|
Words by Vacha Patel
In 2020 the World froze. It will go down in history as the year of a Pandemic. While none of us have been immune to some sort of suffering, whether directly or indirectly from the hardships induced by Covid-19 this year, it’s important to shift our perspective and instead look closely with a more positive outlook: There is an interconnectedness of existence which humanity might not have experienced if it weren’t for the pandemic. Despite starting 2020 with #WW3 memes, humanity experienced quite the opposite. Instead, we saw how people come together when they share the same story, same home, same mission and same adversity. Becoming aware of our similarities, people came together, became stronger and experienced extraordinary change at a breathtaking pace. One of the best examples of harmony and comradery during these trying times was that seen within the scientific community. All over the world, scientists ignored national borders and came together this year with a common purpose and unparalleled momentum to decode the virus and create a vaccine. With the aid of technology, connectivity and mobility we already have millions vaccinated. A more unexpected benefit that occurred as a result of the pandemic was seen in the form of carbon emissions being reduced by the largest amount ever recorded. As people stayed in, the world was able to start healing itself. Continuing this trend, countries like China, Japan and South Korea committed this year to becoming net zero emissions by 2050. Joe Biden promised a $2 trillion climate plan and is set to rejoin the Paris agreement. The EU and UK aim for about 55% and 67% reduction in emissions, respectively, by the year 2030. Also, large corporations like Apple aim to have net zero emissions by 2030 and Walmart by 2040. In addition, the cost of renewable energy sources is declining much faster than predicted. This never before seen alacrity by the global community to address the emergency of climate change is due in large part to the pandemic. Covid-19 has caused some serious disruption in the corporate world. It has caused economies and society at large to bring into sharp focus the immediate economic priorities for governments and businesses. With that being said, environmental, social and governance (ESG) measures are entering a new phase and people approach it with a different lens. Previously, ESG was not a priority as performance-based metrics for companies, but since the pandemic began, corporations have since had to refocus their priorities to include ESG measures. Additionally, ESG ratings are becoming increasingly important for all investors, rather than only attracting the socially conscious investor. This again addresses the issue of climate change, but also focuses on employees’ wellness and social inclusion. It’s important to realize that 2020 wasn’t a boxed event in time. Rather, it was the year that the crisis that already existed became blatantly apparent. As a community of scientists, it is up to us to educate the world and work together towards healing our planet in the next year.
0 Comments
Interview and Words by Jenny Schneider.
Edited by Jessica Sharrock. A conversation with Dr. Sumru Bayin, Senior Postdoctoral Fellow at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), New York. See parts one, two and three here. PART 4: TIPS & ADVICE JS: Any advice for international scholars on applying for funding? SB: The website GrantScoop is a great search engine for funding opportunities. In addition, talk to your PI about it and contact your institute’s grants office (most big institutes have them). They can help you get more information that is specific to your field of research and nationality. In terms of timeline, it is advisable to start looking for grants as early as possible because most of the grants have a specific window of eligibility (e.g. you can apply within 1-2 years of your PhD defense date). I think applying for grants is a great exercise even if you don’t need the extra funding or if you don’t get it at the end. It is beneficial for your CV, especially if you want to stay in academia, and it allows you to understand your own project from the start. JS: Overall through your scientific experience, were there moments where you thought to yourself “I wish I knew this before”? SB: I definitely wish I knew I had to contact PIs about rotations before my first day at the PhD program. I also wish I was more aware of the politics and competitiveness of science when I started my PhD. It can be brutal and unfair and it would of help to be ready to face it. Now I am used to it but during the first stages of my PhD I took it very personally, to the point where I thought I didn’t want to be in science anymore. If I had been prepared, I could have been more pragmatic and cared less about adverse reactions to my science. JS: Looking back on your science path, would you do anything differently? SB: I would say “no” to science more often. I still sometimes make the mistake of taking on too much. Overworking becomes a habit and if you don’t learn to make time for yourself from the start it is very hard to change later. I am a bit of a workaholic and I think that now it’s too late for me to change my habits. I wish I had set a better work-life boundary and remembered that science can wait sometimes! JS: What is one piece of advice you would give someone starting their PhD or postdoc? SB: Be realistic about your expectations, make sure that you really love science and that you are willing to spend the overtime on it. Definitely don’t go into grad school or a postdoc as a default; it’s the worst mistake. I am not saying you won’t be successful, you just might be miserable. Get into it because you want to do it, not because you don’t know what to do next. Also, if somewhere along the way you realize that it is not for you, it’s okay to get out and reconfigure your career path. In short, know yourself and know your limits. JS: Moving from turkey to the US; what was the best, worst, and weirdest experience you have had? SB: The best part was definitely New York City. Maybe I watched too much TV but NYC felt like home even when I first moved here. It felt so familiar, like I’d lived here all my life. It is multicultural and much more influenced by other world regions. As a foreigner, I think New York is very welcoming because of its diversity, no one treats you differently because everyone is a foreigner here. It is also one of a few select places in the world where you don’t have to define who you are. The hardest part, scientifically, was dealing with the first round of disappointments from your project not working as expected in the lab. I also had to deal with some fallout from Hurricane Sandy, I think from my 8 years in the US; it was one of the hardest, most emotional experiences that I had to deal with. NYU got hit very hard and that put our lives on hold for a very long time. In retrospect, this experience strengthened relationships with my peers and eventually we bounced back. The weirdest parts are the doors and locks opening the opposite way, and having to walk everywhere instead of driving. On a more serious note, seeing the amount of homeless people in NYC was difficult for me. I think in general, coming to a new country without knowing anyone is challenging. We put up brave faces but it can be hard at times. It helped that I acquired an extremely supportive group of friends during my PhD at NYU. We would like to thanks Dr. Bayin for taking the time to INet NYC about her life in the science world. Interview and Words by Jenny Schneider.
