research plan for faculty position

Students & Educators  —Menu

• Educational Resources
• Educators & Faculty
• College Planning
• ACS ChemClub
• Project SEED
• U.S. National Chemistry Olympiad
• Student Chapters
• ACS Meeting Information
• Undergraduate Research
• Internships, Summer Jobs & Coops
• Study Abroad Programs
• Finding a Mentor
• Two Year/Community College Students
• Social Distancing Socials
• Planning for Graduate School
• Grants & Fellowships
• Career Planning
• International Students
• Planning for Graduate Work in Chemistry
• ACS Bridge Project
• Graduate Student Organizations (GSOs)
• Schedule-at-a-Glance
• Standards & Guidelines
• Explore Chemistry
• Science Outreach
• Publications
• ACS Student Communities
• You are here:
• American Chemical Society
• Students & Educators

Writing the Research Plan for Your Academic Job Application

By Jason G. Gillmore, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Chemistry, Hope College, Holland, MI

A research plan is more than a to-do list for this week in lab, or a manila folder full of ideas for maybe someday—at least if you are thinking of a tenure-track academic career in chemistry at virtually any bachelor’s or higher degree–granting institution in the country. A perusal of the academic job ads in C&EN every August–October will quickly reveal that most schools expect a cover letter (whether they say so or not), a CV, a teaching statement, and a research plan, along with reference letters and transcripts. So what is this document supposed to be, and why worry about it now when those job ads are still months away?

What Is a Research Plan?

A research plan is a thoughtful, compelling, well-written document that outlines your exciting, unique research ideas that you and your students will pursue over the next half decade or so to advance knowledge in your discipline and earn you grants, papers, speaking invitations, tenure, promotion, and a national reputation. It must be a document that people at the department you hope to join will (a) read, and (b) be suitably excited about to invite you for an interview.

That much I knew when I was asked to write this article. More specifics I only really knew for my own institution, Hope College (a research intensive undergraduate liberal arts college with no graduate program), and even there you might get a dozen nuanced opinions among my dozen colleagues. So I polled a broad cross-section of my network, spanning chemical subdisciplines at institutions ranging from small, teaching-centered liberal arts colleges to our nation’s elite research programs, such as Scripps and MIT. The responses certainly varied, but they did center on a few main themes, or illustrate a trend across institution types. In this article I’ll share those commonalities, while also encouraging you to be unafraid to contact a search committee chair with a few specific questions, especially for the institutions you are particularly excited about and feel might be the best fit for you.

How Many Projects Should You Have?

While more senior advisors and members of search committees may have gotten their jobs with a single research project, conventional wisdom these days is that you need two to three distinct but related projects. How closely related to one another they should be is a matter of debate, but almost everyone I asked felt that there should be some unifying technique, problem or theme to them. However, the projects should be sufficiently disparate that a failure of one key idea, strategy, or technique will not hamstring your other projects.

For this reason, many applicants wisely choose to identify:

• One project that is a safe bet—doable, fundable, publishable, good but not earthshaking science.
• A second project that is pie-in-the-sky with high risks and rewards.
• A third project that fits somewhere in the middle.

Having more than three projects is probably unrealistic. But even the safest project must be worth doing, and even the riskiest must appear to have a reasonable chance of working.

How Closely Connected Should Your Research Be with Your Past?

Your proposed research must do more than extend what you have already done. In most subdisciplines, you must be sufficiently removed from your postdoctoral or graduate work that you will not be lambasted for clinging to an advisor’s apron strings. After all, if it is such a good idea in their immediate area of interest, why aren’t they pursuing it?!?

But you also must be able to make the case for why your training makes this a good problem for you to study—how you bring a unique skill set as well as unique ideas to this research. The five years you will have to do, fund, and publish the research before crafting your tenure package will go by too fast for you to break into something entirely outside your realm of expertise.

Biochemistry is a partial exception to this advice—in this subdiscipline it is quite common to bring a project with you from a postdoc (or more rarely your Ph.D.) to start your independent career. However, you should still articulate your original contribution to, and unique angle on the work. It is also wise to be sure your advisor tells that same story in his or her letter and articulates support of your pursuing this research in your career as a genuinely independent scientist (and not merely someone who could be perceived as his or her latest "flunky" of a collaborator.)

Should You Discuss Potential Collaborators?

Regarding collaboration, tread lightly as a young scientist seeking or starting an independent career. Being someone with whom others can collaborate in the future is great. Relying on collaborators for the success of your projects is unwise. Be cautious about proposing to continue collaborations you already have (especially with past advisors) and about starting new ones where you might not be perceived as the lead PI. Also beware of presuming you can help advance the research of someone already in a department. Are they still there? Are they still doing that research? Do they actually want that help—or will they feel like you are criticizing or condescending to them, trying to scoop them, or seeking to ride their coattails? Some places will view collaboration very favorably, but the safest route is to cautiously float such ideas during interviews while presenting research plans that are exciting and achievable on your own.

How Do You Show Your Fit?

Some faculty advise tailoring every application packet document to every institution to which you apply, while others suggest tweaking only the cover letter. Certainly the cover letter is the document most suited to introducing yourself and making the case for how you are the perfect fit for the advertised position at that institution. So save your greatest degree of tailoring for your cover letter. It is nice if you can tweak a few sentences of other documents to highlight your fit to a specific school, so long as it is not contrived.

Now, if you are applying to widely different types of institutions, a few different sets of documents will certainly be necessary. The research plan that you target in the middle to get you a job at both Harvard University and Hope College will not get you an interview at either! There are different realities of resources, scope, scale, and timeline. Not that my colleagues and I at Hope cannot tackle research that is just as exciting as Harvard’s. However, we need to have enough of a niche or a unique angle both to endure the longer timeframe necessitated by smaller groups of undergraduate researchers and to ensure that we still stand out. Furthermore, we generally need to be able to do it with more limited resources. If you do not demonstrate that understanding, you will be dismissed out of hand. But at many large Ph.D. programs, any consideration of "niche" can be inferred as a lack of confidence or ambition.

Also, be aware that department Web pages (especially those several pages deep in the site, or maintained by individual faculty) can be woefully out-of-date. If something you are planning to say is contingent on something you read on their Web site, find a way to confirm it!

While the research plan is not the place to articulate start-up needs, you should consider instrumentation and other resources that will be necessary to get started, and where you will go for funding or resources down the road. This will come up in interviews, and hopefully you will eventually need these details to negotiate a start-up package.

Who Is Your Audience?

Your research plan should show the big picture clearly and excite a broad audience of chemists across your sub-discipline. At many educational institutions, everyone in the department will read the proposal critically, at least if you make the short list to interview. Even at departments that leave it all to a committee of the subdiscipline, subdisciplines can be broad and might even still have an outside member on the committee. And the committee needs to justify their actions to the department at large, as well as to deans, provosts, and others. So having at least the introduction and executive summaries of your projects comprehensible and compelling to those outside your discipline is highly advantageous.

Good science, written well, makes a good research plan. As you craft and refine your research plan, keep the following strategies, as well as your audience in mind:

• Begin the document with an abstract or executive summary that engages a broad audience and shows synergies among your projects. This should be one page or less, and you should probably write it last. This page is something you could manageably consider tailoring to each institution.
• Provide sufficient details and references to convince the experts you know your stuff and actually have a plan for what your group will be doing in the lab. Give details of first and key experiments, and backup plans or fallback positions for their riskiest aspects.
• Hook your readers with your own ideas fairly early in the document, then strike a balance between your own new ideas and the necessary well referenced background, precedents, and justification throughout. Propose a reasonable tentative timeline, if you can do so in no more than a paragraph or two, which shows how you envision spacing out the experiments within and among your projects. This may fit well into your executive summary
• Show how you will involve students (whether undergraduates, graduate students, an eventual postdoc or two, possibly even high schoolers if the school has that sort of outreach, depending on the institutions to which you are applying) and divide the projects among students.
• Highlight how your work will contribute to the education of these students. While this is especially important at schools with greater teaching missions, it can help set you apart even at research intensive institutions. After all, we all have to demonstrate “broader impacts” to our funding agencies!
• Include where you will pursue funding, as well as publication, if you can smoothly work it in. This is especially true if there is doubt about how you plan to target or "market" your research. Otherwise, it is appropriate to hold off until the interview to discuss this strategy.

So, How Long Should Your Research Plan Be?

Learn more on the Blog

Here is where the answers diverged the most and without a unifying trend across institutions. Bottom line, you need space to make your case, but even more, you need people to read what you write.

A single page abstract or executive summary of all your projects together provides you an opportunity to make the case for unifying themes yet distinct projects. It may also provide space to articulate a timeline. Indeed, many readers will only read this single page in each application, at least until winnowing down to a more manageable list of potential candidates. At the most elite institutions, there may be literally hundreds of applicants, scores of them entirely well-suited to the job.

While three to five pages per proposal was a common response (single spaced, in 11-point Arial or 12-point Times with one inch margins), including references (which should be accurate, appropriate, and current!), some of my busiest colleagues have said they will not read more than about three pages total. Only a few actually indicated they would read up to 12-15 pages for three projects. In my opinion, ten pages total for your research plans should be a fairly firm upper limit unless you are specifically told otherwise by a search committee, and then only if you have two to three distinct proposals.

Why Start Now?

Hopefully, this question has answered itself already! Your research plan needs to be a well thought out document that is an integrated part of applications tailored to each institution to which you apply. It must represent mature ideas that you have had time to refine through multiple revisions and a great deal of critical review from everyone you can get to read them. Moreover, you may need a few different sets of these, especially if you will be applying to a broad range of institutions. So add “write research plans” to this week’s to do list (and every week’s for the next few months) and start writing up the ideas in that manila folder into some genuine research plans. See which ones survive the process and rise to the top and you should be well prepared when the job ads begin to appear in C&EN in August!

Jason G. Gillmore , Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Chemistry at Hope College in Holland, MI. A native of New Jersey, he earned his B.S. (’96) and M.S. (’98) degrees in chemistry from Virginia Tech, and his Ph.D. (’03) in organic chemistry from the University of Rochester. After a short postdoctoral traineeship at Vanderbilt University, he joined the faculty at Hope in 2004. He has received the Dreyfus Start-up Award, Research Corporation Cottrell College Science Award, and NSF CAREER Award, and is currently on sabbatical as a Visiting Research Professor at Arizona State University. Professor Gillmore is the organizer of the Biennial Midwest Postdoc to PUI Professor (P3) Workshop co-sponsored by ACS, and a frequent panelist at the annual ACS Postdoc to Faculty (P2F) Workshops.

Other tips to help engage (or at least not turn off) your readers include:

• Avoid two-column formats.
• Avoid too-small fonts that hinder readability, especially as many will view the documents online rather than in print!
• Use good figures that are readable and broadly understandable!
• Use color as necessary but not gratuitously.

Accept & Close The ACS takes your privacy seriously as it relates to cookies. We use cookies to remember users, better understand ways to serve them, improve our value proposition, and optimize their experience. Learn more about managing your cookies at Cookies Policy .

1155 Sixteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036, USA |  service@acs.org  | 1-800-333-9511 (US and Canada) | 614-447-3776 (outside North America)

• Terms of Use
• Accessibility

Copyright © 2024 American Chemical Society

5 Simple Tips for Writing a Good Research Statement for a Faculty Position

Completed your Ph.D.? What next?

Traditionally, most sought-after jobs after completing Ph.D. are university professors and industry R&D labs professionals. While industrial jobs have seen a surge in applicants to various positions, academia has prominently been the most considered field by Ph.Ds. As a part of the job application for faculty positions in academia, applicants are required to present a research statement that outlines the research they have already completed.

Table of Contents

What is a Research Statement?

A research statement is a document that summarizes your research interests, accomplishments, current research, and future research conduction plans. Furthermore, it outlines how your work contributes to the field. It allows applicants to present the importance and impact of their past, current, and future research to their potential future colleagues. However, throughout your academic career, you may be asked to prepare similar documents for annual reviews, tenure packages, or promotion.

What is the Purpose of a Research Statement?

The purpose of a research statement isn’t just about exhibiting your research interests, achievement, or other academic feats. In fact, its purpose is to make a persuasive case about the importance of your completed work and the potential impact of your future trajectory in research. In other words, researchers must coherently write about their past and current research efforts and articulately present their future research plans.

Furthermore, a research statement’s purpose is to allow the search committee to envision the applicant’s research evolution, productivity, and potential contributions over the coming years. Your research statement must promisingly convey the benefits you bring to the position. In other words, these benefits could be in terms of grant money, faculty collaborations, student involvement in research, or development of new courses.

Three key purposes of a research statement are:

• Clear presentation of your academic feats.
• Description of your research in a broader context, both scientifically and societally.
• Laying out a clear road map for future endeavors concerning the newly applied position.

How is a Research Statement Different from a CV?

While your CV gives an overview of your past research projects, it does not address the details of conducted research or future research interests. Furthermore, a CV fails to answer some questions that can be easily answered through a research statement.

• Why are you interested in a particular research topic?
• Why is your research important?
• What techniques do you use?
• How have you contributed to your field?
• How can your research be applied commercially or academically?
• Does your research have an impact on allied fields?
• Is your research directing you to newer questions?
• How do you plan to develop new skills and knowledge?

