In regards to students presenting at meetings, I think a student does her/himself a disservice to present "unripe" work at large meetings. If you wish to make a name for yourself, it is important to consider the nature of the reputation you are courting. In large meetings with many concurrent sessions, many people do not wish to attend session after session dominated by untested ideas and methods discussions as they have traveled far, also wish to acquire useful information and must choose among sessions. A student without solid results would better spend their time talking with presenters after the sessions. These presenters are much more likely to remember you favorably from your insightful questions than if they feel you have wasted their time. It is also possible to contact people in your field in advance to see if they might be willing to sit down with you to privately discuss your work. That said, there are many meetings that specifically cater to the work of students. People who attend these meetings expect to see works in progress and are usually helpful in providing feedback. I do not mean to discourage students with ripe work from presenting doing so is incredibly valuable both to the student and to the rest of the scientific community.
> I'd like to hear your opinions on the following. > > My previous advisor (Master's degree) believed that scientific meetings > are > for presenting work in progress, asking for critiques, looking for > collaborators, and networking. Therefore, he encouraged students to > submit > work that was not necessarily ready for journal submission, but ready for > discussion. The more meetings, the better. > > So, I've presented my thesis work and some subsequent professional work > at > several meetings. > > I'm now in a PhD program, with some interesting results from year 1 > research. Adviser says not to present, that my work isn't quite "ripe" > yet, > that I'm at least a year away from being able to present. I figure that > it > is my job to present, that I'm doing myself a huge disservice by not > presenting, both in terms of getting my name out there, as well as > getting > some honest feedback from my peers. > > Shouldn't the abstract review process catch work that isn't "ripe" for > presentation (ie results will be discussed vs preliminary data show that > ___ > and that __ should be incorporated to refine the model)? > > How often/when do ecologgers present at scientific meetings? Shouldn't I > aim for at least 1 meeting/yr? > This address soon to expire - change to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Heather G. Davis, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
