Dr. Lanre Morenikeji received his PhD in animal genetics at the Federal University of Technology in Akure, Nigeria. With a strong interest in genetics and immunology, he pursued a pre-doctoral program at Cornell University and a postdoctoral fellowship at the Rochester Institute of Technology. As an assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh, he focuses his research on understanding the mechanisms that regulate immune response during infectious diseases. He’s been working on noncoding RNAs associated with disease susceptibility and tolerance. In addition to research, he is passionate about teaching science to his students.

How did your academic background prepare you for your present position?

I had a background in genetics, where I started as an animal science student. I liked the health aspect of my course because I did stuff like immunology, parasitology, and genetics, which sparked my interest in molecular genetics. During my Master’s, I signed up for some courses in immunology due to my interest in health, even though they were not required for my graduation, and I did quite well in them. My interest in integrating genetics and immunology informed my decision to do a postdoc in immunology. Because of my love of biomedical science, combining my genetics and immunology background positioned me well for what I’m doing now.

What barriers did you have to overcome, having envisioned your future career in biomedical science?

I’m originally from Nigeria, where we have minimal resources to conduct research. Although we can access the theoretical aspects through reading textbooks and taking courses, doing hands-on work is limited. I started looking for opportunities to further my studies abroad early on. During my Master’s, I did molecular characterization of some proteins associated with feed efficiency and some growth parameters in pigs. Performing protein analysis, gel electrophoresis, and PCR were difficult, but I leveraged a professor who studied in India and brought some equipment to his lab. Most of my professors considered my PhD research proposal ambitious except one (who had gone abroad and done some work in genetics). The latter said, “Let’s give him the opportunity. He said he wanted to do it, let him do it. We’ll be here.” He encouraged me, and I brought him on as my co-advisor for my PhD to benefit from his mentorship and experience. Funding is a major problem when conducting research in Nigeria, so I started looking for scholarships. I received many rejections and once received an admission offer with a partial scholarship to a university in the U.S., but I couldn’t attend because there was no further funding support. So, I kept on doing my research and didn’t limit myself due to limited resources. Because of my interest in doing my PhD in the U.S., when I got the opportunity, I moved to Cornell University in Ithaca, NY, to do the most important part of my PhD research and returned to Nigeria to graduate with a PhD.

Also, the language or accent barrier was a challenge when I came to the U.S. We speak English in Nigeria, but it’s different from how it’s spoken in the United States. Sometimes, it isn’t easy to communicate with colleagues, and I have to repeat things multiple times to aid comprehension. So, it’s something that I had to overcome over time by watching videos, listening a lot, listening to the news, and practicing my communication. Likewise, I think the pace of work is another challenge. The pace is a bit faster. The volume is much higher than what I had in Nigeria. And, of course, the resources are available, so I just plug into it and then keep moving.

How did your pre-doctoral program experience spur your interest in a postdoc in the U.S.?

When I came to the U.S. for my pre-doc, the first time I resumed my lab, I looked at everything and said a statement to myself because I like to speak to myself a lot. I said, “Lanre, you have everything now. Become whatever you want to become.” I needed to learn a lot and work independently when I got here. As soon as I resumed in the lab, they gave me my bench, and I met with my advisor on Fridays to give reports of what I’d done and discuss progress. We also had lab meetings, but everybody in the lab focused on their research, so I had to work independently on my research. This attribute helped me and positioned me well for my postdoc because I learned a lot of techniques. During that time, I attended meetings, met many other scientists, and made friends, including my postdoc advisor, whom I met while I was at Cornell University. Most of my collaborators today were people I knew at Cornell. In fact, a professor called me after a presentation and commended me on my presentation. Since then, we’ve been friends and collaborators and won some grants together. So, that experience helped me to transition into my postdoc research, especially doing my pre-doctoral fellowship at a prestigious institution like Cornell University, which also influenced my postdoc offers. When I came for a postdoc, I had three different offers, two in the United States and one in India, and I chose one in the U.S.

How do you navigate research expectations as a scientist from a minority group while training your students?

As I love research and discovering new things, I exert myself a lot beyond an average person. If you want to be outstanding, nothing comes cheaply, and you need to exert yourself to do more than an average person will do. As a minority scientist, you compete with people around you and have to extend yourself to do more, to get a lot done. Sometimes, I had to stay in the lab until night. It requires a lot for you to be able to do many research projects and publish multiple papers. Currently, I have four students doing research with me and I also collaborate with other professors in my school and other universities. So, collaboration also helped me to be able to get more research output. Also, I read a lot to understand current research trends, identify gaps, and then try to create something novel to fill the gaps. As research results come out, I take students to conferences to present and prepare papers for publication afterward. I believe there is time for everything, so I maintain a work-life balance. I have time to spend with my family, visiting places and spending time playing with my kids. I just have a principle to focus on whatever I need to do and attend to other things later.

Part of the reward is recognition of my work, like the Excellence in Research and Teaching Award I received in the overall Pitts system, which is great and highly competitive. Also, my campus shares news and publishes my successes with my students.

As a professor, how do you mentor students, and what is your mentorship philosophy? How do you measure mentorship success?

First, mentoring is work, as it requires time, patience, and applying different methods and pedagogy to train students. My goal is to be able to communicate science to my students and give them a platform to become what they want to be. So, it’s always exciting for me when my students can take the techniques, the spirit of excellence, and commitment and it reflects in their work. That will position them well for whatever they want to do, either going to medical school or graduate school. Also, honesty is the first thing I require of students who come to my lab. This is because honesty is required to be a scientist. Therefore, they don’t need to manipulate or make things up but report whatever results they get from an experiment. I also teach them to work hard and not be afraid of making mistakes. Because they are undergraduate students, I train them through examples and demonstrations and allow them to try it out even when their hands are shaky. My goal is to transform them from being dependent to independent. After they are gone, many of them send thank you emails for the training, and I write them strong references when needed.

One of the ways I measure my success is to see my students being successful by fulfilling their goals in life and being where they desire to be. This brings me joy. Sometime last year, I visited a lab at West Virginia University, where I met a former student from Nigeria who is now a postdoc in that lab. Seeing my students succeed brings me joy, which is how I measure mentorship success.

Any final words for Black students and early career scientists?

To Black students and early career scientists: Be strong, courageous, and believe in yourself. You have the best in you; therefore, be confident in expressing that and reaching your greatest potential by acting it out. Disprove any labels or stereotypes by doing your best to shine. Also, mentorship is very important. Seek opportunities to connect with mentors and climb on their shoulders to reach your goals. Lastly, explore opportunities directed toward minorities and take advantage of them.

About the Author:

Blessing Olabosoye is a member of the Early Career Scientist Career Development Committee and a Graduate Student and Graduate Assistant at Iowa State University.

Learn more about the GSA’s Early Career Scientist Leadership Program.

Guest post by J. Humberto Cunha, Danielle F. Mello, and Jadson Carlos dos Santos.

The Genetics Society of America, Portuguese Multilingual Seminar took place on November 16, 2021, and was attended by four guest panelists and three organizers with diverse scientific backgrounds, from different regions of the world. The panel was designed to represent the diversity of the Brazilian scientific population, considering gender, region of origin, area of expertise, and ethnicity.

The event was held entirely in Portuguese and was focused on the central theme of scientific communication in English for non-native speakers. It highlighted the importance of bringing together diverse experiences and views to discuss the challenges and opportunities in building an international scientific career.  Here are some of the insights and tips the panelists shared with their audience:

Challenges for Portuguese-speaking scientists

During the seminar, guests shared the challenges of adapting to a new language, country, and way of communicating science. Despite the diversity of origins and training, the panelists had several points in common. These included the role language plays as one is adapting to a new country, and the social issues surrounding the study of English.

Among the points addressed, the following stand out:

English language and culture are not the same throughout the world

Although English is considered the “language of science,” certain variations, such as those in American and British English, can make scientific understanding difficult. Grammatical dissimilarities for example, can sometimes make writing and understanding scientific articles more difficult.

But the biggest challenge highlighted by the panelists involved spoken English and cultural differences.

The English spoken in different regions of the world can be considerably different. This diversity in accents, everyday expressions, and scientific jargon is an additional challenge for learners looking to master the language and actively participate in scientific discussions.

Additionally, being in a region of the globe with an entirely different history and traditions can add an extra level of challenges for communicating science. Depending on what region or community the scientist is now in, science may take place in a very different environment than what they were previously used to. It may be more formal or strict, increasing language barriers and posing an extra weight on the foreign scientist to bear. Or, as is often the case, science may take place in a more friendly and welcoming environment, allowing the scientist to feel comfortable and encouraged to overcome any language or cultural barrier.

Differences in basic education aggravate inclusion in science

In Brazil, the education system introduces students to English very early in their schooling. However, the intensity and quality of English exposure is far from homogeneous, depending on the nation’s region and its level of development. This factor, combined with socio-racial issues, can make learning a new language unattainable for future scientists and aggravate diversity, inclusion, and equity in science.

Even scientists struggle with scientific jargons

Each scientific area has specific technical terms or jargon used not only in scientific publications but also as a part of a scientist’s everyday life. The proper use of this kind of vocabulary can be particularly challenging for non-native speakers and this challenge can be even greater when they have a different background or are starting in another scientific area.

Unexpectedly, studying or practicing science in a foreign country also presents challenges when the scientist shares science in their native language, in our case, Portuguese. This is because scientists sometimes learn different technical terms for the first time in English and are either unaware of their Portuguese translation, or often these terms have never been translated. As highlighted during our seminar, making an effort to have these terms translated is important to ensure inclusion in science.

By aiming for perfect English, Brazilians increase their socialization barriers in the new country

Another factor that posed a significant challenge, according to the panelists, was difficulty socializing in an English-speaking country. In addition to the role that cultural environment plays in facilitating or aggravating socialization, a scientist’s own insecurity about communicating properly in the foreign language can also contribute to the challenges they face. Most panelists agreed that this insecurity can be linked to the fact that most Brazilians worry about speaking with faultless grammar, which is probably due to the prevailing English course systems in Brazil.

Practical tips for overcoming the English language barrier

Each of the invited panelists suggested valuable tips for understanding the language with less headache or butterflies in the stomach. Some of the recommended tips include:

1. Try not to get stuck in the grammatical rules of English. Accept the fact that it is okay to make mistakes and that jest and mimicry can be a great ally in your every day or scientific conversations.
2. Be mindful of the fact that many native English speakers can only speak English and so they are usually impressed with people that can speak more than one language.
3. A critical factor to truly experience the English language is continuous exposure through various experiences and sources (for example, traveling for tourism or scientific conferences, social events, music, movies, TV shows, social media). 
4. When living abroad, try not to limit your social interactions to other Brazilians or foreigners only.
5. Always have a book in the English language handy to better understand text interpretation and expand your vocabulary.
6. And last but not the least, if you are unable to travel to an English-speaking country, always be aware of opportunities where you can listen to native English speakers through virtual meetings, such as events held by the Genetic Society of America.

About the author

J. Humberto Cunha graduated in Biomedical Science and is a member of the Genetics Society of America. He is also the Creative Director at Academic Genetics League.

Danielle F. Mello, PhD, is a postdoctoral researcher at the laboratory of Environmental Marine Sciences (LEMAR UMR 6539), Functional Physiology of Marine Organisms Unit at Ifremer/University of Western Britanny, France.

Jadson C. Santos (Jall) is a PhD Candidate and Project Manager. He is the Co-chair of the Career Development Subcommittee at Genetics Society of America’s Early Career Leadership Program. He also writes a newsletter about Scientific Leadership, Collaboration, and Project Management for Scientists.

Guest post by Gavin Rice and Jessica M. Vélez 

Over the past year and a half, the lack of in-person conferences and reduced number of external seminar speakers have damaged the connection that early career scientists feel toward their scientific community. “Networking” is often cited as one of the most important tools for success in careers both within and outside of academia, making many of us anxious about our future. Although Zoom provides us the ability to interact with more people without the cost of travel, the onus to reach out and start the conversation often lands on the early career scientist. 

In 2021 the GSA launched discussion sessions to connect early career geneticists from the Early Career Leadership Program (ECLP) and the Presidential Membership Initiative (PMI) with members of the GSA Board of Directors.

Discussion sessions connecting Early Career Geneticists with the GSA Board of Directors:

How it started: This program was born through a conversation at a GSA Board meeting. When the agenda turned to the Early Career Leadership Program and the Presidential Membership Initiative, GSA Board members were excited by these efforts and wanted to further support these programs. Early Career Scientist Representative to the Board Gavin Rice proposed that Board members could participate in Zoom sessions to introduce themselves and give advice to early career geneticists in these programs. 

Topics were suggested and voted on by members of the ECLP and PMI, with particular emphasis on areas where early career scientists needed guidance. Selected topics ranged from best practices when setting up scientific collaborations to discussions of how to improve childcare in academia. GSA Board members as well as members of the GSA’s Education Committee, and Equity and Inclusion Committee then picked which discussions they wished to lead. 

Session format: Each Zoom session focused on a single topic and hosted up to 15 early career scientists and one to three GSA Board or committee members. To minimize screen fatigue, meetings were kept short (~45 minutes). Each meeting began with the Board or committee members giving a quick opening statement on the topic followed by brief introductions. The rest of the time was left to open discussion where early career geneticists asked questions or shared their own experiences. 

What works: What has been most impressive about these sessions is how the early career geneticists and senior GSA members have been willing to open up and share their experiences. 

I was lucky as a postdoc to have a strong support network (in no small part through interactions fostered by GSA meetings!). So, when I submitted my faculty applications, I felt about as prepared as it was possible to be. And yet, in the process of Zoom and on-campus interviews, there were still many unexpected details and decisions I wasn’t mentally prepared for. It’s why I’m glad to be able to share my experiences as a recent applicant, while they’re still fresh in my mind.

– Teresa Lee, University of Massachusetts Lowell

I have been impressed at how open the GSA Board and committee members have been in these sessions. In several of these meetings we have had powerful discussions about what it is like to feel excluded in academia. To see people I highly respect share their struggles helps me feel less alone in mine. It has also allowed many early career participants to share our difficulties as well. It makes you feel closer to those who are running the GSA and that your experiences are being heard and validated. 

– Gavin Rice, University of Pittsburgh

It was very valuable to me to hear the questions from the attendees because these helped me understand what the next generation of scientists are concerned about with regards to the academic job search. Now I can use these (and the sage advice from the other panelists) so that I can do a better job helping my own trainees.

– Folami Ideraabdullah, GSA Board of Directors

Template for societies/departments: Feeling included and valued in a scientific community is vital for early career scientists to persevere and succeed, but COVID-19 is still limiting our ability to interact and have vital conversations in person. We are excited to continue with this program to connect early and senior career scientists. Establishing this goal at conferences, especially for virtual attendees and even within departments, can be a way for early career scientists who feel isolated to feel that they are part of a community.

