Embedded Files
Marieke Groth-van Erp liked this.
Comments
Being a Good researcher in one sentence ...
The art of being a good researcher is to temporarily get totally obsessed with a research problem up to the point that you can’t stop thinking about it and actually *enjoying* that.
Thinking about https://goo.gl/ChRlHT which describes what makes a *bad* researcher, I thought it's worthwhile formulating things positively and to try to summarize my own thoughts on what it takes to actually be a *good* researcher: I think it can be summarized in that one sentence above... Explaining this in a few more words, i.e., what it means for me:
- devotion/enthusiasm to the topic: for myself I actually often discovered that enthusiasm grows once you have dived into a problem, struggled to get your head around it, once you have got around the first obstacles, the fun starts.
- having people to talk to *about your research*: socialising, i.e. liking your community helps a lot, working on a problem in teams to discuss the status or alternative solution paths is much better (for me, at least) than sitting in the office alone.
- having people to talk to about *other things*: work-life-balance - you can’t only work, that wrecks you and it totally helps to have someone who keeps you from doing that, you need breaks and vacations (where you switch off work completely) smile emoticon
- experiencing that you suddenly have an idea you need to write down, in unusual places, even in your spare time, in the most unlikely moment, is actually fun … being ready to find out the next day that the idea was complete nonsense or that 10 others have thought the same thing before not always wink emoticon
- pushing through deadlines once in a while gives you adrenaline and can be fun, especially if you share the deadline surf with others, but too much deadline surfing is not sustainable on the long run, plus deadline surfing also has the danger of giving up quality for a deadline, be ready to miss the deadline in the last minute before 24:00 Hawaiian time if necessary, if you are not convinced about your paper.
- … to be continued ...
Marieke Groth-van Erp and 16 others like this.
Charles J Petrie I think it is wanting to get a the truth of a matter. Really deeply understanding to the degree that you can clearly explain it to others, understanding their assumptions, and stepping them through it. One of my slogans (and I am not religious) is that "we are God's eyes and he wants us to see clearly". Oh, and being clear is very hard.
Axel Polleres Being clear, precise, and finding the time right level between conciseness vs. too much verbosity ... Indeed, very hard
Charles J Petrie You, often unfortunately, also have to understand the background of your audience. Frequently it's best to assume they are "just" students and you are helping them to understand something.
Alexandre Miguel Pinto Yes, but research needs funding and these days only research plans which "end up" in business plans get a decent chance of being funded. Fundamental research in universities, of which practical applications are not obvious (and may remain non-obvious for decades!), is currently on its death-row precisely because of this obsession that funding agencies have with applied research that has immediate results, preferably with a market impact. Although immediately applicable research promotes technological improvements, these are usually of a small and incremental nature. Truly disruptive innovation comes only from fundamental research, and it may take years, or even decades, for its applications to become apparent. And besides all that, research is done by highly qualified people who, most of the times, have short term contracts and are always worrying about their professional stability. It's hard to "get totally obsessed with a research problem" when you are constantly worrying if you'll still have a job in one year or so.
Research needs time, funding, and stability; none of which the funding agencies are willing to provide enough.
Everybody wants researchers to cook omelettes, but nobody wants to provide them with eggs.
Diana Maynard That's a very negative view of research!
Alexandre Miguel Pinto At least in Portugal that's a very realistic view of what's happening to research and researchers.
Charles J Petrie It is certainly an accurate description of research in the US. You have to be good at solving applied problems that actually help you with deeper research problems. This is possible, but hard. Doing science is hard. Much easier just to have a 9-5 job. Despite what most people think.
Diana Maynard Indeed, here also you have to be good at applied problems now. You have to be easily adaptable to new problems and changing kinds of research too,
Diana Maynard It's harder to get funding everywhere, for sure, but there are ways and means. I've been doing research in the same job for 16 years now, all funded by research grants.
Alexandre Miguel Pinto Not in Portugal, for sure.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse