Things early career researchers ponder upon

 Hola folks!!

Yes, it's been a while since I last posted.

What was I busy with? 

World Wetland's Day preparation and I was swamped with work. The good news is the national event went well, as did my conference. If you remember,  I submitted an abstract based on my master's thesis for a conference and it got accepted. I gave an oral presentation at the conference which took place in the coolest place- Dehradun!! 

I went to the conference with some questions in my head and returned home with even more questions. That's just how it goes when you attend conferences and meet new people. 

As an early career researcher, one question that I still struggle to find an answer for is how to carry forward my three to four research interests. Mid and late-career professors or professionals have a team to work with, with each member focusing on different research interests. This enables them to keep their multiple research interests alive by working with different students, with each student working on one of the research interests. This arrangement is mutually beneficial for both students and professors. However, as an early career researcher, I wonder how I can keep my diverse research interests alive, especially if they are vastly different from each other.

Also, one of the professors at the conference raised a really interesting question about evaluating progress in the field of science for individuals who are no longer students. While students have to write a thesis and produce a certain amount of results, what about mid-career researchers (Example: professors)? How can their progress be evaluated? Should it be based on the number of papers they produce in 10 years or a single paper on a landmark question that takes years to answer due to long-term experiments or observations?

Aren't these interesting questions to think about for our long-term career goals?

Well, I'll leave you with these questions. Think about them until my next post.

Signing of,

Sushi

P.S. I also learned something which I want to share with you. There is no such thing as good or bad research work. Every piece of work has its own limitations and drawbacks, and that's how you and your work progress. People will comment on your research work, and you'll address those limitations. Every study will come out with some answers and questions, and based on the outcomes, you will start working on the questions it leads to. So, instead of worrying about whether your work is good enough, you should publish or present it somewhere. It's a learning and growth opportunity.