A Letter To My Mentor and His Reply ...

Dear Dr. W

Happy Thanksgiving !

I am delighted to inform you that Dr. C has kindly allowed me to work in his lab part of the time. I do not know for certain, but I am guessing that that he must have spoken to you at some point in time and you must have put in a kind word or two on my behalf. In any case, he did have access to your letter of recommendation. Even if I do not make it this year, (Last year they accepted only 1 International student) I will be glad to be working on rhythms in the meantime. More importantly, I will have peace of mind that my life is moving in the right direction. So, a Big Thank You.

Now, on a different subject ....

Dr. E used to say that there was something wrong in my head/thinking/philosophy that I was not working as hard or as smart as I needed to be working. Dr. L also was a little bit frustrated in his inability to make me see things his way. I did not pay much attention to the matter back then, but a few months ago, I came across a phrase that might have described the atttitude problem from which I was suffering, namely, "having a theatrically sensitive soul and delusions of self-importance." I would lay stress on the number of hours that I had put in, instead of the number of things accomplished. Simple things as having a clear understanding of what is expected between myself and the PI and then putting in all efforts to meet those expectations as if my life depended on it eluded me.

Joblessness, reading a lot of books on philosophy and psychology, and frustrations in not getting into any lab as a technitian led me to apply and then accept a position for electronics technitian at TR. The only connection to rhythms research was that the company built incubators with circadian lighting and temperature for use by rhythm researchers. The job allowed me to overcome my phobia of all things electronic and mechanical. My self confidence was restored when I built 20 of them, without even one coming back for repair.

Dr. P, owner of TR and a former Harvard worm biologist himself, decided to make use of my programming skills, in making the circadian incubators better. Once I did that, he gave me more challenging tasks - such as building a FedEx label printing system. Eventually, I ended up designing and rebuilding the entire Tritech Research web site. The positive dynamics I had working with him restored my belief that I can have a good work relationship. I came to know all the things I had done right this time, when he showed me the letter of recommendation he drafted for U--- graduate program - putting in extra time on weekdays and weekends to not let a project suffer and being open to criticisms being the foremost of them.

There were many times when I made mistakes such as making a bad soldering joint or using too thin a wire or just wasting everyone's time trying to debug an electronics problem that was beyond my expertise. I was criticized, rather harshly at times, but I continued to work, and a few days later, would realize that the criticism was meant for just that one aspect of working, not a statement about my entire life. A desperation to work, along with past experience at U---- allowed me to "not have a theatrically sensitive soul" and focus on matter, not the manner of criticism. Getting things done was constantly reinforced positively by Dr. P. None of the things were done just because I wanted to do them (the kind of expectations that I had when I was a graduate student). Every thing was done because Dr. Papp wanted it done, and I focused merely on getting them done. My work attitude was consistent with the idea of "not having delusions of self-importance."

When I went this Monday to Dr. C's lab to do my first project - namely repairing their Shock Apparatus - I focused just on gettting that done - and was delighted that I could in fact do that. My next projects include making a drinkometer - these are purely electronic jobs, but I have the ability to execute these, and if Dr. C wants them done, then those shall be done. A year and a half ago, I would have found reasons to say no to such projects. (In fact, I now recall that Dr. E wanted a collaboration with Dr. S which involved me going to London - that I plainly refused point blank!)

Only further experiences will tell whether this theory is correct, and whether I have changed my attitude really. I will be happy if you could share your thoughts on this matter.

I have not yet thought through why I am writing all this to you, but I do know that I wanted to, so I am writing.

Finally, on the very important matter of recommendation letters ....

I have zero hopes of getting in this year, but am working on getting a green-card, which will allow me to apply in the general category next year. Then, I will be competing for sixty seats instead of one. So, the next one year in Dr. C's lab is really a preparation for my 2010 application.

This year, I am reapplying only to Neuroscience graduate program at U--- ... the graduate program coordinator insists that I resubmit letters of recommendation even though they might be identical ... Could you resend your last letter, if not a new one, to neurophd@---.edu as soon as possible? Their deadline is December 1st for receiving applications (which I have met) but they will wait for letters of recommendation and transcripts for a few more days.

Thanks,
Sincerely,
Srikanth.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Srikanth,
Many thanks for the update. I've just sent in a revised version of the letter to U---.
I don't recall having spoken to C about you; I haven't talked to him in a long time.
BUT, you're welcome anyway.
It sounds as though you have had an interesting year.
It seems you accept that criticism from Dr. P is intended to correct and re-direct you, not to tear you down.
This is usually the case in working relationships, and recognizing this is very important.
There is much too much rejection in this business (whether it is manuscripts, grant applications, etc...even job applications) for every criticism to be seen as a personal criticism.
Indeed, an important aspect of training is to become adept at professionally attacking a paper, while (hopefully) still respecting the source, and providing a critique that instructs the author in how to improve the product. The objective to keep in mind, even while the criticisms are stinging, is that the end product will be better if one can swallow pride long enough to understand the criticism as it was intended. Another way to think of it is to de-personalize the process as much as you can; in submitting a manuscript for review, you're looking for "feedback from the beta-testers" , not necessarily acceptance (and certainly not compliments).
Similarly, defending yourself against criticism/ responding to reviewer comments, questions after a talk, or evaluations of your work, needs to be done calmly, without attacking the person or viewing them as hostile. They usually are trying to provide the opportunity for you to say it better, explain more clearly, or justify your choices.
There's a distinction between doing things because the boss wants them done and because you do. It is true that accomplishing objectives in the short term to satisfy the boss is necessary. The ideal is when you can take a sense of ownsership over that accomplishment, making the boss's objective yours as well. I believe that is what you express below. There also comes a time when you will need to focus instead on what you want, and become increasingly self-directed. When this occurs, within a graduate program, varies a lot, both by PI and by student. Some PI's let the students sink or swim, in developing something independent, for which the student has the greatest resoponsibility (and also takes considerable risk, if it fails).
Other PI's want to dictate how much will be accomplished.
Others will provide a background question, and expect the student to find a niche within that broad area that is new enough to be worthwhile, yet not so risky as to risk 2-3 years of a graduate career.
Some students are ready to be given a budget and a firm push in the right direction;
others need yardsticks and milestones to keep them on track.
There's no one way to do it.
BUT, to be successful, it is critical to understand what is expected of you, and to communicate along the way.
Hope you find these thoughts helpful.
I have some old drinkometers from Lafayette Instruments.
If you need one to use as a template, to get part numbers, resistor strength etc., let me know and I'll send it out to you.
Best of success to you, and happy Holidays,
D