So I blogged a while ago about an unsolicited postdoc interview offer that I got while attending a conference. I'm still very flattered to be invited. And still unsure how interested I am. But, if nothing else, it's a great chance to go talk about my work, meet and talk to great scientists and hear about projects for super cool project. It's fixed for 2 or so weeks from now, now I just have to make the travel arrangements, which I'll try to look after tomorrow.
As my first postdoc interview, I'm getting a little nervous. My talk will be very similar to the one I gave at the conference, so the PI who invited me will have already heard it. Should I try to change things up a bit? Or go with the same talk? I'm waiting to hear the time guidelines which will, of course, influence the contents of the talk. I have some cool unpublished preliminary data that I could add at the end to explain what I'm currently working on, but since the rest of the story was only recently accepted and not yet in print, I'm not sure that's necessary. What do you think?
Pumpkin Cheesecake
3 days ago
I'm on my second postdoc interview now--yay for interviews! If you are giving a talk just to the group, it doesn't matter too much if you repeat yourself because they will be able to stop and ask questions and discuss further. Or if you are giving a reguarly scheduled seminar type talk, then lots of people will be there so it also doesn't matter too much if you repeat yourself. Of course, if you have some different stuff to add to your talk that you haven't said already, that would be ideal. In my field, these things are almost always hour-long (or most of an hour) talks. Good luck!
ReplyDeleteI think if you get a long time to talk (say, 45 minutes or longer) then definitely add the new stuff. If it's shorter, then just choose what's the most exciting to you - even if the PI has heard it, no one else has, so it would be fine (I think!).
ReplyDeleteI think adding in the new stuff is a good idea. It will lengthen the talk (if it is a typical 45 minute talk) and it might add to a more well rounded talk (maybe? depending on how well your experiments complement each other). Plus- you said it was cool! Talking about cool, brand spanking new data is exciting!
ReplyDeleteThe PI wrote back, and said he liked the talk I gave at the meeting, it would be fine as, but that I might think about giving more introduction for non specialists since the others don't necessarily come from my background. I think that's a good suggestion so I'll add it in. The new stuff is related, but disrupts the flow of the story since it actually fits as an aside from the middle... maybe I'll try it and see how it goes. Thanks for the suggestions!
ReplyDeleteI'd not addd the new results. it's better to create a nice story. at least that's what my PI says, so just giving a better explanation at the beginning for non specialists is the best idea. you can always say a little about your new work is the chance comes up in the question or when you talk to the PIs. good luck
ReplyDelete