At Pariah/Pioneer: things lab/ industry GCs want others to know: @SohneeAhmed: Psychosoc counseling is still what we do. @shreshthaGC: It's ok to be ambitious. @twitherington: We're doing our best here.
Sara Pirzadeh-Miller: Whatever traditional meant is not what it means anymore
Q/A session: @shreshthaGC: we should expose students to lab/industry earlier in training. Will move us forward as profession. @twitherington: I went into industry first bc it fit me as a person. Take a roll that fits your interest and skills.
Ideas as to how to support GCs who are only genetics prof at their work:
Sara P-M: We all deal with similar issues no matter where employed.
How should we think about titles at work?
Sohnee: We should fully embrace these other titles (besides "genetic counselor"). These titles open other doors. We're not limiting ourselves.
Q: How did you find these roles?
Shreshtha: I had to network and found a roll that didn't have "genetic counseling" in the title.
Sara P-M: I can't tell you how big networking is. That can get you to places you didn't see coming.
Echoing a point made by Sarah W. here, but new grad GCs: you can pass the boards while in a lab/industry position. I did it. My colleagues have done it. Not an issue if that's a concern!
Also, sorry but wasn't quick enough to tag @SaraPMiller1317 on the original posts!
Thank you all for the talk!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here's the thing about this DEI survey disaster: if you didn't respond, & esp if you started to respond and stopped, you committed a racist act. DEI work, and the work to get to it, are anti-racist acts. There is no middle ground.
This DEI work is not a neat thing NSGC is doing. It's not some cool idea. It's not something other people will do and you can just coast along.
It's imperative anti-racist work we all have to do for ourselves and our community.
If you got flustered hearing that you committed a racist act by withdrawing from the survey or ignoring it, then good. That means you have work to do. Luckily, GCs are a plucky group of learners.
For starters, at least read How to Be an Anti-racist by Ibram X. Kendi.
1/n: So, we just finished reviewing abstracts for NSGC's 2018 Annual Ed Conference & I really enjoyed it! I loved some of the projects—for others I had constructive, diplomatic feedback. Here are some good & bad things that might be helpful to other researchers:
2/n: First, let’s start with the things that I didn’t like: 1. Bad intros. Omit clunky declarative opening lines. When in doubt, type “Purpose:” and go from there. Good intros don’t receive extra points, but you will avoid the dreaded sigh through grinding teeth.
3/n: Intro infatuation. Intros shouldn't be the longest part. Try color-coding each section or a word-count and make a bar graph to see relative length. It's like filling up on breadsticks at a subpar Italian chain restaurant when I came for the osso buco.