piece about me for a newsletter. It's kind of a follow-up to the award
I got from them last year. I just read the rough draft and it's
pretty good but I'm concerned about the details of my research. See,
they're pitching the (arguably) most exciting part of my project, but
I haven't really begun that part yet. The stuff I'm actually doing
this summer is part of the bigger picture, but not very exciting to
write about (at least not compared to what they think I'm doing). To
what extent should I exact the details of my project and narrative?
They've also given me a "label" that I'm not sure I'm qualified to
have. Let's say they called me "Karina the Katydid Capturer" but I
haven't caught any katydids yet. Do I suggest something less catchy
but also more fitting?
4 comments:
Seriously, I could really use some advice. Any thoughts?
Well, you eventually will catch katydids, and you have caught them in previous research... I don't think it's a big deal.
At Michigan State, a grad student is trying to put radio tags on panda bears in China. First field season, she didn't find any bears. Second field season was the big earthquake, and she couldn't go. Third season, still no luck. They've interviewed her for MSU research highlights every year, and although she's finishing her fourth year with no data yet, she always talks like a professional scientist whose project is in the bag. You just have to play the game and convince everyone you know what you're doing. It's a world where your salesmanship is at least as important as your actual data!
Jon here, I have to say that Anonymous' advice seems spot on to me. Other people already think you are a bad ass scientist. You just have to stop worrying that they are wrong.
Post a Comment