Category: Uncategorized

Catching up with NCAM2019

Today we share 3 cybersecurity threats you need to know about–and how you can easily fix them yourself.

October is National Cybersecurity Awareness Month! All this month we are partnering with our colleagues in the DCC cyber group to provide tips and information for keeping you (and your data) cyber safe. You can read more on the cyber group’s blog and website, and don’t forget to check out their 31 Days of Cybersecurity, which will run all through October.*

Today we share 3 cybersecurity threats you need to know about–and how you can easily fix them yourself.

1.
I am looking forward to seeing many of you at the American Medical Writers Association conference in San Diego next month. If I see you at the airport, I hope it’s not at a public charging kiosk without appropriate cyber protection–because that cord that charges your phone also transfers data up and down.  [Read more here.]

2.
Do you install extensions on your browser? They sure can be handy tools, but what do you really know about them? Find out which ad blocking extensions were found to be malware and how you can guard yourself against the threat posed to your online security by browser extensions. [Read more here.]

3.
Do you use Google Calendar? Many of us do. But did you know that a bug in the application makes you vulnerable to smishing? Safeguard yourself with two easy changes to your settings and, of course, vigilance. [Read more here.]

NCAM2019 will end . . . then what?

For weekly summaries of hot topics, check out the DCCCyberScoop. Links to existing issues are below, and you can get future issues delivered directly to your inbox by subscribing.

DCCCyberScoop Issue #3 (11 October 2019)
DCCCyberScoop Issue #2 (03 October 2019)
DCCCyberScoop Issue #1 (25 September 2019)

For more information on these and other cyber threats and what you can do to address them, you can go to their website.

To learn more about cybersecurity for individuals and small businesses, check out the Freelancer’s Guide to Cybersecurity and its list of resources.

*Our cyber group blogs about cyber threats facing professionals in our data-rich space, but does it in plain language. Most plain-language material is written for readers interested in protecting their family’s online privacy, which is actually quite different from the threats faced by consultants, freelancers, solopreneurs, and other small businesses. Our cyber group takes that plain-language approach and scales it up for the more rigorous threats these professionals face.

If you ever work remotely (as is common in grant writing/editing and academic spaces), or if you take your personal devices into your or your clients’ workspace, you should be picking up what the cyber group is putting down.

Freelancer’s Guide to Cybersecurity

Learn best practices for securing your freelance business’s data without breaking the bank.

Concerned about the cybersecurity of your freelance business? Join me in San Diego at AMWA2019 to learn about best practices to protect your (and your clients’) data. But hurry–this session requires registration, and it sold out quickly last year. (For details about this session and to register, visit the conference web site.)

AMWA Conference 2019
Sheraton San Diego Hotel & Marina
November 8, 2019, 7:15 – 8:45 am
San Diego, CA

For freelancers and small business owners, data protection can be something they don’t think about until tragedy strikes: a new hard drive fails, viruses and malware attack, or data is taken for ransom. This can be heartbreaking when personal data is lost or destroyed—e.g., emails and photos—but the loss, destruction, or theft of data can be devastating for a business managing ongoing projects and clients’ confidential data. In this roundtable session, we will cover the basics of data protection by defining the universe of potential problems, then discuss best practices for securing data without breaking the bank.

Presented by Kelly Byram, MS, MBA, ELS of Duke City Consulting.

Should I Resubmit?

Seasoned PIs know that resubmissions generally have a much higher success rate than new submissions.

Seasoned grant seekers know that thick skin and abundant tenacity often separate the funded from the unfunded, and resubmission is just part of the process. Of course, getting comfortable with the concept of the sunk cost fallacy and being willing to walk away from untenable (read: unfundable) proposals is also a skill that will optimize your return on your valuable time.
Continue reading “Should I Resubmit?”

Where to Find Sample Grant Applications (and How to Use Them)

sample
NIH/NIAID

Today, we support your New Year’s resolution to buckle down on grant writing by offering you information about where to find sample applications and how to use them:

When training people to write grants, I use examples and am often asked by my clients for sample proposals. Obviously, my client proposals are confidential, so sharing them is absolutely out of the question. I don’t even talk about my projects with my family, I’m a vault. So the question still stands, where can you find good sample applications?

Some grant writing books have samples, but usually they are discrete sections of the application, and context can be lost. That doesn’t help the new grant writer get the sense of how the sections of the application all fit together. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) web site has a very well thought-out grant preparation section that you should definitely investigate, but it lacks samples as well. However, one of the NIH’s institutes, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), has an application development section with sample applications and summary statements for R01, R03, R21, R21/R33, and F31 opportunities, and sample applications for the SBIR/STTR applications: R41, R42, R43, and R44.