Edited by Jessica Sharrock A conversation with Dr. Sumru Bayin, Senior Postdoctoral Fellow at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), New York. See part one and part two here. PART 3: POSTDOC LIFE JS: Did you consider doing a postdoc outside of the US? SB: I did and I decided against it. People might disagree, but my personal perception is that once you get out of the US-science-niche it is very hard to get back in. A postdoc is the time to set up your network and create connections, whatever your future career may be. Since I wasn’t sure if I wanted to stay in the US long-term, I decided a postdoc in the US would keep the doors open. JS: Did you consider doing a postdoc outside of academia? SB: I did, though I considered it a bit too late. Industry postdoc applications usually have specific timelines (unlike academia). If I could do something differently, I would definitely look more thoroughly into industry postdocs. There are great programs (e.g. Novartis, Regeneron, and Genentech) in industry labs run by very successful PIs. Talk to people and ask questions about the lab publication record and get a feel regarding the level of autonomy you may have, if that is something that is important to you. JS: How did you go about the process of looking for a postdoc? When did you start and what were your first steps? SB: I started looking about a year before my graduation. Since positions at high profile labs get filled fast, it is good to apply about a year in advance, or at least send “feelers” out to the PI at that point. I started searching for labs by reading papers and marking names of PIs whose research I was interested in, I also consulted my PhD committee members about my interests and asked their advice. I looked for open postdoc positions through Nature Jobs and I did get a few interviews from there, but the most successful applications came from personal e-mails I sent without knowing if they had a vacancy or not. I think the e-mail you send to the PI makes a huge difference. Keep it concise and make it personal, don’t copy-paste a template. I stated why I was interested specifically in their lab as well as my general scientific interests. I attached my CV, references, and a short cover letter detailing my previous experience. I would suggest going to interviews even if it is not in your dream lab or subject, you never know what the lab really does and what the future projects will be until you talk to the PI. JS: What are the most important questions to ask during the interview? SB: We tend to focus on the fact that we are being interviewed by the PI and the lab, but it is also important to remember that a big part of the process is you interviewing them. Consider your future goals and ask how supportive your mentor will be with your career aspirations. For me, it was important to ask if the PI assigns more than one person on a project as a competitive move- it’s a hard question to ask but it was a deal breaker for me. The second question I asked was can I take my project with me when I leave to start my own lab. This conversation needs to be established from day one if opening your own lab is in your thoughts. JS: How did you pick your postdoc lab? SB: More than my interest in the research subject, I looked into what I can learn from the lab, technique- and methodology-wise. I wanted to do something different to my PhD to develop new skills and get out of my comfort zone. JS: Did you encounter any bureaucratic challenges in your transition from your PhD to your Postdoc institute? SB: If you do your PhD in the United States, this transition is very structured and the school will usually guide you through your transition from an F1 visa to an OPT visa. However, you should definitely be aware of the process and monitor it to make sure everything is being done according to plan. JS: In your opinion, what is the biggest difference between being a grad student and being a postdoc? SB: The scale of responsibility! In grad school your mistakes are allowed. The expectations are high but when you do well the level of praise is commensurate. As a postdoc, even if you accomplish something very challenging it is usually met with… “Yeah, it’s your job”. You are expected to take charge which is not a bad thing, it is just an adjustment. The relationship between you and your PI is extremely important (even more so than during your PhD). The success of your postdoc can definitely rely on the strength of your relationship with your PI because you don’t have the backing of grad school and your committee anymore. I am lucky that I have a great relationship with my PI but I can see with others how easily you can get lost in your postdoc without the proper support. On that note, when you apply for postdocs try to pick institutions that have a strong postdoctoral associations and administrative support for postdocs. Though in most cases things work out well, it is good to have backup and people to turn to if things get rough. Both my PhD and postdoc institutes (NYU and Memorial Sloan Kettering respectively) have a strong institutional support system for postdocs. JS: Did you have any expectations from a postdoc and were they met? SB: I had fairly realistic expectations, so the day-to-day life in the lab was what I expected. I also came from a lab where I was very independent and I had a lot of responsibility; in a way I was trained well for the postdoc. That