Planning for a Productive Summer

For many faculty researchers, summer looks like a wide open space where one can achieve all of those goals that needed to be sidelined during the busy year. But, oftentimes, come the end of the summer, these same researchers look back wondering "where did the time go?" and feeling disappointed at all the goals they didn't meet.

According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, this sense of regret that faculty feel at the end of the summer is often attributed to unrealistic expectations and a lack of planning at the start of summer. So, as we have the end of the spring semester in our sights, here are some tips for planning a productive summer:

Plan ahead:
This seems obvious, but in truth many faculty put off planning their summer till after their grading is done and the academic year is wrapped up. But, by the time they feel like they've recovered from a hectic spring, weeks of their summer have passed with nothing to show for it. So, although you are in the throes of the semester, try to find time to sit down and map out your summer before it begins.

Be realistic:
Although summer seems like a great expanse of unstructured time, it's not that long. When you start adding up time for vacation, conferences, childcare, planning for the fall semester, you find your summer is whittled down from the start. So, when planning out your summer, first factor in all those things that are going to take time to begin with, identify what you need to complete this summer to feel good and productive about the summer, and work backwards to plan how you will achieve it. Set benchmarks every few weeks to keep yourself on track. If you find you're having a hard time keeping up, revisit your plan and rework it so that you can still feel productive.

Set a rhythm:
For your research and writing time, create a structure or a habit to keep with it in the summer. Identify when you will write or research (best to pick when you are most productive in your day), choose the days and hours you will commit, identify where you'll do your work (e.g., a home office, your university office, or a coffee shop), and use that rhythm to stay at it.

Take time off:
One of the worst scenarios for the academic's summer is they flail trying to get so much done, aren't able to accomplish what they want, and come back in the fall feeling exhausted and defeated. To avoid this, make sure you give yourself some time off, some time to relax and clear your head. You'll actually find that if you have this time, you can be more productive when you come back to your work.

So, as you head toward the end of the semester, take some time to plan for a fun and productive summer.

Resources:
Making Summer Work - Audrey Williams June
How one Professor Avoided Summer Slump - Audrey Williams June
How to Make Time for Research and Writing - Chronicle of Higher Education

The NIH Review Process

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a complex organization, so understanding the ins and outs of their processes can be daunting. But, fortunately, they provide many resources and insights into their review process. Depending on the program, the NIH will at times create special study sections to review applications, like those submitted for K programs or in response to an RFA. But, today, I wanted to offer a snapshot of the NIH review process that most applications go through and point you to more resources to better understand the process from the horse's mouth.

Center for Scientific Review (CSR)
Once you've submitted your grant application to the NIH, it is received by the CSR. In the CSR, PhD-level scientists check your grant for completeness and direct it to the appropriate study section and institute. You can request the study section and institute to which your application goes in the PHS Assignment form. This form is also where you identify any reviewers who are inappropriate to review your grant as well as any expertise reviewers should have to review your grant. This information used to go in your application cover letter, but NIH implemented this new form last year to streamline the process.

If you're unsure of which study section and/or institute to direct your application, the NIH has a neat tool to help you assess this. Matchmaker is a tool through the NIH's Reporter, where you enter your abstract and the database will produce a report on success levels by related study sections  and institutes based on how similar proposals have fared.

Study Section
Once they initially check your proposal for completeness and identify the appropriate study section and institute to field your application, the CSR passes your application on to the assigned study section. The Scientific Review Officer (SRO) is responsible for managing their study section. The SRO recruits the reviewers to their study section and manages any conflicts of interest. They also prepare the summary statements for applicants after the review.

The review process within the study section begins with each application being assigned to a primary, secondary, and tertiary reviewer. A reviewer assigned to an application is responsible for reading and reviewing the proposal and submitting an impact score from 1-9 (1 is the best). Based on these initial scores, a certain number of applications are discussed in the study section meeting, where as those with the worst scores are triaged and not discussed. For those discussed, during the study section meeting, the primary reviewer gives a brief presentation on the proposal and its strengths and weaknesses. The secondary reviewer shares any additional perspective on the grant, and the tertiary reviewer shares any other points not yet discussed. Then the whole study section (30-40 people) scores the application. The final score is an average of all scores. The NIH offers a video illustrating this process.

Institute Advisory Council/Board
The best-scored applications out of the study sections are sent on to the institute to which they were assigned. Once there, the staff at the institute develop a grant funding plan based on the priorities of the institute. This plan is then reviewed and amended or approved by the institute's Advisory Council or Board.

Hopefully then you receive a funding notification for your project. But, if not, you'll receive a summary statement with valuable advice for revising and resubmitting your application and be ready for the next time.

Resources:
CSR Director Video - NIH
Grant Process Overview - NIH