On grants

I recalled a post by Female Science Professor that deals with the issue of grants and research funding that I dug up and partially re-post below. I'm doing this because I see no need to re-invent the wheel (and because even though I've recommended her blog, I'll bet that very few students have navigated over to that site nor spent much time there), but I would add one more point to what she's written - grants are written to conduct very specific research: The budgets are detailed and MUST be spent in the way spelled out in the grant (mas o menos) unless specific permission is granted by the program officer at (in my case) the National Science Foundation. The grant itself is a contract between the Principal Investigator (me) and the funding agency - it's my job to see that research gets done in the way that I've laid it out in the grant proposal.

"Over the years I have found that even moderately well informed and apparently sane graduate students have trouble understanding some basic issues involving grants and research. These issues include:

- Grants have start and end dates. They do not go on forever. This might be confusing in part because PIs can get no-cost extensions for a year (or two), so grants may have a longer life than their original start and end dates might suggest.

- Grants have budgets. They do not contain an infinite amount of money. Even when some students are told exactly how much is available for a certain activity, they seem to think that somehow there will be more and/or they are surprised and upset when the money runs out.

- The total $ amount of a grant is not equivalent to the amount the PI has available for the research. A substantial amount of the money in a grant goes to the university, not to the PI.

- Grant funds for grad students may be much more than just salary. Some institutions also require that the PI pay tuition and benefits. Grad students may not be highly paid, but they may be a significant component of a grant budget.

- Proposal budgets for most proposals can't be too high. PIs develop a sense for what the funding agency/program would consider to be reasonable vs. too high. For this reason, PIs have to do some delicate balancing between grad stipends (+ related costs) and research activity expenses.

- Students supported on a grant may start their graduate studies before or during a particular grant's lifetime. It may not seem fair to the student, but this timing relative to a grant's lifetime may affect the advisor's stress level about doing the research on a particular time scale, and that stress level may be transmitted to the student.

- The time between proposal submission and notification of the proposal's fate may be long.

- Some university accounting systems are so bizarre and complicated that it can be difficult for a PI to know exactly how much money is left in a grant. For example, it can be difficult to determine what is encumbered and what is not, and whether all outstanding invoices have been paid. There have been times when the actual amount remaining in one of my grants has been off by tens of thousands of $$ from what the accounting tables indicated. This is particularly stressful near the end of a grant. Budget stress level may fluctuate depending on when PIs look at accounting statements. A graduate student might perceive this as erratic behavior in an advisor.

- In some cases, departments/institutions make new policies that cost PIs money in existing grants even if this money was not originally budgeted. For example, my department occasionally mandates that graduate students receive raises that are effective immediately, even for existing grants. I supported the raises, but the money has to come from somewhere in finite budgets. This means less money for research activities.

Most of us could do a much better job of explaining the proposal/grant system to our students, but I think that it is inevitable that when issues of money, time, and stress are involved, as they are during a typical graduate program in Science, there are going to be difficult situations. I also think that grant management is one of those things that you have to experience yourself before you can really understand what is involved.

Maybe some computer science person will create a video game - SimGrant. Advisors can give it to students and postdocs to play and see how they do with the various decisions involved in writing transformative proposals, keeping various members of a research group funded, and dealing with kafkaesque accounting situations. I think this would be great, but the only problem is that the game couldn't use a proposal submission system like grants.gov or else no one would play, and those forced to play would end up shooting their computers."

On student-advisor perceptions

A recent post on the Chronicle of Higher Education relates to my last blog entry about what professors actually do. I've reproduced the article below because it goes beyond just what professors DO and delves into the student-advisor relationship and expectations. It also touches on graduate student pay - something that is normal for PhD students at research universities (where there is institutional support) but that relies on grant support at other institutions (a topic that I will no doubt blog about in the future). For now, I will say that my expectations of graduate students are the same whether or not I am able to pay a student from a grant (though I have more and firmer expectations of graduate students that I am supporting) - ultimately a research project is the grad student's project, not mine, and success or failure lies quite firmly in grad student's hands. I hope this isn’t true, but sometimes I wonder if graduate students doing research with me think they are doing me a series of favors – if so, that perception needs to change because (and I hope this doesn’t sound too harsh) I could do the work much more efficiently on my own. Grad students are research trainees and my job as an advisor is to help grad students do their best possible work, and if they’re successful, go on to a Ph.D. program.