said, I left my PhD program knowing everything there was to know about my work and my lab, and I entered my postdoc lab not knowing anything. Despite my independence and training, it caught me off guard but you get over it very quickly; it is part of the learning curve in any new job. Also, I did not expect that I would be poorer than I was in grad school (says jokingly). You definitely don’t starve and your overall quality of life is higher, but your net salary after taxes, rent, and bills is slightly lower. This is also partially because we live in NYC where everything is more expensive. Lastly, one of the major adjustments for me was the social aspect. In grad school, you have classes and plenty of socializing opportunities within reach. As a postdoc, you go straight to the lab in a completely new institute where in most cases you know no one. I found it a bit difficult to make friends and build a community like the one I had at NYU during my PhD. MSK specifically has a slightly more “distant” feel to it since it is not a university environment. If you are the type of person who feeds off of other people’s energy, you should consider the overall dynamics and culture of the institute when deciding to join a lab. JS: If you sum up your postdoc experience so far, what is the best and worst part about it? SB: The best part is the science; I love what I do. My mentor knows my career goals and she is doing her best to prepare me for the next steps in my career. We have mentoring discussions that are preparing me and I appreciate that. The worst part is the overall struggle of figuring out what I want to do next. Up until now it was fairly set, finish a PhD and start a postdoc. Once you get to the postdoc part questions start arising: Academia or not academia? If academia, what am I going to work on in my own lab? How am I going to handle it all? Even knowing I had years to think about it during my postdoc, I had those thoughts and questions about my next steps from day one; it is definitely a stress I put on myself. Join us next week for Part 4, when Dr. Bayin will give us some tips and advice about being a graduate student and postdoc in the US. Interview and Words by Jenny Schneider.
Edited by Jessica Sharrock. A conversation with Dr. Sumru Bayin, Senior Postdoctoral Fellow at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), New York. See part one here. PART 2: PhD LIFE JS: You got into a PhD program on your second attempt. What did you do differently the second time around that you think influenced the outcome of your applications? SB: A few things. First, I got better, more personal, recommendation letters the second time around. It is not enough to have a generic letter that says, “She was top of her class”. Second, I worked more on my personal statement. Your statement should show why you are interested in that specific institute, program, or lab. It is important to research the institute you are applying to and get as much information as you can through their website and by talking to people. Not getting into a program does not mean you are not good. There are bureaucratic aspects that you may not be aware of that will influence the school’s decision, like quotas for international students, or budget restrictions for flying you in for an interview. Try to find out how many international students there are in the program or if the institute is familiar with students from your country. Overall, putting in the time to do research about the students and the faculty, and understanding the program and the University you are applying to can increase your chances of getting into your desired PhD program. Also, when I applied I didn’t contact individual Principal Investigators (PIs) but in retrospect I should have. International students are often afraid of being too familiar with a PI and coming off as disturbing. But the worst that can happen is that you will not get a response. Get in touch with PIs to express your interest in their work, just make sure to do this in advance; a few months ahead of the application deadline would be best. Overall, at PhD level everybody is equally smart, so you need to find a way to differentiate yourself and show that you are adaptable and resilient. My summer research program in the UK definitely helped showcase my experience and get good recommendation letters. JS: How did you pick your PhD institute and lab? SB: It was partially luck for me. I had trouble establishing my first rotation because I was not aware that I had to start contacting PIs about rotations before I started the program. That is part of the challenge as an international student; you can be out of the loop. By the time I started reaching out to potential rotation labs all the rotation spots were taken. Luckily, the dean of our school told me about a new PI that just opened a lab the month before. I contacted the PI and it was a great fit. I ended up doing my first rotation there and eventually joined the lab full time. JS: Did you continue your rotation project once you joined the lab? SB: No. I loved both my rotation and thesis projects but they were not the same. That is one of the reasons I think that the project is not the most important part when picking a lab, as it often changes. It is important to talk to your PI about your interests and pick a lab where you will have a few projects to choose from. Most of the times things don’t work out like you thought and it is good to have back-up projects. JS: What were the most memorable moments of your PhD experience? SB: I had a great mentor that let me find my identity as a scientist and this led to an overall great PhD experience (although like most people, I had days where I hated everything and wanted to quit). In terms of specific moments, I remember my qualification exam as the most challenging thing I did throughout my PhD; I left the exam thinking I knew nothing. On the flip side, I think my thesis defense was the highlight of my PhD. Towards the end of your PhD, you reach the top of your learning curve and you accumulate a lot of data. Then at your defense, no one knows your project better than you and that is your moment to shine and be proud of what you have accomplished. Another big moment is getting your first first-author publication; it is a great feeling of affirmation. JS: When did you know that you wanted to continue to a postdoc? SB: I knew early on in my PhD that I wanted to do a postdoc because I want to stay in academia (for now, let’s see how it goes). Although, I think I would do a postdoc even if I didn’t want to stay in academia because it is an opportunity to understand what you want and it gives you time to consider your next steps. I did consider skipping the postdoc entirely and going directly to a junior investigator program where you are supervised, but you have your own grants and freedom to direct your research. Eventually I decided against it because I didn’t feel ready to be that independent; I wanted time to learn and understand more about my own interests for my future lab. Join us for Part 3, when Dr. Bayin will talk about how she went about landing her postdoc, how she chose the lab and her experiences so far. Interview and Words by Jenny Schneider.
Edited by Jessica Sharrock. INet NYC sat down with Dr. Sumru Bayin, Senior Postdoctoral Fellow at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), New York. In this four-part interview, Dr. Bayin offers great insight and advice to early career scientists by talking about her personal scientific journey through Turkey, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US). Dr. Bayin completed her Bachelors and Masters degrees at Bilkent University, one of Turkey’s leading institutes. She went on to get her PhD at New York University (NYU) and is currently a Postdoctoral Fellow at MSKCC. PART 1: INTRODUCTION JS: How did you decide to become a scientist? SB: As a kid, I was one of those “freaks” who played with earth worms, dissected flies, and knew at the age of 12 what they wanted to do. I come from a family of STEM scientists, and although I was never forcibly pushed into that professional direction, it probably influenced my inclination towards science. In middle school, we had to interview someone who was pursuing our “dream job” and I picked a PhD student studying molecular biology and got to visit their lab. That experience was a crucial point in my decision to become a scientist and helped set my mind in that direction. JS: How did you pick your scientific field? SB: I always found stem cells and their adaptability fascinating. Up until now I worked with liver stem cells, brain tumor stem cells, and now stem cells in the context of brain development. Honestly, I never thought I would work on the brain but I found it very attractive because there is so little known about it; it was the challenge that drew me to the field. In general, when picking a field, I would say follow your gut and be aware that your interests may change over time. Follow a general interest and do not be too consumed with picking a specific subfield. At the start of my career, I was interested in Cancer Biology because of family history, but after finishing my PhD in the cancer field I realized I didn’t know anything about the function of healthy cells, so I moved into developmental biology research. Projects change all the time, so make sure you like the general theme and techniques. In a nutshell, listen to the science and see where it takes you. Try to see the big picture and don’t be too consumed with the little details although it is easier said than done. JS: Can you tell me more about the time you spent doing research in the UK as an undergraduate student? SB: The internship program I joined in the UK was similar to the Summer Undergraduate Research Programs (SURP) here in the US. While I was an undergrad in Turkey, I sent bulk applications to try and get into a program abroad. My application was eventually picked up by a lab that was familiar with the reputation of Bilkent University (they had a PhD student from my University in the lab, which I was not aware of when I sent the application). It can be challenging to prove your academic merit when coming from countries like Turkey. Despite having world-class institutes with outstanding academic programs, the perception in the world can be skewed due to lack of familiarity. It helps to have someone to vouch for you and your home institution. That said, the challenge is mostly getting noticed during the application process. Once you are in the program no one will question your abilities and professionalism. JS: Why did you decide to apply for a PhD program in the US? SB: I was debating the US vs. Europe (EU) but I felt that the US had better-structured PhD training programs. Unlike most programs outside the US, here you get