simply blood

In this two-part blog about my experience with the interview process for academic faculty positions, I previously covered the application process. This post will be about the ten visits I went on. In most places, the first visit will be one day with a seminar and one-on-one meetings with current faculty. Sometimes the first visit also includes a chalk talk. Some institutes organize a symposium where all the applicants give their talk, followed by one-on-one meetings with the search committee.

For your seminar and your chalk talk, the key is to prepare early and practice many times. Practice with colleagues and anyone you think might listen. The search committee will most likely include people that are not in your field, so make sure the big picture comes across clearly. Ideally you can convey a trajectory of research from your graduate work to your postdoctoral work. This should logically progress into your future research plans, which can be addressed with a few slides at the end of …

Having been through a number of academic faculty interviews this year, I thought it would be a good time to convey some useful tips about the process. The blog is split into two parts: how I got academic faculty position interviews and how to handle the visits.

I went on the job market 4.5 years into my postdoc with a K99 award and good publications. Knowing how competitive the field is, I wanted to apply broadly. The two main ways I applied for interviews was (1) responding to ads on job boards, university and research institute websites and (2) talking to people in the field, asking if they knew of any open positions. To my surprise, the first approach was relatively ineffective. I responded to some 20 job openings and did not hear back from most of them, and got few interviews. Several university websites are out of date and the most promising openings were just not on there. My second approach, networking, was much more successful. In particular, I got three interviews through pe…

The ISEH 48th Annual Scientific Meeting was recently held in Brisbane, Australia. The meeting was excellent: the latest and greatest science in the field, catching up with old friends, meeting new ones, and all in a beautiful location.
For those of you that could not attend, here are some highlights of the meeting from the perspective of the students, postdocs and junior PIs of the ISEH New Investigators Committee.

Outstanding science
The program of speakers at this year’s meeting was outstanding. Leaders from across the field freely shared their latest data and discussed new ideas. One highlight was David Scadden’s (Harvard, USA) description of a gel scaffold that is injected under the skin to promote T cell progenitor growth, which improved immune responses in bone marrow transplant recipients. Another great moment was Adam Wilkinson (Stanford, USA) describing a remarkable expansion of haematopoietic stem cells in culture after the addition of children’s craft glue!

Brilliant days of…

Each month, Simply Blood spotlights a lab focused on the research of basic hematology, immunology, stem cell research, cell and gene therapy, and other related aspects. Get to know these different labs around the world! This month, we are featuring the Gazit Lab at the Shraga Segal dept. of Microbiology, Immunology, and Genetics.

How long have you had your lab? 
Six years

How many members make up your lab?  Students/postdocs?
The lab roster currently consists of 2 undergrads, 1 Master, 4 PhD and 1 Postdoc, as well as many good friend and colleagues.

What is the major research theme of your lab?
Hematopoietic Stem Cells Immunology. We have several projects that are all about HSC regulation, especially by transcription-factors that are the stronghold of the cell's identity. Transcription factors allow us to study direct-reprogramming into HSCs, and to generate novel Leukemia Models in immune-competent mice. We are highly interested in Alternative Splicing, which brings a new dimens…

Learning to communicate
The foundation of science is deeply rooted in fact and skepticism. Throughout scientific training, a scientist must master the skill of critical thinking. Without a strong logic or rationale, it is difficult to interpret your own work or that of others. Implicit to the mastery of critical thinking is the ability to convey your argument and critique others.

Like all skills, practice makes perfect. When you are just starting out, it is sometimes difficult to clearly convey your point confidently. The first step in gaining self-confidence is talking with your mentor and lab mates. This group will be most familiar with your work and can offer a detailed perspective on the project. The casual discussions that naturally occur in the laboratory and among your scientific friends lay the foundation for effective communication. Moreover, new and interesting collaborations can arise out of these interactions. My most successful and most fun collaborative projects arose o…