2. What makes a good impression
• Have a reason to interact
– Question on research
– Interesting potential collaboration
• Always state your name and affiliation
– People meet a lot of people
– I have a terrible memory!
• If asked to communicate, e.g. email
– DO IT!
– Also, email them to remind them what you talked
about. They won’t remember!
3. A CV is your face to the world
• Gilbert’s Do’s:
– Whether you like it or not publications matter (though
not at all levels)
• Annotate your publications – why are they important to the
field
• Software and methods are important – make it prominent.
– Teaching is a good thing!
– Highlight research, but make it short.
• A research statement is good – but personalize it to the lab
you are applying to!
– Letters of reference count, make them good.
4. A CV is your face to the world
• Gilbert’s Dont’s:
– Don’t make it too long, unless it has to be.
– SPELLING and PUNCTUATION matter. (Jessica Green –
UOregon – “ I assume a well designed CV translates to
other aspects of science communication.”
– Publications:
• Put the publications you have actually published first
(including accepted and in press)
• Put in preparation ones (if you have to) in a separate section
(or don’t!)
• In you just submitted (don’t list as in press)
– But you can list submitted ones in a separate section
5. What do faculty look for on a CV first?
Survey says:
• Publications
– Rob Knight (UCBoulder), Guatam Dantas (WashU), Jessica
Green (UOregon)
• Advisors Letter
– Eric Alm (MIT), Jessica Green (UOregon), Janet Jansson
(PNNL)
• Statement of Interest (Passion for subject)
– Jonathan Eisen (UC Davis), Norm Pace (UCBoulder)
• Multidisciplinary activity
– Jessica Green (UOregon)
• Technical Expertise
– Norm Pace (UCBoulder)
6. Jeff Gordon’s response
• First thing:
– Where they have been educated/trained: this does NOT mean just
'traditional high visibility universities': I value an undergraduate
education with a broad liberal arts background; good mentors and
scientists that I know or have heard of…..
– The thoughtfulness, clarity, scholarship, novelty and personalization
expressed in their statement of interests (why they were applying my
lab)
• Second thing:
– Letters of recommendation
– Papers – subject matter/potential application of their field of interest
(disciplinary expertise) to the work we are doing or are planning to do
(NOT just whether they were published in traditional high impact
journals)
7. David Relman’s Response
• I’m interested in whether there is evidence of
thinking about the questions that have driven past
work and the questions that might drive future
work, and then, the quality of those questions.
• I look at evidence of insight into the answers to
these questions.
• Too often and to too great a degree, a CV
emphasizes a list of techniques with which the
person has familiarity. I’ve also been struck by the
positive predictiveness of side interests in science,
education and public engagement.
• But too much of the latter can come at the cost of
sufficient dedicated time to thinking about how to
address hard problems in science.
8. Why use social media
• Find out about research
• Publicize your own research
– No body is going to do it for you!
• Connect with potential collaborators
• Crowd Source Samples! (Home Microbiome)
• Crowd Source Money! (American Gut)
• Advertise/find jobs
• Listening on conferences
11. Twitter
• Follow me @gilbertjacka
• Interestingly, faculty do search you out on social
media – including Facebook – so remove those
embarrassing photos!
• Remove tweets about how much you hate the
current lab!
– It doesn’t bode well for your potential new lab.
• Read what you tweet – make sure you don’t say
something that’s not reflective of a linked article.