Planet of the Professors

Why do doctoral students and their advisers have such different views about the graduate-research experience?

By FEMALE SCIENCE PROFESSOR

"It is well known that professors and undergraduates exist on different planets with respect to their expectations and views about educational issues (like grades). That may relate to the difference in their ages, or in the intensity of their academic focus. Those factors are less pronounced in the relationships between professors and graduate students, who, nonetheless, also exist on different planets and have different views about the graduate-research experience.

For example, some graduate students, including research assistants, believe that they are exploited, employed at low wages to work long hours accomplishing various tasks that benefit the research endeavors of an adviser who doesn't really care about them and whose own "work" may not be apparent to the student. I don't doubt that there are cases in which that description applies to a particular professor, but it's not an accurate description of the typical graduate experience, at least not in the physical sciences with which I am familiar. It's an incomplete and inaccurate description for at least three reasons.

1) Not cheap labor. Graduate-student stipends may be low compared with other employment options, particularly in science and engineering fields, but students are not "cheap" labor for advisers. When salary, benefits, and, in some cases, tuition are factored in, graduate students cost a lot, and most or all of that cost may come out of the adviser's research grants.

Graduate students don't see those additional costs; they just see their modest salaries. In fact, graduate-student salaries and their related costs may largely consume grants. Expenses for the actual research may be the smallest component of the budget.

From the adviser's point of view, therefore, students are getting paid a decent (living) wage while working toward their (tuition-free) graduate degree, and doing interesting research in the process. A student, however, may focus on how hard the work is for not a lot of money in a stressful environment that may be populated by some intense and/or difficult people. If the student has or wants to have a family, the stipend may seem even smaller. Financial pressures may be a source of discontent on both sides because each has a different perspective on the "cost" of the research.

2) Training time. Most students do not arrive in graduate school knowing how to do research. It takes time to learn. Unlike most postdocs (who have already successfully attained a Ph.D.), some graduate students never learn.

If the training time and the uncertainty that a graduate student will do well in research are factored in, one could reasonably conclude that using students is an extremely inefficient way for an adviser to conduct a research program. A student may need time to adjust to a new environment in which expectations and skills are different from those in a typical undergraduate program. At first, the student may be taken aback by the culture of criticism, discussion, and debate of graduate seminars, research-group meetings, and research presentations.

Some students can handle all of that and some can't — no matter how smart they are. In fact, from the professor's point of view, the most efficient way to conduct a research program would be to hire nonstudent workers who are already trained and who would stay in the job on a long-term basis rather than leaving just at the point when they finally know what they are doing. That would be more efficient even than hiring postdocs who only stay a couple of years and then move on.

That would be fine if efficiency were the only thing that mattered, but a completely efficient scenario of trained workers doesn't sound appealing to me, nor does working in isolation. Most of us science professors aren't here to manage a group of technicians, or even to work alone.

I do like to get results, and my fondest wish is that students who are paid on a grant will get some results, for their sake and mine. But I also expect a bit of inefficiency along the way. By results, I mean data, a talk, a paper, or a new grant proposal. We need such results to keep the interconnected system of research and graduate education functioning. Advisers may be more focused on certain important deadlines (including those involving tenure and promotion decisions) than students and may transmit (without much explanation) their stress and sense of urgency to their students.

In that context, the concept of efficiency doesn't capture the most valuable outcomes of teaching students how to do research, whether the teaching involves direct instruction or letting a student loose on a problem. The most valuable outcomes are discovery, insight, and inspiration (and having fun in the process). Can those be taught? Years of advising lead me to an unsatisfying answer: Sometimes.

3) The way we work. Most students, even quite senior graduate students, have little idea of what faculty members do all day. I have heard students complain that they do all the work while their advisers do nothing. I am always skeptical that a professor managing a research group at a research university is really doing nothing all day.

There are some periods of time, including entire academic terms, when I don't have time to do any actual research myself. I suppose in some respects I am doing nothing during those times — nothing other than teaching, serving on committees, reviewing manuscripts and proposals, writing manuscripts and proposals (an activity I count as research), dealing with budgets and accountants involved in grants management, writing letters of recommendation, attending conferences (preparing and giving talks), and a host of other random things that seem to pop up every day and consume my time.