What Should You Include in a Research Statement for Faculty Position?

With over hundreds of applications being received at various departments, your research statement must stand out from the crowd and address all points concerning the target position. Expectations for research statements may vary across disciplines. However, certain key elements must be included in a research statement, irrespective of the field.

• Academic specialty and interests.
• Dedication for research.
• Compatibility with departmental or university research efforts.
• Ideas about potential funding sources, collaborative partners, etc.
• Ability to work as a professional scholar.
• Capability to work as an independent researcher.
• Writing proficiency.
• Relevance of your research and its contribution to the field.
• Significant recognition received by your research such as publications, presentations, grants, awards, etc.
• Appropriate acknowledgment of other scholars’ work in your field by giving them credits where due.
• Degree of specificity for future research.
• Long-term and short-term research goals

How to Write a Research statement for Faculty Position?

An effective research statement must present a clear narrative of the relation between your past and current research. Additionally, it should clearly state how your research aligns with the goals, resources, and needs of the institution to which you are applying.

Here we discuss 5 simple tips for writing a good research statement:

As stated earlier, a faculty position may easily receive over a couple of hundred applications. Consequently, the search committee may just glance through some applications. Therefore, you must make your research statement reader-friendly.

Following tips will allow readers to quickly determine why should they select you over other applicants:

• Organize your ideas by using headings and sub-headings.
• Space out different sections properly.
• Additionally, include figures and diagrams to illustrate key findings or concepts.
• Avoid writing long paragraphs in your research statement. Moreover, a concise yet thoughtfully laid out research statement demonstrates your ability to organize ideas in a coherent and easy-to-understand manner.

2. Ensure to Present Your Focus on Research

• Discuss feasible research ideas that interest you.
• Explain how your goals are related to your recent work.
• Additionally, mention your short-term (2-5 years) and long-term (5+ years) research goals.
• Discuss your ideas about potential funding sources, collaborative partners, facilities, etc.
• Specifically mention how your research goals align with your department’s goals.

3. Tailor Your Research Statement

• It is imperative to mention how you will contribute to the research at the institution you are applying to.
• Mention how will you use core facilities or resources at the institution.
• Furthermore, you should mention particular research infrastructure present at the target institution that you may need to do your work.

4. Write for Each Audience

• Even at top-most institutions, not all members of the search committee may be aware of the intricacies of your research work. Therefore, you should avoid jargon and describe your research work in a detailed yet lucid manner.
• Your motive must be to instill a sense of belief in the reader that you are a dedicated researcher and not overwhelm them with finer details.
• Moreover, focus on conveying the importance of your work and its contribution to the field.

5. Be Yourself

In an attempt to impress the search committee, applicants are often seen to go overboard and come out as boastful.

• Emphasize your major academic achievements.
• Be realistic and do not present research goals that are too ambitious.
• Finally, avoid comparing your research statement with other applicants.

Did you decide on the faculty position you want to apply for? How do you plan to go ahead with your research statement? Follow these tips while writing your research statement to acquire your most desired faculty position .

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• AI in Academia
• Trending Now

Simplifying the Literature Review Journey — A comparative analysis of 6 AI summarization tools

Imagine having to skim through and read mountains of research papers and books, only to…

• Publishing Research
• Reporting Research

How to Optimize Your Research Process: A step-by-step guide

For researchers across disciplines, the path to uncovering novel findings and insights is often filled…

• Promoting Research

Plain Language Summary — Communicating your research to bridge the academic-lay gap

Science can be complex, but does that mean it should not be accessible to the…

8 Effective Strategies to Write Argumentative Essays

In a bustling university town, there lived a student named Alex. Popular for creativity and…

• Career Corner
• Diversity and Inclusion
• PhDs & Postdocs

Mentoring for Change: Creating an inclusive academic landscape through support programs

Imagine stepping into a world where everyone’s unique talents and backgrounds are not only recognized…

Mentoring for Change: Creating an inclusive academic landscape through support…

Reviving Your Research Career: Overcoming the roadblocks of resuming research after a…

Aiming for Academic Tenure? – 5 Things You Should Know Before Applying!

Statement of Purpose Vs. Personal Statement – A Guide for Early Career…

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

As a researcher, what do you consider most when choosing an image manipulation detector?

Faculty Application: Research Statement

Criteria for success.

• Clearly articulate your brand.
• Demonstrate the impact of your past work.
• Show that you are credible to carry out your proposed future research.
• Articulate the importance of your research vision.
• Match the standards within the department to which you are applying.
• Show that you are a good fit for the position.
• Polish. Avoid typos.

Structure Diagram

The typical structure and length of research statements vary widely across fields. If you are unsure of what is typical in the field where you are applying, be sure to check with someone who is familiar with the standards. 

In electrical engineering and computer science, research statements are usually around three pages long with a focus on past and current work, often following the structure in the diagram below.

Identify Your Purpose

Your cover letter and CV outline your past work and hint at a general direction of your future work but do not go into detail. Therefore, the purpose of a research statement is to emphasize the importance of your past work and describe your research vision. Both your past/current work and future work presented in the research statement should reflect your branding statement .  

In EECS, faculty research statements focus on past/current work. However, it is important to also include your vision for the future, which should build on your previous work. This statement should convince the committee that your future work is important, relevant, and feasible. The future work section should go beyond direct extensions of your doctoral or postdoctoral work; it should cover a 5-10 year span. Proposed future work should show scientific growth and convince the committee that you propose strong research directions for your future group. Your research statement can also include possible funding sources and collaborations.

Analyze Your Audience

Your audience is a faculty search committee, which is made up of professors from across the department, not just the ones in your research area. A typical search committee member is probably very busy reviewing lots of applications, and hence may not read your statement in depth until you make it to later rounds of the hiring process.

Knowing details of the job posting and what the faculty search committee is looking for will help you tailor your statement. If the call is for a specific research area (e.g., language processing, bioinformatics, algorithms, machine learning, systems), it is beneficial to motivate and emphasize the importance of your work in the language of that area whenever possible.

Structure your statement

Although there is usually no mandated structure for a research statement, it can be very helpful to a reader if the content flows naturally.

Use the hourglass concept. It makes a compelling introduction if a research statement presents motivation starting from the high-level picture and then zooms in to the main topic(s) of research. This is helpful for two reasons. First, a research statement is typically read by committee members from several research areas, so starting with a high-level picture gives members a gentle guidance to the meat of a work. Second, providing general motivation helps in showing how different pieces of research fit in a big puzzle.

After talking about specific results, the story typically zooms back out by discussing impact and future directions. It is best if future work has some concrete research directions and also widens up to touch on a broader perspective of research plans.

The diagram below summarizes the hourglass concept and provides one potential flow of content.

Use good formatting to help retain focus . A successful research statement is typically organized into three main parts: Introduction and motivation; past work/achievements; and vision/future work. Each of these parts can be divided into subsections.

In addition, you can help a reader focus their attention on the important content by:

• making each section/paragraph title tell a message;
• using bullet points and itemization while listing;
• using bold or italics to emphasize important keywords or sentences. 

Some institutions set constraints on the format of research statements, primarily constraints on length . Make sure that your research statement is tailored to the guidelines. It is helpful to prepare two versions of your statement — a long one and a short one. The short version is usually the long one stripped of many details with the emphasis on high-level pictures and ideas.

Say who you are

Your research statement tells a story about you. Think who you want to be in the eyes of committee members (e.g., a programming languages person, a machine learning expert, a theory professor) and which of your achievements you want them to remember.

Make your research statement echo your branding one . A successful research statement builds a story around the author’s branding statement. A strong point is made if past and future work are echoes of the same brand. 

Successful candidates outline their research agenda before stating actual results and after providing a background. Sometimes this is done even before giving background and motivation. In the latter case, the research agenda is typically stated briefly, and then reiterated with more context after providing the background.

Show credibility for your future work by your past work

Your past work is an excellent way to illustrate that you are fit for the future work you are proposing. Refer to some of your past work when outlining feasibility of your proposed future directions. Even if you aim to change your field of research, your past experience should still serve as a justification for why you are well suited for the new line of work.

Dedicate space to your strongest results . Describe your strongest results in the most detail. If you want to mention many papers, organize them into several themes. A successful statement communicates how obtained results affect a field or a research community. Impact of papers can be shown by awards, high number of citations, or follow up papers by other research groups. A reader will have limited time to go over your statement, so make sure that the reader’s attention is spent on your most impactful work. Note that your strongest results do not necessarily have to be your most recent ones; they can even be several years old. Nevertheless, it is still a good idea to also mention some of your recent work as it shows that you have been active lately as well.

Importantly, a research statement should be a coherent story about ideas and impact, not only an overview of published articles. Hence, it is often the case that a research statement does not discuss all papers published or all work done by the applicant.

Use figures to support important claims . Consider including figures . They can be used to support your claims about your results and/or in the future work section to illustrate your research plans. A well-made figure can help the reader quickly understand your work, but figures also take up a large amount of space. Use figures carefully, only to draw attention to the most important points.

Devote time!

Getting out a job application package takes an indefinitely long time (writing, addressing feedback, polishing, addressing feedback … aaaand polishing)! Start early and invest time.

Get feedback . Your application package will be read by committee members that are not necessarily in your research area. It is thus important to get feedback about your research statement from colleagues with different backgrounds and seniority. Note that it might take time for other people to share their feedback (remember, others are busy as well!), so plan ahead.

MIT EECS affiliates can also make an appointment with a Communication Fellow to obtain additional feedback on their statements.

Resources and Annotated Examples

Amy zhang research statement.

Submitted in 2018-2019 by Amy Zhang, now faculty at University of Washington 1 MB

Elena Glassman Research Statement

Submitted in 2017-2018 by Elena Glassman, now faculty at Harvard University 2 MB

• Enhancing Student Success
• Innovative Research
• Alumni Success
• About NC State

How to Construct a Compelling Research Statement

A research statement is a critical document for prospective faculty applicants. This document allows applicants to convey to their future colleagues the importance and impact of their past and, most importantly, future research. You as an applicant should use this document to lay out your planned research for the next few years, making sure to outline how your planned research contributes to your field.

Some general guidelines

(from Carleton University )

An effective research statement accomplishes three key goals:

• It clearly presents your scholarship in nonspecialist terms;
• It places your research in a broader context, scientifically and societally; and
• It lays out a clear road map for future accomplishments in the new setting (the institution to which you’re applying).

Another way to think about the success of your research statement is to consider whether, after reading it, a reader is able to answer these questions:

• What do you do (what are your major accomplishments; what techniques do you use; how have you added to your field)?
• Why is your work important (why should both other scientists and nonscientists care)?
• Where is it going in the future (what are the next steps; how will you carry them out in your new job; does your research plan meet the requirements for tenure at this institution)?

1. Make your statement reader-friendly

A typical faculty application call can easily receive 200+ applicants. As such, you need to make all your application documents reader-friendly. Use headings and subheadings to organize your ideas and leave white space between sections.

In addition, you may want to include figures and diagrams in your research statement that capture key findings or concepts so a reader can quickly determine what you are studying and why it is important. A wall of text in your research statement should be avoided at all costs. Rather, a research statement that is concise and thoughtfully laid out demonstrates to hiring committees that you can organize ideas in a coherent and easy-to-understand manner.

Also, this presentation demonstrates your ability to develop competitive funding applications (see more in next section), which is critical for success in a research-intensive faculty position.

2. Be sure to touch on the fundability of your planned research work

Another goal of your research statement is to make the case for why your planned research is fundable. You may get different opinions here, but I would recommend citing open or planned funding opportunities at federal agencies or other funders that you plan to submit to. You might also use open funding calls as a way to demonstrate that your planned research is in an area receiving funding prioritization by various agencies.

If you are looking for funding, check out this list of funding resources on my personal website. Another great way to look for funding is to use NIH Reporter and NSF award search .

3. Draft the statement and get feedback early and often

I can tell you from personal experience that it takes time to refine a strong research statement. I went on the faculty job market two years in a row and found my second year materials to be much stronger. You need time to read, review and reflect on your statements and documents to really make them stand out.

It is important to have your supervisor and other faculty read and give feedback on your critical application documents and especially your research statement. Also, finding peers to provide feedback and in return giving them feedback on their documents is very helpful. Seek out communities of support such as Future PI Slack to find peer reviewers (and get a lot of great application advice) if needed.

4. Share with nonexperts to assess your writing’s clarity

Additionally, you may want to consider sharing your job materials, including your research statement, with non-experts to assess clarity. For example, NC State’s Professional Development Team offers an Academic Packways: Gearing Up for Faculty program each year where you can get feedback on your application documents from individuals working in a variety of areas. You can also ask classmates and colleagues working in different areas to review your research statement. The more feedback you can receive on your materials through formal or informal means, the better.

5. Tailor your statement to the institution

It is critical in your research statement to mention how you will make use of core facilities or resources at the institution you are applying to. If you need particular research infrastructure to do your work and the institution has it, you should mention that in your statement. Something to the effect of: “The presence of the XXX core facility at YYY University will greatly facilitate my lab’s ability to investigate this important process.”

Mentioning core facilities and resources at the target institution shows you have done your research, which is critical in demonstrating your interest in that institution.

Finally, think about the resources available at the institution you are applying to. If you are applying to a primarily undergraduate-serving institution, you will want to be sure you propose a research program that could reasonably take place with undergraduate students, working mostly in the summer and utilizing core facilities that may be limited or require external collaborations.

Undergraduate-serving institutions will value research projects that meaningfully involve students. Proposing overly ambitious research at a primarily undergraduate institution is a recipe for rejection as the institution will read your application as out of touch … that either you didn’t do the work to research them or that you are applying to them as a “backup” to research-intensive positions.

You should carefully think about how to restructure your research statements if you are applying to both primarily undergraduate-serving and research-intensive institutions. For examples of how I framed my research statement for faculty applications at each type of institution, see my personal website ( undergraduate-serving ; research-intensive research statements).

6. Be yourself, not who you think the search committee wants

In the end, a research statement allows you to think critically about where you see your research going in the future. What are you excited about studying based on your previous work? How will you go about answering the unanswered questions in your field? What agencies and initiatives are funding your type of research? If you develop your research statement from these core questions, your passion and commitment to the work will surely shine through.

A closing thought: Be yourself, not who you think the search committee wants. If you try to frame yourself as someone you really aren’t, you are setting the hiring institution and you up for disappointment. You want a university to hire you because they like you, the work you have done, and the work you want to do, not some filtered or idealized version of you.

So, put your true self out there, and realize you want to find the right institutional fit for you and your research. This all takes time and effort. The earlier you start and the more reflection and feedback you get on your research statement and remaining application documents, the better you can present the true you to potential employers.

More Advice on Faculty Job Application Documents on ImPACKful

How to write a better academic cover letter

Tips on writing an effective teaching statement

More Resources

See here for samples of a variety of application materials from UCSF.

• Rules of the (Social Sciences & Humanities) Research Statement
• CMU’s Writing a Research Statement
• UW’s Academic Careers: Research Statements
• Developing a Winning Research Statement (UCSF)
• Academic Packways
• ImPACKful Tips

Leave a Response Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. All fields are required.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

More From The Graduate School

Advice From Newly Hired Assistant Professors 

Virtual Postdoc Research Symposium Elevates and Supports Postdoctoral Scholars Across North Carolina 

Expand Your Pack: Start or Join an Online Writing Group! 

• Undergraduate Students
• Masters Students
• PhD/Doctoral Students
• Postdoctoral Scholars
• Faculty & Staff
• Families & Supporters
• Prospective Students
• Explore Your Interests / Self-Assessment
• Build your Network / LinkedIn
• Search for a Job / Internship
• Create a Resume / Cover Letter
• Prepare for an Interview
• Negotiate an Offer
• Prepare for Graduate School
• Find Funding Opportunities
• Prepare for the Academic Job Market
• Search for a Job or Internship
• Advertising, Marketing, and Public Relations
• Arts & Entertainment
• Consulting & Financial Services
• Engineering & Technology
• Government, Law & Policy
• Hospitality
• Management & Human Resources
• Non-Profit, Social Justice & Education
• Retail & Consumer Services
• BIPOC Students & Scholars
• Current & Former Foster Youth
• Disabled Students & Scholars
• First-Generation Students & Scholars
• Formerly Incarcerated Students & Scholars
• International Students & Scholars
• LGBTQ+ Students & Scholars
• Students & Scholars with Dependents
• Transfer Students
• Undocumented Students & Scholars
• Women-Identifying Students & Scholars

Research Statements

• Share This: Share Research Statements on Facebook Share Research Statements on LinkedIn Share Research Statements on X

A research statement is used when applying for some academic faculty positions and research-intensive positions. A research statement is usually a single-spaced 1-2 page document that describes your research trajectory as a scholar, highlighting growth: from where you began to where you envision going in the next few years. Ultimately, research productivity, focus and future are the most highly scrutinized in academic faculty appointments, particularly at research-intensive universities. Tailor your research statement to the institution to which you are applying – if a university has a strong research focus, emphasize publications; if a university values teaching and research equally, consider ending with a paragraph about how your research complements your teaching and vice versa. Structures of these documents also varies by discipline. See two common structures below.

Structure One:

Introduction: The first paragraph should introduce your research interests in the context of your field, tying the research you have done so far to a distinct trajectory that will take you well into the future.

Summary Of Dissertation: This paragraph should summarize your doctoral research project. Try not to have too much language repetition across documents, such as your abstract or cover letter.

Contribution To Field And Publications: Describe the significance of your projects for your field. Detail any publications initiated from your independent doctoral or postdoctoral research. Additionally, include plans for future publications based on your thesis. Be specific about journals to which you should submit or university presses that might be interested in the book you could develop from your dissertation (if your field expects that). If you are writing a two-page research statement, this section would likely be more than one paragraph and cover your future publication plans in greater detail.

Second Project: If you are submitting a cover letter along with your research statement, then the committee may already have a paragraph describing your second project. In that case, use this space to discuss your second project in greater depth and the publication plans you envision for this project. Make sure you transition from your dissertation to your second large project smoothly – you want to give a sense of your cohesion as a scholar, but also to demonstrate your capacity to conceptualize innovative research that goes well beyond your dissertation project.

Wider Impact Of Research Agenda: Describe the broader significance of your work. What ties your research projects together? What impact do you want to make on your field? If you’re applying for a teaching-oriented institution, how would you connect your research with your teaching?

Structure Two:

25% Previous Research Experience: Describe your early work and how it solidified your interest in your field. How did these formative experiences influence your research interests and approach to research? Explain how this earlier work led to your current project(s).

25% Current Projects: Describe your dissertation/thesis project – this paragraph could be modeled on the first paragraph of your dissertation abstract since it covers all your bases: context, methodology, findings, significance. You could also mention grants/fellowships that funded the project, publications derived from this research, and publications that are currently being developed.

50% Future Work: Transition to how your current work informs your future research. Describe your next major project or projects and a realistic plan for accomplishing this work. What publications do you expect to come out of this research? The last part of the research statement should be customized to demonstrate the fit of your research agenda with the institution.

• DACA/Undocumented
• First Generation, Low Income
• International Students
• Students of Color
• Students with disabilities
• Undergraduate Students
• Master’s Students
• PhD Students
• Faculty/Staff
• Family/Supporters
• Career Fairs
• Post Jobs, Internships, Fellowships
• Build your Brand at MIT
• Recruiting Guidelines and Resources
• Connect with Us
• Career Advising
• Distinguished Fellowships
• Employer Relations
• Graduate Student Professional Development
• Prehealth Advising
• Student Leadership Opportunities
• Academia & Education
• Architecture, Planning, & Design
• Arts, Communications, & Media
• Business, Finance, & Fintech
• Computing & Computer Technology
• Data Science
• Energy, Environment, & Sustainability
• Life Sciences, Biotech, & Pharma
• Manufacturing & Transportation
• Health & Medical Professions
• Social Impact, Policy, & Law
• Getting Started & Handshake 101
• Exploring careers
• Networking & Informational Interviews
• Connecting with employers
• Resumes, cover letters, portfolios, & CVs
• Finding a Job or Internship
• Post-Graduate and Summer Outcomes
• Professional Development Competencies
• Preparing for Graduate & Professional Schools
• Preparing for Medical / Health Profession Schools
• Interviewing
• New jobs & career transitions
• Career Prep and Development Programs
• Employer Events
• Outside Events for Career and Professional Development
• Events Calendar
• Career Services Workshop Requests
• Early Career Advisory Board
• Peer Career Advisors
• Student Staff
• Mission, Vision, Values and Diversity Commitments
• News and Reports

Application Materials for a Faculty Job Search

• Share This: Share Application Materials for a Faculty Job Search on Facebook Share Application Materials for a Faculty Job Search on LinkedIn Share Application Materials for a Faculty Job Search on X

The following materials are commonly requested.  We encourage you to schedule an appointment with a career advisor to review your documents and discuss your plan. Get additional feedback on your materials from your faculty advisor and other mentors.

1) CV (curriculum vitae)  :  comprehensive scholarly record, including your research experience, teaching and mentoring experience, publication record, and more.  See more details on preparing a CV .

2) Cover letter :  1-2 page letter, addressed to search committee.  Include a brief summary of your academic background, highlights of past and future research, summary of teaching experiences and interests, and your fit with the department and school (why are you interested in that position?  How does your experience match the position ad?)

3) Research Statement:   A summary of your past research accomplishments, and a proposal for your future research plan as a faculty member. Include both your long-term vision, as well as concrete projects for your research group for the first 3-5 years. Length varies, but typically 3-6 pages.  See more advice on writing research statements .

4) Teaching Statement : A statement of your approaches and philosophy regarding teaching and learning. Include specific examples to illustrate your approaches from your past teaching experience, or propose specific ideas for how you would teach future courses. Include a statement of the broad courses you are qualified to teach, as well as any courses you would like to develop. Usually 1-2 pages.  See more advice on writing teaching statements .

5) Diversity Statement : A discussion of your past, present and future contributions to promoting equity, inclusion and diversity in your professional career. Typically 1-2 pages. See sample guidelines for writing a diversity statement .

/images/cornell/logo35pt_cornell_white.svg" alt="research plan for faculty position"> Cornell University --> Graduate School

Research statement, what is a research statement.

The research statement (or statement of research interests) is a common component of academic job applications. It is a summary of your research accomplishments, current work, and future direction and potential of your work.

The statement can discuss specific issues such as:

• funding history and potential
• requirements for laboratory equipment and space and other resources
• potential research and industrial collaborations
• how your research contributes to your field
• future direction of your research

The research statement should be technical, but should be intelligible to all members of the department, including those outside your subdiscipline. So keep the “big picture” in mind. The strongest research statements present a readable, compelling, and realistic research agenda that fits well with the needs, facilities, and goals of the department.

Research statements can be weakened by:

• overly ambitious proposals
• lack of clear direction
• lack of big-picture focus
• inadequate attention to the needs and facilities of the department or position

Why a Research Statement?

• It conveys to search committees the pieces of your professional identity and charts the course of your scholarly journey.
• It communicates a sense that your research will follow logically from what you have done and that it will be different, important, and innovative.
• It gives a context for your research interests—Why does your research matter? The so what?
• It combines your achievements and current work with the proposal for upcoming research.
• areas of specialty and expertise
• potential to get funding
• academic strengths and abilities
• compatibility with the department or school
• ability to think and communicate like a serious scholar and/or scientist

Formatting of Research Statements

The goal of the research statement is to introduce yourself to a search committee, which will probably contain scientists both in and outside your field, and get them excited about your research. To encourage people to read it:

• make it one or two pages, three at most
• use informative section headings and subheadings
• use bullets
• use an easily readable font size
• make the margins a reasonable size

Organization of Research Statements

Think of the overarching theme guiding your main research subject area. Write an essay that lays out:

• The main theme(s) and why it is important and what specific skills you use to attack the problem.
• A few specific examples of problems you have already solved with success to build credibility and inform people outside your field about what you do.
• A discussion of the future direction of your research. This section should be really exciting to people both in and outside your field. Don’t sell yourself short; if you think your research could lead to answers for big important questions, say so!
• A final paragraph that gives a good overall impression of your research.

Writing Research Statements

• Avoid jargon. Make sure that you describe your research in language that many people outside your specific subject area can understand. Ask people both in and outside your field to read it before you send your application. A search committee won’t get excited about something they can’t understand.
• Write as clearly, concisely, and concretely as you can.
• Keep it at a summary level; give more detail in the job talk.
• Ask others to proofread it. Be sure there are no spelling errors.
• Convince the search committee not only that you are knowledgeable, but that you are the right person to carry out the research.
• Include information that sets you apart (e.g., publication in  Science, Nature,  or a prestigious journal in your field).
• What excites you about your research? Sound fresh.
• Include preliminary results and how to build on results.
• Point out how current faculty may become future partners.
• Acknowledge the work of others.
• Use language that shows you are an independent researcher.
• BUT focus on your research work, not yourself.
• Include potential funding partners and industrial collaborations. Be creative!
• Provide a summary of your research.
• Put in background material to give the context/relevance/significance of your research.
• List major findings, outcomes, and implications.
• Describe both current and planned (future) research.
• Communicate a sense that your research will follow logically from what you have done and that it will be unique, significant, and innovative (and easy to fund).

Describe Your Future Goals or Research Plans

• Major problem(s) you want to focus on in your research.
• The problem’s relevance and significance to the field.
• Your specific goals for the next three to five years, including potential impact and outcomes.
• If you know what a particular agency funds, you can name the agency and briefly outline a proposal.
• Give broad enough goals so that if one area doesn’t get funded, you can pursue other research goals and funding.

Identify Potential Funding Sources

• Almost every institution wants to know whether you’ll be able to get external funding for research.
• Try to provide some possible sources of funding for the research, such as NIH, NSF, foundations, private agencies.
• Mention past funding, if appropriate.

Be Realistic

There is a delicate balance between a realistic research statement where you promise to work on problems you really think you can solve and over-reaching or dabbling in too many subject areas. Select an over-arching theme for your research statement and leave miscellaneous ideas or projects out. Everyone knows that you will work on more than what you mention in this statement.

Consider Also Preparing a Longer Version

• A longer version (five–15 pages) can be brought to your interview. (Check with your advisor to see if this is necessary.)
• You may be asked to describe research plans and budget in detail at the campus interview. Be prepared.
• Include laboratory needs (how much budget you need for equipment, how many grad assistants, etc.) to start up the research.

Samples of Research Statements

To find sample research statements with content specific to your discipline, search on the internet for your discipline + “Research Statement.”

• University of Pennsylvania Sample Research Statement
• Advice on writing a Research Statement (Plan) from the journal  Science

This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By continuing to use the site, you are accepting our use of cookies. Read the ACS privacy policy.

• ACS Publications

Writing the Research Plan for Your Academic Job Application

• Sep 8, 2017

Want to get that academic faculty job you’ve been dreaming about? Are you stressed about writing a lengthy research plan as part of the application process? Do not fear. ACS can provide you with guidance on writing a remarkable research plan needed for your academic job application so that you can stand out among other […]

Want to get that academic faculty job you’ve been dreaming about? Are you stressed about writing a lengthy research plan as part of the application process? Do not fear. ACS can provide you with guidance on writing a remarkable research plan needed for your academic job application so that you can stand out among other job applicants.

The mobile-friendly eBook entitled “ Writing the Research Plan for Your Academic Job Application ” includes tips on how to:

• Tailor your application for each school: Make sure you look at the guidelines that your university requires for the application. If your application matches the qualities of the type of candidate they want, the more likely you will be selected for the desired position. (i.e. Shania is applying to a university and sees that their “Desired Qualifications” list says they want someone who has a Bachelor of Science degree in Chemistry and knowledge using a certain type of equipment. When she includes this experience on her application, the recruiter will prioritize her as one of the top candidates.)
• Craft your research plan with your audience in mind: The audience reading your research plan will make or break your fate in getting your dream job. If the research plan grabs their attention, it will increase your chances of being hired. (i.e., Britney is starting to write her research plan and begins it with an engaging introduction and provides sufficient details that demonstrate her expertise in the field. If her goal and plan of execution intrigues the audience, she will become a standout candidate.)
• Determine the length of your plan: The recommended length for a research plan is ten pages. Additionally, you should have a proposal that is 3-5 pages long, which would serve as a summary of your roles and responsibilities if/when hired.

Want to show hiring managers that you’re the most qualified candidate? Download your free eBook to learn what it takes to write an effective research plan for your academic job application!

Want the latest stories delivered to your inbox each month?

Loading metrics

Open Access

Ten simple rules for giving an effective academic job talk

* E-mail: [email protected] (SAS); [email protected] (JOLS)

¶ ‡ SAS, LLS, and MRA contributed equally to this work. CEGA, ACB, ACRG, MJ, GSK, JSM, JM, and ROM also contributed equally to this work.

Affiliation Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, United States of America

Affiliation Department of Human Genetics, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, United States of America

• Shayna A. Sura, 
• Lauren L. Smith, 
• Monique R. Ambrose, 
• C. Eduardo Guerra Amorim, 
• Annabel C. Beichman, 
• Ana C. R. Gomez, 
• Mark Juhn, 
• Gaurav S. Kandlikar, 
• Julie S. Miller, 

Published: July 25, 2019

• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007163
• Reader Comments

Citation: Sura SA, Smith LL, Ambrose MR, Amorim CEG, Beichman AC, Gomez ACR, et al. (2019) Ten simple rules for giving an effective academic job talk. PLoS Comput Biol 15(7): e1007163. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007163

Editor: Fran Lewitter, Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, UNITED STATES

Copyright: © 2019 Sura et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: The authors acknowledge support from the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program (to SAS, ACB, and JSM under grant #DGE-1144087, and to GSK and JSM under grant #DGE-1650604), the NSF Postdoctoral Research Fellowship in Biology (to JSM under grant #DBI-1812292), and NSF research grants OCE-1335657 and DEB-1557022 (to JOL-S and ACRG). ACRG was supported by the CAPES Science Without Borders Doctoral Fellowship. ROM and JOL-S were supported by the US Department of Defense Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (RC-2635). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

You’ve finally completed your dissertation research and have your PhD in hand—yay! Maybe you’re also in the middle of a postdoctoral position. If you’re reading this article, chances are you are actively searching for and applying for faculty positions. (Check out reference [ 1 ] if you’re early in the application process and [ 2 ] for additional advice!) Unfortunately, many graduate students and postdocs are not taught the skills necessary for acquiring a faculty position after passing the “looks good on paper” part of the application and securing an on-campus interview. One of the last crucial steps in earning a faculty position is your academic job talk. No matter how great of a scientist you are, if you cannot give a compelling job talk, chances are low that you will be hired. Yet many candidates receive little guidance on how to ace this unique and vital test.

To help address this gap, we have put together these ten simple rules that will help you give an effective job talk. To be clear, these are rules developed for the academic job talk in a research-heavy department, which is typically in a seminar format. These rules are not targeted toward other formats such as chalk talks or teaching demonstrations, although some pointers may still apply. We are a group primarily composed of University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) faculty, postdocs, and graduate students who participated in two recent job searches in the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Department. We evaluated ten job talks over the span of 2 months and discussed their strengths and weaknesses in a weekly seminar course. These ten rules are based on our discussions of what worked (and what didn’t) across the variety of job talks we observed, as well as our various experiences on the job market and search committees over the years.

Rule 1: Know your audience

As with any seminar or presentation, when preparing your job talk, you want to target your specific audience. Therefore, you need to consider the background knowledge and interests of the audience members. Learn as much as you can about the position and what institutional needs the position is meant to address within the department and broader university. If you’re applying for a position within a specific department, what is the scope of the research in that department? Does it have a mission statement? Are any strategic aims or future plans publicly available? Does the department work closely with other academic units on campus, and does the position you’ve applied for have any formal ties to other units? To answer some of these questions, you should read the job ad closely, read about the current faculty’s research, and look through the department’s web page (see also Rule 7 [Understand your potential new workplace] and 8 [Understand your new colleagues] from reference [ 3 ]). If you’re lucky enough to have network connections to the department, use them now to get insights before you visit. We also recommend that after you receive an invitation to interview, you consider setting up a phone call with the chair of the search committee to inquire about the job and ask any specific questions you have regarding the job or department. In particular, it is a good idea to ask what the search committee is looking for—it may have been a long time since the job ad was released, and the search committee’s focus may have shifted from what was initially stated. We recommend a phone conversation as opposed to an emailed list of questions because it saves time; also, people are often more candid and may provide more useful insights over the phone. Depending on when your job talk occurs during your interview schedule, you might even make small changes to customize your talk based on interviews and meetings with department members prior to your talk.

Rule 2: Sell yourself

The faculty and search committee are trying to choose the candidate they’ll be most excited to have as a new colleague, so you need to showcase the reasons you’re their best choice! It is smart to include an explicit introduction about yourself—i.e., the kind of science you do, your grand aims, and your approach to research. You want to communicate your identity as a researcher and, if appropriate given your career stage and research plans, how this differentiates you from your mentors (reference [ 4 ] is an excellent resource).

You also want to convey other traits as a scientist and potential colleague. Reflect on the qualities that make you an exceptional researcher (creative, persistent, thoughtful, rigorous, multidisciplinary, etc.), as well as the specific traits that your audience will be looking for, and try to demonstrate them subtly to the audience over the course of the talk via examples in your work. Consider ways to demonstrate your fundamental strengths as a scientist, such as the ability to question your methods and results to pursue deeper and more robust conclusions. If you have any particular successes on your record, such as big grants or markers of professional stature, don’t be shy about mentioning them (but don’t brag!). Having your publication citations and/or grants listed in smaller text at the bottom of corresponding slides is one way to show your accomplishments without explicitly mentioning them. Finally, you can casually highlight additional non-research skills (e.g., mentoring, outreach, collaborations) throughout your talk. For example, give credit to an excellent mentee who contributed to the data collection or to a gifted collaborator who added a component to your study. Your application materials likely included many of these things, but if you can find ways to incorporate them in your talk, a broader audience can see the full package of who you are.

Keep in mind Rule 1 (Know your audience) when deciding how best to showcase yourself, as different disciplines and subfields may vary in their perceptions of what makes a good scientist. For example, disciplines may vary in their appreciation for deep thought into specific mechanisms and experimental designs versus mathematical elegance and rigor. Others may prize applied over fundamental research or vice versa. This may be especially challenging if your research is interdisciplinary, so make sure to investigate what factors are valued most highly by the decision makers in the audience for your talk so you can design your talk to emphasize those aspects of your work.

Rule 3: Impress the in-crowd…

Likely there will be people in the audience who work in the same field as you. Make sure to impress these experts with your knowledge and convince them you are worthy of being their colleague. You want to show them you have the sophistication and skills necessary to tackle advanced problems. Therefore, it’s a good idea to do at least one “deep dive” during your talk in which you include one or two “muscle-flexing” slides. By this we mean slides with technical content that the general audience member may not be able to fully understand but for which you can flex your intellectual muscles and showcase your skills. Importantly, do not bluff or bluster in this section—a technical error in your deep dive would be fatal.

These deep dives shouldn’t be long, or you risk losing most of your audience. However, a glimpse into the more advanced aspects of your work will convey that you’re able to play in the big leagues in your field. Just make sure to reengage your audience after this show of prowess, ideally providing a big-picture summary of what you’ve just shown.

Rule 4: … but also appeal to the out-crowd

In addition to impressing the specialists in the audience, you want to make sure the people who work outside your discipline are able to follow and enjoy your presentation. When preparing your talk, consider how you can present and frame the material so that even audience members from far-flung disciplines are engaged and can appreciate the broader relevance of your presentation. Be attuned to the breadth of the department you’re visiting, as this can present various communication challenges. The diverse interests of faculty in a broad department (e.g., biology) can make it difficult to make your research program appealing to everyone. However, it can also be difficult communicating to a more focused department (e.g., molecular genetics) if your research is not exactly in line with what everyone else does. It helps to summarize the important findings of your research as you present them, in addition to their implications and why they are exciting, in case not everyone followed the technical aspects of your results. You can also make it easier for audience members from other fields to follow your talk by avoiding excess jargon and keeping your messages clear.

Emphasize the themes in your work that relate to the job and department you’re interviewing for. If applicable and appropriate, it can help to subtly highlight connections between your research to research of other members of the department who have different specialties. But be careful not to overdo this, as it can become distracting.

Rule 5: Play the hand you’ve got to optimal effect

Strategic choice of topics to include in your talk from among your entire research portfolio is critical for giving an effective and memorable job talk. Depending upon what career stage you are in (just finished PhD, postdoc, assistant professor, etc.), you may have a smaller or larger research portfolio. For an hour-long job talk, it is unlikely you will be able to effectively discuss everything you have ever done. And that’s okay, because that is what a CV is for!

For your job talk, you need to assess your portfolio of published work, unpublished but completed work, and ongoing projects to determine which projects showcase your work most effectively and best match what the department is looking for in a future colleague. The most effective talk structures we observed were ones that focused on 2–3 research studies and that combined higher-level information with a few “deep dives” into the nitty gritty of a particular study ( Fig 1 ). This talk structure will help you satisfy Rules 3 and 4 above, which discuss how you want your whole audience to understand and appreciate your talk, while also presenting the “meat” of your research and impressing those most familiar with your field. If you feel that this design doesn’t convey the breadth or quantity of your productivity, consider adding a slide or two on the conceptual structure of your full research program in which you can show (with all your best citations) how all the pieces fit together.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

You want to start broad during the introduction to get everyone on board and then go into more depth on a few specific studies, including some “deep dives” to show off expert knowledge. Finally, you want to conclude your talk on a broad scale similar to your introduction. The dashed lines indicate flexibility in how many specific studies you incorporate into your talk, based upon your own research portfolio.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007163.g001

In addition to presenting on your past and ongoing research, you need to clearly articulate your plan for your future research program. Tell the audience (and your potential future colleagues!) about your vision for your research lab both in the immediate future (next couple of years) and in the long term (5–10 years from now). This should also help differentiate you and your research from your previous mentors and their research programs. A critical part of establishing and maintaining a research program is your ability to generate funding. If you have already secured funding for your future research plans or you have a track record of successfully acquiring funding, then this is a great opportunity to bring this to your audience’s attention. If you don’t have independent funding yet, you can still demonstrate your awareness of the funding landscape and which funding opportunities are likely to support your research program. For example, in your future directions section, you might briefly touch on how one (or more) of your research questions aligns well with promising funding opportunities in your field, such as open research grants.

In organizing the structure of your talk and your transitions between topics, strive for a cohesive narrative that will make your talk more enjoyable to follow and easier to recall afterwards. What’s the progression of your research? How did one study lead to the next, and what shaped your decisions about how to proceed? What ideas do you have for future research at this new job? Telling a story is always a great way to keep your audience engaged and makes your science more memorable.

Rule 6: Give a good talk

A classic early paper in this series [ 5 ] provides ten useful rules for giving a good presentation. Read it! Showing you are a competent oral communicator is a vital component of giving an academic job talk. In addition to the universal suggestions from [ 5 ] (such as practicing for fluidity without over-rehearsing, making eye contact with the audience, and being enthusiastic and excited about your work), there are a few other pointers to bear in mind for a job talk. First, be aware that your job talk will be judged as an indicator of your ability to teach. Teaching is a crucial element of most academic jobs, but interview schedules often don’t allow time to address it explicitly, so this doubles your incentive to give a clear and engaging presentation. Bonus points if you are able to expand people’s understanding of technical aspects of your work—for instance, with a lucid explanation of your deep dive. Second, the job talk is a direct measure of your ability to sell your work and to act as an ambassador for the department in your future speaking engagements. Third, Rule 4 from [ 5 ] is “Make the take-home message persistent,” and this is a particular priority in the swirl of an academic search in which four or five candidates may visit over the span of a few weeks. We found that a strong thematic structure, including outline and summary slides, was an effective way to emphasize and reiterate your key points and make them memorable for the audience.

Our next three pointers are more pragmatic, but they are still useful to consider. First, be sure to ask for guidance on talk length if you’re unsure. For an hour-long seminar, the actual presentation length is typically 45–50 minutes, allowing for the fact that your host may burn precious minutes introducing you, and being certain to leave time for questions. Second, you should also make sure you understand the audiovisual equipment setup in the room where you are giving your presentation. If there isn’t seminar preparation time on your schedule, ask for it! This way, you can ensure your presentation is loaded properly, your presentation slides appear how you expect, and you are able to navigate through them without glitches. It is a good idea to save your presentation in multiple formats in case you encounter compatibility issues with the primary format (e.g., if your presentation is in PowerPoint, also save a PDF backup version). Third, don’t give your presentation while hungry. You want to exude energy and confidence, which may be difficult if you give a seminar later in the afternoon after many meetings and haven’t eaten since lunch—so take note of your schedule and, if necessary, bring a snack to revive your energy levels before your talk.

The pragmatic pointers we mentioned are great for planning ahead, but overall, you should be adaptable. Problems can arise unexpectedly, and it’s possible you’ll be delayed by interruptions or a lengthy introduction. Do your best to not get flustered, to handle yourself with grace, and to end your talk on time. Make a note of places in your talk where you can go into greater depth if you’re running ahead of schedule or places (particularly toward the end) where you can skim over the details more quickly if you’re behind schedule.

Rule 7: Be kind to your audience’s eyes

Your slides should enhance your presentation, not distract from what you are saying. Make sure your slide aesthetics are appealing to the audience. Your slides should be clear and concise, without too much text. When you have text-heavy slides, you lose some proportion of your audience’s attention while they read the text instead of listening to your words. So only display text that emphasizes the key points you will say out loud. Also, since the figures and images you present are especially important, you will want to construct figures specifically for your slides, keeping in mind that formatting for a presentation is typically different from formatting for a published paper. Refer to Box 1 for additional advice on qualities of good slides and common mistakes to avoid. You should also check out [ 5 , 6 ] for additional advice, noting that the rules in [ 6 ] are not specific to figures for presentations.

Box 1. Qualities of good slides versus slide qualities to be avoided

Slide qualities to aim for:

• ○. Minimal text.
• ○. Figures that are readable and easily understood.
• ○. Figures created specifically for talks (rather than pulled directly from a paper). Talk figures are generally simpler than figure panels from a paper, with fewer items per plot, a focus on the key points, larger labels and axes, etc. Avoid having to tell your audience to ignore parts of the figure by remaking the figure without extraneous information.
• ○. If you have a complicated figure, you can animate your slides to build up the complexity as you explain it to the audience. For example, you can start by showing only a very simple plot and then layer on additional pieces of information as you explain them.
• ○. Clean background.
• ○. Consistent design throughout the talk.
• ○. Color-blind-friendly color palettes or alternative ways to distinguish differences on figures besides just color (e.g., using dotted versus solid lines to represent different measures in a plot).
• ○. Simple visual markers (silhouettes or clip art) that link ideas across slides and jog your audience’s memory (e.g., a human silhouette next to parameters estimated from human data and a mouse silhouette next to data estimated from mice).

Slide qualities to avoid:

• Too much text.
• Text that’s too small to read or overlaid on an image so that it’s not legible.
• Busy background (e.g., photograph) that distracts from the text and/or figures you’re showing on the slide.
• Figures with no or unreadable axis labels.
• Poor color combinations, including combinations that are difficult for color-blind viewers to make out (e.g., red/green, blue/green).
• Visual markers that don’t convey any meaningful information, such as changing fonts and background colors. Even minor inconsistencies are distracting and convey a lack of attention to detail.

Rule 8: Embody the future

Remember that you are the exciting next generation of scientists! Make sure to share your enthusiasm and your fresh ideas for research. Emphasize how your work is new and innovative, whether by showing new solutions to old problems or by describing ways to approach problems that have only recently been recognized. If appropriate, highlight how you will harness the latest technologies and methodological developments to advance your research. This will get the audience thinking about applications to their own research programs and how you’d be a valuable colleague to have around.

You can also emphasize other forward-looking traits you would bring to the job. Maybe you have developed a new online resource or are using a new mentoring or teaching style that helps make research more broadly accessible for students. Find ways to showcase how you are moving science forward and how you’ll be a dynamic force for years to come.

Rule 9: Don’t blow it in the question-and-answer session

You’re almost done with your job talk, so don’t blow it during the question-and-answer (Q&A) session! You want to leave your audience with the best final impression and show that you can think and speak clearly in unscripted moments.

Here are some tips for a strong finish. When someone asks you a question, it can be helpful to paraphrase the question before beginning your answer. This gives you some extra time to compose your own thoughts and make sure you understood the question and ensures the rest of the audience hears the question. Regarding your actual responses, one cardinal rule is to never bluff. If you don’t know the answer, you can say so, but then show how you would think through the question, or relate it to something you have done or know about. If somebody voices a fair criticism, then acknowledge it and discuss approaches to addressing it. If you can, convey enthusiasm in this situation—if it’s truly an idea you’ve never considered, then treat this as an exciting and valuable scientific exchange, not an oral exam you are failing.

Remember that your audience likely includes people from outside your area of expertise, so it is possible you will get questions that seem to have missed key ideas from your talk. As with all questions, make sure you understand what the questioner is asking, and then take advantage of the opportunity to address any misunderstandings in a respectful, productive way. This is a great chance to demonstrate your ability to explain concepts clearly and concisely.

If there are predictable follow-up questions to your presentation, it can be helpful to have a few extra slides prepared. For example, if you presented a mathematical model using a schematic diagram, you may want to have a backup slide that shows the actual equations in case someone asks for more detail. If there is an extra data set or analysis that you’d love to include but just don’t have the time, then a spare slide or two might enable you to deliver a home-run response if you get asked the right question.

Finally, remember to handle yourself with grace during the Q&A session. Be poised, calm, and respectful, and demonstrate your intellectual maturity—all of these are qualities people admire and are seeking in a future colleague. Another past article in this series gives rules for building your scientific reputation [ 7 ]; Rules 1, 2, and 3 are useful during both the Q&A session and the whole interview process! Which brings us to Rule 10.

Rule 10: Be professional

Throughout this whole process, remember you are asking the host department to hire you as a (hopefully) long-term colleague in a small, tight-knit unit. Therefore, it is important to present a good image of yourself. You should dress appropriately for your job talk (i.e., not too casually). Even if you end up being a bit overdressed, it is better to leave that impression rather than showing up underdressed and being remembered as not having taken the job talk seriously. Be conscious of your body language and use of slang throughout your job talk and in any interactions you have during your visit. Humor can be a wonderful way to humanize and enliven your talk, but don’t overdo it, and steer well clear of anything potentially offensive. While you are answering questions, or if you happen to be interrupted during your talk, remember to show yourself in the best light by being polite and calm, even if an audience member is being confrontational or rude.

You are an amazing and productive scientist (you wouldn’t have been invited to give a job talk if you weren’t!), but it’s important to be clear about your specific contributions to the various research projects you present, particularly when the research is part of a big collaboration. It’s essential to acknowledge your collaborators, especially junior mentees. This shows your audience that you are ready to mentor undergraduates, graduates, postdocs, etc., and most importantly, that you do not take collaborators’ contributions for granted or claim them as your own. It’s also good practice to acknowledge relevant previous work that your research and ideas are building upon, as you never know who is in your audience, and you don’t want anyone to feel you are uninformed about or taking credit for this prior research. Again, you’re asking to be hired into an academic family, and you want your new family members to be comfortable and excited about pursuing new research opportunities with you.

Finally, it is a nice touch to write thank-you notes after your visit (but see Rule 10 from [ 3 ] for an alternative opinion). These notes can be sent by email within a few days after the end of your job interview. How many you send is up to you, but we suggest sending follow-up notes to at least the search chair and the other key players in your interview visit. And don’t forget about all the people who helped coordinate the logistical details for your visit!

In summary, the academic job talk is unlike most other seminars in its goals, context, and aspects of its execution. We have outlined some rules to help you put your best face forward in the job market (and to help all of us get the most out of the job search experience). There are additional resources online (e.g., [ 8 ] and [ 9 ] as two examples), and people should glean whatever insights they can from these sources. So do your preparation, nail the talk, and go get that job!

Acknowledgments

This paper arose from discussions in a graduate seminar course jointly led by KEL and JOL-S. We thank other participants in the course including Katie Gostic, Natalie Lozano, and Bernard Kim for their thoughts on these topics.

• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 8. Reis RM. Giving a job talk in the sciences. 30 March 2011 [cited 2019 May 15]. In: The Chronicle of Higher Education [Internet]. Available from: https://www.chronicle.com/article/Giving-a-Job-Talk-in-the/45375 .
• 9. Aguilar SJ. Tips for a successful job talk. 10 January 2018 [cited 2019 May 15]. In: Inside Higher Ed [Internet]. Available from https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2018/01/10/advice-giving-effective-job-presentation-opinion .

Understanding and solving intractable resource governance problems.

• In the Press
• Conferences and Talks
• Exploring models of electronic wastes governance in the United States and Mexico: Recycling, risk and environmental justice
• The Collaborative Resource Governance Lab (CoReGovLab)
• Water Conflicts in Mexico: A Multi-Method Approach
• Past projects
• Publications and scholarly output
• Research Interests
• Higher education and academia
• Public administration, public policy and public management research
• Research-oriented blog posts
• Stuff about research methods
• Research trajectory
• Publications
• Developing a Writing Practice
• Outlining Papers
• Publishing strategies
• Writing a book manuscript
• Writing a research paper, book chapter or dissertation/thesis chapter
• Everything Notebook
• Literature Reviews
• Note-Taking Techniques
• Organization and Time Management
• Planning Methods and Approaches
• Qualitative Methods, Qualitative Research, Qualitative Analysis
• Reading Notes of Books
• Reading Strategies
• Teaching Public Policy, Public Administration and Public Management
• My Reading Notes of Books on How to Write a Doctoral Dissertation/How to Conduct PhD Research
• Writing a Thesis (Undergraduate or Masters) or a Dissertation (PhD)
• Reading strategies for undergraduates
• Social Media in Academia
• Resources for Job Seekers in the Academic Market
• Writing Groups and Retreats
• Regional Development (Fall 2015)
• State and Local Government (Fall 2015)
• Public Policy Analysis (Fall 2016)
• Regional Development (Fall 2016)
• Public Policy Analysis (Fall 2018)
• Public Policy Analysis (Fall 2019)
• Public Policy Analysis (Spring 2016)
• POLI 351 Environmental Policy and Politics (Summer Session 2011)
• POLI 352 Comparative Politics of Public Policy (Term 2)
• POLI 375A Global Environmental Politics (Term 2)
• POLI 350A Public Policy (Term 2)
• POLI 351 Environmental Policy and Politics (Term 1)
• POLI 332 Latin American Environmental Politics (Term 2, Spring 2012)
• POLI 350A Public Policy (Term 1, Sep-Dec 2011)
• POLI 375A Global Environmental Politics (Term 1, Sep-Dec 2011)

Preparing a research statement for an academic job application

This is not my first blog post on research statements (this one on research statements and research trajectories and this other on research pipelines, research trajectories and research programmes are quite related), but this is perhaps the first time I write about and address the Research Statement as a key component of job applications for tenure-track or post-doctoral positions. We all know how angry and upset I feel about the dismal state of the academic job market(s). However, let us assume that you still want to apply for tenure-track (TT) jobs. I do have some experience applying for (and landing) TT jobs, as well as chairing search committees for these positions. I have also sat on search committees, and have read hundreds of applications. These are thus a few pointers that I think might help potential applicants write their statements.

We all know the huge role that luck, connections, institutional “pedigree” and other factors play, but for purposes of helping those who want to apply, some ideas that you all may want to consider in crafting your Research Statements. This blog post started as a Twitter thread so I’ve pulled from there too.

One way to write your research statement is to follow a similar model to the blog post I wrote here https://t.co/A3FaGQkeCU DO NOTE: In this post, I wrote about writing a Research Statement and crafting a Research Trajectory. This was not by chance. There’s a logic to this. — Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) July 25, 2020

Personally, I think that when departments and universities hire you, they want to see how you develop your work through time . In that sense, the Research Statement that you arrive with (at the time of application) is STATIC . You present a SNAPSHOT of what you’ve done so far.

In my personal view (please don’t take my suggestions as dogma or guidelines!), I think that there is value in developing both a Research Statement and a Research Trajectory (this one is worth considering in both ex-ante and ex-post modes)

A Research Trajectory can one (or both) of two things:

1) it can present a narrative in timeline form of how your thinking has evolved.

2) it can present your Research Plan for the next 5-6 years (pandemics and life will obviously derail that plan!)

So what I have done with my own Research Statements is to present how my research interests have evolved through time. In that sense, my Research Statement is a STATIC snapshot at a certain point in time (at the time of writing, of course!) of how my different research strands have evolved through time (that is, of my Research Trajectory ). Below is an example of how I have done self-reflection about my own Research Statement.

Last year I was invited to participate in a global workshop of a few selected scholars on the future of environmental policy, which surprised a couple of people. Well, here’s the thing: at the beginning of my career, I *was* a specialist in environmental policy instruments.

Now, my own thinking about the importance, value, structure and content of the Research Plan, Research Trajectory, Research Pipeline and Research Statement has evolved (most recent iteration can be found here https://t.co/nNMDnKa3Gm ) What must be clear from my blog is that… — Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) July 25, 2020

… to observe and read many Research Statements (or research narratives, as you may want to call them), but I recently came across @paullagunes ‘ revamped website, and I really, really liked how he narrates his work https://t.co/dWdYJbHjvT Paul explains his projects through time — Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) July 25, 2020

Paul also explains very well how his work contributes to theoretical debates and the empirical literature. Paul is an excellent writer and you may consider reading through his website and published work to see how he crafts his narratives.

If people want to learn more about how to craft a Research Statement, I think one strategy would be to poke around and read the “Research” pages of various scholars’ websites to find patterns. That is how I have learned much of what I now write about, by looking at many scholars’ strategies, distilling them and adapting them into something that works FOR ME.

I said I had two pieces of advice. But in reality, I think it’s just that one: for me, a Research Statement of a candidate tells me what they’ve done, if/where it is published or under review, and how those pieces of work fit a coherent, cohesive narrative of their research .

As someone with interdisciplinary training who continues to do interdisciplinary work, I often struggle when people want to categorize me (am I a geographer, a political scientist, a public administration scholar, a sociologist?). Truth be told, the way I have made peace with this challenge of being interdisciplinary when being in disciplinary departments (who say they want interdisciplinarity but judge you by their disciplinary norms) is to show how my work speaks to the debates of their discipline.

Also, my work (though it cuts through different disciplines and methods), is centred around ONE key question that has puzzled me my entire life: what drives agents to cooperate and collaborate? ?

Studying collaborative behaviour has led me to write on environmental activism and transnational coalitions.

And yes, I study cooperation and collaboration, but often times there are factors that preclude these and lead to disputes, which is why I ALSO study protests, activist mobilization and conflict: https://t.co/cwOJ6mkrcO Studying water conflict has led me to study this resource. — Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) July 25, 2020

… the study of cooperation and conflict for the governance of orthodox and unorthodox commons (or common pool resources). Anyhow, just my two cents in hopes this thread may help those crafting their research statements. </end thread> — Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) July 25, 2020

You can share this blog post on the following social networks by clicking on their icon.

Posted in academia .

Tagged with research pipeline , research plan , research statement , research trajectory .

No comments

By Raul Pacheco-Vega – July 31, 2020

0 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post .

Leave a Reply Cancel Some HTML is OK

Name (required)

Email (required, but never shared)

or, reply to this post via trackback .

About Raul Pacheco-Vega, PhD

Find me online.

My Research Output

• Google Scholar Profile
• Academia.Edu
• ResearchGate

My Social Networks

• Polycentricity Network

Recent Posts

• “State-Sponsored Activism: Bureaucrats and Social Movements in Brazil” – Jessica Rich – my reading notes
• Reading Like a Writer – Francine Prose – my reading notes
• Using the Pacheco-Vega workflows and frameworks to write and/or revise a scholarly book
• On framing, the value of narrative and storytelling in scholarly research, and the importance of asking the “what is this a story of” question
• The Abstract Decomposition Matrix Technique to find a gap in the literature

Recent Comments

• Hazera on On framing, the value of narrative and storytelling in scholarly research, and the importance of asking the “what is this a story of” question
• Kipi Fidelis on A sequential framework for teaching how to write good research questions
• Razib Paul on On framing, the value of narrative and storytelling in scholarly research, and the importance of asking the “what is this a story of” question
• Jonathan Wilcox on An improved version of the Drafts Review Matrix – responding to reviewers and editors’ comments
• Catherine Franz on What’s the difference between the Everything Notebook and the Commonplace Book?

Follow me on Twitter:

Proudly powered by WordPress and Carrington .

Carrington Theme by Crowd Favorite

• CREd Library , Planning, Managing, and Publishing Research

Developing a Five-Year Research Plan

Cathy binger and lizbeth finestack, doi: 10.1044/cred-pvd-path006.

The following is a transcript of the presentation videos, edited for clarity.

What Is a Research Plan, and Why Do You Need One?

Presented by Cathy Binger

First we’re going to talk about what a research plan is, why it’s important to write one, and why five years—why not one year, why not ten years. So we’ll do some of those basic things, then Liza is going to get down and dirty into the nitty-gritty of “now what” how do I go about writing that research plan.

First of all, what is a research plan? I’m sure some of you have taken a stab at these already. In case you haven’t, this is a real personalized map that relates your projects to goals. It’s exactly what it sounds like, it’s a plan of how you’re going to go about doing your research. It doesn’t necessarily just include research.

It’s something that you need to put a little time and effort into in the beginning. And then, if you don’t revisit it, it’s really a useless document. It’s something that you need to come back to repeatedly, at least annually, and you need to make it visible. So it’s not a document that sits around and once a year you pull it out and look at it.

It can and should be designed, especially initially, with the help of a mentor or colleague. And it does serve multiple purposes, with different lengths and different amounts of detail.

I forgot to say, too, getting started, the slides for this talk were started using as a jumping off point Ray Kent’s talk from last year. So some of the slides we’ve borrowed from him, so many thanks to him for that.

But why do we want to do a research plan? Well, to me the big thing is the vision. Dr. Barlow talked this morning about your line of research and really knowing where you want to go, and this is where that shows up with all the nuts and bolts in place.

What do you want to accomplish? What do you want to contribute? Most of you are at the stage in your career where maybe you have started out with that you want to change the world scenario and realized that whatever you wanted your first research project to be, really, is your entire career. You need to get that down to the point where it is manageable projects that you can do—this is where you map out what those projects are and set reasonable timelines for that.

You want to really demonstrate your independent thinking and your own creativity, whatever that is that you then establish as a PhD student, postdoc, and beyond—this is where you come back to, okay, here’s how I’m going to go about achieving all of that.

This next point, learning to realistically gauge how long it takes to achieve each goal, this for most of us is a phenomenally challenging thing to do. Most of us really overestimate what we can do in a certain amount of time, and we learn the hard way that you can’t, and that’s another reason why you keep coming back to these plans repeatedly and learning over time what’s really manageable, what’s really doable, so we can still reach our goals and be very strategic about how we do that.

When you’re not strategic, you just don’t meet the goals. Your time gets sucked into so many different things. We need to be really practical and strategic.

Everything we do is going to take longer than we think.

I think this last one is something that maybe we don’t talk about enough. Really being honest with ourselves about the role of research in our lives. Not all of you are at very high-level research universities. Some of you have chosen to go elsewhere, where research maybe isn’t going to be playing the same role as it is for other people. The research plan for someone at an R One research intensive university is going to look quite different from someone who is at a primary teaching university. We need to be open and practical about that.

Getting sidetracked. I love this picture, I just found this picture the other day. This feels like my life. You can get pulled in so many different directions once you are a professor. You will get asked to do a thousand different things. There are lots of great opportunities that are out there. Especially initially, it’s tempting to say yes to all of them. But if you’re going to be productive, you have to be very strategic. I’m going to be a little bit sexist against my own sex here for a minute, but my observation has been that women tend to fall into this a little bit more than men do in wanting to say yes and be people pleasers for everything that comes down the pike.

It is a professional skill to learn how to say no. And to do that in such a way that you are not burning bridges as you go down the path. That is a critical skill if you are going to be a successful researcher. I can’t tell you how many countless people I’ve seen who are very bright, very dedicated, have the skills that it takes in terms of doing the work—but then they are not successful because they’ve gotten sidetracked and they try to be too much of a good citizen, give too much service to the department, too much “sure I’ll take on that extra class” or whatever else comes down the line.

I just spoke with a professor recently who had something like five hours a week of office hours scheduled every single week for one class. Margaret is shaking her head like “are you kidding?” That’s crazy stuff. But he wanted to really support his students. His students loved him, but he was not going to get tenure. That’s the story.

So we have to be very thoughtful and strategic, and what can help you with this, and ASHA very firmly recognizes which is why we’re here—is that your mentors in your life should be there to help you learn these skills and learn what to say yes to, and learn what to say no to. I’ve learned to say things like, “Let me check with my mentor before I agree to that.” And it gives you a way out of that. The line that I use a lot is, “Let me check with my department head” or, I just said this to somebody last week, “I just promised my department head two weeks ago that I would only do X number of external workshops this year, so I’m going to have to turn this one down.” Those are really important skills to develop.

And having that research plan in place that you can go back to and say, know what, it’s not on my plan I can’t do it. If I do it—I have to go back to my research plan and figure out what I’m going to kick off in order to review this extra paper, in order to take on this extra task. The plan also helps me to know exactly what to say no to. And to be very direct and have a very strong visual.

I actually have my research plan up on a giant whiteboard in my office, so I can always go back to that and see where I am, and I can say, “Okay, what am I going to kick off of here? Nothing. Okay, I have to say no to whatever comes up.” Just be strategic. This is where I see most beginning professors really end up taking that wrong fork in the road—taking that right instead of that left, and ending up not being the successful researcher that they wanted to be.

What evidence supports research planning? This was something Ray Kent had found. That a recent analysis had found that postdoc scholars who developed a written plan with their postdoc advisers were much more productive than those who didn’t. And your performance during a postdoc—and I know many of you have either finished your postdoc or decided not to—so more simply, just during those first six years, the decisions you make really do establish the foundation for the rest of your professional life. It’s very important to get started and get off on the right foot.

I love this quote, I just found it the other day: “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.”

What we see with productivity is that postdoc scholars who developed written productivity expectations with their advisers were more productive than those who didn’t. You see 23% more papers submitted, 30% more first-author papers, and more grant proposals as well.

So why five years? I’m going to start with number 5. It’s long enough to build a program of research, but short enough to deal with changing circumstances. That’s really the long and the short of the matter. As well as these other things as well that I won’t take the time to go through point by point.

What Should a Five-Year Plan Include?

Presented by Lizbeth Finestack

So, thinking about a five-year research plan, I like to think about it like your major “To Do List.” It’s what you’re going to accomplish in five years. Start thinking: What is going to be on my to do list?

You can also think about it like: Okay, I have research. I’ve got to do research. Maybe think about this as one big bucket, or maybe one humongous silo. I have some farm themes going on. Cathy was just on a farm, so I thought I’d tie that in.

So here’s your big silo. You can call that your research silo.

But more realistically, you need to think about it like separate buckets, separate silos, where research is just one of those. Just like Cathy indicated, there’s going to be lots of other things coming up that you’re going to have to manage. They are going to have to be on your to do list, you need to figure out how to fit everything in.

What all those other buckets or silos are, are really going to depend on your job. And maybe the size of the silos, and the size of the buckets are going to vary depending on where you are, what the expectations are at your institution.

That’s important to keep in mind, and Cathy said this too, it’s not going to be the same for everyone. The five-year plan has to be your plan, your to do list.

Here are some buckets or some silos that I have on my list and the way that I break it up, this is just one example, take it or leave it.

The first three are all very closely related, right? Thinking about grants, thinking about research, thinking about publications. I’m going to define grants as actual writing, getting the grant, getting the money.

Research is what you’re going to do once you get that money. Steps you need to take before you are getting the money. Any sorts of projects, the lab work, that’s why I have the lab picture there. Of course, publications are part of the product—what’s coming out of the research—but it also cycles in because you need publications to support that you are a researcher to apply for funding and show you have this line of research that you’ve established and you’ll be able to continue. So, those first three are really closely related. And that’s where I’ll go next. And then have teaching and service you see here at the bottom.

So thinking about research, in that broad sense. As you’re writing your five-year plan you’re going to want to think of, “What’s my long-term goal?” There’s lots of ways to think of long-term goals. You could think, before I die, this is what I want to accomplish. For me I kind of have that. My long-term goal is that I’m going to find the most effective and efficient interventions for kids with language impairment. Huge broad goal. But within that I can start narrowing it down.

Where am I within that? Within the next five years or maybe the next ten years, what is it I want to accomplish towards that goal. Then start thinking about: In order to accomplish that goal, what are the steps I need to take? Starting to break it down a little bit. Then it’s also going to be really important to think: where are you going to start? Where are you now? What do you need to have happen? And is it reasonable to accomplish this goal within five years? Is it going to take longer? Maybe you could do it in a couple years? Start thinking about the timeline that’s going to work for you.

Then thinking about your goals—and everyone’s program is going to be different, like I said, there’s going to be a lot of individual needs, preferences. So it might be the case that you have this one long-term goal that you’re aiming for. Long-term goal in the sense of, maybe, what you want to study in your R01, perhaps something like that. But in order to get to that point, you’re going to have several short-term goals that need to be accomplished.

Or maybe it’s the case that you have two long-term goals. And with each of those you’re going to have multiple short-term goals that you’re working on. Maybe the scope of each of these long-term goals is a little bit less than in that first scenario.

Start thinking about my research, what I want to do, and how it might fit into these different circumstances.

Also thinking about your goals, this is a slide from Ray Kent from last year, was thinking about the different types of projects you might want to pursue, and thinking about ones that are definitely well on your way. They are safe bets. You have some funding. They are going to lead directly into your longer-term plan.

Those are going to be your front burner—things you can easily focus on. That said, don’t put everything there.

You can also have things on the back burner. Things that really excite you, might have huge benefits, big pay. But you don’t want to spend all of your time there because they could be pretty risky.

Start thinking about where you’re putting your time. Are you putting it all on this high-risk thing that if it doesn’t pan out you’re going to be in big trouble? Or balancing that somewhat with your front burner. Making that steady progress that will lead directly to help fund an R01 or whatever the mechanism that you’re looking for.

Then, thinking about your goals—if you have multiple long-term goals, or thinking about your short-term goals, you could think about your process. Is it something where you need to do study 1 then study 2, then study 3—each of those building on each other, that’s leading to that long-term goal. In many cases, that is the case, where you have to get information from the first study which is going to lead directly to the second study and so forth.

Or is it the case that you can be working on these three short-term goals simultaneously? Spreading your resources at the same time. Maybe it will take longer for any one study, but across a longer period of time you’ll get the information that you need to reach that long-term goal.

Lots and lots of different ways to go about it. The important thing is to think about what your needs are and what makes the most sense for you.

Here’s my own little personal example. Starting over here, I have my dissertation study. My dissertation study was this early efficacy study looking at one treatment approach using novel forms that really can’t generalize to anything too useful, but it was important.

Then I did a follow up study, where I was taking that same paradigm, looking to see where kids with typical development perform on the task. So I have these two studies, and they served as my preliminary studies for an R03. So I just finished an R03 where I was looking at different treatment approaching for kids with primary language impairment. At the same time, while conducting my R03, I’m also looking at some different approaches that might help with language development. Also conducting surveys to see what current practices are.

I have these three projects going on simultaneously, that are going to lead to a bigger pilot study that are going to feed directly into my R01. All of this will serve as preliminary data to go into an R01.

Start thinking about your projects, what you have. Maybe starting with your dissertation project or work that you’re doing as a postdoc as seeing how that can feed into your long-term goal. And really utilizing it, building on it, to your benefit.

That’s all fine and dandy. You can draw these great pictures. But you still have to break it down some more. It’s not like, “Oh, I’m just going to do this project.” There are other steps involved, and lots of the time these steps are going to be just as time consuming.

Starting to think about: well, if you have the funding. Saying, “I want to do this study, but I have no money to do it.” What are the steps in order to get the money to do it? Do you have a pilot study? What do you need?

Start thinking about the resources? Do you need to develop stimuli, protocols, procedures? Start working on that. All of these can be very time consuming, and if you don’t jump on that immediately, it’s going to delay when you can start that project.

Thinking about IRB. Relationships for recruitment, if you’re working with special populations especially? Do you have necessary personnel, grad students, people to help you with the project? Do you need to train them? What’s the timeline of the study?

Start thinking about all these pieces, and how they are going to fit in that timeline.

This is one way that might help you start thinking about the resources that you need. This is online—Ray Kent had it in his talk, and when I was doing my searches I came across it too and I have the website at the end. Just different ways to think about the resources you might need.

Let’s talk about mapping it out. You have your long-term goal. You have your short-term goals. You’re breaking it down thinking about all those little steps that you need to accomplish. We gotta put it on a calendar. When is it going to happen?

This is an example—you might have your five years. Each month plugging in what are you going to accomplish by that time. Maybe it’s when are grant applications due? It’s going to be important to put those on there to go what do I need to do to make that deadline. Maybe it’s putting when you’re going to get publications out. Things like that.

Honestly, looking at this drives me a little bit crazy, it seems a bit overwhelming. But it’s important to get to these details.

This is an example from, I did Lessons for Success a few years ago and they had their format for doing your plan. I wrote out all my projects, started thinking about all the different aspects. So if something like this works for you, by all means you could use that type of procedure.

Here’s a grid that Ray Kent showed last year. We’re breaking it down by semester. Thinking about each of your semesters, what manuscripts you’re going to be working on, what data collection, your grant applications. Starting to get into some of those other buckets: course preparation, conference submissions.

We also need to include teaching and service.

You probably can’t see this very well. This is similar to that last slide Ray Kent had used last year.

I have my five year plan: what studies I want to accomplish, start thinking about breaking it down.

Then at the beginning of each semester, I fill in a grid like this. Where at the top, I have each of my buckets. I have my grant bucket, my writing bucket which is going to include publications. I also include doing article reviews in my writing bucket, because that’s my writing time. My teaching bucket, my research bucket. Then at the end, my service bucket.

At the beginning of the semester, I think about the big things I want to accomplish. I list those at the top. Then at the beginning of each month, I say, okay what are the things I’m going to accomplish this month, write those in. Then at the beginning of each week, I start looking at whether I’m dedicating any time to the things I said I was going to do that month. I start listing those out saying, this is the amount of time I’m going to spend on that. Of course, I have to take data on what I actually do, so I plug in how much time I’m spending on each of the tasks. Then I graph it, because that’s rewarding to see how much time you’re spending on things, and I get a little side-tracked sometimes.

Think about a system that will help you keep on track, to make sure you’re meeting the goals that you want to meet in terms of your research. But also getting the other things done that you need to get done in terms of teaching and service.

Discussion and Questions

Compiled from comments made during the Pathways 2014 and 2015 conferences. (Video unavailable.)

Building Flexibility into Your Five-Year Plan Comments by Ray Kent, University of Wisconsin-Madison

The five-year plan is not a contract. It’s a map or a compass. A general set of directions to help you plan ahead. It’s not even a contract with yourself, because it will inevitably be revised in some ways.

Sometimes cool things land in your lap. Very often it turns out that through serendipity or whatever else, you find opportunities that are very enticing. Some of those can be path to an entirely new line of research. Some of them can be a huge distraction and a waste of time. It’s a really cool part of science that new things come along. If we put on blinders and say, “I’m committed to my research plan,” and we don’t look to the left or the right, we’re really robbing ourselves of much of the richness of the scientific life. Science is full of surprises, and sometimes those surprises are going to appear as research projects. The problem is you don’t want to redirect all your time and resources to those until you’re really sure they are going to pay off. I personally believe, some of those high risk but really appealing projects are things you can nurse along. You can devote some time and build some collaborations – far enough to determine how realistic and viable they are. That’s important because those things can be the core of your next research program.

It’s very easy to get overcommitted. We all know people who always say “yes”—and we know those people, and they are often disappointing because they can’t get things done. It’s important to have new directions, but limit them. Don’t say, “I’m going to have 12 new directions this year.” Maybe one or two. Weigh them carefully. Talk about them with other people to get a judgment about how difficult it might be to implement them. It enriches science: not only our knowledge, but the way we acquire new knowledge. A psychologist, George Miller—this is the guy with the magic number 7 +- 2—when we interviewed him years ago at Boystown, he said, “My conviction is that everybody should be able to learn a new area of study within three months.” That’s what he thought for a scientist was a goal.

The idea is that you can learn new things. And that’s very important because when you think of it in terms of a 30-year career, how likely is it that the project that you’re undertaking at age 28 is the same project you’ll be working on at age 68? Not very likely. You’re going to be reinventing yourself as a scientist. And reinventing yourself is one of the most important things you can do, because otherwise you’re going to be dead wood. Some projects aren’t worth carrying beyond five or ten years. They have an expiration date.

Building Risk into Your Five-Year Plan Comments by Ray Kent, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Your doctoral study should generally be low-risk research. As you move into a postdoctoral fellowship, think about having two studies—one low-risk, one high-risk with a potential for high impact. At this time you can begin to play the risk factor a little bit differently.

When you are tenure-track you can have a mix of significance with low-risk and high-risk studies. And when you are tenured, then you can go for high risk, clinical trials, and collaborations. Because you have established your independence, so you do not need to worry about losing your visibility. You can be recognized as a legitimate member of the team.

As you plan your career, you should take risk into account. Just as you manage your money taking risk into account, we should manage our careers taking risk into account. I have met people who did not really think about that, and they embarked on some very risky procedures and wasted a lot of time and resources with very little to show for it. For example, don’t put everything into an untested technology basket. You want to be using state of the art technology, but you want to be sure it is going to give you what you need.

Other Formats and Uses of Your Research Plan Audience Comments

• If you do your job right with your job talk, there’s a lot of cross-pollination between your job talk and your research plan. Ideally your job talk tells your colleagues that this is the long-term plan that you have. And they shouldn’t be surprised when you submit a more detailed research plan. They should say, “okay this is very consistent with the job talk.” In my view, the job talk should be a crystal summary of the major aspects of that research program. Of course, much of the talk will be about a specific project or two—but it should always be embedded within the larger program. That helps the audience keep sight of the fact that you are looking at the program. You can say that this is one project that I’ve done, and I plan to do more of these, and this is how they are conceptually related. That’s a good example of why the research plan has multiple purposes – it can be a research statement, it can be the core of your job talk, it can be the nature of your elevator message, and it can be a version of your research plan for a K award application or R01 application or anything else of that nature.
• I think what’s useful is to actually draft your NIH biosketch. The new biosketch has a section called “contributions to science.” It’s really helpful to think about all your projects. It’s hard to start with a blank sheet of paper. But to have it in the format of a biosketch can be really helpful.

Avoiding Overcommitment Audience Comments

• One of the things that is amazing about planning is that if you put an estimate on the level of effort for each part of your plan, you’ll quickly find that you are living three or four lives. Some 300% of your time is spent. It’s helpful for those of us who might share my lack of ability to see constraints or limitations to reel it back and say, “I have a lot on my plate.” Which allows you to say no—which is not something we all do very well when it comes to those nice colleagues and those people you want to impress nationally and connect with. But it allows you to look at what’s planned and go, “I don’t know where I’d find the time to do that.” Which will hopefully help you stay on track.
• I keep a to do list, but I also keep a “to not do” list. One of the things I will keep on my plan is the maximum number of papers I will review in a year. If I hit that number in March, that’s it. I say no to every other paper that comes down the pike. That’s something to work out with your mentor as far as what’s realistic and what’s okay for you. Every time I get a request, I think, “That’s my reading and writing time, so what am I willing to give up. If it means I won’t be able to write on my own paper this week, am I willing to do this?”

Staying on Schedule with Reading, Writing, and Reviewing Audience Comments

• You have to do what works for you. Some people do wait for big blocks of time for writing—which are hard to come by. But the most important thing is to block off your time. Put it on your schedule, or it is the first thing that will get pushed aside.
• Another thing I’ve done with some of my colleagues is writing retreats. So maybe once a year, twice a year, we’ll get together. Usually we’ll go to a hotel or somewhere, and we’re just writing. It’s a great way to get a jumpstart on a project. Like, I need to sit down and start this manuscript, and you can keep going once you’ve got that momentum.
• My input would be that you really have to write all the time, every day. It’s a skill. I’ve found that if I take time off, my writing deteriorates. It’s something you need to keep up with.
• I would look at it like a savings account that you put money into on a daily, weekly, monthly basis. The flip side of writing is reading. I would read constantly, widely, and not just in the discipline. That will give you not only a breadth in terms of your understanding of your field and the world around you, but it will also give you an incentive to make your own contributions. I think we don’t talk enough about the comprehensive side to this, and being receptive to the reading. I have a book, or something, by my bedside every night. And I read that until I fall asleep every night. And it’s done me in good stead over the years.
• Reviewing articles can help advance your career, but it is something you need to weigh carefully as a draw on your time. You get a lot from it. You get to see what’s out there. You get to see what’s coming down the pipe before publication. To me that’s a huge benefit. You get to learn from other people’s writing, and that’s part of your reading you get to do. But it is time consuming. And it depends on the kinds of papers you get. Sometimes you’re lucky and sometimes you’re not.
• If someone else is reviewing your grants and your articles, at some point you owe it back. You should at least be in break-even mode. Now, pre-tenure or postdoc your mentor should be doing that or senior faculty in the department. But there are so many articles to review. I review so many articles, but I am also at the tail end of my career. The bottom line is, if you don’t put on your schedule that if you don’t put time on your schedule for reading, reviewing articles forces you to look at and think about the literature, so you can be accomplishing what you owe back to the field—and at the same time, staying one step ahead knowledge wise. It forces you to do what you should be doing all along, which is keeping up with the literature.

Further Reading: Web Resources

Golash-Boza, T. (2014). In Response to Popular Demand, More on the 5-Year Plan. The Professor Is In . Available at http://theprofessorisin.com/2014/05/09/in-response-to-popular-demand-more-on-the-5-year-plan

Kelsky, K. (2010). The Five-Year Plan for Tenure-Track Professors. Get a life, PhD . Available at http://getalifephd.blogspot.com/2010/07/five-year-plan-for-tenure-track.html

National Association of Geoscience Teachers (NAGT). (2012). Planning Worksheets . Planning your Research Program (Available from the Science Education Resource Center at Carelton College Website at http://serc.carleton.edu/).

Pfirman, S., Bell, R., Culligan, P., Balsam, P. & Laird, J. (2008) . Maximizing Productivity and Recognition , Part 3: Developing a Research Plan. Science Careers. Available at http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2008_10_10/caredit.a0800148

Cathy Binger University of New Mexico

Lizbeth Finestack University of Minnesota

Based on a presentation and slides originally developed by Ray Kent, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Presented at Pathways (2015). Hosted by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Research Mentoring Network.

Pathways is sponsored by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) through a U24 grant awarded to ASHA.

Copyrighted Material. Reproduced by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association in the Clinical Research Education Library with permission from the author or presenter.

Clinical Research Education

More from the cred library, innovative treatments for persons with dementia, implementation science resources for crisp, when the ears interact with the brain, follow asha journals on twitter.

© 1997-2024 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Privacy Notice Terms of Use

Minnesota Sea Grant

A Systemwide Program of the University of Minnesota

Job Opportunity: Fisheries and Aquaculture Assistant Extension Professor

The University of Minnesota Sea Grant's Fisheries and Aquaculture program seeks an Assistant Extension Professor focused on providing outreach and applied research on fisheries and aquaculture.

Quick Summary

The fisheries and aquaculture assistant extension professor will be responsible for providing outreach and applied research on fisheries and aquaculture for the Minnesota Sea Grant Program. Preferred candidates will have experience and knowledge in fisheries and aquaculture. This person will develop, deliver, and evaluate extension programming relevant to Sea Grant’s mission and strategic plan. The fisheries and aquaculture assistant extension professor will work closely with other Minnesota Sea Grant staff, U of M extension educators, and Sea Grant extension educators across the Great Lakes and nation who are involved in related issues. This person will also work with appropriate state, federal, and tribal agencies along with the recreational, charter, and commercial fishing and aquaculture industries. This position is supervised by Minnesota Sea Grant's extension program leader.

Quick Links & Instructions

Applications must be submitted online. 

• Go to UMN's Job Description and select the blue "Apply for Job" button at the top right of the webpage page. 
• If that link does not work, go to: https://hr.umn.edu/jobs/Find-Job, select the category of applicant that you are (external, employee, student), and search for Job ID 361332
• Cover letter
• Contact information for three professional references

Quick reference 

• Who's hiring: University of Minnesota Sea Grant College Program
• Job title:  Fisheries and Aquaculture Extension Educator (FAEE)/Assistant Extension Professor
• Job code:  9623
• UMN Job ID: 61332
• Full/part-time:  Full-time (40 hours per week)
• Compensation: $42,870 - $85,000 (dependent on qualifications)
• Location:  St. Paul, Minnesota
• Application open date:  May 15, 2024
• Application review date: May 31, 2024 (position will remain open until filled)

About the Position

This position is a permanent, 100% time, academic professional appointment with benefits, and is with the University of Minnesota Sea Grant College Program. Annual compensation for this position is dependent upon qualifications and is expected to range between $42,870 - $85,000. The successful candidate is expected to develop an externally funded program through grants that generates at least 25% of their annual salary within three years of joining the staff.

General Responsibilities

U of M Sea Grant Extension and Research duties (85%)

• Conduct periodic needs assessments among community groups (researchers, managers, public, industry, etc.) to determine program priorities. Define clear and measurable goals and objectives to address these priorities that fit within Minnesota Sea Grant’s strategic plan. Evaluate, track, and report program measures and metrics. 
• Develop and lead extension programs designed to deliver products and services that increase participant knowledge and understanding and advance participants’ access to and use of fisheries and aquaculture resources. Programs will address Lake Superior coastal communities, inland lake/stream communities, aquaculture producers, natural resource managers, lake associations, businesses, and individuals, and may include workshops, training, tools, and/or other appropriate educational products and services for relevant communities. 
• Conduct formative (pre) and summative (post) evaluations of programs and use results to improve and revise program products, services, and activities and assess overall program outcomes.
• Develop and maintain an extramurally funded research program in science or education related to fisheries and aquaculture that will fund 25% of salary within three years.
• Coordinate, lead, and/or participate in statewide, Great Lakes, and national projects and programs, as appropriate and/or requested by U of M Sea Grant supervisor.
• Participate in U of M Sea Grant extension program team initiatives as appropriate.
• Collaborate with organizations such as the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Minnesota Aquaculture Association, Great Lakes Sea Grant Network (GLSGN), the Sea Grant Fisheries Extension Network (FEN), North Central Regional Aquaculture Center, and state, federal and tribal agencies to address important issues in fisheries and aquaculture in the Great Lakes region.

General administrative and scholarship duties (10%).

• Share and/or present results of extension and research efforts at regional or national professional events and venues and through MSG communications channels including the media.
• Complete other duties related to participating within the U of M Sea Grant organization, including but not limited to preparing reports and plans of work, writing and administering grants, serving on committees, etc.
• Participate in professional development opportunities.
• Travel overnight occasionally as required.

Core duties (5%)

• Attend staff meetings and other required U of M Sea Grant meetings and events. 
• Maintain shared, flex, and all office spaces in a professional manner, update computer security and virus protection software, and ensure computer files and records are backed-up on a timely basis.
• Maintain a current calendar of events, travel, and program activity viewable to staff (e.g., U of M Google calendar).
• Report activity on a regular basis using program forms, databases, or other formats as requested.
• Help write, edit, design, review, and/or produce documents critical to U of M Sea Grant such as the strategic plan, the omnibus (budget) proposal, and the annual progress report.

Minnesota Sea Grant (MNSG) is a systemwide program of the University of Minnesota and one of 34 federal-university Sea Grant partnerships across the country that bring applied water science to communities. MNSG’s extension educators, researchers and communicators work with community members, local decision-makers, policy leaders, and personnel from resource agencies, business and industry to protect, enhance and restore habitats, ecosystems and the services those ecosystems provide. We are what makes the University of Minnesota a Sea Grant institution.

Amy Schrank , Minnesota Sea Grant Extension Program Leader and Fisheries and Aquaculture Extension Educator, University of Minnesota.

Additional Information

Minnesota Sea Grant is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 's (NOAA) Sea Grant Program , which supports 34 similar programs in coastal states throughout the United States and Puerto Rico. It receives funding through the NOAA - Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research and the University of Minnesota . The program partners with local, regional and national organizations and is an integral member of the Great Lakes Sea Grant Network .

Departments

• Special Request
• What is Sea Grant?
• Advisory Board
• People Directory
• Partners & Collaborators
• Reports & Plans
• News Overview
• Featured Stories
• Newsletter Archive
• News Releases
• Sea Grant in the News
• Staff Publications
• Outreach Materials
• Programs Overview
• Coastal Hazards of Superior - Community of Practice
• Partnering with Local Governments for Climate Adaptation
• Great Lakes One Water Resilient Future
• One Block at a Time
• The Watershed Game
• Twin Ports Climate Conversations
• Bugs Below Zero
• Center for Great Lakes Literacy
• Shipboard Science Workshops
• Students Ask Scientists
• Aquaculture 101
• Aquaculture Market Study
• Aquaculture Regulations
• Consumer Education Resources
• Egg-to-Market Yellow Perch Project
• Steelhead or Salmon? Which Did You Catch?
• Increasing Golden Shiner Bait Production in Minnesota
• Great Lakes Aquaculture Collaborative
• Great Lakes FreshFishFinder.org Website
• Kids Cooking Seafood with Spark-Y
• Fisheries and Aquaculture Supply Chain
• Clean Sweep Program
• Field Guide for Maintaining Rural Roadside Ditches
• Habitat Management in the St. Louis River Estuary Workshop
• Invasive Cattail-Dominated Shorelines
• Regional Stormwater Protection Team (RSPT)
• Twin Ports Freshwater Folk
• Wild Rice - Manoomin
• Great Lakes Shipping 101
• Hazardous Material Transport Outreach Network
• Drowning Hotspots in the St. Louis River Estuary
• Hypothermia: Understanding and Prevention
• Minnesota Lake Ice-Out Clock
• Paddle Safe Twin Ports
• Research Overview
• Research Projects
• Scholarly Articles
• Biennial Request for Proposals (RFP)
• Joint MN-WI-OH Sea Grant RFP
• Marine Debris Challenge Competition
• Marine Debris Community Action Coalitions
• Translating Coastal Research Into Application
• Fast-Track Grants
• Knauss Fellowship
• National Marine Fisheries-Sea Grant Joint Fellowship
• NOAA Hollings Undergraduate Scholarship
• NOAA Coastal Management Fellowship
• Proposal Forms and Documents

EsadeGeo Daily Digest, 16/05/2024

Euractiv - Charles Szumski and Natália Silenská / Fico’s assassination attempt reveals Slovakia’s serious polarisation

The assassination attempt against Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico exposed deep divisions in Slovak society, which his controversial ruling style polarised further. 

Fico (Smer-SD, S&D) was shot by a lone gunman on Wednesday afternoon (15 May) and was immediately transported to a local hospital, where he underwent surgery and was said to be in a life-threatening condition. 

Many European leaders immediately condemned the violence and showed support for the controversial leader, who has been criticised for his pro-Russian stance, attacks on the media and NGOs, and laws that his government is trying to pass despite criticism from the European Commission. 

These include draft laws that would significantly lower jail terms for corruption, the introduction of labelling NGOs as “organisations with foreign support”, and strengthening the governmental control over the public broadcaster RTVS.

Foreign Policy - Jack Detsch / Russia Advances on Kharkiv as Ukraine Struggles to Fight Back  

After months of attrition warfare, Russia is once again on the march in Ukraine, this time targeting Kharkiv, the country’s second-largest city, which is just a stone’s throw from the border with Russia. 

The attack, currently focused on breaching defenses north of the city, has already picked up steam as Ukrainian troops still wait for Western weapons to arrive en masse. Ukraine has evacuated 8,000 people from the Kharkiv region during the five-day assault, according to the national emergency services. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has canceled his foreign trips. And Ukrainian troops appear to be backing off the city of Vovchansk, a central front-line defensive position near Kharkiv. 

Outgunned and outmanned, frustration is mounting in Kyiv. Ukrainian officials say Russia has succeeded in making tactically significant gains around Kharkiv in recent days in part because the Biden administration has forbidden Ukrainian troops from using U.S. weapons to fire on Russian positions across the border inside Russia. 

These targets are right in front of Ukrainian troops—Kharkiv is only 25 miles from the Russian border. They can geolocate them. But Ukrainian officials say they’re not being allowed by the White House to fire their guns en masse to hit them.

The Guardian - Peter Beaumont / Israel war cabinet split looms as defence minister demands post-war Gaza plan  

A long-festering split at the heart of Israel’s war cabinet has burst into the open with the defence minister, Yoav Gallant, challenging the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to come up with plans for the “day after” the war in Gaza, and saying he would not permit any solution where Israeli military or civil governance were in the territory. 

Gallant’s comments, immediately backed by his fellow minister Benny Gantz, plunged Israel’s leadership into a highly public row, in the midst of the Gaza conflict, raising immediate speculation over his future in the Israeli government and of Netanyahu’s fractious coalition. 

In uncompromising remarks, Gallant – whose firing last year by Netanyahu triggered mass protests, a political crisis and an eventual reversal by the PM – publicly demanded that Netanyahu describe plans for a “day-after plan” for Gaza. 

Gallant’s comments provoked an immediate political row, with Netanyahu pushing back rapidly with a videotaped statement and a call from the far-right national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, for Gallant to be replaced.

Related article: The Washington Post - Louisa Loveluck / Israeli forces push into Rafah city as roughly 600,000 flee fighting

Financial Times - Andy Bounds, Henry Foy and James Kynge / EU under pressure after US levies tariffs on Chinese goods  

New US tariffs on Chinese goods are set to redirect shipments to Europe and put increased pressure on Brussels, which is scrambling to avoid being caught in the trade war between Washington and Beijing. 

President Joe Biden on Tuesday slapped tariffs of 100 per cent on Chinese electric vehicles and tripled the rate on steel and aluminium. He increased tariffs on solar cells to 50 per cent and said the rate on semiconductors would be doubled from 2025. 

“The US has sent a very clear message that it wants minimum Chinese participation in its green transition,” said Yanmei Xie, a geopolitics analyst at Gavekal Research. “The EU being the remaining large developed market with green ambitions and generous subsidies will be a must-have market for Chinese exporters of clean-energy products.”

The US move came as the European Commission is struggling to protect domestic green technology industries from cheap Chinese competitors, with EU officials stressing that Brussels lacks the powers to compete with Washington and Beijing in a global trade war.

Our opinion reads for today:

The Economist / America’s 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs: bad policy, worse leadership  

Bloomberg - Lionel Laurent / Europe's New Power Map, From ASML to the Arctic  

Esade (Sant Cugat)

Call us +34 935 543 511

Where to find us

Change language

The program content is not available in the language in which you are browsing