Another Busy Tuesday... Goal Post... Lots to Discuss
Well, today is Wednesday and I am writing this journal, so I think we can safely say that yesterday went alright.
I thought the genetics update conference was really insightful because the speaker, Sam Rhine, didn't just talk about the newest advancements/technology of the genetics world in an isolated manner but he spoke at length about their applications specific to cancer. I thought this was interesting because I feel like a lot of times, when we think about curing genetic diseases, we immediately think of sickle cell anemia or cystic fibrosis - things that people acquire from birth and deal with for their whole lives. Personally, I always regarded those illnesses differently than something such as cancer because in most cases, cancer comes later in life and I've always imagined it as this widespread monstrosity of a disease. Basically, I always thought of cancer to be messier than something like sickle cell anemia because it can't be traced back to a single mutation (one incorrect amino acid) or a specific genetic error - it's incorrect cell reproduction that's tangled in blood vessels and layers upon layers of connective tissue... it's a mess. My original point of view aside though, I really enjoyed the lecture and I appreciated the way various genetic immunotherapies acted almost like vaccinations that can help get rid of various tumors/cancers - it was very very cool. CRISPR was also discussed in the lecture which was also super exciting because I've found yet another reason to be amazed by this cutting edge technology. Although I'm not sure much of Sam Rhine's lecture will make its way directly into my project, I think attending the conference will have a positive effect on my thought process and remind me of the magnitude of genetic mutations - something that can definitely be applied to errors such as the PSEN - 1 and A - beta precursors - items that do fall into the scope of my project.
The next worrisome yet exciting part of the day (besides calculus of course) was my very first thesis approval committee meeting.
I will start by saying that I've never done something like this before and I'm not entirely sure that I handled every situation in the best manner, but that I thought for the most part it was a positive conversation and it was a start. You know, earlier in the year, Jonah and I would always talk about beginning our papers and at first I was scared to begin because I didn't know what to expect but as I worked through my thoughts and revised my writing, something began to take shape and I'm almost positive that's the same approach I'll have to take with these meetings. Yesterday made me quite nervous, but it was definitely a start and I think as long as I keep on refining my skills, realizing things that went wrong or went well, the learning process will work its magic.
Instead of simply retelling all that occurred (you can take a look at my meeting notes for details on our discussion), I think it might be more valuable to discuss some of my mentors' largest concerns, my own concerns, and what I plan to improve upon for our next meeting based upon their feedback.
So one thing that has kind of been in the background ever since I began was how I would mediate between a technical tone and language that is clearly and easily understood. Because I made a substantial and conscious effort to meet with each of my committee members and provide as much explanation/background knowledge as possible, I personally considered this concern addressed. Yes, I knew that this is something that would become routine throughout the year and I am not opposed to that implication as these meetings have become an effective means for me to further hone my verbal communication skills. But to be honest, I came out of our meeting yesterday feeling uncertain about whether or not I had truly taken care of it. Since we were discussing the next part of the paper - procedures, materials, methods - I was kind of articulating to them the path I wanted to take and how I had all of the information layed out in my head. I shared my thoughts/ideas with the hope that they could advise me on my approach, direction, or any complications that they anticipated prior to me beginning the actual writing process. In the process of holding this discussion, I got the feeling that I was losing some of my committee members. Perhaps this was because they did not have any written draft before them but what I am struggling to understand is what my ideas written down would have contributed since, at this early stage, they really are nothing more than ideas.
Which brings me to my personally largest outstanding concern - I feel as though there was some lack of clarity and incoherence between my committee and me. It wasn't until the very end that I learned Mr. Finsel had not been following the discussion and felt that he could not contribute due to the absence of a written draft. This upset me mostly because I didn't want the meeting to be a waste of anyone's time, nor did I want anyone on my committee to feel as though their voice was not heard. I guess I'm just confused as to what I can do to prevent this from happening again. I mean, I thought I had taken care of this possibility by doing individual meetings, and I can prepare a written draft of what I'm looking to discuss but I don't see how that would change the content of the conversation. In my earlier, individual meetings, which were all also verbal explanation/discussion, I did not get the same feedback of confusion or lack in understanding. My next course of action then, and I think this is one of the areas I struggle most in - was to communicate my confusion on this concern because obviously, some things were getting lost in translation and I wasn't adequately filling in the gaps. As the facilitator of our discussion, I threw the question out there - what can I do to help alleviate any confusion and make our meeting discussions engaging to all? Some suggested images/diagrams, and others suggested that before I bring something to the table, I provide everything in explicitly written form. Although I did not get a clear answer about any conflicts/problems/shortcomings with using a little bit of each - meaning I need to work on the way I am asking clarification questions - I think I want to utilize both methods of communication through illustrations and writing. When I mentioned this at the meeting, I believe it may have been understood as me using illustrations in place of a written rationale. But this is something I will definitely not be doing. The purpose of any diagrams I include will be to further affirm the points I am making and to offer a visual aid for those who prefer such.
So to be brief, the conclusions of our meeting were that we would gather again during late November/early December to begin discussion of procedures, materials, methods, and a working literature review document. I did agree to provide a written draft of the next section to be discussed but I'm not sure that will be necessary for our next meeting as the methodology is vital and will likely be requisite of approval in multiple stages. But of course, we will see how everything plays out and I will be in contact with my committee members as much as I can so details like that can be worked out. The other thing I definitely want to work on improving is asking more explicit questions in the sense that if I am confused, I think I need to work on articulating that simply and clearly so that the exchanges between my committee and me are not muddled by unnecessary verbosity as most of my correspondences are (such as this journal, but shhhh, I'm working on it).
Anyway, overall, I thought the meeting went pretty well and I feel like I have a substantial amount of feedback to think over and act accordingly which I suppose is the most important part - looking forward to that next step of how I can improve.
Lastly, the final item for yesterday was my telephone interview with Dr. Noonan - an internal medicine physician who was diagnosed with Lewy Body Disease and Parkinson's Disease about 9 years ago. I don't want to give too much away as this interview will be highlighted in my next SDA (which will be ready by this Friday) but I will say that it was probably one of the most profound and inspiring conversations I've had. Dr. Noonan's practicality and sheer tenacity definitely made for a wonderful end to the day's events. So stay tuned for that podcast this Friday and I guess we'll go from there. Things are moving, probably quicker than I am used to, but I'm very very excited to see how everything falls into place.
Now, since we are talking about feedback I've received and how I am choosing to act in response to that, I think now would be a good point at which to talk about my goals for the next part of my project - particularly my next SDA. As I mentioned above, communication, communication, communication. I cannot stress this enough mostly because that has never been my strong suit and I've experienced many frustrating situations where I am unable to get my point across but this thesis thing and the constant need to schedule meetings is definitely helping me refine this skill. In terms of what areas I want my product to hit, I think I need to spend a little more time with creativity and reignite that innovative spirit that may have been quieted since I began writing my paper. That said, even though I'm not sure what medium I will use, I want to build off of this current podcast with something of translation nature. I've been working to set the scene for people with my video on C. elegans' life cycle and this podcast delineating the path from worms to humans, so I think now is the time to begin getting into the actual substance of my particular experiment. Whether that means I offer a miniseries on the glymphatic system or create some kind of interactive model for glial cells, I am unsure. But my goal is to build off of that scene-setting I did and provide some tangible substance relating specifically to my original experiment.
I feel like I need to tie this all together now so my final thought is none other than this; yesterday was a very busy day but I know that I've gained immense value from each of these events. They are directing me into my next steps and I am grateful that things are moving along. Stagnation, as I learned last year was always kind of my enemy so this year, it definitely makes me feel assured to be moving forward.