經驗貼：做學術，大牛給年輕學者的11條軍規

Michael Stryker 是UCSF 桑德勒神經病學中心的一位大牛教授，在一次午餐會上，他給年輕的學者分享了成為學術大牛的11條軍規。這其中有些觀點雖然與世俗不同，但卻字字珠璣，句句箴言，直擊我等小年輕的內心。

我在朋友圈和公眾號（ID:MrGutService）看到有人分享，花了近1個多小時把照片里的英文原文敲出來，再對照MrGutServiced的中文翻譯分享出來，大家且細細品讀。

牢牢記住：對你的未來最重要的事是你發表的文章。Remember that the most important thing to your future is the papers you publish.

按下面這個原則來評估所有出差行程——這是否比花同樣的時間在一個新實驗或新文章上更有價值？Evaluate all travel in the following terms: is this going to be more valuable than spending the same amount of time on a new experiment or new paper?A lot of young people, particularly young women, get invited to fun places. It seems like an honor, and it is seductive, and people away always seem to appreciate you more that do your local colleagues. But a 3-day trip takes a lot out of you, and if it delays a paper by a week it is almost never worth it. No one will remember which trips you took in 5 years time. A few (2 or 3 per year) invited seminars to important meetings or good places is all you need on your CV for promotionSome travel can be really useful, however, when you learn new things that are useful to your research long before they are published, so the decision of whether to accept an invitation is often not clear.But the decision in your early years should always be on the most selfish basis, of the benefit to your research careers and can afford to slough off sometimes.You can be envious of all the fun that senior people take, but they are at different points in their careers and can afford to slough off sometimes.很多年輕人，特別是年輕女性，受邀去各種好玩的地方。這看上去很榮耀，也十分誘人，外面的人也總是比你的同事們更欣賞你。但是為期3天的旅程會佔用你的時間，要是這耽誤了寫文章就完全不值當了。沒人會記得你在5年里去過什麼地方。在推薦自己的簡歷上列出少數幾次（2-3次/年）重要會議的獲邀報告就足夠了。然而，某些行程可能確實有用，你能在那裡掌握對你的研究有啟發且遠早於被發表的時間點的新信息，所以是否接受一次邀請通常難以決定。但是，在你研究生涯早期的決定都應該總是基於「最自私」的出發點——是否有益於你的研究。你可以羨慕那些資深人士參加的有趣行程，但是他們處於自身工作的不同時間節點，而且有時候經得起把工作放棄的代價。雖然發一些小文章不是一個好策略，但任何時候，當你有一個真正的發現，都要頻繁地去發表文章。While the least publishable unit is a poor strategy, publish frequently, whenever you make a real discovery.

Don t wait for theNature,ScienceorCellpaper. Give those places a shot, if you like, but it is much more important for you (and better for your students) to publish good, sound work. Too many assistant professors are self-destructive in waiting to publish a magnum opus, and the longer you delay, the better it has to be just if the delay. It is a vicious circle.不要為了 Nature、 Science 或 Cell 文章而等待。如果你願意，也可以一試，但是對於你和學生來說，更重要的是能發表出好的、完整的文章。太多的助理教授為了等著發表一篇大作而耽誤前程，而且折騰的時間越長，文章就需要更完美。這是個惡性循環。在課堂教學上下功夫，因為這也會在晉陞時被重點評估，但你一定只能在此上面付出適度而不是大量的精力。當下課時學生們為你起立鼓掌，甚至當你看見這些年輕人的眼睛因你而閃亮時，教學會帶給你迅速而強烈的回報。但科研工作中的回報來得更漫長更艱辛，所以不要沉迷於教學帶來的甜頭而忘了科研的重要性。Putting real effort into classroom teachingsince it is evaluated seriously at the time of promotion, but do only a modest amount of it very well, and not take on a large amount. Teaching can be immediately and intensely rewarding, when the class claps at the end or even stands up and claps, or even when you just see those bright young eyes light up. The rewards of your scientific work come slower and harder, so don t get addicted to the candy of teaching and devote yourself to it at the expense of research.

限制再限制參加行政或社會服務性工作。Be even more restrained at taking on service activities.

Ad-hoc ing at a study section once only before tenure may be valuable in cluing you in to the bizarre criteria that can be used to evaluate your grant applications, but do not do more. Departmental and university service, and national service organizations (like reviewing for HHMI), should be done only in moderation at most one thing each, and only if it does not take much time. For much of the past 30 years there has seemed to be a conspiracy to destroy the careers than the young men would be appointed. These activities are worthwhile, and someone should do them, but let it be someone else. Your career depends on the research you do, not on whether the community though that you were a bright young man or woman who could be so useful to one of your communities.在獲評終身教授之前，在項目評審組裡只待一次或許是值得的，這可能會讓你掌握對評估你的基金申請有用的奇葩標準。只能適度參與院系、學校和全國性機構（如HHMI）的服務性工作，最多參與一項，且不能佔用太多時間。在過去30年的大部分時間裡，相比年輕男性，年輕女科學家更早在她們的工作中被指派參與Sloan、Searle、HHMI研究員評審委員會或高級別大學委員會等組織的服務性工作，這似乎是摧毀她們研究工作的陷阱。這些活動是有價值的， 需要有人去做，但讓別人去做。你的職業生涯依靠的是你做的研究，並不是靠任何委員會覺得你是一個聰明有用的年輕人。評審稿件也是如此。少做一點這樣的事情，不要害怕拒絕別人。Same for reviewing manuscripts.Do a small amount well, and have no fear about refusing.

坦誠對待你的學生。Be honest with your student.

Do not keep them in your lab if you think that they can t hack it or are more needy (personally or scientifically) than you have time to satisfy. My own biggest two regrets about students are people whom I took out of pity, because their original advisors left or had difficulties. They took 4 times as much of my energy as the other students, ad h huge amount of my lab s money, and at the end there was little to show for it for either them or me.Also, trust your instincts on dealing with laboratory personalities. An MCP almost destroyed the happy and productive laboratory environment. Fortunately, the women in the lab at the time were strong enough to take care of themselves without murdering him, and he soon finished up and left. I had followed my instincts, I would not have taken him on.I have absolutely no regrets about the two students whom I kicked out of my lab. Though they were many tears at that time, both were grateful to me some years later.如果你覺得某些學生不能容忍，或者你需要花更多時間才能滿足他們個人或科學上的要求，就不要把他們留在你的實驗室里。關於學生，我自己最後悔的兩件事是出於同情心而收留了離開先前的導師或有其他困難的學生。我在他們身上花了相當於別的學生身上4倍的精力，以及一大筆實驗室經費，但不管是對他們或是對我，到最後都成果甚微。同時，要相信你在處理實驗室人際關係上的直覺。一個大男子主義的人幾乎曾毀掉我們實驗室的快樂和高產氛圍。所幸那時實驗室里的女性足夠強大，能控制好自己而沒有試圖「幹掉」他，他很快也就結束研究離開了。如果我能遵從自己的直覺，就不會收這個人。我完全不後悔把兩個學生請出我的實驗室。儘管他們當時聲淚俱下，但多年以後兩人都很感激我。在評估僱員時，要更坦誠。Be even more honest in evaluating your employees.

A great technician is a huge asset to lab (and I was blessed with one for many years), but do not let a technician or other employee someone get past a probation period without reconciling yourself to the likelihood that you will have them for life and never be able to get someone better to replace them. Bad employees have difficulties getting another job and so they stay. It is very hard to dismiss them, and your department may not be willing to put in the effort.一位出色的技術員是實驗室的財富（我很慶幸能與這樣的一個人共事了很多年），但是如果你不能確信自己能與他們共事一輩子，以及再也找不到更好的人來取代他們，就不要讓技術員或其他僱員通過試用期。不好的員工很難找到其他工作，所以他們會留下來。要解僱他們很難，而且你所在的院系可能也不會願意付出努力幫忙。別讓寫文章變成一個陷阱。Don t let paper writing become a trap.

Scientific manuscripts need note be literary creations. Their only necessary quality is clarity-concision and wit are purely optional. If it taking you and your student more than a week to write a paper after the figures are made, then reserve a couple of days to sit down with them in your office and write the paper together, line by line. It is a discipline that gets the manuscript done in less than a week, and in my experience, the product is usually very good. Sitting down like this is also a great time view primary data and at least sanity-check all the analyses with the person other than you who was involved the experiments. Passing papers back and forth between you and the student or postdoc can drag on forever with little or no benefit.All this stage of your career, getting published is the mostimportant use of your time.科學文章不是文學創作。它們唯一必要的品質是清晰，簡潔和機智只是可選項。如果配圖都已經準備好了，你和學生還要花不止一周的時間來寫一篇文章，不如騰出幾天在辦公室里坐下來和學生一起逐字逐行來寫這篇文章。在一周內寫完文稿是一條鐵律，以我的經驗來看成品往往不錯。這樣坐在一起寫文章，也能和參與實驗的其他人一起評估最初的數據，至少完整檢查一遍所有分析。讓文章在你和學生或博士後之間傳來傳去只會拖延時間，沒有太大甚至沒有任何好處。在你職業生涯的這一階段，讓文章得以發表，是你的時間最重要的用途。基金申請策略Grant strategy

Doing something important rather than whoring after what you thing is the most fundable is what you should aim for.However, you may need to bootleg the thing that you think is the most important thing you want to do and get funding for something else that will keep your lab going along a related but better appreciated line. You can try a couple of times, but if something is poorly received, even if you know it is great, give up and propose something else. You can still do the poorly received thing, so long as you have some product at the end.When a grant does not score high enough to be funded, talk to yourProgram Officeras soon as possible after the review. He or she can be your most helpful friend because they can tell you what the study section seemed really to care about. The SCR person is generally useless. When the review come back, it is generally best to remove portions of the application that reviewers do not like and to say that you will do everything that they suggest on the parts that they criticize but thought had merit. Often the review of the reviewer are really stupid, and you know better, but you have nothing to gain by arguing with them. You need the money from a successful grant application, and changing your proposal to make it most likely to be funded is the way to get it. You can still do something you want to do-These are grant, no contracts with deliverables. No one will ever care about (or probably even read) what you propose to do in detail; at renewal time they will only take note of published papers that convey your accomplishments.在你的計劃中，可能考慮做一些重要的事而不去考慮哪些事情最容易得到資助。然而，你可能要偷偷做你認為最重要最想做的事，而得到資助的往往是另外與之相關但是更吸引人能讓你的實驗室運作下去的事。你可以多試幾次，但即便你知道它是很好的主意，卻很難被接受，放棄它並想點別的著。你仍然可以干很難被接受的事情，只要最終你能得到成果。當一項基金申請沒有被評到足夠高的分數以獲得資助，在評審意見回來後儘快與你們的項目官員交談。他們會告訴你評審組的真實意圖，此時他/她是你最有用的朋友。而CSR的人通常沒什麼用處。評審意見回來以後，通常最好去掉評委們不喜歡的部分，並承諾你會做好他們有批判但認為還是有閃光的的部分。通常評委們的觀點會很愚蠢，你懂得更多，但與之爭吵你得不到任何好處。你需要從一份成功的基金申請中獲得經費，將你的想法修改到最可能被資助的狀態是得到資助的最佳途徑。你仍然可以做你想做的事，這是研究經費，不是合同交付。沒有人會真正關心（甚至閱讀過）你計劃要做的具體內容，在再次評審的時間點，他們只會留意發表出去的能展現你的成績的文章。儘可能多地待在實驗室，別窩在辦公室。Be in your lab and stay out of your office.

You were hired because you were good scientists. You may not a good manager. So do science with your own hands, and you will attract and inspire the best student. They will make your lab great.你們被僱用是因為你們是優秀的科學家。你可能不是一個好的管理者。所以，用你的雙手做科學，你會吸引並激勵優秀的學生。他們會讓你的實驗室變得不凡。

來源：訂閱號——書圈

篩選：汪樂樂

編輯：鑫辰

聲 明

國政學人微信公眾平台系非盈利學術平台。建立初衷是方便廣大學人進行學術研究，促進學術的傳播和交流，不做任何商業用途。如有任何權利問題，請直接與我們聯繫。

喜歡這篇文章嗎？立刻分享出去讓更多人知道吧！