If you're a scientist who wants to get your work recognized, then the titles you put on your talks, papers, and grants matter.
Today I had a conversation related to my
Sometimes I get to wondering about people, especially when they write in to the blog with really silly comments, like
"Presentation is a trivial part" (referring to grant writing).
This person clearly
Events often conspire to force us to wake up and think about things in a new way. I'd had many discussions about whether the Apple iPad is a "necessity" or just superfluous fluff. Having my iPad grabbed from my hands on a train in Paris forced me to really think about this.
The US NIH recently changed the grant format, among other things adding a new section titled "Innovation." Many of us have wondered: how can we convey innovation if we're using standard techniques and methods? Morgan has some ideas on this, illustrated with an iPad and a razor.
When we get our grant rejected, it is easy to point the blame at the reviewers. "Those
stupid reviewers, they didn't get it." While that approach may be emotionally satisfying and ego-stroking, it doesn't
solve the problem. Your reviewer didn't understand your proposal, and there is only one person to blame for that.