by Madison » Mon May 09, 2005 4:42 pm
Erica,
I can only tell you of my experiences. Here's my pedigree:
Grad school at Washington U.-St. Louis. Not a big-name lab, but fairly respectible. 4 first author publications, 2 JBC, 2 biochem. A national pre-doc award. A fabulous rec letter from my PI. 4.5 years.
Postdoc (changing fields) at Harvard Med, in a fairly big-name lab. One Cell paper (that got written about by others quite a bit). a post-doc award from a private foundation. Competitive slot for 2 years on the institutional NRSA. Invited talks at 2 prestegous meetings (one at cold spring harbor). Ad-hoc reviewer for a crummy journal. Burroughs-Welcome harvard nominee and finalist (but not recipient). Received a fundable score on my K22 application. Strong rec letter from my PI here.
Went on the job market at the end of my 3rd year.
I sent out 49 applications. Got 17 first interview offers (I didn't go on all of them, only 14). Went to second interviews at some schools. Got 11 offers (2 top-10 schools, 4 top-10-20 schools, and the others). I chose one of the top 20 schools - primarely because of fit (but the start-up package is nice too! :)
Fit is very important. At some of these schools, it was obvious that I totally wouldn't fit in. Sometimes the rest of the work going on in the department was very weak. Frankly, at these schools the offers (money, space) were just not good enough. There was only one "very good" school that I went to, that had lots of money to offer, where it was obvious from the beginning that the fit between me and them was not good at all. Needless to say, they didn't contact me further. I think fit is the biggest reason I didn't hear from more schools I applied to - I obviously wasn't what they were looking for. C'est la vie!
I think it's really important to have your own ideas, and to have them fully fleshed out. I think it really helped to start applying for fellowships early on in my postdoc (even though I didn't have to, and my PI actually discouraged it since he has plenty of money), because I had to start thinking out, in a very concrete way, where I wanted to take my project, and what I wanted to get out of it. Going through the process of continuously writing about my ideas really helped crystalize them, so that I could get grant money, and could really pick a good angle from which to sell my research plan. I think you also have to keep pushing the whole time; trying to get your name out - always applying for things, always trying to get talk slots at some of the big meetings.
But there is also the group of people that get positions, at good schools, by staying in a postdoc an extra year, and perhaps don't have a "big three" paper, but have several first-authors from 2nd tier, good journals. You need to present yourself as a leader. You are in charge of your project, and you know where you are going to take it next, and you are the world-leader on your topic. Your rec letters should back up that you do have independence, now. You need to show the capacity for independence by demonstrating a certain "attitude" (confidence) out on your interviews, and it also has to come through in your writing. Work on your writing - it's your most valuable asset, and it's how you will always be judged as a scientist.
I hope this helps, somewhat.
BTW: Your post really made me laugh! You're right - always lots of contradictions!!!