to do rotations and try different labs before you commit to one, giving you time to explore your options and interests more. Also, the education programs in Turkey are more similar to the American system than the EU system and this familiarity influenced my decision. JS: Why not in Turkey? SB: Despite the top-notch research going on in Turkey, it’s hard to compete with international level science simply because of logistics and geographic location, like the amount of time it takes to get an antibody shipped. I felt that if I decide to go back to Turkey one day, going back with a proven scientific record would make it easier to navigate the scientific community and have more of an influence than if I would try to build my career there from the ground up. Join us next week for Part 2, when Dr. Bayin will talk about her PhD application process and life as a PhD student. Words by Nicole Parada
Edited by Jessica Sharrock There is nothing like being in New York during the holiday season. Here are five things to do in the city with you family and friends to get into the holiday spirit…
Happy Holidays from all at INet-NYC! Words by Ipshita Zutshi
You’ve packed your suitcases, flown several hours cramped up in a tiny aircraft, and just arrived in New York City with your head held high full of hopes and expectations. You’ve got your mind set on conquering the world and what better place than NYC to achieve those dreams? As you step onto the curb at the airport, a jaunt in your stride, you’re spared by inches from a cab speeding past you, trailed by an endless stream of the choicest insults. You shake your head numbly, take a few steps back, and with an inward groan, begin to question all your life decisions. This is essentially what life in New York City is – an incessant, impossible juxtaposition of contradictions. And trust us, we get it – you came here to focus on your career, and somehow found yourself instead deciphering complicated acronyms such as DS2019, FSA or W4, worrying about credit scores, figuring out if the F train runs on weekends, and wondering why it takes you months just to get a doctor’s appointment. And in addition to negotiating all of these real-world problems, you are also expected to publish, network, and find yourself a job before your visa runs out, or before you get bankrupt from exorbitant rents. Yikes. Clearly being a scientist is extremely challenging but being an international scientist in NYC is arguably more so. This is precisely what INet NYC is here to help you out with! We are a group of international scientists, who, just like you, reached the United States only to realize that sometimes New York City can be a bit too much. As a team of scientists across all the major educational institutes in the New York area, we aim to bring people across different fields of science together by organizing a wide variety of events, such as monthly hangouts, workshops, networking sessions, immigration and tax advice, and career opportunities. Our hope is that these events not only provide short and long-term career benefits, but also provide an opportunity to make friends and enjoy all the millions of benefits that NYC has to offer. So, if you find yourself in search of a fun group of like-minded people, or would like some career advice, or have specific questions about research in NYC, give us a shout out, follow us on instagram and twitter and show up for our events! We will also now have regular posts on our blog with various updates about our events and life as a scientist in NYC. Stay tuned! By Chiara Bertipaglia, CUPS
Jaime Jurado, INet NYC Advisory team of ECUSA-NYC On Wednesday May 17th the Columbia University Postdoctoral Society organized an Info Session about Immigration at Columbia University. The event was co-organized by Columbia University Postdoctoral Society (CUPS), INet NYC, ECUSA (Spanish Scientists in USA), Einstein Postdoctoral Association (EPA), Postdoc Executive Committee at ISMMS and co-sponsored by Columbia University Postdoctoral Society (CUPS), Columbia University Office of Postdoctoral Affairs (OPA), Rockefeller University Dean's Office, NYU School of Medicine Postdoctoral Affairs through their BEST grant and Graduate School of Medical Sciences (at Weill Cornell Medicine) Postdoctoral Affair office. The idea was to provide the large community of New York postdocs with information on how to transition from non-immigrant to permanent resident status, or immigrant, in the United States. The event got fully booked within 24 hours. The massive attendance of 185 people from 9 different institutions (Columbia University, Cornell University, NYU, Mount Sinai, Albert Einstein, The Rockefeller University, CUNY, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Rutgers, among others) speaks loud and clear about the discomfort of the time that we are living and the uncertainties that we, the international scientific community, face here in the United States. Research in the U.S. is carried out and progresses thanks to many outstanding international PhD students, Postdocs and associate researchers on non-immigrant visas, who seek to become permanent residents to be able to stay and do the their best Science. According to the National Science Foundation (NSF), the current number of international scientists and engineers in the U.S. workforce is estimated to be 5.2 millions, constituting almost 20% of the sector. This number has