Hey, if an electron can be in two places at once, why can't I? (don't answer that)
I'm happy to announce that I've just joined the gang at LabSpaces, an awesome website full of sciency news, helpful protocols, and sweet, sweet blogging. They've got a quickly growing and diverse community of writers, including biotech badass Jade Ed, hilarious cartoonist Angry Scientist, and two of my long-time favorite gals, Biochem Belle and Disgruntled Julie.
Now, fret not--I know with all the hulabaloo over at ScienceBlogs lately your Google Reader (or RSS feed manager of choice) has been taken for quite a spin, but I have no intention of abandoning my happy blogspot home. It's just that now I've got a...pied-à-terre of sorts.
++++++++
PS- for those of you who are relatively new to OtM: FTTT, you may want to check out my first post over at LabSpaces, which provides a handy Dr Becca refresher course.
The Plight of the Post-Doc
Showing posts with label the magic of teh interwebz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the magic of teh interwebz. Show all posts
7.26.2010
1.20.2010
Extreme Makeover: Blog and Grant edition
While y'all were down in NC this weekend at ScienceOnline2010, meeting each other IRL and watching videos of duck penises**, I was home in rainy New York with an icky cold and a grant to revise. Naturally, I found it the perfect opportunity to teach myself a little HTML/CSS and start watching Lost. Inspired by Biochem Belle and her blog's fancy new look, I checked out BTemplates for something that felt more like me than the standard Blogger template. I found one that I almost liked completely called "Extreme Georgia," and then through lots of trial and error figured out how to tweak the font and colors to better suit my liking. HTML is the sort of thing I imagine is actually super easy if you have even the tiniest smidgen of baseline knowledge, but with zero, I assure you, it is quite boggling. But persevere I did, and as you can see, OTM:FTTT is now different, but similar. Didn't want to freak anyone out; did want to incorporate my favorite font (Futura--coincidentally, same font as Lost logo!).
With that and 10 hours of fuselage, polar bears, and SECRETS SECRETS OMG SO MANY SECRETS!!!! under my belt, it was time to turn my 20-page, 5-year K99 proposal into a 2-page, 2-year NARSAD proposal. This is not just a little fat-trimming here, we're talking major surgery: face lift, eye job, tummy tuck, lipo--the works. I had to pick out the sexiest parts of the K99 and sculpt them into a perfect, tight little package of hot science that could feasibly be done in two years. Not an easy task, no indeed (how excellent is this expression, btw? I was so confused when I first heard it, back when the SfN meeting used to be in New Orleans).
Now, I could have just gone and taken Specific Aim 1 from the K99 and called it a day, but let's be honest: Specific Aim 1 is the boring Specific Aim. Oh sure, it sets things up, lays the groundwork for things to come, but as a self-contained idea is often lacking in hotness. If I'm going to get some clinically-relevant, high-impact-style data out of this grant, I've gotta go straight to the money shot: Specific Aim 3. Luckily, my proposal was not set up such that I needed definitive answers from the first two Aims in order to do the third, so I didn't need to re-work things too much.
But two pages, man, that is KILLER. I think the last time I had to write a two-page anything was in my freshman writing course, which occurred during the Clinton administration (first term). Add in the fact that I'm restricted to just 10 citations, and I basically have to find someone who's done my exact experiments already so as to keep my methods as succinct as possible.
Painful though it may have been, I think writing this grant was a great exercise. When you're so constricted, you're forced to be clear and to the point, rather than blathering on about the entire history of your field and how monumentally important your research is. Your ideas need to speak for themselves, rather than you speaking for your ideas. This is going to prove incredibly useful the next time I apply for a grant from NIH, which recently cut the page limit of its grant applications in half, much to the chagrin of long-winded scientists everywhere. But for me, 6 or 12 pages is going to feel downright luxurious!
**Hot damn did you love those duck penises! Twitter was so full of your tweets during Carl Zimmer's presentation I'm amazed "duck penis" wasn't a bona fide trending topic. For those of you who have no idea what I'm talking about, click the "duck" link at the top, and scroll down to the video. It just might blow your mind.