When doctoral students graduate and become faculty members, perhaps after doing postdoctoral research, a common refrain is "I didn't know I would have to spend so much time doing ... [fill in blank with administrative or advising task]."

We advisers could do a better job of teaching our students exactly what professors really do. That might result in less dissatisfaction at a perceived imbalance in workload between students and their advisers. Students should also be more aware of the environment in which they are working, although some of what is involved in being a professor and adviser of a research group is difficult to anticipate or understand until you actually do it.

I like having a research group, and I like working with students. I enjoy doing research, discovering things, developing new ideas, and communicating the results, and I like trying to teach others how to do all of that as well. It takes a lot of time and energy for both adviser and student, even when things go well and even when the student thinks he or she is doing most of the work.

Some advisers are more involved with their students' research and education than others. Some leave a lot of the day-to-day advising to other members of a research group. Some advisers would prefer to have more "workers" and fewer students, especially advisers who have had a lot of negative experiences with unproductive graduate students. It can be extremely frustrating and demoralizing to (try to) work with a dysfunctional grad student.

I think, however, that most of us advisers have enough positive experiences to balance out the negative ones — even if the negative ones are rather spectacular and make for better stories.

By working with many different students over the years, we can achieve a reasonably upbeat perspective on the overall experience. In contrast, most graduate students work with only one or two advisers, so a single bad experience can be crushing.

Most of us science-professor types at research universities advise graduate students, for better or worse. Sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn't. Successful adviser-student interactions require of both parties a balance between being patient and being assertive, keeping overt complaining to a minimum, and realizing that what seems like insensitive or strange behavior or laziness in the other might have a reasonable explanation.

Graduate students and professors alike are continually amazed at each other's mystifying behavior, so it is not surprising that there are gaps in experiences and expectations between them. But maybe it's not surprising that these misunderstandings exist: My colleagues and I often don't understand each other, either.”

Editing marks

Today I'm reading an M.S. thesis and two thesis proposals and noticing some problems in common. Some problems relate to formatting and style, some problems result (despite my pleas) from not having run a spell and grammar check, but mostly because it takes time to learn how to write scientifically. I think many problems would be caught by simply flipping through the paper to see how it looks before submitting (why are all my figures blue?). The formatting issues can be dealt with by following instructions for publication in a professional journal (where you will see a reminder to spell check...is anyone getting this thing about spell-checking?) or looking at a copy of a published paper. I believe the goal for every M.S. thesis should be to get it published in a peer-reviewed journal, so you should write as if you're getting your thesis ready to publish. Every journal has its own quirks in formatting (usually with regard to the references), but the main text should follow the same general rules. I edit accordingly. Hence, this post with notes about editing marks and some examples.

Editing and professional proofreading marks are similar with the main difference that editing marks are done in the line of text and professional proofreaders write the corrections in the margin. Editing marks are fairly intuitive; I had to learn what the professional proofreader's marks meant when I submitted my first manuscript for publication to Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta in 1998.

How to prepare for field work and what to pack

We brainstormed today on how to plan/prepare and pack for field work using a difficult field area as an example – the Indian Himalaya. Keep in mind you should travel as lightly as possible and this must all fit into a backpacking pack and one Action Packer (filled with the consumables). The results of the brainstorming session form a check list for the field party:

Before you go (well in advance):
Plan the route: Where is the relevant geology? Do you need permission to access certain areas? Is it safe to travel in those regions? Are there access roads or will it require backpacking, horses, or rafting?
Check road conditions, weather conditions
Check for clothes appropriate for weather/local customs (it can be in the 80s during the day and in the 30s at night; Women: maybe no shorts or tank tops)
Compile maps: topographic, geological and road maps
Choose scientific papers to reference in the field
Assemble aerial photographs and/or satellite images (if available or from Google Earth)
Buy emergency medical/evacuation insurance
Current passport and Indian visa
Update vaccinations (you may not be vaccinated completely for Hepatitis and be sure your Tetanus is up-to-date)
Compile contact info, flight info, relevant phone numbers (for airlines, hotels, etc.)
Check travel advisories with the U.S. Department of State
Arrange a GSM cell phone (with international use activated or unlocked for an Indian SIM card)
Call credit card companies to notify that you’ll be traveling and to accept those charges
Register your travel plan with U.S. embassy in New Delhi
Order/purchase equipment or supplies (see below)