These are samples of well-written applications, or, as NIAID puts it, “sound examples of good grantsmanship.” However, some of these sample applications were written in response to older opportunities, and so they may not reflect the current form sets or requirements. Their value, as the value of any sample of writing should be, is not in detailed “copying” of the approach, but in demonstrating how ideas are articulated in each section and how the sections hang together to form the complete application.

Where can using sample applications go wrong? Seeing these or any other writing examples as “templates” is a mistake. As the saying goes, you do you. Also, reading the sample applications without reading the sample summary statements leaves you with half the story. Take the time to read the feedback on the sample–it will give you great insight into what the reviewers like and dislike in applications.

Other Sample Materials

The page has other samples you will likely find useful, including a sample data sharing plan and sample model organism sharing plans. Links to the NIH’s biographical sketch samples will also be useful to most grant writers, if they haven’t found them already at the NIH site. I review NIH biosketch strategies in several places on this blog.

One Last Thought

Ask your mentor and members of your department who have had success in grant writing if they have any proposals you may review and use as a guide for your own proposals. Of course, keep in mind that under US law each proposal is automatically copyrighted and the academic rules regarding plagiarism apply (of course). And, while you are asking, it wouldn’t hurt to ask if those trusted colleagues would be willing to review your application and offer feedback. Your grant application should have ample internal review by multiple people in and outside of your discipline before submission. But that’s a topic for another blog entry.

 

 

Preparation for the New NIH Biosketch

Just a quick post so my blog doesn’t appear abandoned! It has been a while since the last post simply because there is so much going on in funding at the moment that I just don’t have the time to blog anything substantial. To that point, yes, federal funding is on the decline in many ways, but there are a lot of new sources of funding and novel emerging funding models. It’s an exciting environment these days!

The quick bit of advice I would like to share today is regarding the change in the NIH biosketch form. I am finding that a lot of people are really focused on the form itself and strategies for developing a solid biosketch using the new form. That’s great! I have blogged about the new form and those strategies previously, so if you are looking for biosketch strategy, just browse the blog.

What is alarming to me is that people are tending to ignore the need to have all of their publications in a publicly available digital database, like My Bibliography or SciENcv, and to link to the database in the biosketch. If you do not have a publicly available digital database with a full list of your published work already developed, this (dreary) task will take some time. In my experience, getting housecleaning items like this squared away in advance of the final push toward the finish line alleviates a considerable amount of stress.

Additionally, if you are a PI, take the time to assure all of your colleagues who will need to submit a biosketch for your project are aware of the new format, and schedule some time to review the team’s biosketches together to assure they are pertinent and work together. You may also want to assure the publication databases are being developed if they don’t exist already so there are no unpleasant large surprises as your deadline draws near!

Strategies for the New NIH Biosketch Format (Part 3)

With the advent of the Contribution to Science (C2S) section as the major part of the new NIH biosketch format, the strategy for writing the (PS) has become a bit more complicated.

Today I offer a review of the NIH biosketch Personal Statement (PS) and pertinent strategies for this section in the new format that goes into effect on 25 May 2015. The function of the PS in the new format is the same as before, to “briefly describe why you are well-suited [sic] for your role in the project described in this application,” but with the advent of the Contribution to Science (C2S) section as the major part of the new biosketch, the strategy for writing the PS has become a bit more complicated.

Continue reading “Strategies for the New NIH Biosketch Format (Part 3)”

Strategies for the New NIH Biosketch Format (Part I)

I understand the anxiety researchers are feeling about the change to the NIH biosketch format. However, I would suggest it is wise to accept the inevitability of the change and put that energy into focusing on some strategies for making yourself and your team shine in your new biosketches.

I led a seminar on the new NIH biosketch format earlier this week, and it was rough going. People don’t like change, and, as a result, almost every change will meet a certain amount of pushback. Those of us on the front lines are used to hearing the static from those affected by changes, but this was exceptional (although not unexpected). The online feedback regarding NIH’s initial post in May about the new format was mostly negative and sometimes fairly hostile, and some in the room this week voiced many of the same complaints about the format. I understand the anxiety researchers are feeling with this change; however, rather than go into any detail about the complaints about the new format (you can read them online at the link above and in response to NIH’s post on the subject this week), I would suggest it is wise to accept the inevitability of the change to the NIH biosketch format and put that energy into focusing on some strategies for making yourself and your team shine in your new biosketches.

For my part, for the next few days I will share some strategies for writing a competitive NIH biosketch using the new format.

Continue reading “Strategies for the New NIH Biosketch Format (Part I)”

The Value of Networking–Articulated in Terms of Extramural Funding, of Course!

Build your network, broaden your perspective, and watch what happens.

We can get very siloed in research. It’s a natural outcome when your focus is on learning and cultivating the intellect, but the problem is that fundable extramural proposals generally require solid teams. Research proposals are business proposals, and researchers need to consider that solid businesses with millions in earnings are often built on teams, so why shouldn’t successful million-dollar research projects also require teams?

It’s been quite a while since my last post, but I was taking some time to relax after finishing my MBA and to enjoy the honor of being the valedictorian. A bit of a re-boot of the systems. But today I want to wanted to get back to blogging by posting very briefly about the value of networking in terms of attracting extramural funding. It’s been on my mind a lot recently, and it’s a point that really cannot be made too frequently or too firmly.

We can get very siloed in research. It’s a natural outcome when your focus is on learning and cultivating the intellect, but the problem is that fundable extramural proposals generally require solid teams. Research proposals are business proposals, and researchers need to consider that solid businesses with millions in earnings are often built on teams, so why shouldn’t successful million-dollar research projects also require teams?

Continue reading “The Value of Networking–Articulated in Terms of Extramural Funding, of Course!”

Plagiarism Is Theft of IP, and It Is Unethical in All Forms Period

I typically dislike getting into a fray, but a tweet this morning struck a nerve. I write the following entry not to start a throw down, but to defend intellectual property rights.

I was disheartened to read my Twitter feed this morning, in which @NatureNews (yes, Nature!) promoted one of its columns in which the author applies ethical relativism to plagiarism. He claims “not all plagiarism requires a retraction.” I respectfully disagree. The author divides plagiarism into three types of theft: ideas, results, and words. He argues vociferously against the theft of those areas in his wheelhouse, ideas and results, and thinks those thefts of intellectual property should be prosecuted to the fullest. He discounts the theft of writing, since apparently it is not something he “values”:

“Such plagiarism is unethical and it is a form of misconduct, but scientists are not writers. We value the originality of ideas more than of language. There are worse offences than text plagiarism — such as taking credit for someone else’s research ideas and lifting their results. These are harder to detect than copy-and-pasted text, so receive less attention. This should change. To help, academic journals could, for instance, change the ways in which they police and deal with such cases.”

Writing is a skill that enables the clear communication of ideas and results and facilitates the dissemination of knowledge and the development of science, among other things. It is essential, and it is valuable, and there are plenty of top scientists who are also superb writers. E. O. Wilson’s Diversity of Life was a major inspiration for me to become a wildlife biologist. Without his writing skill, I may never have become aware of his amazing, paradigm-shifting work in the field of biology, his science. To say that writing is not intellectual property to be valued in the same way “ideas” and “results” is to undermine the very way in which “ideas” and “results” live and perpetuate science, and it discounts the work of some of the best scientists in history who were also gifted writers.

Further, science is about the ability to synthesize information to create new ideas. Simple regurgitation and narration of past findings holds no value in the movement of science forward. Plagiarism of language is regurgitation used in narration, a mark of the lack of synthesis and original thought. Detection of plagiarism in documents such as research reports and grant proposals are clear indications that the writer is regurgitating, not synthesizing. What is the value of the research being reported or proposed in this case? Likely very little.

There are countless reasons why the theft of any intellectual property is wrong without caveat. It is theft, after all. Distinguishing between types of theft serves little purpose. And might I point out that people rarely steal that which they do not, in some way, value. To argue that language is of lesser value, and therefore its theft should be punished less than that of ideas and results is fallacious. If it is of little or no value to you, then don’t steal it.

Boom.

 

Early Career Researchers Can (and Should) Participate in NIH Reviews–Here’s How

Hopefully readers of this blog know by now how crucial understanding your audience is in writing an effective and competitive proposal. Sitting on a study section can give new researchers the opportunity to better understand the review process and gain insight into how to effectively present their thoughts and ideas to study sections. Additionally, the process helps new researchers expand their professional networks and gain crucial professional critique-writing skills. But, just as with grants and data, it can be a bit of a chicken-and-egg scenario. Just as you need data to get a grant, but you need a grant to get the data, how can you get the requisite experience of sitting on a study panel when you don’t have the experience of grant/research success? Continue reading “Early Career Researchers Can (and Should) Participate in NIH Reviews–Here’s How”