About the authors:

Jessica M. Vélez, PhD, is GSA’s Membership, Engagement, and Early Career Programs Manager.

Gavin Rice, PhD, is a postdoc at the University of Pittsburgh and was an Early Career Representative to the GSA Board (2020–2021)

Guest post by Mehrnaz Afkani and Parinaz Khalilzadeh.

In July 2021, as part of the Genetics Society of America’s Multilingual Seminar Series, scientists fluent in Farsi came together with a goal of connecting with each other and providing a platform for speaking about science in Farsi. This included discussing some of the issues and barriers facing Farsi-speaking scientists. With the continuous global domination of English as the “language of science” after 1967, scientific resources in English currently have the highest impact and are recognized as the most trustworthy. 

Having one dominant language in science has offered the chance to exchange knowledge and share research ideas among scientists worldwide. However, it has limitations for non-native English speakers, such as difficulties with writing grant applications and research manuscripts as well as oral presentations in English. These limitations often lead to gaps in knowledge exchanges between communities. During the seminar, two themes emerged: the difficulty of accessing scientific resources and essential employability skills in genetics. 

Access to scientific resources

During the seminar, the topic of being able to access English resources in genetics came up. Given that access is often dependent on which country you are living in, this makes it difficult for geneticists in some non-native English-speaking countries to stay up to date with the recent developments. 

As Dr. Narjes Yousefi, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Zurich, Switzerland, and one of the Farsi seminar panelists shared, one potentially fast solution is to email the authors of books or journal articles to request a copy. This solution has the added benefit of sometimes leading to collaboration. “In my master’s study, I found out that most of the articles that I was reading were from one person who did similar studies to mine on a larger scale,” Yousefi said. “So, I contacted him by email and told him that I am doing a similar study in northern Iran. I asked for some of his papers because, at that time, they were not accessible in Iran. Then, I asked him to become my committee member, and he accepted. He helped me tremendously through my work.”

Essential employability skills in genetics

The majority of participants in the Farsi seminar were students who were eager to continue their education at the graduate level, but were concerned their skills and knowledge were not good enough, which would limit their chance to obtain a graduate position. When a student interested in genetics pursues a bachelor’s or graduate degree, they learn a general knowledge of heredity. Students also have the opportunity to enhance soft skills and gain field, laboratory, and analytical skills. However, universities’ resources in the field act like a mirror, reflecting the education quality, unique curriculum, and well-equipped laboratories, which all raise the opportunity of getting a well-paid job. 

Most of the highly equipped universities are in native English-speaking countries. Although these universities and their biology/genetics faculties are open to international students, competition is high, especially at the graduate level. This means that the difference between educational systems of developed and less-developed countries, the dominance of English language in these universities, and the availability of limited graduate-level spots can discourage some candidates. In some cases, the original country’s economic condition limits their chance in learning the most recent changes of essential skills in the genetics world. 

Our panelists, Dr. Mohammad Reza Akbari, an assistant professor at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, and Dr. Mojgan Padash, an assistant professor in the Department of Biology at the University of Oklahoma, both shared what their expectations were for students who wanted to pursue a graduate degree in their research group. Neither expect their incoming graduate students to know specific skills and methods. “Graduate students spend the first few months of graduate school learning essential methods for their projects. However, there are some basic things that everyone interested in genetics should know about, like DNA extraction and PCR (polymerase chain reaction),” Akbari said. Dr. Padash agreed and added that pipetting is also another fundamental skill that the student is expected to know. Every panelist agreed that at the personality level, having the right attitude toward problem solving and the drive to learn is essential.

 Dr. Ahmad Reza Katouzian, who is a professional biologist of the Alberta Society of Professional Biologists (ASPB), added that it is important to be familiar with sampling methods. “If you do fieldwork, one of your hurdles will be getting your samples to the laboratory. You will need to keep this in mind for designing your project,” Katouzian said. As for analytical skills in a graduate genetic project, Dr. Narjes Yousefi suggested that it is a good idea to learn the basics of command line and programming languages such as R or Python. “Just like for learning the English language, put a specific time aside to learn bioinformatics,” Yousefi said. 

Seminar attendees were also interested in the job market. In general, in the field of genetics, there are more job opportunities outside academia than there are within. With their experience in laboratory work, genetics students will have the opportunity to join companies that do laboratory-based work after graduation. Having bioinformatics skills enhances the chance of being hired in different biological companies. 

Existing bias in the scientific community leads to lesser engagement of non-native English-speaking geneticists. Two critical concerns for participants in the Farsi seminar were accessibility to genetics resources and limitations in learning fundamental skills. After the event, we had requests from participants to continue holding seminars and workshops on different topics such as how to write a scientific paper in English, available funds for international students, recent sequencing techniques as well as teaching programming languages such as R and Python. This is evidence that the drive to learn about genetics as a career path is strong and programs like the multilingual seminar series help people, especially incoming students, connect people with the same native language, so they can learn how to navigate scientific resources and skills.

Special thanks to Rachel Fairbank for helping review this piece and to Jessica Velez for initiating the multilingual seminar series.

About the authors:

Mehrnaz Afkani is a PhD candidate at the University of Oklahoma whose research focuses on evolution and neurogenetics. Her research uses the Drosophila melanogaster species complex to look at the female response toward the novel trait in the males called the posterior lobe. She got her master’s degree in Biosystematics from University of Tehran working on intertidal crabs. Her student group at OU, STEM Inclusion Council (SIC!), co-hosts a free coding workshop with a group of graduate students at the Miami University of Ohio.

Parinaz Khalilzadeh is a conservation geneticist. She is doing her second master’s at Laurentian University, Canada. Her research focuses on genetic monitoring of wild and reintroduced northern leopard frog (Lithobates pipiens) populations: optimization of a slow recovery. Khalilzadeh completed her first master’s degree in biodiversity and habitats at Gorgan University, Iran, where she studied the genetic diversity of the Iranian wild boar Sus Scrofa.

Guest post by Marah Wahbeh and Arby Abood.

Last year, after a casual conversation with Spanish-speaking early career scientists about the struggle of communicating their work in Spanish, Jessica Vélez, PhD, was inspired to create the Multilingual Seminar Series. This series offers an opportunity for multilingual and non-English speaking scientists and science enthusiasts to talk about science in languages other than English, while also providing a space to discuss strategies for expanding science communication efforts to include non-English speakers. 

When Jessica, who is also the GSA Membership, Engagement, and Early Career Program Manager, reached out to us to ask for our help in organizing and hosting the Arabic session, we enthusiastically agreed. Although we speak Arabic fluently, we use English to discuss our research. It wasn’t until Jessica invited us to collaborate that we realized we have isolated our identities and work as scientists from our mother tongue. This helped us realize that science accessibility has been limited in many ways to only English speakers. 

With that as our motivation, we helped create the multilingual seminar session in Arabic, both as a way to explore the linguistic gap that exists, as well as to practice speaking and discussing science in Arabic with other scientists who share the same experiences. We started planning for the session by identifying our goals, as well as potential panelists. During this phase, we realized there is a scarcity of scientific resources in Arabic, as well as Arabic-speaking science communicators, which emphasized the need for this event. 

When we reached out to potential panelists via Twitter as well as our networks, we saw first-hand a growing excitement about the opportunity to participate. Once we confirmed the panelists, we began advertising the event. Our efforts included reaching out to Arabic-speaking research groups on Facebook, sending out emails to institutions, as well as reaching out to students in the Middle East that we know. Our advertising efforts resulted in over 700 RSVPs!

The panel was comprised of Arabic-speaking scientists and science communicators from different levels of the academic track who are experts in their fields. This included: Rana Dajani, PhD; Ghada Amer, PhD; Tarek Abbas, PhD; Mouadh Benamar, PhD; and Eman Rabie, MSc. 

During the seminar, they started by sharing their career journey and experiences with science communication in Arabic. Throughout the event, the discussion was very engaging as the panel had a wide range of expertise, experiences, and opinions on the topics discussed. Everyone agreed that every person has the right to learn science, as well as have access to the benefits of its advances, and that since the majority of the world’s population don’t speak English, science communication needs to expand to include other languages. Dr. Rana Dajani, professor of biology and biotechnology at the Hashemite University in Jordan said that “sometimes we forget that language can be a barrier and have a duty to society as scientists to make science accessible to all.” 

During the session, one of the discussions was about expanding accessibility through direct (literal) translation of science concepts and words from English to Arabic. This sparked a debate on the sufficiency of translation alone and whether or not it is necessary in all cases. In the words of Dr. Tarek Abbas, Assistant Professor of Radiation Oncology at the University of Virginia, “we need to differentiate between the language of science and using a language to talk about science.” Dr. Ghada Amer, Vice Dean for Postgraduate Studies and Research in the College of Engineering at Benha University, added that learning and using English is necessary for us as scientists to engage in the modern-day scientific community; however, the best scientists are those who are able to effectively communicate their science to their own communities. 

This is where science communication efforts play a huge role. Although translation can help, understanding scientific concepts requires the use of simplified language that is clear of scientific jargon, similar to discussions around science communication to an audience of English speakers. It’s also important to note that the audience for whom a scientist speaks determines the language. 

Simplified language or not, “we can’t deny that there is a benefit to a universal language for science and having it be English is just what it is now,” Dr. Abbas said. The use of one language to discuss science facilitates collaboration across the world, makes communication between scientists easier, and overall, is similar to the many other industries and professions that use English as their language of communication. 

Although many agreed with Dr. Abbas, others had the opposite idea. Because science is for everyone including all who speak different languages than English, limiting its accessibility to English speakers creates a language barrier that excludes the majority of the world’s population. This barrier can be eliminated if we expand the use of science terms to other languages. 

The panelists also shared different initiatives and efforts for communicating science in Arabic. Dr. Dajani described an initiative in Jordan that encourages students to read, write, and contribute to simple science content online in Arabic through translating Wikipedia pages. This allows contributors to learn how to engage in science in Arabic while also benefiting people who are searching for explanations of science concepts in Arabic online. Other efforts include conferences focused on showcasing Arab scientists such as MIT’s Arab Conference and Arab-American Frontiers of Science, Engineering, and Medicine Symposium. Dr. Amer shared that the Arab Science & Technology Foundation started the Center of Strategic Studies for Science and Technology last year, with the goal of engaging Arabic-speaking scientists. Moreover, networks like the Society for the Advancement of Science and Technology in the Arab World (SASTA) were mentioned as a way to connect and learn from the expertise of other Arabic-speaking scientists. The panel also suggested that future initiatives should focus on translating scientific jargon into standardized Arabic phrases, paralleling practices already implemented in Mandarin and Cantonese. 

There is a need for spaces where non-English speaking and multilingual scientists can talk about science and science communication in an inclusive way that does not exclude non-English speakers. This is highlighted by the fact that we had 200 extremely engaged participants from all over the world with differing science backgrounds. 88 responded to a feedback survey with the majority expressing positive feedback and interest in events like this in the future. As one of the attendees shared, “I think the most valuable aspect of the event was the fact that there were Arabic-speaking scientists representing different countries and each had unique interests.”

In conclusion, discussion series like GSA’s Multilingual Seminar series not only address the language barriers in science, but also stress the need to use our multilingual expertise to discuss and share science to those who don’t speak English. Moreover, given the recent uptick of misinformation perpetrated by anti-science propaganda across the world, having the tools of communicating science in two or more languages is essential.

Join the GSA’s Multilingual Slack workspace to connect with other scientists in multiple languages!

About the authors:

Abdullah “Arby” Abood is a PhD candidate, bioinformatician, and data scientist at the University of Virginia School of Medicine. Arby’s research focuses on leveraging the transcriptome to inform bone mineral density (BMD) genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Arby is an alumnus of the NIH Biomedical Data Science training grant. Website: www.arby-abood.com Twitter: @ArbyAbood

Marah Wahbeh is a member of the Early Career Scientist Policy and Advocacy Subcommittee and a 5th year PhD candidate in Human Genetics at Johns Hopkins. She works in the lab of Dimitri Avramopoulos where she studies schizophrenia genetic risk variants in stem cells.

Kellyann Jones-Jamtgaard is a Biological Sciences Specialist at the USDA, where she supports education grant programs. Here, she talks about her passion for communicating the value of science to society and how that led her to pursue a career in science education and policy. 

In the Decoding Life series, we talk to geneticists with diverse career paths, tracing the many directions possible after research training. This series is brought to you by the GSA Early Career Scientist Career Development Subcommittee.

Kellyann Jones-Jamtgaard is a paragon of a successful science career shaped through volunteering opportunities and network building. She earned a PhD in Microbiology from the University of Kansas Medical Center. During graduate school, she engaged with students in local K-12 schools at outreach events and encouraged them to explore STEM careers. She aspires to be a role model for the next generation of STEM professionals by breaking down barriers and making science more inclusive. 

After completing her PhD, she joined the education non-profit Partnership for Regional Educational Preparation – Kansas City (PREP-KC) as the Career Academies Liaison. At the same time, her interests in science policy enticed her to apply to the Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Fellowship Program, where she was a part of the 2017 fellows cohort. She was also appointed to the Kansas City Health Commission through her leadership in public service and healthcare advocacy. 

Currently, Kellyann continues to broaden her knowledge and skills in science policy through her position at the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), where she supports the education grant programs for institutions committed to improving the representation of minority groups in food and agricultural sciences. She manages the peer review process of grant applications and helps grantees manage funds and achieve their project goals.

What motivated you to choose a career in science education and policy? 

When I started grad school, I was focused on finishing my PhD, doing a postdoc, and then becoming a faculty member somewhere. Halfway through, I asked myself, “Is that really what I want to do when I graduate?”

I did an individual development plan to assess my strengths, weaknesses, and career interests, which prompted me to explore careers in science education and policy. At the same time, I was involved with several student groups and organizations in my university and volunteering at local schools. I really enjoyed the interactions and challenges outside of the lab. Those were my passions that fuelled me and gave me the greatest joy! 

While I still loved my research and being in the lab, it became difficult to keep going from experiment to experiment and dealing with failures, especially when I had interests outside of the lab. I still wanted to utilize the skills I gained as a scientist to encourage and help students learn about different STEM careers because being in the lab isn’t the only way to be a scientist. I wanted to communicate the value of science to students, the public, and policy makers.

How did your interactions with students at local schools inspire you?

I was primarily engaging with low-income students of color, specifically girls. When I was working with students, I would see myself reflected back at me. I grew up in the Bronx, New York. I’m a first generation American and my parents are immigrants from Guyana. I was the first one in my family to go to college and earn a PhD. A lot of the life experiences I had were very similar to the students I was serving. I wanted to find ways to motivate them, and to let them know that if they wanted a career in health or science, they could achieve it regardless of the barriers they may have faced. I benefited a lot in my career from mentorship opportunities for underrepresented students and I wanted to bring those same opportunities to the students I served, because I see myself as a success story of those types of opportunities.

Which experiences in graduate school helped you prepare for your career in science education and policy?

I volunteered with PREP-KC, a non-profit organization that provides educational opportunities to students from underrepresented and low-income backgrounds. I also participated in community health fairs and reading programs through local organizations. I worked with the Student Government and the Graduate Student Council as vice president and president, respectively. I was also very involved with the Student Diversity Council, which championed diversity amongst students on campus and created events for students to engage in efforts to increase diversity and inclusion. Those experiences taught me how to run a meeting, interact with students outside of my program, interact with faculty, become comfortable with public speaking, and be the face of an organization. These experiences also led to mentorship opportunities with staff and students. Every opportunity that I took advantage of as a graduate student, led to other opportunities and advanced my career.

How did networking help in your job search, and can you share some tips on building connections?

Throughout graduate school, I was constantly networking and was able to gain some inside information about different opportunities that helped me tailor my applications and my interviews to be successful. For example, I was mainly able to get my first job at PREP-KC, because they already knew me and my passion for science through my volunteering work there. My application to the Christine Mirzayan Science Policy Fellowship was strengthened through the interactions I had with the alumni of that program at scientific society meetings and science policy panels. 

As a graduate student, it was intimidating to email someone without knowing them. I started by attending a lot of networking events and reaching out to people by saying that I heard them speak at an event and their words really resonated with me. This made it much easier to then convey my interest in learning more about their career path and if they would have some time for a phone call or to grab coffee. Everyone I spoke with was able to introduce me to other people in interesting career fields which helped me build my network. I maintain those networks now just by updating people on where I am or congratulate them if I see they’ve had a career accomplishment.

Why did you choose a position at the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), and what are your key responsibilities there?

I was always interested in working for the federal government but I thought I needed to be in Washington, D.C. to be able to do so. My family and I are settled in Kansas City, and we’ll be here for the foreseeable future. When I heard about USDA moving some of its agencies to Kansas City, I considered it an opportunity to develop my career goals in science policy while working for the federal government. So, I followed updates about the vacancies at USDA through USAJobs.com and applied to the position of a Biological Sciences Specialist.

At the USDA – NIFA, I mainly support the peer review process. NIFA is the arm of the USDA that provides extramural funding primarily to land-grant universities, but also to non land-grant universities, small businesses, and nonprofits. When universities submit grants to NIFA, I help organize panels that review the grants and manage the process of getting the money out to the universities. I work with the grantees through the lifetime of their grants to make sure they meet their objectives and disseminate their great work to the public. In this way, the public is aware about the projects in food and agricultural sciences through NIFA. In addition to these responsibilities, I provide data to congressional staff and the federal government when they require information about the programs that we’re funding.

How have your various positions helped make science more inclusive? 

At PREP-KC, it was easy to achieve a more inclusive scientific environment because one of our missions was to work with students from underrepresented backgrounds and provide educational opportunities for them to succeed. I led most of our STEM programming and got to bring students on field trips related to health and science, and run internship programs for students interested in research or general science careers. 

At NIFA, I’m still pursuing diversity in science as the grant programs I’m involved with support Hispanic-Serving institutions, as well as Alaska Native-Serving and Native Hawaiian-Serving institutions. NIFA funds institutions that are providing opportunities to underrepresented students in food and agricultural sciences. Even though I’m not directly, one-on-one working with students anymore, I’m making science inclusive at a macro level by funding universities that are improving diversity and inclusion.

What aspects of your career do you enjoy and did you face any challenges?

The most rewarding experience for me is impacting society with the science achievements through public service, which has tied my two careers together. With PREP-KC, I enjoyed working one-on-one with the students. Now with the federal government, it is really about being a good steward of the taxpayer money we give out to universities and making sure that the discoveries and programs being implemented can benefit the people.

Some of the difficulties I faced were in leaving academia. A more prescribed career path for graduate students is to do a postdoc and apply for faculty positions. It is a lot harder to navigate your career path outside of academia. For me, it was hard to figure out what value I could provide to an organization and convince them of that value, especially when a PhD isn’t necessarily needed for the position. The unknowns of navigating a non-academic career path may be a little unusual or outside the norm. 

Do you have any advice for early career scientists interested in your career path?

Leaning into the uncertainty can be scary, but it can also be exciting! It is important to be OK with that discomfort and know it is a part of the process. Talk to as many people as you can, and learn about the variety of career paths people took to get to different places because no story is exactly the same. There is no recipe to get to a specific career. Be open to opportunities and go into things with an open mind, because you never know where the next opportunity for something may come from.

About the author:

Oindrila De is a member of the Early Career Scientist Career Development Subcommittee and a PhD Candidate in the Department of Biology at Case Western Reserve University. She is passionate about making science inclusive and accessible to early career scientists with disabilities and leads the Accessibility and Disability Advocacy Group in the Early Career Leadership Program.

Learn more about the GSA’s Early Career Scientist Leadership Program.

In the Decoding Life series, we talk to geneticists with diverse career paths, tracing the many directions possible after research training. This series is brought to you by the GSA Early Career Scientist Career Development Subcommittee.

Kailene Simon is a scientist not just driven by passion, but by cause. When she was in high school, she lost her grandmother to the rare disease scleroderma. Her curiosity to understand the disease, passion for science, and urge to serve society eventually led Simon first to Genzyme, now part of Sanofi, a Boston-based company with a strong reputation in the rare disease community, and then to Atalanta Therapeutics, a startup company focused on developing siRNA-based therapeutics to treat neurodegeneration.

Simon started at Genzyme as a research assistant immediately following her graduation from Providence College, where she obtained an undergraduate degree in biology. As an RA in the Bioanalytical Development group, she supported several rare disease projects, including one focused on scleroderma, but soon realized she needed to continue her education. Using a company-sponsored degree program, Simon was able to continue working at Genzyme while earning her MS from Tufts. As her career progressed, she again felt compelled to return to graduate school, this time for her PhD. 

However, unlike with the masters’ degree, there was no precedent in her company for obtaining a PhD while working full-time. Undeterred by this, Simon initiated an agreement with the University of Massachusetts Medical School which allowed her to pursue a doctorate in biochemistry as a full-time student while also maintaining her scientist position. After completing her PhD, she was offered a position as an associate director of in vitro biology at Atalanta Therapeutics, which was founded by UMass scientists Anastasia Khvorova, Neil Aronin, and Craig Mello.

What was your motivation for joining industry?

When I was in high school, I lost my grandmother to a disease called systemic scleroderma. The biggest challenge my parents faced in caring for my grandmother was finding a doctor who could identify her collection of symptoms for what they were—a rare autoimmune disease. By the time she was properly diagnosed, her disease had progressed beyond the point of treatment, and she passed away within a few months. We now know that with the correct diagnosis and treatment, patients with scleroderma can often have a normal life expectancy. But as is the case with many rare diseases, the limited research and treatment options that existed (especially in the mid-90’s) made her diagnosis and treatment particularly challenging.

Motivated by my experience, I decided to attend PC as a pre-med/biology major with the intention of going on to medical school. However, during my sophomore year an opportunity arose to work in the biochemistry lab of Dr. Yinsheng Wan that provided a view of what being a research scientist was like. Dr. Wan was a fantastic mentor and was the first to discuss a career in industry with me, something I had not considered until then. Admittedly, he did encourage me to consider grad school first, but I decided against it and began applying for jobs in rare disease research. The opportunity to be a part of improving the lives of people like my grandmother was incredibly important to me, and there seemed like no better place for this than at Genzyme.

Why did you decide to go back to school after spending so many years in industry? 

A few years after I began working in industry, I developed a sense of the gaps in my scientific knowledge. I was also working with two women in leadership positions in my group who both had PhDs, and I benefited from their excitement for science. At that point, I decided I needed to go back to school. I took advantage of their tuition reimbursement program and applied to a part-time master’s degree program at Tufts. This allowed me to work during the day and take one class at a time in the evenings until I had completed my degree. 

My PhD happened a few years later. After years of following the leadership of some wonderful scientific directors, I felt confident in what I knew in the field of biology and what I could contribute, but I also knew I still had a lot to learn. When working with my colleagues with a PhD degree, I always felt an inherent difference in their thought process compared to mine. They could think more critically about the trajectory of their work or the rationale behind choosing one therapeutic modality over another for a given patient population or target. In industry, these factors are what make a program successful.

Why did you decide to pursue a PhD while also working a full-time job?

As I was finishing my master’s degree, my husband Andrew (a fellow Genzyme scientist) and I got married and bought a house. Around that same time, I began to think seriously about pursuing a PhD, a career goal of Andrew’s as well. However, because we had just purchased a house, giving up both salaries in lieu of grad school stipends was not an option. And despite having the support of my immediate supervisor, conversations with our leadership team about the possibility of working toward the PhD while at Genzyme were understandably met with skepticism. So, after much discussion, Andrew and I collectively decided I would stay at the company, while he would go back to school full-time with the understanding that once he was finished, I would return as well. 

A few years after Andrew went back to school, we welcomed our son, Bennett, which coincided with Sanofi’s buyout of Genzyme and a major reorganization of the company’s leadership. Two years after that, with Andrew still engaged in his thesis research, we found out we were expecting again, and this time we were having a girl. The news that we had a daughter on the way suddenly made getting the PhD seem much more urgent. I realized I never wanted her to ask why her father had a Ph.D. but her mother did not. I also knew that if I were going to return to school, I needed to do it right away, or I likely would not do it at all. And since we relied primarily on my salary, I had to find a way to hold onto my full-time job.

So, after discussions with our parents about what it would take for us to pull this off (and them offering their unwavering support in all possible ways), and at six months pregnant, I went to the dean at the University of Massachusetts Medical School to ask about the possibility of doing a PhD while also working full-time. To my relief, he was supportive and excited. On his side, he convinced the associate dean of the graduate school and the dean of admissions for their support. On my side, I went back to Genzyme (now Sanofi), to ask for their support to build this collaboration of sorts, so I could keep my salary. Unfortunately, unlike with my master’s, there wasn’t a lot of precedent for doing a PhD while holding a salaried position. There were some programs for executives, which I used as an administrative loophole to get an inroad, but I was the first to ask for the opportunity to combine my work responsibilities with a doctoral program. There were so many factors at play – who would own the IP? (Sanofi), would UMass pay me a stipend? (no, but I did keep my salary and benefits from Sanofi), what happened if the company decided to terminate my project (too bad!) After a lot of back and forth with the Sanofi lawyers, they gave their approval for me to work on a discovery research project that supported a drug discovery program at Sanofi, but that was funded with grant money from a third party. Three days before I went on maternity leave, I signed a contract with our head of R&D that gave me permission to move ahead with this arrangement. A few months later, I interviewed for and was accepted to the graduate program at UMass, and when my daughter was eleven months old, I started the PhD program. 

You had two kids before you joined the PhD program. How did you balance your life and work? 

I started graduate school when my children were just shy of turning one and three, and life became more hectic than ever. In many ways, my academic schedule was the same as every other student. I was, of course, expected to take all the classes required by my PhD program, including the career development courses, while doing rotations and my thesis work. Yet I was also expected to fulfill my obligation to Sanofi to maintain my position there. This often meant going to class in the morning, then heading to Sanofi by noon and working late in the lab. Whenever possible, I would make it home in time for a late dinner with Andrew and the kids (who became experts at the flexible schedule our situation commanded), and after dinner we would put the kids to bed, and we would both sit back down at our computers to study or analyze data. It was a challenging schedule but having a partner who was willing and able to share the childcare responsibilities equally made all the difference. We were fortunate that my first few years back in school overlapped with his last few, so we had the flexibility of his grad school schedule to make things easier. I also had the advantage of my experience as an industry scientist, which helped a lot. I had been in a lab for 15 years at that point and I had developed good time management and project management skills.

Once the first year was over, my course load got easier, and we found ourselves in a good routine. But no matter how well we managed our days, we could not have done this all alone. We relied heavily on my parents, who provided two days a week of childcare for us. And every week, my parents kept the kids for an overnight so there was always one night (usually Thursday) where we could work late in the lab guilt-free or even sneak in a late dinner date at a pub near our house.

In the end, it worked out, and I was able to graduate in just under five years. Looking back on the experience now, I am so glad I made the decision to go back for my doctorate. It was tough, of course, but for our family, it was worth it. And while I know that this path wouldn’t be the right fit for everyone, it feels great to know I didn’t have to choose between having a family and having the career I wanted. More importantly, I am grateful that with the support of UMass, I was able to be an example for what it looks like to invite industry into the world of academia and create a collaborative relationship in the process.

What prompted your move to Atalanta?

After I graduated with my PhD, I was ready for the next step in my career. By that time, I had been at Genzyme/Sanofi for about 18 years, and it felt like the right time to move to a completely new environment. I had begun considering my options when a friend from school reached out to me to discuss a potential opportunity with a startup company she was helping establish with her PI at UMass, Anastasia Khvorova. She connected me with the company’s CEO, Alicia Secor, and CSO, Aimee Jackson, and after speaking with them I knew this was the best place for the next phase of my career. The opportunity to work at a company with a founder who has been such a force in the field, and for a leadership team of such talented women, was something I couldn’t pass up. I was employee number 13 at Atalanta, which meant having the opportunity to help build the science organization alongside some amazing scientists. I started the position in February of 2020. Building a lab from scratch during a pandemic was incredibly tough, but my team is fantastic. They, along with the rest of our company, are all working very hard, very quickly, and we are making exciting progress!

I was so fortunate that the right people took a chance with me—first at UMass, then Genzyme, and now at Atalanta—and it has made all the difference. After twenty years in this field, I have finally gotten to where I want to be.

About the author:

Ruchi Jhonsa was a liaison on the Early Career Scientist Career Development Committee. Currently, she is an account manager at Absorption Systems, Philadelphia. She strives to educate young scientists about career development and is passionate about writing new scientific developments from academia and industry. 

Learn more about the GSA’s Early Career Scientist Leadership Program.

In the Decoding Life series, we talk to geneticists with diverse career paths, tracing the many directions possible after research training. This series is brought to you by the GSA Early Career Scientist Career Development Subcommittee.

Neal Lemon currently serves as the Associate Director of Technology Licensing and Corporate Outreach for the Penn Center for Innovation and Perelman School of Medicine. He is focused on commercializing innovation with a particular emphasis on medical technologies and therapies. He has an MBA in International Business and a PhD in neuroscience. Neal switched between business and biology a few times before finally settling on technology transfer, where he can intersect these two interests.  

What does a job in technology transfer look like? 

