Today in Scientopia, I respond to a reader's distress about re-reading a recently submitted grant proposal.
14 years ago
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Musings of a science professor at a large research university.
About Me
- Female Science Professor
- I am a full professor in a physical sciences field at a large research university. I am married and have a teenaged daughter. I have the greatest job in the world, but this will not stop me from noting some of the more puzzling and stressful aspects of my career as a science professor. E-mail (can't promise to reply): femalescienceprofessor@gmail.com
Search This Blog
Blogs I Read
-
-
1 month ago
-
5 years ago
-
8 years ago
-
7 years ago
-
6 years ago
-
3 days ago
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2011
(237)
-
▼
August
(23)
- Mrs Degree
- Non Stop?
- My Answers
- Opposites
- NIH v. NSF
- Dependent
- Like a Business
- In Loco Parentis
- Can You Top This?
- One is Enough
- We, Robot
- Pity PhD
- No Thanks
- Minty Fresh Face
- How Many Times?
- Take Out
- It Hurts When I Do This
- Discarded
- Subparallel Research
- Trending
- Gifted Students
- Sidekicks and Bond Strength
- Once a Student
-
▼
August
(23)
Labels
- academia (143)
- academic etiquette (1)
- academic novels (10)
- accounting nightmares (9)
- administrative assistants (4)
- administrators (3)
- adviser-student (106)
- applying for a faculty position (24)
- attempt at humor (44)
- awards (9)
- bizarre (68)
- blogging (31)
- books (28)
- broader impacts (10)
- campus (3)
- career issues (44)
- cats (26)
- citations and citation index (27)
- colleagues and collaboration (42)
- committees (13)
- conferences (41)
- crazy-making things (56)
- criticism or rejection or failure (29)
- CV (24)
- department seminars (7)
- editor (16)
- email (14)
- ethics (19)
- faculty meeting (14)
- faculty office (18)
- family (47)
- feminism or feminists (9)
- gender-directed weirdness (GDW) (7)
- graduate school (13)
- graduate school applications (37)
- graduate students (69)
- grants and grant proposals (61)
- interview (21)
- jerks (28)
- language class (21)
- letters of reference (33)
- life (39)
- media (29)
- mentors and mentoring (26)
- money (22)
- negotiating (1)
- perception of academia (28)
- poll or survey (44)
- postdocs (26)
- publishing (46)
- research (56)
- reviews and reviewing (54)
- sabbaticals (4)
- sarcasm (1)
- science (27)
- search committee (2)
- service (22)
- sexism (49)
- spring break (1)
- summer (16)
- talks (50)
- teaching (150)
- teaching evaluations (17)
- tenure (41)
- travel (19)
- two career couple (17)
- undergraduate research (5)
- what to wear (12)
- women (36)
- women in science (145)
- work hours (12)
- work-life balance (47)
- writing (28)
1 comment:
Agreed with all of this. Don't read your proposal again until much later (either turning it into a paper if you had preliminary data, or when you get your reviews back). Minor typos don't impact my review, and I've had a proposal funded that had something along the lines of "{cite Smith's work here}" (which made me laugh out loud when I re-read the proposal upon getting the money and trying to remember what I promised to do :). The science is more important than the editing.
Also, in my field, proposals have less than a 20% hit rate. Why try to make it flawless if it doesn't matter and only a handful of people will ever read it? Spend the time on your papers and coming up with really good research ideas.
Post a Comment