Read on Twitter
@JJSabatini thanks for sharing your experience. I think posting something knowing it will likely receive pushback is gutsy, but I would love to get your take and maybe share my own personal experience #chemtwitter #RealTimeChem @RealTimeChem #AcademicTwitter (1/n) https://twitter.com/JJSabatini/status/1303624633510498305
My experience as a synthetic organic chemist was in Rob Batey's lab @chemuoft. I was an undergrad, not a grad school, but I published several papers, had my own projects and was held to the standards of the grad students. I joined the lab because Rob was a great teacher (2/n)
He is a hands-off advisor, but was available when people needed to meet with him. We too had weekly lab meetings, and once every two weeks we'd have problem set meetings (they would alternate with literature presentations). Similar format though. (3/n)
What was different (it seems) from your experience, was that the aim was to teach people and build them up. They were hard, and would push someone to their limits, even the best graduate students, but they were not exercises in humiliation. I loved them and learned a lot. (4/n)
I agree with you entirely on many points: grad school is a time to learn how to solve problems, to be resource, that problems won't solve themselves and time and persistence is absolutely required. I also agree that it is a time to go beyond your comfort zone. (5/n)
That said, there are some things I'm less sure about. I'm less sure about your message that those who choose to work 40 h/wk must be prepared to live with the consequences, should it mean they are less competitive for jobs. There are many people I know who work(ed) (6/n)
themselves to destruction but did not find success proportional to their efforts. Before I go on, I want to be clear that I am not someone who works 40 h/wk. I'm also not someone who consistently works 80 h/wk, but more on this later. (7/n)
When I'm working, I'm generally doing so because I want to be there. I enjoy doing the experiments and thinking about tough problems. This qualifier here because I want to focus on the tone and sentiment and not the idea of having mandated hours, can save for another time. (8/n)
So, I went to grad school @HarvardCCB, which had a reputation for being a challenging environment. I think every place has pros and cons, and honestly I loved my time at Harvard. You mentioned stepping out of your comfort zone: well, I came in wanting to (9/n)
do total synthesis, but I found myself so curious about the prospect of learning something new that I changed over to chembio -- organic reaction mechanisms in proteins -- mass spectrometry and small molecule probes. So much to love. (10/n)
How did I pick my grad advisors? They were warm friendly and patient people. I didn't know much about proteins, but it didn't matter to them. I can guarantee you that there is no better way to force yourself to learn, and learn fast than changing fields (11/n)
When I started grad school I was still in my organic chemist mode: I worked ~9 am-midnight most days. I'd go to the gym a few times a week. By the end of my 2nd yr I was burned out; I was probably burned out before from UG but I held it together somehow. (12/n)
Turns out grad school in addition to being a great time to push yourself as a scientist is also (for most) during your 20s, when you're going through a lot of other stuff. You mentioned the death of your sibling (I'm sorry), and how your PI supported you. 100% agree. (13/n)
Any PI who would do any less than this doesn't deserve the time of day. But even less extreme things can throw you off: breakups, illnesses, interpersonal drama. I had one of these life-events bump me, and when I was down it felt almost impossible to even must 40 h/wk (14/n)
I'm glad you figured out your rhythm in grad school, and found some outlets: your running to and from, your karaoke, your football. Some people don't even give themselves these, and I think outlets are essential for your mental well-being. (15/n)
I found that my outlet was sports. I had never been serious about sports, but I started. I took it seriously, and I found that the best way for me to allocate time to it consistently was to have training/performance goals. I rowed for 3 years, and wasn't too bad (16/n)
(for a lightweight guy), then I moved to CA and the rowing turned into biking. I have been part of teams, and that team environment builds community outside work but also offers accountability. I can't just blow it off when I want to work late in lab. (17/n)
Sports took time away from lab, no questions asked. But it also taught me to balance my time. It forced me to shut off. I remember having a conversation with my PhD advisor about it, one Sunday morning when we were running stairs at the Harvard stadium (18/n)
I asked him if I should give up sports to have more time in the lab. I told him I'd probably get more done. He asked me if I liked doing it, and I said yes. He told me that would count for a lot more in my life than one extra paper. I will never forget that. (19/n)
You say "When you begin publishing, winning awards, and having success, you’ll find out who your friends are" -- this really hits home. I've found time and time again this is the truth. As people compete they look at the success of others as a challenge to them. (20/n)
Science is not (and should not be) zero sum. I want to see my coworkers be successful. If my success can only come at their expense something is very wrong. Your comment about people being critical of time expectations when PIs are working hard(er) is also a good one (21/n)
I (and I'm sure most students) are well aware of how hard faculty work. Honestly, for those I know well, they are working a lot, and as you point out much of this is for their trainees. Editing papers, getting funding, building their network, etc. (22/n)
But maybe the system is what needs to change. My wife is an MD, and so much of their training is "do X, because when I was at your stage I did X, and now I'm successful". Is that really where innovation comes from? Does it come at 11 pm when you're in the lab trenches (23/n)
Maybe for some it does. But I think right now academia is taking a hard look at why we don't have as diverse of a set of faculty as we could, and while there are many reasons, and many forms of diversity, I will say that as long as we keep rewarding people for the # h (24/n)
we're going to lose out on a number of people who for whatever reason can't just "work more". I am excited for when I am a PI, because I can't wait to lead a lab where people are excited by interesting science, feel supported, and know that all that they are will always be enough