What else to pack:

Geology-related gear:
Brunton
“Rite in the Rain” field book (with any necessary IUGS diagrams, etc. you might want in the field taped inside)
Field pouch (to carry field book, Sharpies, chisels…)
Pens and pencils, colored pencils
Sharpies (several)
Sample bags – cloth or Ziploc freezer bags (quartz and gallon size)
Ruler/scale?
Field belt (for carrying hammer, field pouch, etc.)
Spare heavy duty duffle bag(s) for additional rocks
Hand lens on cord
4-lb. sledgehammer “crack hammer” with a long handle (pack this in checked baggage to be easily accessed by TSA agents)
Chisels (at least 2)
Backpack (day pack and backpacking pack if trekking overnight)
Binoculars/monocular?
Clipboard

Things that need batteries or charging:
Camera, 1+ Gb memory card(s), and batteries
GPS and batteries
Laptop computer?
AC power inverter for cigarette lighter charging
Chargers (if necessary for camera, phone, GPS, computer, etc.)
All necessary cables (data [USB] and power cables for camera, phone, GPS, computer…)
Satellite phone (unnecessary unless in very remote regions of Tibet)
Ethernet cable
Headlamp and batteries
Extra batteries
Instruction manuals for unfamiliar electronics
Electric plug adapter appropriate for the country
Alarm clock or watch with an alarm

Other stuff:
Laundry cord or rope
Action Packer(s) for rock transport, and name/address labels (bring copies) for inside and out
Tent
TSA locks for checked baggage
Sleeping bag
Sleeping pad/Thermarest
Sleep sheet (for funky Indian “hotels”)
Cash, credit card(s), ATM card
Several extra copies (~10) of both your passport photo/info page and Indian visa (must be surrendered for travel permits)
Secure (zip-up) wallet for travel documents and cash, etc.
Sunglasses and lanyard
Sunblock (very important)
Duct tape (at least one big roll)
Hat
Hiking boots
Tevas or Chacos (to air out the feet, river crossings, showering)
Zip-off pants
Quick-dry, lightweight clothes
Spare Ziploc bags
Swiss Army knife (in checked luggage)
Bathing suit
Hiking socks
Rainjacket
Towel
Toilet paper (no joke, bring a roll)
Bandana (for exhaust/dust)
Good, long paperback book(s) that you can leave behind
Lonely Planet guide (or similar)
Phrasebook or translation dictionary (Hindi and Ladakhi?)

Cooking/eating/drinking:
Cup/mug
Nalgene(s)
Clif or Power bars and/or dried fruit
Lemonade mix so water doesn’t get boring (encourages you to drink) like Crystal Light “On the Go” packets
Stove that uses available fuel like the Primus Gravity MF II
Fuel cannister and coffee filters for dirty fuel
Pot for cooking
Bowl/plate
Tupperware container for carrying lunch?
Utensils
Matches
Plastic bottle of something alcoholic (for cleaning wounds, of course)

Medications and health-related items:
Iodine and dropper or water filter (filters may clog with rock powder in glacial run-off)
Toiletries
Anti-inflammatories like Advil or Aleve
Painkillers like Tylenol
Antibiotics (Cipro)
Laxative (for after days of dal, dal, and more dal)
Any regular medications
Altitude sickness pills like Diamox/Acetazolamide
Anti-malarial medication
First aid kit (bandaids, alcohol wipes, antibiotic cream, moleskin…)

Once there:
Apply for travel permits to access restricted areas
Buy a SIM card for GSM phone, phone card with minutes
Buy propane (or other available gas for stove)
Buy food and case of bottled water
Arrange car and driver

Then go do it!
Collect lots of structural data, take lots of notes, take more photos than you think are necessary, go ahead and collect that sample you're not sure you'll need, orient every sample that you can, label every. single. piece. of. rock. with a sample number (and the sample bag!), mark GPS waypoints frequently, and have fun.