The main focus of technology transfer is to interact with faculty and explain how they can take their ideas, experiments, and intellectual property to a state where they can be developed into something that can be sold as a product or service. Usually, this is accomplished by getting invention disclosures, protection through patents, and often either starting a company or licensing to a pre-existing company. Half of the job is interacting with the university community, faculty, and students, while the other half is interacting with industry. This is quite interesting because you can have a foot in the university and a foot out of it. You can gather a sense of early stage research in universities as well as the trends and what is required to turn intellectual property into something people can use. As a part of the bridge between universities and industry, there are options to partner with an existing large company to sponsor additional research and further advance intellectual property to the point of licensing, or even into a startup. 

How did you come into your current position?

I did my undergraduate degree in biology and psychology, and I was really interested in neuroscience. Following undergrad, I continued with a medical research council scholarship in Canada, where I did neuroscience research for two years. I decided to stop after two years and complete my master’s instead of continuing to do my PhD. The work was very focused, and I wasn’t really keen on doing one specific type of research long-term. I decided to do an MBA at the University of Victoria and Handelshochschule (HHL) in Leipzig, Germany. After that, I took a position at Hewlett Packard working in finance. During this time, I found that what I really wanted to do was combine my neuroscience and business backgrounds. At that time, however, there weren’t many opportunities at that intersection. 

I took a job at a bioinformatics startup and found myself at a decision point between continuing in finance or trying to go back to working in science. I was interviewing with people in both fields but decided to go back to Germany to the International Graduate School of Neuroscience to get my PhD. Following graduate school, I went back to Canada for a postdoc before taking a job between academia and industry working in commercialization. This brought me to my first position in technology transfer, where I have been since. 

How do you use the skills that you gained in your academic training specifically in this position?

There are two different aspects to the application of academic training: knowledge and skills. The knowledge aspect of the training, especially on the neurophysiology side, is understanding material that is critical to interpreting invention disclosures and speaking about them knowledgeably. Everyone in technology transfer has an area where they are an expert, which is usually aligned with their PhD. It’s enjoyable to be able to dig deep into those topics.  

The other aspect is the skills you develop while doing a PhD. If you think about when you started your PhD and the material was all new, the ability to educate yourself was very important. You develop the ability to search through PubMed and extract the information you need. In technology transfer you are doing the same thing, looking through patent records and commercial databases. So in this position, you need the skills to be able to learn by yourself. 

What characteristics make you good at your job in technology transfer?

In many scientific career paths, you need to have a combination of curiosity and discipline. At least professionally, I think I have both of those characteristics. It’s debatable sometimes which trait is more important to make a good researcher. Is it more important that the person is disciplined or has a sense of curiosity? They intersect, though, as you also need motivation for discipline. Personally, I like to understand how things work and how to make things work better. I am interested in society and capitalism and how they work, and how ideas become realities. I think that level of curiosity to dig into the processes and systems of commercialization, in addition to the details of the technologies, is important for a job in technology transfer. However, like with everything, you need the discipline to not just find out interesting things but also use that knowledge and work to benefit others. 

How does your life outside of your career influence your career?

You can work very long hours in this job. You also need discipline in saying “enough is enough.” The great thing about this position is that you should never be bored. There’s nearly an infinite amount of work to do through transactional work as well as the research side. Like in a lot of other careers, you could let it totally consume you, but it is important to have a life outside of work. When you’re finished working on something, it is good to take time to do something else so you don’t burn out. You could work 24/7 and feel that you continue to add value, but you get diminishing returns at a certain point. 

How has your network shaped your career?

I’ve built a few different networks through my professional life, research, and business school. It is interesting to think of the Venn diagram of my networks, because I believe there is little overlap. I think this is good because I have a network of friends and professionals in technology transfer who have similar interests and abilities, as well as a network of friends that have no relation to the sciences or business at all. I even keep in contact with friends from college sports. 

If you are looking at where you want to go in your career and set your sights towards something, start walking towards that. On the journey, you will meet people with similar interests to form a network.

What advice do you have for early career scientists who aren’t sure what to do next in their career? 

Take an afternoon with a cup of coffee and a notebook, sit down, and think about what would make you happy professionally. What is really interesting to you? What kind of setting do you want to work in? Maybe it has nothing to do with what you did over the last five years at all, but take time to look into it. Then, see what concrete steps you need to take to do what you’re interested in. My advice is to take the time to think about what you like to do — don’t be paralyzed by the choice. Be prepared that you might go in different directions than what you’re doing now. 

About the author:

Abigail DiVito is a member of the Early Career Scientist Career Development Committee and a Graduate Student at the University of Pennsylvania. She is currently researching reproductive arrest and germline aging, and hopes to work in intellectual property.

Learn more about the GSA’s Early Career Scientist Leadership Program.

In the Decoding Life series, we talk to geneticists with diverse career paths, tracing the many directions possible after research training. This series is brought to you by the GSA Early Career Scientist Career Development Subcommittee.

CJ Neely is a certified career coach and Assistant Director of Career Education at Johns Hopkins Medical Institute. She has a PhD in Microbiology and Immunology from The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and was a postdoctoral fellow at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. While serving on the Postdoctoral Leadership Council at St. Jude, she found her passion for career development. 

What career did you imagine you would have when you were a graduate student and postdoc? 

I became interested in research early on as an undergraduate at Towson University. I was able to gain hands-on experience working in multiple labs while in college and loved it. One of my professors encouraged me to pursue a PhD, which I didn’t even think was a possibility. After applying and receiving multiple offers, I started grad school at UNC with the goal of becoming a PI at a primarily undergraduate institution (PUI). I wanted to inspire the next generation in the same way my professors did for me. However, at UNC I was enthralled with the research, and I didn’t think it was feasible to continue this type of work at a PUI. At that point, my interests shifted to being a PI at an R1 institution. 

 I then did a postdoc at St. Jude, where I was looking to develop new skills and improve my grant writing. I was strategic and went to a lab that had a history of moving postdocs into faculty roles. However, I found that my graduate school experience and postdoc experience were very different. In my graduate lab, I was the first grad student. I spent a lot of time training others in the lab, and I was encouraged to serve on committees and present at conferences. On the other hand, as a postdoc, my focus was to get the project off the ground and develop research independence. In the process, I realized I wasn’t really happy doing all of the things I needed to do to become a PI. This is when I started to look for careers outside of the lab that mimicked the aspects of graduate school I enjoyed the most. 

How did you decide to pursue a career in professional development? 

Once I realized there was a misalignment between my interests and career trajectory, I started to look into professional development resources. The only resources available at St. Jude at the time were developed by postdocs on the Postdoc Leadership Council. There was a role available as the Chair of Career Development, so I ran and was elected for that position. As the Chair, I created a career discovery series, where I brought in local PhD professionals to discuss their career paths and current roles in more detail. I found that a lot of the careers were interesting on paper, but when I learned more about them, they just weren’t what I was looking for. 

One day, our postdoc coordinator asked me, “What are you doing when you get lost in your work and lose track of time? What makes you feel built up instead of depleted?” It was everything that I was doing for the Postdoc Leadership Council. She reminded me that it was a real job! Before that, it didn’t click that there were people with PhDs who were working in professional development and academic administration roles. 

It’s interesting that from the beginning your interest in research was based in wanting to inspire the next generation, and that’s what you are doing now. 

Yes, just in a different way than I initially envisioned. I think that if I was more self-aware and listened to what I wanted to do instead of what I thought I should do, it wouldn’t have taken me so long to get where I am now. I needed to be honest with myself about my strengths and interests. While I find research incredibly fascinating, sitting at the bench or leading a research team is not where I am most fulfilled. It did take me a while to mourn the loss of leaving academia because I had invested so much time, and a lot of my identity was wrapped up in being a scientist. Even though I was ready to make the transition, it was a hard process to go through and likely why it took so long. 

