I was thinking about some of the comments I received on my F32 NIH postdoctoral fellowship application from 6-7 years ago. It’s surprising how frustrated I still get when I think about it. A thread... 1/

One reviewer said that my 3.0 undergraduate GPA was subpar. I had 2 part time jobs in undergrad to survive. They reduced available study time. Keep in mind, at the point of the app I had defended my PhD with distinction and had published 4 grad papers and 2 postdoc papers. 2/

Another reviewer said that it was appalling that it took me 8 years to finish my PhD. It didn’t. It took me 5.5 years. The NIH bio sketch only asked for the date of completion. I wasn’t able to go straight from undergrad to grad school and had to work in between to save money. 3/

Further, I didn’t even know grad school was an option when I was in undergrad. No one ever suggested I should apply nor explained what a PhD was. No one saw me as a potential scientist. I discovered grad school quite by accident. 4/

If they didn’t like the science or felt like the approach was bad, they could have provided those comments. Instead they focused on their interpretation/opinions of my path to the PhD and how I didn’t deserve to be supported by the NIH. 5/

For those of you reviewing grants and grad school applications, please try to think about people who come from different circumstances. Not everyone has parents who understand the system and help them navigate or enough cash to flow through the system without interruptions. 6/

To increase inclusivity in academia, we will need to re-define our metrics of excellence, which may be consciously or subconsciously biased and based on a less than perfect system. We are not a monolith and there are many successful paths to academia. 7/