increased 2.5 fold in just the last decade. The session started with a presentation about the main categories of visa given by attorney Aviva Meerschwam from Fragomen. Then, a panel of researchers that have successfully applied for and obtained an H-1B visa or a Green Card introduced their case and answered questions collected from the public, discussing the alternatives that students and postdocs have to apply for permanent residency. Panelists included: - Sophie Colombo, from Columbia University, H-1B (academic, professional); - Kiran Kumar Andra, from Cornell University, EB-1A Green Card (obtained with the help of a lawyer); - Hourinaz Behesti, from The Rockfeller University, EB-1B Green Card (obtained without the help of a lawyer); - Chamara Senevirathne, from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, EB-2 Green Card (obtained without the help of a lawyer); - Wissam Hamou, from Mount Sinai, EB-2 Green Card (obtained with the help of a lawyer); - Alicia Perez-Porro, from the Smithsonian Museum in Washington DC, Green Card through marriage (with a pro-bono lawyer); - Jose Ignacio Garzón, from Columbia University, Green Card through lottery. The session was broadcasted live for people who could not attend and the video can be seen at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IR9_-vvWQIQ Let’s summarize the information gathered during the meeting. The status of non-immigrants is for foreign nationals that come to the U.S. temporarily and keep their residence abroad. In the field of academic research, common categories of visas include:
F-1 visa is available to foreign nationals entering the USA for academic studies and are eligible to work 12 months under the Optional Practical Training (OPT), either pre- or post-graduation in the field related to their studies. STEM degrees students may apply for a 24-months extension. J-1 visa allows foreign nationals to participate in an approved exchange program to gain experience, study or do research in their field. Examples of exchange visitors include, but are not limited to, trainees, interns, teachers, professors, research scholars, specialists, students and foreign medical graduates. H-1B visa types are open to professionals that work in a “specialty occupation” and are going to remain in the U.S. for a minimum of 6 years. 65,000 H-1B visas can be issued annually, beginning each year on April 1st. However, certain employers are exempt from this quota (e.g. non-profit and governmental research organizations). Premium processing for this visa type have been temporarily suspended under the current administration. O-1 visas are open to foreign nationals of extraordinary ability in the sciences, education, arts, business or athletics. Applicants have to meet certain requirements such as:
Most of foreign Postdocs enter the U.S. with a J-1 visa, stay for 5 years and then shift to a H-1B type of visa for another 6 years. This can be done as long as they remain in academia. Eventually, as non-immigrants, they may decide to pursue the status of permanent residence while in the U.S. territory. Many do it because they do not want to deal with visa bureaucracy and paperwork every few years. Plus, being a permanent resident is definitely an advantage when transitioning from academia to industry. This change of status from non-immigrant to permanent resident can be done either from an F-1, J-1 or an H-1B visa. The way to become a permanent resident, or immigrant, is by obtaining a Green Card. A maximum of 650,000 Green Cards can be given each year, and they are distributed through the following different application processes:
The employment based Green Card application is a two or three-step process, where the applicant needs to provide:
The employment based Green Card categories are:
The EB-1 category is subdivided into:
The EB-2 category is subdivided into:
The EB-3 category is subdivided into:
For further information on the various Green Card categories, you can also check www.uscis.gov. The audience asked lots of questions to the panelists. We have summarized their answers, at times commented by the attorney. Q1: Can J-1 or F-1 visa holders adjust their status to immigrant? A1: Yes, J-1 and F-1 visa holders can apply for a Green Card while in the United States. Nevertheless, they may have a travel restriction upon filing a petition application to change or adjust status. Moreover, some J visa holders might be subjected to the 2 years rule, which means that they must return to their home country for 2 years after completion of program, before seeking another non-immigrant visa category or permanent residence. Also, since F-1 is not a dual-intent visa category (i.e. it does not permit immigrant intent), there are certain restrictions related to traveling while the application is pending and to the timing for filing the application, which must be carefully considered. As such, it would be advisable to consult with a lawyer before proceeding with a Green Card application while in F-1 status. Q2: Can one apply for J-1 visa when the current visa is F-1? A2: Yes, you can move from a F-1 to a J-1. However, the applicant needs to meet the following requirements:
Q3: What are the requirements for EB-1? A3: There are 10 criteria to demonstrate extraordinary ability in your field. Applicants must meet 3 of these requirements or provide evidence of a one-time achievement (i.e., Pulitzer, Oscar, Olympic Medal).
