For a more rewarding experience in your PhD programme, work to establish research autonomy.Credit: Monty Rakusen/Getty
One of the most important lessons I learnt from my seven years of graduate studies is the difference between simply ‘doing’ a research project and ‘owning’ one and how to make the transition from a doer to a researcher.
I started as very much a doer. During my master’s-degree work studying proteins involved in Alzheimer’s disease, at Wuhan University, China, I relied on my supervisor — biochemist Yi Liang — to assign me to a research project, to propose ideas and sometimes to plan out sets of experiments for me. I simply had to follow protocols and produce data. I would read papers, but just the most relevant ones on the particular protein I was studying, or those involving the same methods that I was using. When I read those papers, it was to benefit my own experiments: I wasn’t looking for any deeper knowledge or understanding.
There are advantages to this approach: once everything had been mapped out for me, I was well on my way to getting my name on a paper, thanks to the data contributions I’d made. But following instructions without developing a deep understanding is not how students become successful scientists, even if they get their name on a paper.
Doing versus owning a research project
My interest in protein structures continued during my PhD programme at the University of Western Ontario in London, Canada. At first, I maintained the mindset I had while pursuing my master’s: I devoted myself to laboratory work and generating data. My PhD supervisor, structural biologist Gary Shaw, didn’t give me the step-by-step instructions I was used to, however. This often confused me and made it hard for me to find an obvious way forward. Our discussions on the project always remained ‘open ended’, leaving uncertainties for me to solve and decisions for me to make.
So, instead of being told what to do next, I learnt how to think about what confused me. I tried to answer my questions by myself, and to increasingly dictate the path of my own research. My PhD supervisor constantly encouraged and empowered me to come up with ideas, proposals and experiments. He told me, “You should own your research project instead of just doing it. By the time you graduate, your goal is to be the most knowledgeable person about your research in the whole world.”
Road to owning your research
Owning my research project in this way was deeply intimidating at first: I no longer had a decision-maker with more experience to follow. But as I developed as a scientist by reading and thinking at a deeper level, and as my excitement grew from following my own curiosity, I overcame this feeling. By the time I ended the second year of my PhD programme, I felt much more confident in my abilities as a researcher — not just as a data-gatherer.
Owning my project triggered some deep thinking that further inspired me to establish hypotheses, methodologies and collaborations with researchers around the world. In the last year of my PhD programme, I e-mailed neuroscientist Sandra Cooper at the University of Sydney, Australia, to discuss a few technical questions about her 2017 publication in the Journal of Biological Chemistry1. She kindly connected me to computational biologist Bradley Williams at the Jain Foundation in Seattle, Washington.
This was the start of a long-term collaboration between our labs, and I got to learn a lot about computational biology from them. The collaboration changed the direction of my project to some extent and brought a completely new perspective to my research and my lab.
Here are some tips I’d give anyone who wants to learn to own their research project.
1. Think beyond day-to-day bench work. Even if most of your time is allocated to doing lab work, don’t let it take over and become the core of your work. Instead, spend time thinking about why you’re doing particular experiments. What are you trying to achieve? What can you learn? What information is missing? All lab work should be driven by a clear rationale based on the literature, and motivated by a desire to answer scientific questions.
2. Make short- and long-term plans. Your supervisor might plan for you sometimes, but it’s important to be your own pilot. Make to-do lists for each day, week and month, so you know what you’re expecting and what you should prioritize. By doing this, you will learn how to make adjustments and better manage your time. Set goals along the way and enjoy every achievement — big and small.
3. Use all available resources. Science should not be a lone battle. Your supervisor, your lab mates and people from other labs are all resources that can help you with your research. There’s also a rich store of online advice and tools you can use to support yourself. For example, I found great help from Q&A forums on ResearchGate, a social-networking website for scientists. Don’t shy away from initiating conversations with researchers outside your department or institution if you think they could be helpful.
4. Communicate your research. Discussing your research at seminars and conferences, and with members of the public, requires your full understanding of it: I found that speaking at conferences helped me to discover what I didn’t understand in my field. Communication sparks collaboration and allows you to look at your research in contexts you might have not considered, which could in turn inspire ideas.
Of course, self-directed research has downsides. It won’t always give you the best results. You’re also likely to go through more trial and error. Not all the data you collect will be publishable — and some of it might feel like it’s downright useless. Certainly, the road to get my PhD work published was a winding, bumpy one. But nothing is more rewarding than owning up to your failures, pushing past each obstacle and finding a way to move forward.
NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — The body of Ugandan Olympic athlete Rebecca Cheptegei — who died after being set on fire by her partner in Kenya — was received Friday by family and anti-femicide crusaders, ahead of her burial a day later.
Cheptegei’s family met with dozens of activists Friday who had marched to the Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital’s morgue in the western city of Eldoret while chanting anti-femicide slogans.
She is the fourth female athlete to have been killed by her partner in Kenya in yet another case of gender-based violence in recent years.
Viola Cheptoo, the founder of Tirop Angels – an organization that was formed in honor of athlete Agnes Tirop, who was stabbed to death in 2021, said stakeholders need to ensure this is the last death of an athlete due to gender-based violence.
“We are here to say that enough is enough, we are tired of burying our sisters due to GBV,” she said.
It was a somber mood at the morgue as athletes and family members viewed Cheptegei’s body which sustained 80% of burns after she was doused with gasoline by her partner Dickson Ndiema. Ndiema sustained 30% burns on his body and later succumbed.
Ndiema and Cheptegei were said to have quarreled over a piece of land that the athlete bought in Kenya, according to a report filed by the local chief.
Cheptegei competed in the women’s marathon at the Paris Olympics less than a month before the attack. She finished in 44th place.
Cheptegei’s father, Joseph, said that the body will make a brief stop at their home in the Endebess area before proceeding to Bukwo in eastern Uganda for a night vigil and burial on Saturday.
“We are in the final part of giving my daughter the last respect,” a visibly distraught Joseph said.
He told reporters last week that Ndiema was stalking and threatening Cheptegei and the family had informed police.
Four in 10 women or an estimated 41% of dating or married Kenyan women have experienced physical or sexual violence perpetrated by their current or most recent partner, according to the Kenya Demographic and Health Survey 2022.
TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — A rare Bronze-Era jar accidentally smashed by a 4-year-old visiting a museum was back on display Wednesday after restoration experts were able to carefully piece the artifact back together.
Last month, a family from northern Israel was visiting the museum when their youngest son tipped over the jar, which smashed into pieces.
Alex Geller, the boy’s father, said his son — the youngest of three — is exceptionally curious, and that the moment he heard the crash, “please let that not be my child” was the first thought that raced through his head.
The jar has been on display at the Hecht Museum in Haifa for 35 years. It was one of the only containers of its size and from that period still complete when it was discovered.
The Bronze Age jar is one of many artifacts exhibited out in the open, part of the Hecht Museum’s vision of letting visitors explore history without glass barriers, said Inbal Rivlin, the director of the museum, which is associated with Haifa University in northern Israel.
It was likely used to hold wine or oil, and dates back to between 2200 and 1500 B.C.
Rivlin and the museum decided to turn the moment, which captured international attention, into a teaching moment, inviting the Geller family back for a special visit and hands-on activity to illustrate the restoration process.
Rivlin added that the incident provided a welcome distraction from the ongoing war in Gaza. “Well, he’s just a kid. So I think that somehow it touches the heart of the people in Israel and around the world,“ said Rivlin.
Roee Shafir, a restoration expert at the museum, said the repairs would be fairly simple, as the pieces were from a single, complete jar. Archaeologists often face the more daunting task of sifting through piles of shards from multiple objects and trying to piece them together.
Experts used 3D technology, hi-resolution videos, and special glue to painstakingly reconstruct the large jar.
Less than two weeks after it broke, the jar went back on display at the museum. The gluing process left small hairline cracks, and a few pieces are missing, but the jar’s impressive size remains.
The only noticeable difference in the exhibit was a new sign reading “please don’t touch.”
VICTORIA – The British Columbia government is partnering with a bear welfare group to reduce the number of bears being euthanized in the province.
Nicholas Scapillati, executive director of Grizzly Bear Foundation, said Monday that it comes after months-long discussions with the province on how to protect bears, with the goal to give the animals a “better and second chance at life in the wild.”
Scapillati said what’s exciting about the project is that the government is open to working with outside experts and the public.
“So, they’ll be working through Indigenous knowledge and scientific understanding, bringing in the latest techniques and training expertise from leading experts,” he said in an interview.
B.C. government data show conservation officers destroyed 603 black bears and 23 grizzly bears in 2023, while 154 black bears were killed by officers in the first six months of this year.
Scapillati said the group will publish a report with recommendations by next spring, while an independent oversight committee will be set up to review all bear encounters with conservation officers to provide advice to the government.
Environment Minister George Heyman said in a statement that they are looking for new ways to ensure conservation officers “have the trust of the communities they serve,” and the panel will make recommendations to enhance officer training and improve policies.
Lesley Fox, with the wildlife protection group The Fur-Bearers, said they’ve been calling for such a committee for decades.
“This move demonstrates the government is listening,” said Fox. “I suspect, because of the impending election, their listening skills are potentially a little sharper than they normally are.”
Fox said the partnership came from “a place of long frustration” as provincial conservation officers kill more than 500 black bears every year on average, and the public is “no longer tolerating this kind of approach.”
“I think that the conservation officer service and the B.C. government are aware they need to change, and certainly the public has been asking for it,” said Fox.
Fox said there’s a lot of optimism about the new partnership, but, as with any government, there will likely be a lot of red tape to get through.
“I think speed is going to be important, whether or not the committee has the ability to make change and make change relatively quickly without having to study an issue to death, ” said Fox.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 9, 2024.
