well as the postdocs
comes from their ability to interactwith the right group of colleagues.
Lauren (25:54):
I don't think we really have touched on this yet, but, um, one of
the things that we recommend, includingin the mentor statement and sort of in
your role in general are milestones.
And so once you've established yourgoals, you need to find ways of measuring
whether you're meeting those goals or not.
So how did you approach establishingyour milestones and formulating them?
(26:14):
Did you feel like this was a relativelystraightforward and easy task, or was
it something that you struggled with?
Ale (26:20):
So I think something that's really good about their graduate school is
that we actually have a list of the cookiecutter milestones that we have to meet.
And we have to meet with our mentorseach year and get the signs and go over
it and having that cookie cutter typething, I was able to put in what I wanted
to do with each year to help me setthe goals that I wanted to, to reach.
(26:44):
Um, and so I think that was really helpfulwhen it came to just science in general.
Um, another thing that our graduateschool also incorporates is the individual
development plan or the IDP, and beingable to do that and also have those
milestones a little bit more objectively,I would say, um, is also nice.
Cause then you just kind of getthese reminders like, Hey, you
(27:06):
said you were going to do this.
And so that helps keep you accountable,but then it also helps you realize
like, okay, maybe I didn't hit thismilestone because of X, Y, Z. So
this is how we're gonna change theplan, or this is how we're going
to, you know, circumnavigate this.
And I think that's always important withscience is just being able to be flexible.
You can have everything perfectly writtenout and in some parallel universe it's
(27:28):
going to work, but we're here on thisearth and that's not always how it works.
And so, um, I think it's nice if youmay not maybe, you know, your graduate
school doesn't provide something likethat, but I think it's so easy if you
look at whatever's required of you.
Um, and then just set that to atimeline was always important.
And so that just keeps everybodyaccountable in the longterm.
Monique Mende (27:50):
So I think what I did in terms of making sure I was
on top of my milestones was that Iactually pointed out my training plan
that I sent into the NIH for my F 99.
And I expanded on that and I wouldcheck that like periodically, and that
was my internal like check to make surethat I was meeting all the goals that I
(28:13):
wanted to, in terms of my professionaldevelopment, the conferences I'd like
to go to the papers and the reviewsI'd like to send out for that year.
And I would also bring up any of thethings that I was having trouble getting
to that goal to Ania making sure like wewere both on the same page, but one of
(28:34):
the really nice things that I appreciatedtoo, was my committee meetings.
I feel like those were really a good placeto really put things into perspective
and having like a number of like expertsessentially in like your project and
Ania there was really helpful to giveyou an idea of you telling them, okay,
(28:55):
these are the goals I'd like to set.
And then kind of bringingyou back a little bit.
Making sure, you are actuallylike thinking about everything and
all the work that you have to do.
So that was really, really helpful for meto remain accountable and also to achieve
the goals that I set out for that year.
Marguerite Matthew (29:17):
I think it's great that they allowed you the
space to kind of just dream big and,you know, you can scale it back in
terms of what goes on paper, right?
Like what's actually submitted and even,you know, kind of keeping you on track.
Like, well, maybe that's a littleambitious in that sense, but not
telling you, you have to thinkrealistically about this, right?
Like it's a nice have, uh, a reallylarge scope, you know, you shoot for
(29:38):
the moon and then you sort of like,say, okay, well you start over here
is like a good place to, to actuallytarget for a takeoff, so to speak.
Ania Ma (29:48):
But I think it's really important when you do come up with
your milestones to, um, to think,realistically, I think that's something
that I see in study section all thetime is you want to strike this really
delicate balance between being ambitiousand doing lots of things that will
provide you with fantastic training.
And this is true for the training plan.
It's also true for thescientific plan as well.
(30:10):
So you want to do cool things and youwant to do a lot of things that will help
you in the future, but you don't wantto do so or propose so much that it's
actually taking away from your trainingand keeping you from publishing your
papers and getting your experiments done.
So there's a very, there'sa very tight balance.
And I think that's something whenyou're looking at your milestones,
you have to sort of get outside fromyourself and say, this is great,
(30:35):
but which are the most importantones what's going to be realistic.
What's going to be critical to mydevelopment rather than just sort of
more stuff that would be fun to do.
Margaret (30:45):
It's, it's interesting to hear how do you actually go about
achieving and making, making yourselfaccountable to all these milestones
because in the postdoc, it's not asstructured as the graduate program where
it's very clear, you're going to have atleast yearly committee meetings, you're
going to be accountable to having a lotof opportunities to present your science.
So I think with the postdoc, you have tobe a lot more intentional and actually
(31:06):
outline your specific plan for, you know,what conferences do you want to go to?
Where do you actuallyintend to present your work?
When are you going to meet withyour mentors, not only your
primary mentor, but also all yourco mentors and your advisors.
So I think, um, it's pretty importantto actually write that in the grant.
Like certain ones I will meet withthem every six months or if some
of them I meet with them monthly.
(31:26):
Yeah.
So being very specific about thosethings and finding the opportunities
that may be less intuitive like attendingand participating in the lab meetings
of your comentor or things like that.
I think having that constant feedbackon your science from a variety of
different places is going to behelpful to make sure that you are
progressing in a way that's efficient.
Marguerite Matthews (31:49):
I think that's a great point, especially
to your point about postdocs.
You're almost like the stepchildrenthat kind of get forgotten.
You don't really have any structure it'sreally kind of throwing you into the
fire and allowing you to really takecharge of how you want to be trained and
being able to communicate that with theperson you're training under and perhaps
other people at the university or inyour, in your department that, that are
(32:13):
going to help you achieve those goalsso that you can move into independence.
Margaret Ho (32:19):
Yeah.
It's hard when you don't havea set timeline, but you have to
kind of make it for yourself.
Alexis Mobley (32:24):
Yeah.
I'm, I'm actually like in the beginningstages of my post-doc month two.
So I know Margaret has more experience,but one piece of advice I got from
a postdoc, a senior postdoc wasthat very similar to what Margaret
said is you have to be deliberate.
You have to seek out, um, these meetingsand making sure you're presenting your
(32:44):
research and just checking on yourselfessentially to making sure you're
meeting those milestones over time.
Marguerite Matth (32:53):
So how did you all make sure that the mentor sponsor
statement is integrated with, um, andcompliments the rest of the grant and
that it all felt like one cohesiveapplication, especially since you, uh,
since the trainees are expected to writethe majority of this, how do you make
sure that it all looks like the showsthat you have really been thoughtful
(33:16):
about your research proposal, but alsoyour training plan and your mentor is
also thinking about all of these things.
Margaret Ho (33:23):
What I remember is that in terms of the order of
writing the grants, the writing, thementor statement was actually came
like on the later side of things.
So, I mean, we had conversations obviouslyabout the mentor statement before, but
it's really, after you have written yourresearch plan and after you've written
your training plan, that the mentor planactually comes in to it later, where it's
(33:44):
outlining, what's the mentor's role insupporting and assuring that the other
stuff happens if you do, after you'vewritten the training plan and have
decided on the training plan and theresearch plan, then the mentor statement
kind of just comes and surrounds it.
Ania Majewska (33:58):
I have a slightly different take on that.
I do agree that there has to bea last pass to make sure it's
integrated with the rest of the grant.
But I do think that basically givingyourself lots of time and that's not
something Monique and I did causewe, we submitted her grant very
quickly, but it really helps to giveyourself lots of time to revise.
(34:18):
And I think the sponsor statement shouldbe revised at the very last pass as well.
And I think that I found with otherstudents that their scientific plan,
when we write it might go in a slightlydifferent direction than we expected if it
wasn't quite as worked out ahead of time.
And then you have to add elementsthat that will provide the
training for that scientific plan.
(34:40):
So I think, you know, having everythingset and buttoned up and then giving
yourself a couple of weeks to gothrough it and make sure they all
the elements align and they're allin place is a, is the way to go.
I think few of us write grantsthat way, but that I think
would certainly help a lot.
Moniqu (34:57):
So I remember when I was writing through this grant, I felt like
I was constantly repeating myself, butjust saying things slightly different.
So make it tailored to whateverdocument I was writing.
I felt like it was a massive echochamber, but I think that's also important
because I know this was my first timeever writing a grant and everything
(35:20):
in the grad school had said, Oh, youknow, it's just a seven page document.
You have your specific aims and your sixpage research, you know, training plan.
I was like, Oh, that's great.
But then when you sit down andlook at it, it ends up easily, a
70 page document that has to gothrough so many different people.
And so having to keeptrack of all of that.
But I think even when I may not haveseen something for a long time, I knew
(35:44):
my story was cohesive because even ifI picked it back up, I was still able
to say, Oh, this was this portion.
And it still matches what I'm doing here.
So even though it mayseem very, very redundant.
I think if you have that echo chamber inyour head, it will continue to shine well
with your other documents, because thenyou know, that your story is cohesive
(36:08):
because you are saying the same thing.
Um, and so if there's any discrepancies,then you're able to kind of cross
check all of your documents andknow, Oh, well I missed this
portion or this part is lacking.
I mean, I think that was really helpfulin the end, just knowing that I had this
redundancy, but also was able to make thatsection shine really helped with writing
(36:30):
and making sure my story was consistent.
Margaret Ho (36:34):
Yeah.
Doing that last check of seeingit was a very recursive document
referring to itself over and over.
But just doing that last pass whereyou check that everything's internally
consistent is really important because thereviewers will notice if it, if it isn't.
Marguerite Matthews (36:48):
Oh yeah.
Lauren Ullrich (36:49):
Yes, they will.
Jarek Aronowsk (36:51):
One thing that I would probably like to chime in is
that, uh, obviously it depends on thestage, but probably every single stage.
And very often it applies even toourself is to understand the big
picture and actually simplify it.
So very often graduate students arejust simply chopped that they know a
little bit here, a little bit there.
(37:12):
And, and the time when it comesto writing your grants, you need
to basically see where it belongs.
And so you can actually present it asa piece that is missing and it, that
you do understand where it belongs.
So I think that being able to explainand allow the students and post-docs to
(37:34):
simply where they are when it comes toa, the grant moving, in the big picture
is very important, then go to details.
I also believe that obviouslywe all know that there is
something like grantsmanship.
So we all know that there has to be somesort of a elements of novelty and novelty
to just simply realize may come from thescientific point of view, but also kind
(37:58):
of come from the technical point of view.
And actually both are very important.
So if you a using this advancein the very novel project, what
sort of tools are you using?
I mean, you may have a choice touse this or the other technique.
And so often using technique obviouslyuses the past, but also at the same time,
trying to maybe go ahead and propose thetechniques that are being challenging
(38:24):
and recognize that new and more assuring.
So the component of novelty, I thinkis very important, especially for
projects for postdocs and graduates.
Lauren Ullric (38:37):
Yeah great point.
Marguerite Matthews (38:41):
All right.
Well, thank you all for sharing yourwisdom with us and our audience today.
Can I ask each of you for one lastpiece of parting advice for future
applicants and for the mentors who will beassisting in some of these applications?
Monique Me (39:00):
I think it's already been stated, but be honest with
yourself and be honest with your mentor.
Um, it may seem scary.
I know graduate students are still kind oflearning their place in the hierarchy if
you will, but the grant is really the timeto kind of establish that and establish
who you are on a national platform.
And so even though you may not fully knowthat it's a great time, you know, I felt
(39:24):
a lot closer to my mentors just becausewe went through this grant writing process
and being able to really map out myfuture and put it in writing, um, and get
that recognition for better, for worse.
You know, once you get your scores,it's all up in the air, but I mean,
it's, it's a really cool process.
It's stressful, but when you get throughit, then I feel like, you know, so much
(39:46):
more about yourself and your science.
So even though it may be daunting, justdo it and learn to use your words and your
platforms and your conversations to shapewhat you want out of your not only grant,
but like what you want out of your degree.
Alexis (40:03):
I'll follow up on that.
I would say one piece of advicewould be to communicate with your
mentor, communicate early, make surethat you both are on the same page.
And I would say, yeah, that's likethe biggest thing I would say that
really helped, um, us write the F99K00 and also a really important thing
(40:27):
is to set milestones and realisticgoals for yourself that, you know,
you can accomplish during this period.
And one thing that Ania and some othermentors mentioned it's that the research
is a big portion of the grant, butcreating a balanced, like approach to your
grant, including professional development,writing papers and so on is also important
(40:51):
aspects of your training on your career.
And yeah, that's all I have.
Ania Majewska (40:57):
I can go, I guess I have two pieces of advice.
One just from serving on these studysections for the last few years, I will
say that the standards keep changing.
I think that applicants, bothsponsors and mentees are getting
more and more sophisticated aboutthe kinds of grants they put in.
So if you're going to look at successfulexamples when you're looking at
(41:18):
something from five years ago, thatmight no longer be a successful grant.
So look at things that are more recentand for applicants, it is, it is brutal.
There are so many talented,talented applicants like you.
And if that's a that's great news forscience, it's fantastic, but it is really
(41:39):
tough to get funded and don't give up.
I have had some fantastic studentsin my own lab who have had to
put in their grants two or threetimes before they were successful.
And, um, they are now, you know, verysuccessful scientists in their own rights.
So don't, don't get too disappointedwhen you don't get funded.
(41:59):
Just try again.
Marga (42:02):
Uh, I'll add, um, I mean, you guys gave me great advice already,
but I'd also add that, you know, startingearly and getting comfortable with having
a lot of revisions and not being toowedded to all the specific components
in your grants is maybe one lessonthat I learned throughout this process.
So, you know, as you're writing thegrant, you might be, you might love
(42:24):
like a specific aim, but actually ifyou just, if you just show your grant
to a lot of different people, you'llget a lot of great comments and also
try to send your, give your grant to,to other people, to read people who are
not necessarily in your direct field.
Maybe other people who are say likealso neuroscientists, but aren't
specifically working in your model systemor working on your specific concept.
(42:45):
I think that's very helpful.
I definitely use the, we have aninternal, I guess, internal review panel
at Hopkins that my grant went through.
And that was very helpful becauseyou definitely get comments from
people who are not so intimatelyfamiliar with your specific topic.
Um, that's that reflects more thetype of people who are going to review
your grant, not just you and youradvisor and your little echo chamber.
Jarek Aronowski (43:08):
I think it's a really great idea to start
from this specific aim page.
And there were even some studiesdone by NIH when they have this
trigger grounds versus the specificaims to some group of specialists.
And default was actually theidentical that the same grants
(43:29):
almost been supported based on thespecific aims versus the whole grant.
So by basically reviewing grants forpast 20 years, I can tell you that
the climate that you will produce byreading specific aim page is going
to last for all the remaining pages.
So either the impression of thegrant from the very beginning
(43:52):
is positive and you learn a lot.
It is so much easier to besupportive for the remaining pages.
So I think that that's alsohelps to clarify your ideas and
to prioritize your experiments.
And then if you do have the specificaim idea and then select the experiments
(44:16):
and, and provide the background forus so much easier to keep up with a
remaining portion of the grant and theright that then the more faster and
concise and clear way and there is lessdistraction because you already have some
template of what you want to achieve.
So the remaining seven pagesor six pages, you have to
(44:37):
write are much simpler for you.
Lauren Ullrich (44:42):
Certainly if you have a good framework and a good
first impression, it certainlymakes things a lot easier.
I was, uh, just gonna address,I guess, what is our advice for mentees
who are having challenges talking about,you know, some of these issues or training
plans or things with their mentor.
So at Hopkins, I also serve on thepost-doctoral fellow advisory board
(45:05):
where we deal with the trainingand the welfare of all postdocs
across the school of medicine.
And so this issue comes up sometimeswhen, for example, uh, trainees or
mentees that have decided that they wantto pursue a diverse career path and not
necessarily an academic scientific path.
And sometimes, unfortunatelythe mentors are not supportive.
(45:27):
And so my advice in those situationsis basically the trainees should not
be afraid to have direct and opencommunications with their mentor at early
stages, even when you're rotating really.
If, for example, if there's a graduatestudent who is not sure that they want
to do academics and is interested indifferent paths that you talk to your
mentor and just be direct about it, oryou could directly ask the mentor, how
(45:50):
will you support me if we do write a Kgrant or something like that together.
And, and then if it turns out that youguys that the mentee and mentor have
sort of different goals and differentpaths, then maybe it's not the best
fit, you know, and that's better alwaysbetter to figure out early than later.
Marguerite Matthews (46:06):
Lauren, do you have any advice for audience?
Lauren Ullr (46:11):
I'll just reiterate something we talked about earlier, which
is that this plan that you put in yourapplication doesn't have to include
every single thing that you're doing.
You can do more thanwhat you put in there.
So you really want to think about likepresenting the reviewers with a very
nice, well thought out, easy to read,easy to understand justified story.
(46:39):
And it's okay if you're planningon doing other things that you
don't include in there because theyreviewers might think that they were
a distraction or over ambitious.
So just, um, definitely takeMargaret's advice and give it to
lots of people to read and, and taketheir feedback seriously and, and
make sure that your grant is justwrapped up with a nice little bow.
(46:59):
And Marguerite what about you?
Marguerite Matth (47:02):
Yeah, I'd like to also amplify what has been said
previously about the relationshipbetween mentor and mentee.
It's an opportunity to, to reallyget a chance to show your interest,
but also where you think youneed to improve and where your
mentor thinks you need to improve.
I think that's something we do naturally.
(47:25):
You just want to hit the ground running.
And as a PhD student, Ithink many of us can relate.
We're so ambitious and we want to doit on our own and show how, how great
we are and thinking about a weaknessas something that has to be a negative,
but really it's just an opportunityto grow and mature as a scientist.
And that shouldn't happenin isolation, right?
(47:45):
This should be something that you areconstantly working on with your mentor.
And I think putting together theapplication and particularly the mentor
statement, it gives you an opportunity tobe very frank about what the expectations
are, what the desire is to move forward.
And it should be something that ifyou aren't able to have that sort of
(48:06):
conversation, that it may be a signto find another training opportunity.
And sometimes that doesn't, it doesn'tsound like a great thing, but I
think to Mark's point earlier, it maybe something that has to happen in
order for you to be able to have thebest training experience possible.
Um, and I think that's one of the greatthings about many of these training
(48:27):
opportunities is that you're sortof forced to now think about these
things that maybe you can easily justsweep under the rug, because you're
just going through the motions,going through your program as normal.
Um, and this really brings to lightyour own interests and how those
aligned with that of the mentor.
So,
Laur (48:45):
Good point [music playing] So that's all we have time for
today on Building Up the Nerve.
So thank you to our guests this week forsharing our expertise and thank you to
NINDS program director, Dr. Bob Riddlefor composing our theme song and music.
We'll see you next time.
(49:05):
When we talk, letters ofrecommendation and letters of support.
Marguerite Matthews (49:09):
And you can find past episodes of this podcast
and many more grant applicationresources on the web at NINDS.NIH.gov.
Email us your questions atNINDSnervepod@nih.gov and make sure
you subscribe to the podcast on Applepodcasts or your favorite podcast
app so you don't miss an episode.
(49:30):
We'll see you next time.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The MeatEater Podcast
Building on the belief that a deeper understanding of the natural world enriches all of our lives, host Steven Rinella brings an in-depth and relevant look at all outdoor topics including hunting, fishing, nature, conservation, and wild foods. Filled with humor, irreverence, and things that will surprise the hell out of you, each episode welcomes a diverse group of guests who add their own expertise to the vast world of the outdoors. Part of The MeatEater Podcast Network.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.