Q4: How does one meet the scientific standards required to apply for the EB-1? A4: There are no minimal requirements (no minimum number of research or review papers). It is crucial to highlight how your achievements have had a great impact on the American society and internationally. Therefore, more than the number of publications, you may want to highlight how your research has been cited or disseminated. Also, non-scientists will read and evaluate the paperwork, so avoid jargon and technicalities and go straight to the point of why your work matters. Q5: Can O-1 visa be self-sponsored? A5: No, you need an employer or an agent who will act as a sponsor/petitioner. Q6: How many recommendation letters is it advisable to submit? A6: Between 5 and 10 letters of recommendation. It is better if the letters do not come from your past boss or supervisor, but are rather signed by third parties or your future boss. It is crucial to follow the template when writing these letters, which can be crafted also by the lawyers. Hiring lawyers with a science background may help (as it happened to one of the panelists). Sometimes this turns out to be the best option because the right content will be conveyed through the right amount of bureaucratic language. Q7: What happens if the current visa expires while you are in the process of applying for a Green Card or H-1B visas? A7: When you apply for a Green Card or H-1B visas, it is also strongly advisable to apply at the same time for an Employment Authorization (Form I-765) combined with a Travel Document (Form I-131). It allows you to work and travel even if your current visa status expires. Q8: Is it allowed to switch jobs while filing a Green Card or H-1B application? A8: Since this will most likely imply a change in sponsor, it is not advisable to do so. It is definitely advisable to keep the same employer (= sponsor) through the whole application process. Q9: Can one apply for multiple Green Card categories at the same time? A9: It is possible but not advisable. Q10: How much does the whole application process cost? A10: The panelists reported the following experiences: - $13,000, for 1 person + spouse, with the help of a lawyer; - $7,000, for 1 person, with a lawyer; - $1,800, for a spouse of a US citizen, with the help of a pro-bono lawyer; - $2,800, for 1 person, with the application managed by herself, without the help of any lawyer. This included the option of faster processing request (Form I-907) which costs $1,225; - $1,500 for the lottery process. Some lawyers refund you half of the costs if the application is not successful. Q11: How long does it take to get a Green Card, depending on the different categories? A11: It is slower to obtain one of the EB-1 Green Card types than one of the EB-2 or EB-3 types. According to the historical average processing times, the government processing time for the EB-1 visa is about 6 months. Once the EB-1 has been approved, the government takes additional time to issue permanent residence. According to the panelists, the whole application process took up to 18, 9 or 6 months when applying for employment, family or lottery-based categories respectively. The premium service shortens the processing decision down to 15 calendar days. Q12: Can you switch to industry or a different postdoc if you have an academic position-related H-1B? A12: No, you can’t with the same H-1B. If you have an H-1B visa and you want change your employer (which could be a different academic group leader or an industry employer), you also have to change your visa. However, the applicant can apply for a H-1B visa transfer, which allows to start working for the new employer as soon as the H-1B transfer petition is submitted, without having to wait until the transfer is issued. This is the list of the required documents when issuing an H-1B visa transfer:
Q13: Are O-3/O-1 and H-4/H-1B dependents respectively allowed to work? A13: Different from J-2 (J-1 dependents), O-3/H-4 are not eligible. However, H-4 can apply for permission to work only when a permanent residency petition, based on the H-1B’s employment, has been pending for a year or more. Q14: Is it worth it responding to Request for Evidence (RFE) for the EB-1A Green Card or is it better to apply again? A14: RFE is requested from USCIS when a petition is lacking initial documentation or the officer needs additional evidence. The petitioner should respond to the RFE usually in 30 days and will receive a status case respond in 60 days. Keep in mind that USCIS is perfectly able to deny any immigration application without first issuing RFEs, so this might be your last chance to prove what they have asked. Here you will find more information about this process. Q16: How can you apply for Green Card without a lawyer? A16: Panelist Hourinaz Behesti applied for EB-1B without a lawyer and shared her experience. Being EB-1B an employment-based Green Card, the employer (i.e., the University) was the “Petitioner”. The applicant was the “Beneficiary”. Applicants need to have a title other than “postdoctoral fellow/associate” as the USCIS does not recognize “Postdoc” as a permanent position. However, a transition to “Research Associate”, for example after the postdoc position, is considered a permanent position. The employer has to write the cover letter based on material provided by the applicant and has to fill out the forms. On the USCIS webpage, all relevant forms can be downloaded in the “forms” tab. Here is the EB-1B forms checklist:
Q17: As a scientist/researcher, would it make sense to apply for EB-1, EB-2 or EB-3 types of Green Card? A17: EB-3 is for professionals, skilled workers and other workers, which could certainly include scientists/researchers. However, since scientists/researchers usually have advanced degrees and good credentials, it would be more appropriate for them to apply for EB-1 or EB-2 rather than an EB-3. Q18: Who is eligible to obtain a Green Card through family? A18: The following categories are eligible:
By Yue Liu (Edited by Tessa Barrett)
Sharpen Your Professional Writing Swordsmanship Writing in English is unquestionably one of the major challenges international students must conquer. Professional writing, especially scientific writing, is particularly challenging, due to the requirements for clarity, accessibility, and accuracy. The first step in becoming competent in professional writing is to sharpen your writing skills. But how can we do it given our tight schedules, limited funds, and intimidating academic requirements? The following is a range of options arranged by accessibility, depending on your skill level, from which international students can choose: Read Quality Materials on a Daily Basis Nobody can become a good writer without reading. A benefit of intensive reading is the broadening of our working vocabulary. Besides understanding every single word within various contexts, Monica Thorn, a very organized and encouraging English tutor at Hunter College, suggests comparing a group of related words such as synonyms and antonyms from a thesaurus every day. Personally, I have signed up to receive the Merriam-Webster Word of the Day. I also recommend an affordable and portable book, Merriam-Webster’s Vocabulary Builder, which is organized by word-building roots. Thorn also recommends devoting 15 minutes per day to reading quality materials, such as The New Yorker, The New York Times (many universities provide free access), Wired, The Economist, and so on. In addition to building vocabulary, Dr. Kate Gao (a scientific editor at Nature Communications) believes reading not only brings great pleasure but also inspires us to generate our own beautiful stories. Dr. Gao suggests reading several great writers to progressively internalize their ways of storytelling to develop one’s own unique writing style. Read and Analyze Well-written Scientific Articles We usually read scientific articles for research, but how often do we pay attention to their logic and sentence structure? Does the article present an engaging argument like telling a captivating story? Dr. Gao suggests reading well-written scientific articles and learning how to organize data logically, precisely, and compellingly. Moreover, closely comparing one’s first draft of a research paper with the final version will help us find the areas that need improvement. Get Free Assistance from the Reading and Writing Center at Your Institution Most institutions provide free materials and one-on-one tutoring for students to develop fundamental reading and writing skills through Reading and Writing Centers. I met Thorn at the Reading and Writing Center at Hunter College. However, the levels and styles of tutors are quite different, and it may take time to find a good match. In addition to tutoring, you can find many useful handouts and resource links on their websites. Take Writing Classes and Workshops for Free I have audited writing classes at my institute and learned how to compare various forms of literatures and write critical analyses. For professional science writing, most graduate schools provide free science writing workshops. In addition, we can also take online science writing classes, such as the Writing in the Sciences course offered by Stanford University, as recommended by Dr. Jun Tang (a postdoctoral scientist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center). Dr. Tang strongly believes that non-native English speakers will become good writers with practice, and suggests reading good resources to absorb the language usage in one’s own writing, as well as writing regularly and revising intensively. Get Continuous Feedback from a Good Writer Dr. Tang also suggests finding a good and patient writer (a friend, an English tutor from a Reading and Writing Center, or a professional writer if you can afford it) to go through your writing (e.g. essays, research proposals, and cover letters). Continuous feedback is key to improving your writing skills. For example, I was very lucky to work with Jane Shmidt (a doctoral candidate in Comparative Literature at CUNY). Shmidt was very patient and scrupulous in examining my writing. I developed a better sense of logic and realized the importance of organizing the structure. Shmidt gave me two pieces of advice: 1) keep a daily journal to practice writing; and 2) have a reader relay a draft back to the writer, who will then know the parts that require clarification. Take More Advanced Writing Classes and Workshops If free resources such as Reading and Writing Centers, auditing classes, and taking online classes do not satisfy your craving for further improvement, there are many more classes and workshops available. Dr. Gao suggests the creative writing classes offered by the Gotham Writers' Workshop (https://www.writingclasses.com/) and the Santa Fe Science Writing Workshop (http://sciwrite.org/). Join Professional Organizations for Writers Dr. Joan Liebmann-Smith (a consulting writer and editor at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center) suggests joining organizations such as National Association of Science Writers, Science Writers in New York, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Medical Writers Association, The New York Academy of Sciences, or any other organization related to your field. Hone Analytical Skills through Editing Dr. Liebmann-Smith also suggests forming or joining a reading/writing group to analyze and critique each member’s writing. For example, Jordana Lovett (a doctoral candidate at CUNY), who has always been passionate about scientific writing, finds the most satisfying means of improving her writing is to edit other people’s work. The critical reading and editing process trains her mind to write more effectively. “You don’t succeed as a scientist by getting papers published. You succeed as a scientist by getting them cited. … You succeed when your peers understand your work and use it to motivate their own…. Success, therefore, comes not from writing but from writing effectively.” ─Joshua Schimel Acknowledgement: I am very fortunate to know many great writers who are generous in sharing their valuable experiences with me: Dr. Kate Gao, Dr. Joan Liebmann-Smith, Jordana Lovett, Jane Shmidt, Dr. Jun Tang, and Monica Thorn.
|
Archives
October 2024
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed