WIR-006

WIR-006: [10-12-25.10-18-25]

Previous action items

• 1. Connect with 1+ PI @XXX
• 2. Connect with 5+/25+ PIs/students at prospective labs
• 3. Identify 4+ alternative funding sources to the NSF-GREF

AI.3

*Most likely out; requires a post-grad commitment to work for the DOE.

Work completed

Tags

[RSR] – research
[TA]  – TA responsibilities
[ACA] – academics/schoolwork
[LOG] – logistics/chores
[PhD] – PhD applications

Reflections

Why do we set goals? Goals as I see them serve two primary functions: one, to divide big problems into many small problems and two, to assure us of our progress. To those ends, we can aim to set specific, measureable, actionable, realistic, and time-bound (smart) goals. Well formulated action items can provide an enduring source of motivation and clear guardrails to indicate when we’ve veered off track.

Last week, we laid out three commitments:

• 1. Connect with 1+ PI @XXX
• 2. Connect with 5+/25+ PIs/students at prospective labs
• 3. Identify 4+ alternative funding sources to the NSF-GREF

Briefly, my motivation for goals 1 and 2 were to solve one of the thorniest problems students face when applying to graduate school: being a stranger. Your odds of gaining acceptance to candidate program a far greater when a prospective PI has shared previous interactions with you, and improve further when they can champion your application. As is plainly evident, we did not managed to accomplish these action items. This past week I sent over 50 emails – carefully constructed and highly individualized, and managed to get in touch with 10 or so generous students.

Goals 1 and 2 fail two out of five smart goal criterion. First, they were not realistic. Every research lab does complex and highly differentiated work, and crafting thoughtful cold emails to them therefore requires more work than simply moving my fingers. Second, these actions items are not actionable. Wether or not someone takes the time out of their day to respond to solicitations from a perfect stranger is their choice – and theirs alone.

Going forward, we can ask two questions of our action items before they are finalized. First, what is my motivation for setting this goal? Am I, for example, trying to solve a months-long problem in a week; or using magical thinking to minimize a complex, time-consuming challenge? Second, are my goals smart? This second question is self-explanatory.

This week yielded our first major failures during the week-in-review series. It also, perhaps, is the greatest opportunity for personal growth we’ve enjoyed yet.

Looking forward

Our overarching goal for the next 6-8 months is to gain acceptance to a high-quality, well-fitting PhD program. Towards that broader aim, we will aspire to have 10-12 PhD applications at a maximum submitted roughly by December 15, 2025 or 6-7 weeks from today (some programs have deadlines prior to this date; many are after.) Over the next two weeks, we will continue to the endeavor to seek out and make connections with programs well-aligned to my interests. The proposed action items below reflect this aim.

Action Items

• 1. Contact X & Y regarding attending Z by EOD
• 2. Form a concrete plan of action to attend Z; add appropriate continuations to this list thereafter*
  • *Contingent upon results of AI.1
• 3. Make contact with PIs/students at 2+ labs
• 4. Contact LOR writers; inform of high-level plans/timeline

Each of these goals fulfills the smart criteria. Namely, I believe them to be realistic and in alignment with the aforementioned aims of these busy weeks to come.

Until next week 👋