Can you describe what you do in your position now? 

I manage a PhD Career Curriculum called OPTIONS. This involves program management, event planning, and building relationships with various stakeholders, such as senior leadership, faculty, alumni, and other PhD professionals. The other side of my role is providing one-on-one career coaching to early career scientists. Career coaching is about listening to the other person. Earning my career coach certification has taught me the importance of talking less, asking powerful questions, and guiding individuals through the process rather than telling them what to do. The goal is to empower early career scientists to make informed decisions and take action.

What skills have you brought from your graduate school and postdoc experiences? 

In graduate school and as a postdoc, I learned how to stay organized, manage competing priorities, lead an effective meeting, make persuasive arguments, and communicate effectively. All of these skills are essential to my current position.  

How were you able to balance pursuing and exploring your career outside of academia while you were fulfilling your duties as a postdoc? 

It’s not easy. The earlier you start the more time you can work on it. If you can take the approach of “the tortoise vs. the hare,” you can work on it slowly without committing a lot of time each week. For me, because I had taken on a career development role on the St. Jude Postdoc Leadership Council, there was a certain commitment to researching careers and developing relevant programming. So, I would work full time in the lab and then often spend another 10 hours per week on this extracurricular activity. I enjoyed it so much that I was probably putting more time in than I needed to. For me, that was a big indicator that I was tapping into something that I really needed to consider as a career. 

What are some issues that you see coming up for a lot of early career scientists while they’re exploring their career options? 

A problem I often see is that early career scientists don’t commit enough time to career exploration. They’re in a PhD program to become an independent scientist, so research comes first, and I wholeheartedly support that. However, you do need to take time throughout your training to really think about your next steps. Many early career scientists wait until their last thesis committee meeting when they have six months left in their program to start this process. At this point they are feeling so much pressure, it’s hard to think straight. It’s easy to take the “lowest hanging fruit”—the first opportunity that comes along. For example, some pursue a postdoc by default and then fall into a pattern where—three years later—they are no closer to figuring out what they want to do. By spending more time exploring career options, you can be more intentional and confident with your career decisions. 

What is your advice for people like this? 

Protect time for career exploration and professional development. If that means you need to add it to your calendar like any other meeting, do so. Also, most of us will have multiple “careers” in our lifetime. So rather than trying to figure it all out, let curiosity lead you to your next step. 

About the author:

Abigail DiVito is a member of the Early Career Scientist Career Development Committee and a Graduate Student at the University of Pennsylvania. She is currently researching reproductive arrest and germline aging, and hopes to work in intellectual property.

Learn more about the GSA’s Early Career Scientist Leadership Program.

Gonzalo Castro de la Mata works across disciplines to balance economic development and environmental conservation. Here we talk about approaching problems from different perspectives and making time to live while you work.

In the Decoding Life series, we talk to geneticists with diverse career paths, tracing the many directions possible after research training. This series is brought to you by the GSA Early Career Scientist Career Development Subcommittee.

Gonzalo Castro de la Mata has always been interested in challenges surrounding environmental management and economic development. This has led to addressing problems in environmental management from many different perspectives – ecological, economic, and financial. Throughout his career, he has followed opportunities and interests wherever they take him. Now, Dr. Castro de la Mata brings his unique expertise to the oil and gas industry in Lima, Peru. Dr. Castro de la Mata provides advice on following your passions and making time for yourself during your career. 

How did you transition from the world of research to where you are today?

When I worked with other biologists and conservationists at the World Wildlife Foundation we really thought we were changing the world. Then I went to the World Bank and entered a world of economists, and I realized how powerful the science of economics is. It was shocking to realize that my discipline had limits when trying to understand how things work. Economists look at the world in a very mathematical and logical way. I learned about economics by interacting with them and reading, and this helped me a lot. 

Another shock was when I moved from the World Bank to my own company, raising money in the financial market, and I realized the power of finance. Here I realized that economics is really nothing without finance, the engine of growth for the economy. Throughout my career I have found myself with people in other disciplines, and very quickly, I had to integrate and learn those other disciplines to be able to grow professionally. 

How has your career path differed from what you planned in graduate school? 

It is very hard to predict where you will end up. I think there is a combination of the opportunities that present themselves and what you really want to do. I have always chosen to change careers or jobs based on my interests and how the field progresses. I have not had a static career where I would say, “I am going to be in this position until I retire.” On the contrary, I am always looking for new challenges, and that really makes it exciting because I have never been in any given position more than three to five years. This means that you’re always learning and reinventing yourself.

I always wanted to work on international environmental issues, trying to find common ground between development, economic growth, and conservation of the environment. This theme has been pretty much the same, but I’ve been approaching it from very different perspectives. Whether that’s from NGOs that conserve the Amazon, from companies that introduce better environmental practices, from the world bank that has financed many conservation projects globally, or from a development perspective that takes into account the environment. 

What do you do to keep a good work-life balance? 

To me, owning your time is the most important thing to be able to control stress. I have always combined personal interests with my career. I have traveled extensively for work, to more than 80 countries, and I always add one to two days to each trip so that I can visit the country. I use that time to look at the art and architecture. Also, sometimes I block periods of time in my calendar  so that nobody can schedule with me. It becomes stressful when you aren’t able to own your time, and instead, have to fill your day with meetings. When you can structure your own schedule, it is much easier to combine work with other interests that are part of your life. 

It’s a huge mistake when people think they have to retire before they start to travel or pursue other interests. Your life doesn’t start after work, so you have to combine your work with other activities. I have lots of outside interests like art, antique books, and genealogy. Somehow I find time to do all of these things while being productive in my profession. You really have to pursue other interests in parallel and find the time to do other things.  

How do you maintain a good network? 

Never close the door and always think outside the box. More and more today the world is moving to be less sectoral, so the problems are no longer there only for a scientist or a lawyer or an economist alone.  When networking, don’t think that somebody that comes from a different background, a different country, or speaks a different language is not going to be a very important contact for you. You have to be really open-minded. Bring your business cards wherever you go, and keep those names because sooner or later you are going to need to talk to them, whether it is because you are visiting another country or need some advice. If your network is small, your reach is going to be small, and you might get stuck. 

What are the most rewarding and challenging things that you handle in your position now?

The most rewarding is mentoring people and helping people grow professionally. You have to make people feel confident in themselves. I do that by building from how they currently approach things and keeping a positive attitude with them. You need to make people feel like they can achieve more and challenge them. Then, give them the space to grow. 

A challenge for me is bureaucracy. Humans need to be more free to create and solve problems without having to adhere to arbitrary procedures. Always look at a procedure with skepticism. Ask yourself, “Is this really helping me achieve what I am supposed to do, or is it a barrier?” 

What is your advice for early career scientists having a difficult time choosing a career path? 

Try not to worry too much about choosing the right career and follow your passion. Do what you like. Do what you think is right, and make sure you come into work each morning excited about what you’re doing. If you do that, you will grow in that space, and then other doors will open. Life isn’t about working so that you can retire, but rather working and living at the same time. 

About the author:

Abigail DiVito is a member of the Early Career Scientist Career Development Committee and a Graduate Student at the University of Pennsylvania. She is currently researching reproductive arrest and germline aging, and hopes to work in intellectual property.

Learn more about the GSA’s Early Career Scientist Leadership Program.