It's been a while since I've added anything to the blog and until I meet a couple of pressing deadlines this week, you'll have to wait a bit longer. For now, a topic that has come up in previous posts dealt with how to address faculty; I found this comic on a web site that deals with issues related to being a graduate student - Piled Higher and Deeper. Enjoy!

Research grants, Fellowships, and Scholarships

I've compiled a list of research grants, fellowships, and scholarships for both graduate students and undergraduates in the Department of Earth & Climate Sciences at SF State (with a focus on students in my research group). If you see something you want to apply for, put the deadline on your calendar now so that you can start your application, request letters of recommendation, and order transcripts well in advance of the deadline. Deadlines generally hover around the same time of year if not the same date each year:

Graduate Student Research & Travel Grant Opportunities and Fellowships

• AAPG Foundation Grants-in-Aid program, $500-$3,000 - deadline January 15
• AAAS Pacific Division Student Research Award, up to $750 - deadline May 1
• AAAS Pacific Division Student Travel Grants, up to $150 - deadline 5pm on May 1
• AEG Foundation Funds, variable - deadline February 1
• AIPG William J. Siok Graduate Scholarship Program, $1,000 - deadline February 1
• AGeS2 Program, GSA, for geochronology student research - deadline 3pm on February 1 annually
• AGU travel grants (specific international meetings only) - variable
• College of Science and Engineering, SF State - deadlines vary
• Department of Geosciences research grants, up to $800 - deadlines in the 5th week of Fall semester and the 10th week of Spring semester (usually announced by e-mail)
• EDMAP, US Geological Survey, up to $17,500 - deadline in November
• GSA Graduate Student Research Grants (~50% success rate!), with an average award of ~2,000 - deadline February 1
• GSA Travel Grants to Cordilleran Section meetings - deadline in late Winter/early Spring
• MSA Grant for Student Research in Mineralogy & Petrology, up to $5,000 - deadline March 1
• MSA Grant for Research in Crystallography, up to $5,000 - deadline March 1
• National Defense Science & Engineering Graduate Fellowship program, must be U.S. Citizen, generous stipend + tuition - deadline November 2
• National Geographic Society Early Career Grants, $5,000-$10,000 - deadline October 21
• NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program, generous stipend + tuition - deadline October 22 annually
• SEG scholarships, $500-$10,000 - deadline March 1
• Society of Economic Geologists Graduate Student Fellowship Program, $2,500-$15,000 - deadline February 1
• Sigma Xi Grants-in-Aid of Research program, up to $1,000 - deadlines March 15 & October 1
• Zeiss-GSA Research Grant, $10,000 - deadline February 3

Undergraduate Student Research & Travel Grant Opportunities, and Scholarships

• AEG Foundation Funds, variable - deadline February 1
• AIPG National Undergraduate Scholarships, $1,000-$3,000 - February 1
• Association of Independent Professional Earth Scientists National Undergraduate Scholarship, $1,000-$3,000  - deadline February 1
• College of Science and Engineering, SF State - deadlines vary
• Department of Defense SMART Scholarship Program, generous stipend + tuition - deadline 5pm on December 1
• Department of Geosciences research grants, up to $400 - deadlines vary (announced by email)
• The Desk and Derrick Educational Trust scholarships, U.S. & Canadian citizens only (Min. 3.2 GPA) - deadline April 1
• EDMAP, US Geological Survey, up to $10,000 - deadline in November
• Expanding Representation in Geosciences, GSA, diversity program, $1,500 - deadline May 15
• The Gladys Carol Scholarship Program, $2,500 (renewable, Min. 3.75 GPA) - deadline March 31
• The Barry Goldwater Scholarship and Excellence in Education Foundation (apply in Sophomore year), tuition + $7,500 - Fall deadline
• GSA Travel Grants to Cordilleran Section meetings - deadline in late Winter/early Spring
• Microscopy Society of America, Undergraduate Research Scholarship Program, up to $3,000 - deadline 11:59pm on December 1 
• MSA Grant for Student Research in Mineralogy & Petrology, up to $5,000 - deadline March 1
• MSA Grant for Research in Crystallography, up to $5,000 - deadline March 1
• National Geographic Society Early Career Grants, $5,000-$10,000 - deadline October 21
• On To The Future, GSA, diversity travel grant to attend the Annual Meeting of the GSA
• SEG scholarships, $500-$10,000 - deadline March 1
• Sigma Xi Grants-in-Aid of Research program, up to $1,000 - deadlines March 15 & October 1

Underrepresented Students and/or Womxn Only

• AAPG L. Austin Weeks Undergraduate Grants - deadline March 31
• AGI Scholarship Programs, Harriet Evelyn Wallace Scholarship for Female Graduate Geoscience Students, $5,000 (can apply twice) - deadline February 7
• AWG awards (scholarships, travel awards, field-based or paleontology research) - award amounts and deadlines are variable
• Collabera STEM Scholarship (women only), $2,500 - deadline May 29
• Ford Foundation Predoctoral Fellowship (U.S. Citizens only, URM award) - deadline December 17

Field Camp Scholarships (in addition to above scholarships)

• AEG Foundation Beardsley-Kuper Field Camp Scholarship Fund - deadline February 1
• AISES Exxon Mobil scholarships (indigenous students only), $3,000 - deadline May 31
• AWG Maria Crawford Field Camp scholarship, $750 - deadline February 14
• GSA Field Camp Awards, $2,000-$10,000 - deadline March 27 
• NAGT scholarships for field study, $750 - deadline February 14
• SEG Field Camp program, $1,000-$20,000 - deadline February 1
• Scholarships for the Indiana University Judson Mead Geologic Field Station, $40-$180 per credit hour (~80% of students receive a scholarship)
• TravelingGeologist Fieldwork Scholarship (800CAD [or equivalent foreign currency]) - deadline March 31

Good luck!

How to do research, part 1

This is a hard one. Because research is such an unstructured task, it's difficult to describe how to do to it (and do it well). I'll try to pull a few key points from this web site to get started (you'll have to scale a PhD timeline to an MS timeline for SF State):

On doing research in general:

"For many new graduate students, graduate school is unlike anything else they've done. Sometimes it's hard to know exactly what it is you're supposed to be learning. Yes, you have to complete a dissertation, but how do you start? What should you spend your time doing?

Graduate school is a very unstructured environment in most cases. Graduate students typically take nine hours or less of coursework per semester, especially after the second year. For many, the third year -- after coursework is largely finished and preliminary exams have been completed -- is a very difficult and stressful period. This is when you're supposed to find a thesis topic, if you're not one of the lucky few who has already found one. Once you do find a topic, you can expect two or more years until completion, with very few landmarks or milestones in sight."

On day-to-day activities [my changes are in brackets]:

"You'll have to read a lot of technical papers to become familiar with any field, and to stay current once you've caught up. You may find yourself spending over half of your time reading, especially at the beginning. This is normal. It's also normal to be overwhelmed by the amount of reading you think you "should" do. Try to remember that it's impossible to read everything that might be relevant: instead, read selectively. When you first start reading up on a new field, ask your advisor or a fellow student what the most useful journals.... are in your field, and ask for a list of seminal or "classic" papers that you should definitely read.... Start with these papers and the last few years of journals and proceedings."

I will add that you should subscribe to automatic journal updates (e-alerts) that send you the titles and links to the current month's publications in major journals - start with AGU, GSA, MSA, Elsevier/ScienceDirect, and Springer. If/when you publish your research, you will be expected to be up-to-date with current research in your field. And you may spot a paper that is just what you're looking for...

"Before bothering to read *any* paper, make sure it's worth it. Scan the title, then the abstract, then -- if you haven't completely lost interest already -- [look] at the introduction, [figures], and conclusions. (Of course, if your advisor tells you that this is an important paper, skip this preliminary step and jump right in!) Before you try to get all of the nitty-gritty details of the paper, skim the whole thing, and try to get a feel for the most important points. If it still seems worthwhile and relevant, go back and read the whole thing. Many people find it useful to take notes while they read [directly in the margins of the paper to find relevant points quickly]. Even if you don't go back later and reread them, it helps to focus your attention and forces you to summarize as you read. And if you do need to refresh your memory later, rereading your notes is much easier and faster than reading the whole paper."

Organize papers in folders according to a broad(ish) topic (e.g., microstructures) so that you can go back and find relevant papers easily.

On staying motivated:

"At times, particularly in the "middle years," it can be very hard to maintain a positive attitude and stay motivated. Many graduate students suffer from insecurity, anxiety, and even boredom. First of all, realize that these are normal feelings. Try to find a sympathetic ear -- another graduate student, your advisor, or a friend outside of school. Next, try to identify why you're having trouble and identify concrete steps that you can take to improve the situation. To stay focused and motivated, it often helps to have organized activities to force you to manage your time and to do something every day. Setting up regular meetings with your advisor, attending seminars, or even extracurricular activities such as sports or music can help you to maintain a regular schedule.

Chapman (see [chapman]) enumerates a number of "immobilizing shoulds" that can make you feel so guilty and unworthy that you stop making progress. Telling yourself that you *should* have a great topic, that you *should* finish in N years, that you *should* work 4, or 8, or 12 hours a day isn't helpful for most people. Be realistic about what you can accomplish, and try to concentrate on giving yourself positive feedback for tasks you do complete, instead of negative feedback for those you don't.

Setting daily, weekly, and monthly goals is a good idea, and works even better if you use a "buddy system" where you and another student meet at regular intervals to review your progress. Try to find people to work with: doing research is much easier if you have someone to bounce ideas off of and to give you feedback.

Breaking down any project into smaller pieces is always a good tactic when things seem unmanageable. At the highest level, doing a master's project before diving into a Ph.D. dissertation is generally a good idea (and is mandatory at some schools). A master's gives you a chance to learn more about an area, do a smaller research project, and establish working relationships with your advisor and fellow students.

The divide-and-conquer strategy works on a day-to-day level as well. Instead of writing an entire thesis, focus on the goal of writing a chapter, section, or outline. Instead of implementing a large system, break off pieces and implement one module at a time. Identify tasks that you can do in an hour or less; then you can come up with a realistic daily schedule. If you have doubts, don't let them stop you from accomplishing something -- take it one day at a time. Remember, every task you complete gets you closer to finishing."

It is very important to make regular progress (i.e., each week). Keep track of how you spend your time: if you are a TA, spend no more time on those tasks that you are paid for (normally 10 hours per week). Your classes should take up another ~25% of your time (because coursework is not the focus in graduate school). You should be spending about 50% of your time "doing research". This should all total at least 40 hours per week, particularly if you want to complete your graduate research within a fixed period of time (2-3 years for an MS, 4-6 years for a PhD). So that translates into at least 20 hours per week "doing research" if you're TAing and taking classes, more if not.

"Doing research" could mean:

• reading papers (a never-ending task...) and following up on potentially-interesting references therein,
  
• investigating an analytical technique (what kind of samples do I need to collect to do Ar/Ar dating? are there any considerations I should keep in mind when collecting my samples? who has the facilities nearby to prep my samples and do the analyses? how much will it cost? is this the right technique to solve the problem I'm interested in?),
• looking at maps to plan field work (where are the roads? where are the relevant rocks? where can I go to find a particular structure? what's the best time of year to go [too hot?, snow-covered?]),
• working with your data (do I see any trends in the REE data for different sample types? is there a correlation between U concentration and U/Pb age?),
• drafting a figure to go into your thesis and/or for a publishable paper,
  
• writing a grant proposal to pay for thin sections or lab analyses you'd like to do,
• looking at thin sections, hand samples, field notebooks and writing rock descriptions (a pretty fundamental task for anyone in my group),
• cutting rock chips to send off to have thin sections made and finding a quality lab to do that work with a relatively quick turn-around time,
• crushing rocks and doing mineral separation or hand-picking minerals for analysis,
• learning how to do mineral separation
• writing your thesis...
  

Research projects that involve both original field and lab work will take longer because you've got to prepare to go to the field, do the field work, process your samples (mineral separates, thin sections, etc.), prepare for lab analyses, work in the lab, and then interpret everything. Working on samples that have already been collected or a thesis project focusing entirely on a lab-based investigation will take less time. Some people can work more efficiently, others less so. Work when you are most productive (early morning? late at night?), and do something more mindless (like hunting for papers or drafting a figure) when you're not being productive. Be sure to carve out regular, uninterrupted time to do your research each week in a place where you can minimize distractions (cleaning the toilet can wait).

I'm sure there is more I'd like to say about doing research so watch for part 2....