Recently I was "volunteered" to deliver a seminar at my institute, to explain – from a reviewer's perspective – what the major criteria are for submission of a competitive PhD student fellowship application. I anticipated a small turnout and even suggested to the organisers that a small seminar room that held 50 people would be more than sufficient. After all, the eligibility for most fellowships in the US today is exclusively for US citizens or those with permanent resident status. And our graduate student body is comprised of a large number of international students.
I found myself rather shocked to find the large auditorium almost packed with PhD students, post-docs and mentors, regardless of nationality. I guess that in the age of a major "scientific recession", the interest in ways to support students and post-docs is greater than ever.
While my goal was to outline explicitly the criteria that reviewers use to evaluate such proposals, I found the audience hungry for a lot of information that had apparently not reached some of the participants in the workshop. From my travels and meetings around this country, this phenomenon – of PhD students and post-docs not being fully aware of how the "system" works – is quite common. It appears that the average student is often unaware of the significance that early decisions can have on one's career.
In the course of the workshop, I pointed out that most PhD student fellowships, including those of the US National Institutes of Health and American Heart Association (where I have reviewed fellowships and even chaired such panels), evaluate the mentor as a significant part of the fellowship. The mentor, of course, is expected to play a significant role in guiding the student and helping her/him to prepare, edit and indeed polish the proposal. But in addition, the mentor's involvement with the fellowship runs much deeper. Indeed, the mentor is evaluated independently of the student, and this evaluation usually comprises anywhere between 33% and 50% of the overall score of the proposal.
I pointed out to the PhD students (and post-docs) that if their mentor was not currently funded by a large national grant, there would be no point in even submitting an application – it simply would not be funded, no matter how strong the proposal. I added that if the mentor did not have a track-record of showing that previously graduated students had published multiple first-author papers and continued to distinguish themselves in their scientific careers – particularly academic ones – again, there was no point in bothering to apply.
One of the students, apparently shocked by the idea of "discrimination" on the basis of the mentor, noted to me that this wasn't fair. There were a lot of replies that flitted momentarily across my brain. Ultimately, though, my answer was: "I agree – but remember, life isn't necessarily fair."
The point of the matter is that the choice of a PhD mentor is probably the most crucial decision that a young student will make. The minute that choice is made (aside from the ramifications of what type of scientific project the student has selected, etc.), the student has already either chosen a path of potential success, or an imminent path to failure and frustration. This is the truth, as harsh as it may seem.
I am reminded of an undergraduate organic chemistry lecture many years ago in a hall packed with 250 students, eagerly writing down every pearl of wisdom provided by the ebullient professor. I believe he was teaching the Markovnikov reaction – in which a protic acid reacts with an alkene. In describing the fate of the proton, I distinctly remember his explanation, over 27 years later: the hydrogen atom goes to the carbon that already has the most hydrogen atoms – capitalism. Such is the case with grants and fellowships – a path to success begets more success. A rocky start leads nowhere.
What is the moral of this story? Well, there may not be "morality" in scientific careers – life is certainly not fair, and all are not born with equal opportunities or abilities. But to make the most of what one has, a wise selection of a PhD mentor will go a long way to opening the right doors, and leaving all career options on the table.