With that and 10 hours of fuselage, polar bears, and SECRETS SECRETS OMG SO MANY SECRETS!!!! under my belt, it was time to turn my 20-page, 5-year K99 proposal into a 2-page, 2-year NARSAD proposal. This is not just a little fat-trimming here, we're talking major surgery: face lift, eye job, tummy tuck, lipo--the works. I had to pick out the sexiest parts of the K99 and sculpt them into a perfect, tight little package of hot science that could feasibly be done in two years. Not an easy task, no indeed (how excellent is this expression, btw? I was so confused when I first heard it, back when the SfN meeting used to be in New Orleans).
Now, I could have just gone and taken Specific Aim 1 from the K99 and called it a day, but let's be honest: Specific Aim 1 is the boring Specific Aim. Oh sure, it sets things up, lays the groundwork for things to come, but as a self-contained idea is often lacking in hotness. If I'm going to get some clinically-relevant, high-impact-style data out of this grant, I've gotta go straight to the money shot: Specific Aim 3. Luckily, my proposal was not set up such that I needed definitive answers from the first two Aims in order to do the third, so I didn't need to re-work things too much.
But two pages, man, that is KILLER. I think the last time I had to write a two-page anything was in my freshman writing course, which occurred during the Clinton administration (first term). Add in the fact that I'm restricted to just 10 citations, and I basically have to find someone who's done my exact experiments already so as to keep my methods as succinct as possible.
Painful though it may have been, I think writing this grant was a great exercise. When you're so constricted, you're forced to be clear and to the point, rather than blathering on about the entire history of your field and how monumentally important your research is. Your ideas need to speak for themselves, rather than you speaking for your ideas. This is going to prove incredibly useful the next time I apply for a grant from NIH, which recently cut the page limit of its grant applications in half, much to the chagrin of long-winded scientists everywhere. But for me, 6 or 12 pages is going to feel downright luxurious!
**Hot damn did you love those duck penises! Twitter was so full of your tweets during Carl Zimmer's presentation I'm amazed "duck penis" wasn't a bona fide trending topic. For those of you who have no idea what I'm talking about, click the "duck" link at the top, and scroll down to the video. It just might blow your mind.
12.22.2009
I am officially on vacation: Holiday Fun and New Year's Resolutions
To those of you with blogs, aren't traffic tracking programs the most amazing and fun thing? Today Google Analytics informed me that I had a visitor from Wasilla, Alaska, and I SO hope it was SP!!! Does she still live there? I don't even know. But it wouldn't surprise me in the least if, in addition to the many publications she reads both in print and online, Inside Higher Ed (which recently linked to my last entry and generated much of today's traffic) were part of her daily routine.
So much negativity in the last few posts! I don't like it, no I do not. I am mostly of the philosophy that there's very little use in being depressed about stuff--either there's nothing you can do about it, so what's the point in wasting energy feeling sad, or there is something you can do about it, so go do that thing and stop feeling sorry for yourself! Plus, nobody likes a downer, especially around the holidays.
Speaking of the holidays, we had a really fun party in my department. My PI is a bit of a wine guy, so whoever goes shopping for the booze always tries to impress him and we end up with some pretty nice wine. No Yellowtail in this department, no sir. Also, we have a new chair who's pretty cool. He became a whole lot cooler when, during his reading of the raffle winners, demanded a cheer for the New York Yankees. I cheered the loudest, I'm pretty sure. Never hurts to have the chair on your side, you know? Especially when you need things signed.
Also speaking of the holidays, I am leaving early Thursday morning to spend Christmas with J's family in the heart of the midwest. I've never been there, and am looking forward to meeting everyone, and to seeing what that which I usually describe as "fly-over country" is like. I hear there's a Red Lobster, and having never actually been to a Red Lobster (I know!!! I am apparently missing out on cheddar biscuits?), I'm pretty excited. Also, I'm maybe going to make latkes for the grandparents, so that they can better appreciate my faith. I mean, can you think of a better introduction to any religion than deep-fried potatoes and onions? No, you can not. Being Jewish is awesome!!!!! Did I mention that on Passover we are required to have 4 glasses of wine? And by "required" I mean, "required by God"!!
Back to the subject of going and doing that thing (or things) that can change the stuff you are sad about--my resolutions for 2010:
1. Ask more questions. One of the effects of my multi-institution post-doc has been that I've maybe been too independent. I go in, I do my thing, I get out, without talking at length with people in each lab about theories behind everything, possible variations, etc. As a result, I'd say I know less about the things I've done than I should. I now resolve to have more conversations. This is what scientists do, no?
2. Stop delegating, and do it myself. I've been very lucky in the last several years to have some amazing people in the lab who are basically there to do whatever I ask of them. I am very good at asking them to do things, but of course, this means that I don't know how to do those things. I just say, "thank you for ordering that antibody" or "thank you for doing all of that incredibly painful microscope work. You will be second author." In 2010, I am doing all of the fucking microscope work.
3. Read more papers. Seriously, what is wrong with me? I only just got my Google Reader to update when my PubMed searches have a new listing. But now that I have that, there is no excuse for not knowing everything that is coming out of my field.
In sum, I want to be a better scientist in 2010. It's almost embarrassing that these are my resolutions 10 years out from matriculating at my grad school, but I have to think that it's better late than never. Right?
So much negativity in the last few posts! I don't like it, no I do not. I am mostly of the philosophy that there's very little use in being depressed about stuff--either there's nothing you can do about it, so what's the point in wasting energy feeling sad, or there is something you can do about it, so go do that thing and stop feeling sorry for yourself! Plus, nobody likes a downer, especially around the holidays.
Speaking of the holidays, we had a really fun party in my department. My PI is a bit of a wine guy, so whoever goes shopping for the booze always tries to impress him and we end up with some pretty nice wine. No Yellowtail in this department, no sir. Also, we have a new chair who's pretty cool. He became a whole lot cooler when, during his reading of the raffle winners, demanded a cheer for the New York Yankees. I cheered the loudest, I'm pretty sure. Never hurts to have the chair on your side, you know? Especially when you need things signed.
Also speaking of the holidays, I am leaving early Thursday morning to spend Christmas with J's family in the heart of the midwest. I've never been there, and am looking forward to meeting everyone, and to seeing what that which I usually describe as "fly-over country" is like. I hear there's a Red Lobster, and having never actually been to a Red Lobster (I know!!! I am apparently missing out on cheddar biscuits?), I'm pretty excited. Also, I'm maybe going to make latkes for the grandparents, so that they can better appreciate my faith. I mean, can you think of a better introduction to any religion than deep-fried potatoes and onions? No, you can not. Being Jewish is awesome!!!!! Did I mention that on Passover we are required to have 4 glasses of wine? And by "required" I mean, "required by God"!!
Back to the subject of going and doing that thing (or things) that can change the stuff you are sad about--my resolutions for 2010:
1. Ask more questions. One of the effects of my multi-institution post-doc has been that I've maybe been too independent. I go in, I do my thing, I get out, without talking at length with people in each lab about theories behind everything, possible variations, etc. As a result, I'd say I know less about the things I've done than I should. I now resolve to have more conversations. This is what scientists do, no?
2. Stop delegating, and do it myself. I've been very lucky in the last several years to have some amazing people in the lab who are basically there to do whatever I ask of them. I am very good at asking them to do things, but of course, this means that I don't know how to do those things. I just say, "thank you for ordering that antibody" or "thank you for doing all of that incredibly painful microscope work. You will be second author." In 2010, I am doing all of the fucking microscope work.
3. Read more papers. Seriously, what is wrong with me? I only just got my Google Reader to update when my PubMed searches have a new listing. But now that I have that, there is no excuse for not knowing everything that is coming out of my field.
In sum, I want to be a better scientist in 2010. It's almost embarrassing that these are my resolutions 10 years out from matriculating at my grad school, but I have to think that it's better late than never. Right?
10.01.2009
I admit it, I have been drunk before
I like to think of myself as a classy lady. I say "please" and "thank you", I never show up to a party empty handed, and despite a penchant for shopping at Forever 21 (shut up. Everything people like about my outfits is from there), I usually dress age-appropriately. But what of the internet me?
My mom (I know you are reading this, hi Mom!) recently reminded me that prospective employers would likely seek out absolutely everything they could about me via the magic of the internet. Is this something that I should be worried about? I'm not really sure. There is, of course, my facebook page, which is set to the highest privacy settings, but like my mom so wisely pointed out, you never know when one of your facebook friends will betray you and your privacy settings. If that happens, what would they see? First, there's a video of me excelling at Wii Fit Hula Hoop. I reached the Calorie Torcher level (have since graduated to Calorie Incinerator, FYI), and I'm fully dressed, so it's all fine, right?
Then there is the matter of the many pictures of me with a drink in my hand, probably the main concern for my mom. Is it bad for your future employers to know you have a social life, or that you enjoy a cocktail now and then? The reality is that there are two things that are highly likely to occur at parties, and those two things are drinking and picture taking. It could even be argued that the more the former occurs, the more the latter does, too, and thus we've all got a million facebook pictures of us drinking. We do, right? Or is it just me? Say it's not just me.
If you google me, everything but maybe 2 links is science-related, which I feel is a very good rate. I was once quoted (using my real name) by the New York Times in a piece about a non-sciency website with which I've been fairly active, and while the article doesn't directly link to my posts on that site, most people could probably figure it out. My mom's primary worry with that one is my occasional use of profanity (and apparent fondness for fancy cocktails), but as far as I can tell, there are plenty of successful scientists with potty mouths out there.
So the big question is, how much housecleaning do I need to do, here? Do I need to make my internet presence spic-and-span? Should my social life even be considered in evaluations of my professional potential? I'd like to think that it shouldn't be--and if it is, I'd like to remind certain tenured professors about certain stories you've told me regarding you and certain other tenured professors on a certain night in Prague....
My mom (I know you are reading this, hi Mom!) recently reminded me that prospective employers would likely seek out absolutely everything they could about me via the magic of the internet. Is this something that I should be worried about? I'm not really sure. There is, of course, my facebook page, which is set to the highest privacy settings, but like my mom so wisely pointed out, you never know when one of your facebook friends will betray you and your privacy settings. If that happens, what would they see? First, there's a video of me excelling at Wii Fit Hula Hoop. I reached the Calorie Torcher level (have since graduated to Calorie Incinerator, FYI), and I'm fully dressed, so it's all fine, right?
Then there is the matter of the many pictures of me with a drink in my hand, probably the main concern for my mom. Is it bad for your future employers to know you have a social life, or that you enjoy a cocktail now and then? The reality is that there are two things that are highly likely to occur at parties, and those two things are drinking and picture taking. It could even be argued that the more the former occurs, the more the latter does, too, and thus we've all got a million facebook pictures of us drinking. We do, right? Or is it just me? Say it's not just me.
If you google me, everything but maybe 2 links is science-related, which I feel is a very good rate. I was once quoted (using my real name) by the New York Times in a piece about a non-sciency website with which I've been fairly active, and while the article doesn't directly link to my posts on that site, most people could probably figure it out. My mom's primary worry with that one is my occasional use of profanity (and apparent fondness for fancy cocktails), but as far as I can tell, there are plenty of successful scientists with potty mouths out there.
So the big question is, how much housecleaning do I need to do, here? Do I need to make my internet presence spic-and-span? Should my social life even be considered in evaluations of my professional potential? I'd like to think that it shouldn't be--and if it is, I'd like to remind certain tenured professors about certain stories you've told me regarding you and certain other tenured professors on a certain night in Prague....
9.24.2009
eHarmo-NeuroJobs
If you've never used an internet dating service, you were probably not single in NYC in the last 5 years. It's positively de rigueur here, but for those of you unfamiliar, here's how it works: You create a profile for yourself, with pictures and text--it's like facebook, but instead of Mafia Wars and Lil' Green Patch updates you're throwing out your best comedy to answer prompts like "5 things I can't live without" and "If I could be anywhere, I'd be..." Potential suitors who like what you have to say send you a message, or a "wink" if they're shy. If you like what they have to say, you write them back. Usually, though, you don't. Since I now have a fancy live-in boyfriend, I thought my days of internet dating were over, but it turns out I was wrong.
NeuroJobs, as mentioned earlier, is the online career service offered by the Society for Neuroscience (SfN). It's very, very good. In addition to hosting a user-friendly, streamlined search engine, it sends you email alerts when a new post with your special keywords comes along, and allows you to upload your CV so that potential employers can check you out. If they feel that your Classy Institutions and number of first-author publications are up to snuff, they put in a request to NeuroJobs to contact you. NeuroJobs then plays matchmaker, asking you if you'd like this potential employer to get in touch. If you think you might want this job, you say "yes," and you exchange witty emails for a day or two, and then one of you suggests a bar in the East Village or Lower East Side that's trendy but not too trendy, and...oh wait. That's the other one, isn't it?
I'm only sort of kidding. I posted my CV, and a few days later I got an email from NeuroJobs that said, "University of ______ expressed an interest in considering you for the following opportunity," and just like when I got that first contact from an eligible NYC bachelor, I did a little dance, singing "somebody LIKES me!!" But just like when I noticed that the eligible NYC bachelor was 20 years my senior and listed The Da Vinci Code as his favorite book, I had to decline this university's advances due to its location in a part of the country I haven't yet accepted as being inhabitable. I'm working on that, though.
