NIH New PI: Reflection and Progress Report, Month 2

Time flies! I cannot believe that it's already been two months since I got the official notice of award for a 5-year K23. (See blubbering me, right). And because the notice came on the start date of the grant (usually comes ahead of time), it's been two months of grant-funded activities. This grant protects 80% of my time for research; as I'm at a primarily undergraduate institution with a 3/3 teaching load and the notice came mid-semester, the change in day-to-day life was abrupt and dramatic. 

And great. And stressful. And humbling, in the most positive way.

So what have I done with the past two months, you ask? A lot, and not enough, all at the same time. Crazy how that works for so many academics! Here are some of the ways I spent my increased research time in March/April:

Step 1: Transfer two full sections of Abnormal Psychology to new instructors (35 students each). We knew in January that the grant was likely to happen, but we didn't know when, and I was in the classroom until the day the notice came. For one section, an adjunct who had observed me all semester took over; for the other, a full-time faculty member who regularly teaches the course took over. My tasks were to finish grading a set of homework assignments, meet with the new instructors to discuss midterm and final projects, and get my materials into shareable form. I had prepared students for my departure since the first day of the semester, but there was also the matter of actually saying goodbye. Abnormal is a popular course, and I'm pleased to say that at least a few students took it with me specifically because they heard good feedback from peers. So this was a bittersweet moment.

Step 2: Figure out how on earth to manage a grant. I was (and still am) astonished at how much time is spent on administrative tasks. Hiring staff, setting up record-keeping and other procedures, planning and tracking spending. There is so much involved that isn't really about the research (or training; see Step 3), and in my case, I'm doing it for two different institutions (more soon). Some days it seems like all I accomplish are admin tasks, which is frustrating. But I recognize that these are necessary and I try to keep a balance by protecting time for other work. Success rate ~40%.

Step 3: Get started on training activities. The K23 is a career development award, where research projects are intended to (1) facilitate practice and development of new research approaches and skills learned through training with mentors, and (2) generate strong preliminary data for future R proposals. My training plan involves weekly meetings with on-site mentors, monthly trips to other institutions to meet with specific mentors, workshops, and tons of reading. In the first two months, I've planned out the first year, gained a better understanding of the evidence base on tailored behavioral interventions, received guidance in grants management, and scheduled formal training in analysis of ambulatory assessment data. I've also watched several webinars on career development, responsible conduct of research, and academic productivity. 

Step 4: WRITE ALL OF THE THINGS! One of the best features of the K23 is the protected time, and I've tried to spend a good chunk of this time on writing projects. This was much easier in March than in April (see Step 6), but I managed to make some progress. I completed three invited manuscript revisions (two manuscripts now accepted for publication), revised a rejected manuscript and submitted to a new journal, accepted two invitations for manuscript/encyclopedia submissions, and added to drafts of new manuscripts. One of these required reviewing literature I'm not that familiar with, so again, tons of reading. 

Step 5: READ ALL OF THE THINGS! I cannot describe how wonderful it is to have time to read again. Not only for catching up on so much new research and preparing for class (see Step 6), but for other enriching texts that broaden my mind and skills. So far, I've devoured The Coach's Guide for Women Professors and Supervising Ph.D. Students,* and I just started a tome called The Cigarette Century (all nonfiction). I'm also obsessed with audiobooks; my favorite right now is Eleanor Oliphant is Completely Fine (fiction), which I've listened to several times.

Step 6: Continue prepping and teaching a new course, continue mentoring students on independent projects, and take on new leadership roles. So 80% of my time is now devoted to training and related research, and that leaves 20% for everything else. In my case, some of that everything is teaching and mentoring. The course I continued to teach is Psychology of Women, which is really the psychology of gender and equity. Oddly, prior to this semester, the course did not have a Women's and Gender Studies designation, and I did some prep last semester to apply for the designation (approved). Although my research focuses on women's health, my background isn't in the psychology of gender or women's/gender studies. This means that a lot of the material is new to me, and it takes a lot more consistent reading and prep work than a course like Abnormal.** It's also a very interesting point in time to be teaching this course, given the most recent presidential election and the #MeToo movement. I'm fortunate that I have a fantastic group of students who make the course so much fun to teach. Though it's a lot of work.

With respect to mentoring, I have a full-time research coordinator, a senior fellowship student, and a junior student who all have independent projects they're working on, plus a senior lab assistant and a sophomore who is developing an independent project idea through a tutorial with me. That's three sets of data collection, individual mentoring time, and weekly lab meetings. Today, my students are presenting our work at the University's internal research day, so the last few weeks have been devoted to poster preparation. I look forward to sharing this experience with them.

Speaking of posters, it seems like yesterday that I was in New Orleans for the annual meeting of the Society of Behavioral Medicine (SBM). The last major set of tasks that have occupied my last few months have to do with SBM. In addition to prep for student posters, my own oral presentations, and session chair duties, I've taken on an additional leadership role in one of the Society's special interest groups and joined two committees. The number of emails and phone calls per week alone is astonishing. But it's fantastic to have the chance to be more involved with SBM and to contribute to the Society's activities in a more meaningful way, and all of these activities are directly related to the topics of the K23 award.

Coordinator Kristen Pasko and student Sabrina DiBisceglie
presenting at SBM 2018

Step 7: Try to wrap my mind around this amazing opportunity. As I noted in a series of tweets back in March, I really never believed that I would become an NIH-funded PI. The funding environment is so competitive, and brilliant, talented investigators with great projects miss paylines all the time. (We also now have data to support what many suspected about low inter-reviewer reliability for grant scoring, which makes it all seem pretty random.) I'm a very hard worker with some decent ideas, but I fully acknowledge that I am not the most innovative person out there. This is compounded by the fact that my work has taken a sharp turn into the digital sphere, where the commercial market and research space have exploded in the past few years. So I planned to keep plugging, work with collaborators, do my best work and make the best of whatever happened. Then the K23 happened, and all of a sudden, a dream came true.

This changed things for me. Things like my expectations for myself, my sense of what others might expect from me, the scope and possibilities for my work. My researcher identity, in a way. Plus, there's the new responsibility of being entrusted with taxpayer money. I realize that I probably didn't need to have quite such an existential experience over it, but I did. And that hasn't really stopped. It's pretty common for me to be in the middle of one of the activities described above, and all of a sudden remember that I'm now a PI. Not once has this failed to bring a huge smile to my face or remind me how lucky I am. I plan to make the most of the next 4.8 years, and I think I'm off to a pretty good start.

*Supervising Ph.D. students has not been part of my work thus far, but will be soon. Stay tuned!
**My background is in clinical psychology and I've taught Abnormal about 20 times.

#NewFaculty: First Year Review (Part 2)

Relief. Spring semester is now officially over, which means that I have even more time and head space to reflect on the first year. As I described in previous posts and Part 1 of this series, it seems that new faculty make one of the following major mistakes:

1. They are unaware of the immense amount of junior faculty-specific information and advice available (see here for a great collection), or
2. They take the trouble to familiarize themselves with this advice, and then they ignore it. For example, never saying "no" to service requests and keeping their doors open all the time, which leave little time for actual work.

Don't get me wrong - I understand the impulse to please new (and powerful) colleagues and to be perceived as a team player. But you simply cannot be productive if you say "yes" to every request. My technique is to ask myself the following:

• Is this an activity I think is important, and/or that I would enjoy?
• What is the actual time commitment? (ASK ASK ASK)
• Do I absolutely need to do this NOW, or can it wait?

The last is critical. My institution has many mechanisms for supporting faculty development, including internal grants, special programs, and service positions for untenured faculty. But my sense is that both my department and our rank and tenure committee want to see progress. If I do everything in my first year or two - especially the opportunities for which new (vs. returning) applicants are favored - what am I going to do after that? So I focus on pacing myself, and on declining some requests as graciously as possible.

What went well? I think that I successfully protected my time (without angering anyone too much) this year. The evidence is in the positive feedback I received and the concrete output I produced. These include:

• Mostly positive teaching evaluations (and useful specific recommendations),*
• An active research lab with many involved undergraduates,
• Acceptance to a competitive and prestigious training institute for junior faculty (paid for by the National Institutes of Health),
• Awards of a Teaching Enhancement Grant (to create a new course) and a Faculty Summer Research Grant (to write papers and a grant; both internal),
• Publication of six empirical articles** (with five more, and two book chapters, in press),
• Attendance at four conferences** (presented one talk and 12 posters, two with current students),
• Data collection completed for two studies (a third approved to begin), and
• Reappointment for a second year.

Though the best evidence may be the limited amount of overwhelming stress I felt this year. There were a few rough periods throughout, but nothing like the previous two years. 

What didn't go so well? This is a fantastic first year, and I'm immensely grateful. But there were some meaningful failures to learn from. Of course I got rejected from several sources: at least three paper rejections (one that I was particularly disappointed about and one that outraged me***), as well as a rejection on an internal fellowship for a student RA. Rejections are always difficult, but I'm more resilient than I used to be. Asking for feedback and carefully considering reviewers' comments are on my agenda.

With respect to teaching, I was a slightly different person in the classroom second semester (vs. first). I tried new techniques and relied more consistently on undergraduate TAs, which made me a bit less confident than I had been previously (when I used only me, and methods I knew to be effective for me). I also created a course in my topic area and went out of my way to make it advanced, different, and fun. Imagine my disappointment when this failed to be the case, pretty consistently.**** Of many reasons for this disconnect, I believe that one was prepping on the go; I spent more time on this course than on the others (which were repeats of first semester), but not as much as I could have. Although course evaluations were much better than I expected, the experience of the class was frustrating. Lots to tweak for next Spring.

And though I've yet to see any evidence of this, there is always the possibility that I chose poorly with respect to service commitments. I've become involved with our union in small ways, which makes me (slightly) visible during difficult contract negotiations; this could come back to bite me if the atmosphere worsens. But I like this work, so I'll stick with it.

This is your life moment of the week: I did it! I navigated the first year and got some work done. Pretty great accomplishment, for me and anyone else in the same boat. Kudos if that's you.

Now it's time to make my Summer Plan.****

*I have a 3/3 load.

**Several of these were with my postdoctoral mentors and lab, which carried over.

***Ever get a reviewer who is obviously unfamiliar with even the basics of your field, and rejects you on this basis?

****Look for posts on these, soon to come!