Federal Jobs:
We talked to Ned Laman(Fishery Biologist
NOAA/NMFS/AFSC/RACE, Seattle, WA)
and Erica Burton (Research
Specialist,
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary)
1. What are the entry level
positions, or those that a student with a
MS degree could qualify for, and a brief description of what you'd do
in that position?
At NMFS, an entry-level position for someone with an MS is basically a
GS-9. Most folks with a master's would be over qualified for a
GS-7 and under qualified for a GS-11. The GS-9 position is pretty
varied in terms of job types/opportunities. Erica Burton is a GS-9
working for the Sanctuary doing everything from attending meetings on
MPAs to going to sea. Ned Laman is a GS-9 (step 1 [there are 10
steps within each grade]) and his title is Fishery Biologist. The
general job description for a Fishery Biologist (GS-9) follows: Applies
knowledge of programs, policies, and regulations to fishery resource
problems which are usually of a limited range and/or non-controversial
nature. Duties may include assessment of projects or license
applications on fishery resources; managing or developing fishery
resources; developing policies, agreements, and restrictions for the
conservation and management of fishery resources; assuring compliance
with fishery management plans; or analysis of data and preparation of
reports. In general, though, the GS-9 is where MS students would
be getting in to government service and the tasks, level of
responsibility, required skills, etc. are job-specific. GS-11
would require more experience and published papers, and it is
theoretically possible to enter at this level. Description of the
grades can be found at
http://www.opm.gov/fedclass/html/gsclass.htm.
There is also a new
series, the ZP series. Positions listings and descriptions can be
found at
http://www.opm.gov/fedclass/html/gsseries.asp.
The federal payscale is at
http://www.opm.gov/oca/03tables/indexGS.asp
2. Where would he/she look
for job advertisements?
http://www.usajobs.opm.gov
or COOL at
http://www.jobs.doc.gov
3. What are the basic components
of the job application package that would be expected?
This is very simple right now for
federal jobs. On the page above you can create your own account
(need to to set up the custom search engines described above), fill in
an electronic resume/cv that is stored on the COOL (can't remember what
it stands for) web site, and can be electronically accessed and
submitted with the click of a button off most vacancy
announcements. Typically they will also want to see college and
grad school transcripts which are also stored on a general site so you
don't have to submit them more than once. A good reference for
compiling the resume is the Federal Resume Guidebook which can be found
at any bookstore.
4. Are any
particular components more important than the others?
(Ned
says) The
most important component is a strong CV. I don't mean
well-written
(although that is important), but you simply have to be able to
demonstrate that you have the qualifications to fit the bill.
(ERICA SAYS) IT IS
VERY IMPORTANT TO LINK YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE ANSWERS TO YOUR RESUME (VIA
WORK EXPERIENCE SECTION). DOING THIS WILL ALSO MAKE YOUR RESUME
STRONGER AND HELP YOU IN AN INTERVIEW WHEN POINTED QUESTIONS COME FROM
THE QUESTIONNAIRE AND AN APPLICANT HAS TO EXPLAIN WHY THEY ARE
QUALIFIED FOR THE JOB. MAKE THE CONNECTION!!! ONCE YOUR
APPLICATION
IS WRITTEN AND SUBMITTED ONLINE, YOU CAN USE THE SAME RESUME FOR MANY
JOB APPLICATIONS. YOU WILL ONLY HAVE TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONNAIRE
EACH
TIME YOU APPLY. THE HARD PART IS FIRST WRITING THE RESUME, BUT
ONCE IT
IS WRITTEN YOU'LL BE A HAPPY CAMPER AND BE ABLE TO APPLY TO JOBS "AT
WHIM."
5. What activities or
experiences might a student at MLML try to gain
in order to enhance the chances of landing such a position?
(Ned says) There were two things I
commonly came across when I was applying for NMFS positions during the
last couple of years and they were two things I didn't have in my
stockpile: heavy-duty experience with mathematical/ecological
modeling (both practical experience and specific knowledge of a variety
of software packages including such things as ArcView, EcoPath, and
some others); and salmonid experience at all levels of the life
cycle. Lots of money is being thrown at salmon and probably will
be for years to come sadly enough.
What I have learned in the past
couple of years trying to get from my consulting gig into NMFS is that
I should have gone much more heavily in to statistics, mathematical
modeling, fisheries oceanography, and other computer based applications
for science and been leaning away from organismal biology. Let's
face it, being a really good zebra goby biologist is only going to get
you so far if you want to get paid! It seems to me, and I am
philosophizing here, that if you want to stay loyal to a fish, a group
of fish, or just generally want to follow critters as a career, then
best to pursue a PhD. If you want an entry level job, then you
need to have practical, in demand skills that can be put to work in a
variety of different aspects of fishery science. From there you
can dream and scheme to get back to your pet critter sometime down the
road.
(ERICA SAYS) AT-SEA EXPERIENCE OR
FIELD EXPERIENCE IS OFTEN VERY HELPFUL. DURING TENURE AT MLML,
VOLUNTEER FOR NOAA SHIPTIME OR OTHER EXTENDED PERIODS AT SEA.
THIS DEMONSTRATES YOU CAN HANDLE EXTENDED PERIODS OF TIME ON A SHIP OR
IN THE FIELD, WORK WELL WITH OTHERS (HOPEFULLY) IN CONFINED
SPACES. ESPECIALLY HELPFUL IF YOUR INVITED BACK OR REPEATEDLY
VOLUNTEER FOR FIELD WORK. ESTABLISH A SOLID BACKGROUND IN
STATISTICS AND EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN. SOME OF THE FED JOBS REQUIRE
AN APPLICANT TO HAVE PROJECT LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE (COMPLETE A PROJECT
FROM START TO FINISH). ONE SHOULD ALSO TRY TO WORK ON A PROJECT
OUTSIDE OF THE THESIS (I.E. COLLABORATE WITH YOUR THESIS ADVISOR OR
OTHER PROFESSIONAL ON A PROJECT AND TRY TO GET IT PUBLISHED).
PUBLISH A CLASS PROJECT.
PRESENT YOUR RESEARCH AT CONFERENCES
(ORAL OR POSTER) LEADING UP TO YOUR DEFENSE, AND AFTER YOUR PROJECT IS
COMPLETE.
PhD Programs
We talked to Allen Andrews, PhD
Candidate, Rhodes University, S. Africa
And Brooke Flammang, PhD
Candidate, Harvard University
(Brooke's answers follow Allen's in the next section)
Allen Andrews
1. When did you start
looking (relative to when you wanted to
start), and how did you find the program(s) that interested you?
I wasn't really looking for quite a
few years after graduating from MLML (1997). I had been so caught
up in my research that I just kept moving
forward with it. It was about
3 years ago that I decided I wanted to take it to the next step, but
realized I did not have time for (nor did I
feel I needed) more classes.
So I went looking for a university that would recognize the work I'd
been doing for years. I felt it was
innovative enough to warrant not
taking additional classes, plus I have more units than most from MLML
(44) and felt I effectively did the class
work ahead of time.
Basically I was after a program that would consider my work PhD level,
and would allow me to continue my work here at MLML.
2. What were the steps that you followed once you identified
programs that interested you? Did you contact the supervisor that
you wanted to work with? Did you do this before or after you
submitted your application to the department/school? Etc.
Initially I pursued establishing a
connection with UCSC to do my PhD while continuing my work at
MLML. It all seemed to be headed in the right
direction, but the person that would
be my primary advisor was not enthusuastic in the least. I came
with a funded NSF project, made offers
to give a seminar on the age
validation work I had been doing, made an elaborate Statement of
Purpose, made queries about whether he was
interested in this line of work,
etc. Nothing.
Trying to establish a contact with
the person I would be working for as a student BEFORE applying was the
best thing I could have done. I would
have been miserable working under
someone that could care less about the work I do.
I think my position, however, is
somewhat out of the ordinary because of the work I've been doing.
It is innovative, well established, and not
many are doing this kind of
work. Perhaps he/some would not want to have someone as
independent as I was. The work was already PhD level from what
others told me (most thought I
already had a PhD). So I was looking for circumstances that were
out of the ordinary.
3. What are the basic components of the application package that
would be expected?
It was a connection with colleagues
at MLML and at Rhodes University that made the opportunity I am now
involved in. Rhodes has a program called
Research and Thesis, Not in
Attendance. Basically they offer a PhD for work that functions at
that level. This is exactly what I was after.
This is not to be confused, however,
with the $199 online or mailorder PhD. I had to qualify by having
my school work and research scrutinized
by those in the Dept of Ichthyology
and Fisheries Research. Once I established a connection with my
future advisor (made sure he was
interested in me and what I do), I
put together a cover letter, Statement Of Purpose, copies of the funded
NSF proposal and the application (there was probably some other stuff
in there too... transcripts, etc.) and sent it off by the application
deadline.
4. Are any particular components more important than the others?
I think establishing who you really
want to work with is the most important consideration. I have
heard from too many that simply applied
to a program that they were
miserable for 6 years! Choose your advisor, not the other way
around.
5. What activities or experiences might a student at MLML try to
gain in order to enhance the chances getting into a program like yours?
Mine is based in getting involved in
a line of research, finding something fun and fundable(!!), then making
it mine.
Brooke Flammang
1. When did you start looking
(relative to when you wanted to start), and how did you find the
program(s) that interested you?
Well, I had always known that I wanted to go for a PhD. But I was
trealtively sure that I did not want to persue a PhD in
ecology/fisheries management. I knew that I found the functional
morph/biomechanics literature the most exciting and interesting.
So I signed up for the FHL summer course to go to fxnl morf boot camp
and learn as much as I could to see if it was for me. I actually
started looking at PhD programs about a year before I wanted to start
(just after FHL, summer 2004). I was all fired up about
functional morphology after FHL, and I knew I wanted to apply to Beth's
and Adam's labs, since I had such a good experience working with them
in the course. I spoke with each of them to see if they were
interested in taking new PhD students in the next year, and to see if
they had any advice on other professors I might like to work
with. Shiela Patek had guest lectured at FHL, and I thought I
might be interested in her lab as well. Beth suggested I apply to
as many programs as I found interesting, but it should definitely be at
least 4 or 5. Adam said I should go to wherever I could work on
something I REALLY wanted to do, since I would be doing that for at
least 5 yrs.
Also, I wanted to apply to programs that year, because my GRE scores
were about to hit the 5 year mark, where they would no longer be
considered current. I didn't want to take the test again, not
only because it was one more thing to do, but because I had a perfect
score on the analytical section of the exam. Since I took the
exam, it has changed its format, and no longer has the analytical
section (it was replaced with some strange, subjective writing
component).
Find out as much as you can about the program: how much teaching is
required, will you have to take classes for the first few years, what
will you be paid, is there a lot of interaction among labs/departments,
will you do a rotation within the department before choosing your
adviser, how long are students generally in the program and did they
get a job later, etc... A lot of this information is available
from either the advisor's or department's webpage.
2. What were the steps that
you followed once you identified programs that interested you?
Did you contact the supervisor that you wanted to work with? Did
you do this before or after you submitted your application to the
department/school? Etc.
I emailed all the professors of the programs I thought might be
interesting, to let them know I was interested in their program and to
ask more questions about their research. I did this in the early
fall, before I submitted applications. I wanted to contact them
first for a couple of reasons: (a) I could identify early on if they
really were doing something I thought was interesting, (b) I wanted to
see if they were even considering taking any new grad students, (c) I
attached my CV to give them an idea of what I had to offer, and (d) I
wanted them to recognize who I was when my application was finally
brought before them.
I arranged to fly out (on my own dime) to visit Brown and Harvard
before applications were due. (well, it was only going to be
Brown, but you had to go and talk me into meeting George). The
Brown visit was a marathon on interviews with everyone in the
department, tour of the facilites, a few appointments with other grad
students, and a recap with Beth about what each of us were looking for
in PhD work. The visit at Harvard was spent talking to some of
the students, a tour of George's lab, and meeting with George.
During the meeting with George, we talked about my work at FHL, and I
pulled out my laptop to show him some of the results I had. He
then asked me if I would like to give a talk to the rest of the lab,
since they all get together for lunch everyday. Obviously I
couldn't say no, and I didn't have time to panic (lunch was in 15
minutes). After that I went and hid in the MCZ for a few
hours. I am assuming the talk went well ;)
SICB was after I had submitted all my applications, so I arranged to
meet with everyone I had applied to who was there, as well as some of
their grad students and some other people in their departments. I
wanted to find out as much as I could about their programs, but I also
wanted to know who I was in case they were involved in the acceptance
decisions.
UCI invited me for an interview in early spring, after I had submitted
all applications but before I had gotten replies from the different
programs (well, except I knew about Harvard b/c George emailed me right
away).
3. What are the basic
components of the application package that would be expected?
There is the basic personal info and educational/research background
stuff, and then there is the dreaded "personal statement" or "statement
of purpose". I thought the "statement of purpose" bit was
particularly interesting, because if I knew what my purpose was, I
probably wouldn't be filling out all those applications. They are
always so incredibly vague in telling you what they want for the
statement and you feel pretty helpless while you are trying to figure
out what to say. More about the statement in question 4.
They will also ask you questions about you and your parents financial
status. All the grad programs I looked at either freely gave
student support (ie: teaching fellowship at Harvard) or offered
teaching opportunities every semester for grad students to be able to
earn a paycheck. Grad students don't make a lot of money, but
they should make enough available to you that you won't starve.
They will also in this section ask if you have any external funding
(current or pending or applied for). Put whatver you have applied
for (currently) down, so that the review committee will see how hard
you are trying. I applied to several grant agencies, including
NSF, for PhD funding for a couple of reasons. If I got a grant
that would pay for me through my PhD, then I would be able to go to
whatever program I wanted essentially. Just about anybody will
take you if they don't have to pay for you. Also, if I got the
award, it would look really good on my CV. Just going through the
process of filling those things out is good experience, and you will be
submitting many more when you are a grownup in academia.
4. Are any particular
components more important than the others?
The statement of purpose is the most important part of the
application. They read tons of these things, so try to come up
with an intro that will make them want to actually read the whole
thing. They want to see that you can come up with well
thought-out project ideas that you might be interested in doing at
their institution. However, don't make it sound as if you are
only willing to do that certain project. They may not accept you
if they don't have someone who is doing exactly what you propose and
they think that is all you want to do.
I think recommendations are a close second to the statement of
purpose. This is especially true if you have not actually had the
chance to meet the person you are applying to work with. They
will be looking for information about you from people they know (and
like) who have worked with you. I did not get into MLML the first
time because my adviser did not like any of the people I had
recommendations from and he did not know me. It is only natural
to assume that if you think a professional has done crappy work, that
someone who trained with them will also do crappy work. However,
a recommendation from someone the professor does not know or like is
still better than no recommendation - you will just have to either meet
with or arrange a phone interview with the person you would like to
work with, to try to show them how awesome you are.
5. What activities or
experiences might a student at MLML try to gain in order to enhance the
chances getting into a program like yours?
Harvard (for example) has a greater acceptance rate of persons with
extracurricular activites than those without. There are multiple
reasons for this. Most importantly, people who are well-rounded
and do other things with their life are less likely to burn out.
They get stress relief from their other activities and they also have
other time they can negotiate if they need to get something done for
research or academics. If all you can handle is school then you
are maxed out and have nothing else to give. Having a life
outside of school generally implies that you have some social skills as
well, which will be important when you have to teach. As far as
what you do, it is most important that you are passionate about
it. It is also good to try to slip mention of your
extracurriculars into your statement of purpose if it applies in any
way. Things that involve service and philanthropy are definitely
good, especially if more physically active extracurriculars are not
your bag. Many applications offer a section where you tell them
whatever else about yourself you think they might want to know.
You can talk about your extracurriculars there as well.
Go to meetings. This is where all the people in the know are
hanging out and your best opportunity meet them all on an informal
basis. Don't be afraid to introduce yourself - they were grad
students once too. They also have their grad students at meetings
with them, and they are your best source of finding out what its REALLY
like to work with Dr. So-and-so. This is especially true after
they have had a few beers. Meetings are also the best way to find
out first hand what people are actually studying. Listening to a
talk by a person who did the work is often times much more educational
than reading the papers.
Take a specialized course that can teach you new techniques you will
need. Professors like their labs to be well-rounded so that the
students can learn from each other. It is also good to be
educated in the research you plan to do during your PhD so you can ask
intelligent questions and contribute to informal discussions (like at
the meetings you should be going to).
Read. Read papers by the people you want to work with and pay
attention to their methods. Is this something you can do?
Is it something you want to do? Some work sounds glamerous but is
actually not very much fun. Know enough about a person's work so
that if you start talking to them at a meeting, you can at least say
something like "didn't you study blah, blah, blah" All people,
especially potential advisers, like to be recognized for all the hard
work they did. They also like to think that someone else besides
them is interested in what they did. Even if you don't know
anything about what they do, asking questions shows interest, and
that's good.