I'm still optimistic that NeuroJobs is going to come through for me, and find the perfect match. The big SfN meeting is coming up in a few weeks, and I'm looking forward to seeing what the NeuroJobs Career Center there will have to offer. Hopefully, it will work out so that I'll get to have a livedate interview, we'll totally hit it off, and soon we'll be featured in the NeuroJobs commercial...
Becca and Classy Institution: matched October 20, 2009. Tenure-track position started July 15, 2010.
NeuroJobs, as mentioned earlier, is the online career service offered by the Society for Neuroscience (SfN). It's very, very good. In addition to hosting a user-friendly, streamlined search engine, it sends you email alerts when a new post with your special keywords comes along, and allows you to upload your CV so that potential employers can check you out. If they feel that your Classy Institutions and number of first-author publications are up to snuff, they put in a request to NeuroJobs to contact you. NeuroJobs then plays matchmaker, asking you if you'd like this potential employer to get in touch. If you think you might want this job, you say "yes," and you exchange witty emails for a day or two, and then one of you suggests a bar in the East Village or Lower East Side that's trendy but not too trendy, and...oh wait. That's the other one, isn't it?
I'm only sort of kidding. I posted my CV, and a few days later I got an email from NeuroJobs that said, "University of ______ expressed an interest in considering you for the following opportunity," and just like when I got that first contact from an eligible NYC bachelor, I did a little dance, singing "somebody LIKES me!!" But just like when I noticed that the eligible NYC bachelor was 20 years my senior and listed The Da Vinci Code as his favorite book, I had to decline this university's advances due to its location in a part of the country I haven't yet accepted as being inhabitable. I'm working on that, though.
I'm still optimistic that NeuroJobs is going to come through for me, and find the perfect match. The big SfN meeting is coming up in a few weeks, and I'm looking forward to seeing what the NeuroJobs Career Center there will have to offer. Hopefully, it will work out so that I'll get to have a live
Becca and Classy Institution: matched October 20, 2009. Tenure-track position started July 15, 2010.
9.16.2009
Searching Highs and Lows
Are you a chemical engineer? Nor am I, but browsing through the job ads on the Science and Nature websites kind of makes me wish I were. Business is booming! But why do I know this?
I have not quite mastered the art of the Advanced Search. My three sources for job ads (not including my thesis advisor) are Science, Nature, and NeuroJobs on the Society for Neuroscience website, and I haven't found any to be completely user-friendly (if you know of any other good resources, by all means share!). Of course, the paranoid part of me is wondering whether this is some sort of test; if I'm not savvy enough find the right job to apply to, I can't possibly be qualified to fill the position, now can I?
I went through a similar period of self-doubt when I applied for a K99-R00 Pathway to Independence award from NIMH earlier this year. The NIH grants website is nearly impenetrable, and you need to cross-reference the guidelines there with a 250-page pdf manual, out of which you must extract the scattered instructions specific to your particular grant. It's a real exercise in Not Repeatedly Smashing Your Laptop Into the Wall, and I quickly became certain that it was all part of an elaborate filtration process by which most people would, in frustration, give up on science altogether. Wheat from the chaff, you know?
So here I am again questioning my worth, only now it's according to the ease with which I come across listings for The Perfect Job. How useful I'm finding these search engines varies by website, with Nature coming in dead last. It's terrible. As far as I can tell, there's no easy way to sort out tenure track faculty jobs from, say, post-doc jobs, and there are a LOT of post-doc jobs. Thousands. When you put "professor" into the search, it comes up with post-doc jobs that ask you to send your application to Dr Joe Scientist, Professor of Chemical Engineering. To try to eliminate post-doc jobs in your results, you can use the "-" symbol to leave out anything that says "post-doc" in it, putting the expression "-post-doc" in the search bar along with "+neuroscience". However, this poses at least two problems, the most important being, do you know how many different ways people choose to write the word "post-doc"?
Well, there's "post-doc", "postdoc", "post doc", but then you need to also include "postdoctoral", "post doctoral" etc., etc....it's a pain! The second problem is that you end up ruling out ads that say something like, "minimum 2 years post-doctoral experience required for this very excellent tenure-track faculty job." And then you still need to narrow things down so as to rule out all the Chemical Engineering positions.
Science is much better, with a nice big button that says "Faculty Jobs". Thank you! That was easy, wasn't it? Once you click through you get a nice list of the job posting, plus the school and location. You can narrow this search with "neuroscience" or "neurobiology" or "psychology" (my big three), to get a pretty streamlined list of jobs you may want. Neurojobs is basically the reverse, since all posts are at the very least neuro-related (no chemical engineering positions here!), but then you need to narrow with "professor" or "faculty" (apparently there are far fewer post-doc positions listed here). You can also easily filter the jobs by "academic", "not-for-profit", "industry" etc, in case your experience with the K-99 made you never want to write another grant again. It should be noted that Neurojobs is free for SfN members, but $25 A DAY if you're not.
One thing that seems so obvious to me is that there should be some kind of uniformity in the way these jobs are listed. For example, when the department chair goes to list the position, he or she should have to click a box that says "assistant professor" "post-doc" "technician", etc., rather than making up the name of the job. That way job searchers can easily search by category, and not have to guess whether "Position in Neuroscience" is something we'd like to apply for.
Hmmm...perhaps I should be looking in these sites for openings in web design?
I have not quite mastered the art of the Advanced Search. My three sources for job ads (not including my thesis advisor) are Science, Nature, and NeuroJobs on the Society for Neuroscience website, and I haven't found any to be completely user-friendly (if you know of any other good resources, by all means share!). Of course, the paranoid part of me is wondering whether this is some sort of test; if I'm not savvy enough find the right job to apply to, I can't possibly be qualified to fill the position, now can I?
I went through a similar period of self-doubt when I applied for a K99-R00 Pathway to Independence award from NIMH earlier this year. The NIH grants website is nearly impenetrable, and you need to cross-reference the guidelines there with a 250-page pdf manual, out of which you must extract the scattered instructions specific to your particular grant. It's a real exercise in Not Repeatedly Smashing Your Laptop Into the Wall, and I quickly became certain that it was all part of an elaborate filtration process by which most people would, in frustration, give up on science altogether. Wheat from the chaff, you know?
So here I am again questioning my worth, only now it's according to the ease with which I come across listings for The Perfect Job. How useful I'm finding these search engines varies by website, with Nature coming in dead last. It's terrible. As far as I can tell, there's no easy way to sort out tenure track faculty jobs from, say, post-doc jobs, and there are a LOT of post-doc jobs. Thousands. When you put "professor" into the search, it comes up with post-doc jobs that ask you to send your application to Dr Joe Scientist, Professor of Chemical Engineering. To try to eliminate post-doc jobs in your results, you can use the "-" symbol to leave out anything that says "post-doc" in it, putting the expression "-post-doc" in the search bar along with "+neuroscience". However, this poses at least two problems, the most important being, do you know how many different ways people choose to write the word "post-doc"?
Well, there's "post-doc", "postdoc", "post doc", but then you need to also include "postdoctoral", "post doctoral" etc., etc....it's a pain! The second problem is that you end up ruling out ads that say something like, "minimum 2 years post-doctoral experience required for this very excellent tenure-track faculty job." And then you still need to narrow things down so as to rule out all the Chemical Engineering positions.
Science is much better, with a nice big button that says "Faculty Jobs". Thank you! That was easy, wasn't it? Once you click through you get a nice list of the job posting, plus the school and location. You can narrow this search with "neuroscience" or "neurobiology" or "psychology" (my big three), to get a pretty streamlined list of jobs you may want. Neurojobs is basically the reverse, since all posts are at the very least neuro-related (no chemical engineering positions here!), but then you need to narrow with "professor" or "faculty" (apparently there are far fewer post-doc positions listed here). You can also easily filter the jobs by "academic", "not-for-profit", "industry" etc, in case your experience with the K-99 made you never want to write another grant again. It should be noted that Neurojobs is free for SfN members, but $25 A DAY if you're not.
One thing that seems so obvious to me is that there should be some kind of uniformity in the way these jobs are listed. For example, when the department chair goes to list the position, he or she should have to click a box that says "assistant professor" "post-doc" "technician", etc., rather than making up the name of the job. That way job searchers can easily search by category, and not have to guess whether "Position in Neuroscience" is something we'd like to apply for.
Hmmm...perhaps I should be looking in these sites for openings in web design?
