Molecular Podcasting with Darren Lipomi

My down-the-hall colleague Marc Porosoff and I sit down to discuss the public perception of scientific research done in universities and its value to society.Want more of Marc? He is the co-host of PodCAT, available on your favorite podcast apphttps://open.spotify.com/show/0tzTnMlZNcgBQfVUbvgchA

I was invited by the School of Medicine and Dentistry to participate in a panel discussion on Health and Wellness for Graduate Students. The panel was organized by Jeff Koslofsky, who has a large catalogue of excellent resources for graduate students in the sciences, engineering, and medicine.Original postings here so you can subscribe/follow: https://www.linkedin.com/events/7305217005781929984/comments/https://youtu.be/0CeioQJJ7fg?si=gY0LmhYd_TcMOQoshttps://www.linkedin.com/school/urochester-schoolofmedicine/

The story behind my trip to Washington DC in 2019 to get an award from the White House (PECASE, class of 2017). Intersection of science, politics, and personal beliefs. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.

There are no get rich quick schemes, but if you have a PhD or are getting one, you knew that already. However, there are some ways of developing financial security that are open to PhDs that may not be so available to others, even though you spent most of your 20s earning very little income. In this quick monologue, I say some things that may be common wisdom but were definitely not obvious to me when I was living every day in the lab.

I don't usually make videos/podcasts specific to a time, but given the magnitude of the crisis in academic research, I made an exception. To try to add light to the heat, I took some time to chat with my colleague, Prof. Marc Porosoff, co-host of the PodCAT also at the University of Rochester, to discuss our reactions to cuts in federal funding for research and possible consequences on the future of research and graduate education.Subscribe to PodCAT here: https://open.spotify.com/show/0tzTnMlZNcgBQfVUbvgchA?si=f0c6e663d8e04bb5

There is a lot of incorrect information out there on the role of research funding in the economy. Does it waste money or create it? Here, I use some data and back-of-the-envelope projections from my own lab at UC San Diego and University of Rochester to argue that a $10M investment in the form of grants & contracts will generate many hundreds of millions in combined earnings of trainees in the private sector and commensurately pay back the American taxpayer many times over.

I was given the opportunity to give my thoughts in an interview on the topic of managing finances at the lab and department level.

As I've gotten older, more and more people make light (in a good way) about my apparent healthy habits (if only they knew the truth!). Herein, I describe the advice I would give, and which I might even follow myself (on a good day).

Thoughts based on my years counseling students on changing your PhD advisor or PI and where you can find resources to assist in the transition. Darren Lipomi, PhD Professor and Chair, Department of Chemical Engineering University of Rochester Formerly UC San Diego

This is a reading of Chapter 1, second half, on the connection between Nanoengineering and all the other fields of engineering: electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, and bioengineering. Footnotes, figures, and problems for this chapter can be obtained from my book, Introduction to Nanoengineering, which I coauthored with Robert S. Ramji. If you'd like access to these resources, consider buying it or asking your institutional library to buy it! https://a.co/d/5SxYBVm

Part 1 of 2 of Chapter 1 of my book, an annotated fireside reading. Available in hard copy with footnotes, figures, and 150 solved problems, here https://a.co/d/4FZ73Z9

My thoughts on what research is, what function it serves in society, how it is differentiated from "science," and how undergraduate students can obtain research positions at a university.

In this video, I give an annotated reading of the introduction to my book, co-authored with Robert Ramji, Introduction to Nanoengineering.

Beyond finance, what actually IS a research university? What is its place in society? What is its mission and mandate? Where do you fit in?

This is a talk I felt compelled to give after the grad student / postdoc strike in the University of California in the fall of 2022. There was so much I didn't understand about university finance. In an effort to learn more, I decided to put together this talk and share it as a professional development seminar to PhD students, postdocs, and faculty at UC San Diego (UCSD). Halfway through preparing this talk, I came across a WONDERFUL book by Andrew Comrie, Like Nobody's Business: An Insider's Guide to How US University Finances Really Work, which provided me with the viewgraphs compiled from his own extensive research from publicly available information. (A monumental undertaking on his part!) His book is available free of charge as an open access book on www.openbookpublishers.com. Please check it out! Cheers, Darren Correction: when speaking, I accidentally put Worcester Polytechnic into the "public R2" category. I misspoke, it is a "private R2." Thanks!

A few uncategorized tips for working with your PI in grad school.

Topics include generating ideas, finding the right funding agency, working with program managers, the grant proposal as an experiment in psychology, what goes on behind closed doors, and how to write concisely and convincingly.

I spoke in this episode with Maynard Okereke. Maynard is a trained civil and environmental engineer who has developed a second career in scientific communication for young people and particularly young people of color. He arrived at this interest from previous careers in engineering and then acting and music. He is also a seasoned entrepreneur, forgive the pun, with his own line of flavoring salt which are vegan and number one selling brand on Amazon. He is the host of hip-hop science as his alter ego, Hip Hop MD. He is a renowned public speaker and advocate for diversity in STEM, He is a true Renaissance human being, and it was my honor to check in with him.

In this video, I discuss how to write an effective and engaging statement of purpose, how to structure your essay, and how to use your writing to compensate for potentially weaker sections of your application. Thanks to the California Forum for Diversity in Graduation Education for the Invitation to give this talk. This work was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation CMMI-2135428. The views expressed are those only of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the sponsor, host, or UC San Diego.

In this talk, I discuss strategies for research and writing, how to know how much you should put in a paper, how to manage conflicts with co-authors, and how to respond to reviewers. Darren Lipomi, PhD Professor and Associate Dean for Students Jacobs School of Engineering, UC San Diego lipomigroup.org

This is an unusual episode for me. Rather than responding to questions about graduate school, in this video, I responded to an interviewer performing an ethnographic survey about how researchers in bioengineering and bioengineering-adjacent fields view certain controversial subjects like human modification. 0:50 Would you be in favor of a prenatal treatment such that it would be possible for children to live 200 years? 2:04 What if we could guarantee no inequities, and anyone that would want it could allow their children to live 200 years? 2:36 Why wouldn't you want to live 200 years? 3:03 Would you accept an intervention that would increase your cognitive capacities permanently? 5:16 Do you think all technological advancements improve society? 6:43 What would you change to improve society and human well being if not advance technology? 7:12 What are the barriers to technological interventions to societal problems? 8:10 What would you change about the human body if you could? 9:31 How do you respond to the idea that humans should live forever? 10:51 How about the idea that it is humanity's destiny to take control over its own biology? 11:40 What do you regard as the appropriate relationship between humanity and the natural world? 12:35 Is it good that the human species is limited biologically? 14:03 Would you say that a human being is similar to a machine? 15:13 Do you think science should seek to understand everything? 16:02 Should humans be modifying nature? 16:50 Are there any biological species we should be modifying? 19:32 How does your work fit into the broader field of bioengineering?

0:00 How do you get your research published in high-impact journals? 2:05 Grad students and postdocs are busy. How do you vet undergraduate researchers so that they are productive and not breaking equipment? 3:56 I noticed that you had a mini MBA on your resume. How valuable do you think business training is in academia? 6:25 Can you describe ways in which criticism from your students has landed particularly heavy and changed your approach to teaching and mentoring? 9:58 What is a Venn diagram and how has your Venn diagram showing the overlap of teaching, research, and service changed over time? 11:43 Is funding between researchers distributed equitably? And what would you do to change the way science is funded?

The pillars of academia--research, teaching, and service--often seem like very separate activities. However, it can be really rewarding to find ways to make connections between these areas to get more out of parts of academic life that may seem mundane. Here are some thoughts I collected and delivered at the Asian American Association for Scientists and Engineers (AAASE) in October, 2022.

0:00 What does your group work on? 2:20 How is your work funded? 3:25 Is there one project or grant you're especially excited about? 4:13 How many students are in your group? 4:25 Is that typical? 4:54 How do you communicate with your lab members? 6:01 The roundtable sounds like great idea, does that work well? 7:44 How long have you been doing the shoutouts? 8:16 How have shoutouts and other cultural elements you have implemented influenced climate in the lab? 9:08 How do you hire new lab members? 10:06 What do you look for in new lab members? 13:10 How do you deliver your onboarding material? 17:35 Do you use any electronic tools to control your workflow? How often do you post to Slack vs your students?

In this episode, I collected my responses to questions I received on a panel discussion hosted by the American Chemical Society. I redacted any names and read the questions myself. Here is the list of topics with timestamps. 0:28 What is your background and how did you become interested in mental health of academic researchers? 2:00 Is there something special about researchers that make them especially susceptible to mental health challenges? 4:39 We often hear that academics are not good at saying no. How do you think about how to say no to people even about opportunities that may be exciting? 6:26 How do you know you are burned out, depressed, or anxious? 8:22 How do you respond to a friend or coworker who comes to you with an admission that they might be burned out, depressed, or anxious? 9:22 What are some resources on campus that you can reach out to for coping with anxiety and depression? 10:34 What are some self-care routines you do as alternative coping strategies for stress, burnout, and other metal health challenges? 12:21 How do you cope with mental health challenge or other negative situation that arises because of your relationship with your advisor? 15:47 Should I feel bad about taking a weekday off for self-care? 16:23 How do you get out of doing things you don't want to do? 18:23 How do you work with a PI who is not transparent about their expectations? 19:15 What if I need to switch labs at the end of my PhD? 20:14 How do I know where the supportive labs are before I join? 21:26 Do I have to do a PhD to have a fulfilling job in research?

This episode is a crossover with the Teach the Geek Podcast, hosted by Neil Thompson, engineer, author, podcaster, and speaking coach. Here, we discuss my academic path and approaches to public speaking. You can learn more about Neil at teachthegeek.com and askuncleneilbooks.com.

This is a bit of an unusual book review for the book The Code Breaker: Jennifer Doudna, Gene Editing, and the Future of the Human Race. I'm going to focus on Walter Isaacson's portrayal of how scientific research happens in academic settings and provide some context for the comments he makes on scientists, the scientific method, the role of competition, fundamental science vs. technology, and the philosophy of science. My brief bio: I did my PhD at Harvard in chemistry and postdoc in chemical engineering at Stanford. I have been in the same room with many of the individuals written about in this book, though none of them know who I am (unless they subscribe to this channel ;). I am now a professor of nanoengineering and chemical engineering, and Associate Dean for Students, in the Jacobs School of Engineering at UC San Diego.

In this episode, I sat down with my colleague, Prof. Tod A. Pascal, of the Department of NanoEngineering and Chemical Engineering at UC San Diego. Tod developed an interest in computational materials science at a young age while growing up on the island of Grenada in the Caribbean. During his schooling, he spent significant time in Houston, New York, Philadelphia, Pasadena, South Korea, Japan, and Berkeley, before starting his lab at UCSD. In our wide-ranging discussion, we talk about how he became a computational materials scientist, what it was like to do research in such varied environments, and how computation can be used to expand access to technical education in underserved communities.

In this episode, I cover a range of topics having to do with the role of organic chemistry in chemical and engineering education. I also share my thoughts on flipped classrooms, active learning, peer instruction, and other teaching methodologies.

Studies show that engagement in undergraduate research is one of the surest predictors of retention and success of students in science and engineering. Unfortunately, graduate students and postdoctoral scholars assigned to mentor these students rarely receive training. In this episode, I discuss strategies you can use to mentor undergraduate researchers effectively. I draw from my own history as an undergraduate researcher, and my experience mentoring undergraduates at Harvard, Stanford, and UC San Diego.

In this episode, I sat down with Prof. Raychelle Burks of American University to discuss her career as a crime scene investigator, new approaches to field analytics, her side gig as a script consultant for movies, and approaches to inclusive teaching and mentoring. This episode is cross-posted with IDEAs in STEM Ed. Please consider subscribing there also for faster access and exclusive content. Thanks! Darren

Everything I know about writing, reading, and being asked for letters of recommendation. Excuse the sound quality of this Covid-era recording. I was speaking through a mask to a group of IDEA Scholars at UC San Diego. Learn more at jacobsschool.ucsd.edu/idea.

This is a bonus episode from my new podcast, IDEAs in STEM Ed. I never charge for any of my content and don't monetize (though YouTube may), so if you've found this useful, please consider subscribing to the "IDEAs in STEM Ed" podcast on Spotify or Apple (https://open.spotify.com/show/6wnj0T4yiFbehk5eTtBF50?si=8080602ae33e4952), and to the IDEA Engineering Student Center on YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiY4py9Yhn4dTRzPUO53ItqQ5tRmHN-or Thanks! Darren Zhigang Suo is the Allen E and Marilyn M Puckett Professor of Mechanics and Materials in the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences. Professor Suo obtained his BS degree from Xi'an Jiaotan University in 1985 and PhD in mechanical engineering from Harvard University in 1989. He began his independent career at UC Santa Barbara, moved to Princeton in 1997 and to Harvard in 2003. It was during this period that I became aware of Zhigang's work, when he attended some of our more mechanics-oriented group meeting. Zhigang has been a leader in the thermomechanical reliability of semiconductor devices, and did some of the first mechanical analyses on soft matter devices critical to haptics, robotics, adhesives, and human-machine interfaces. He is an engaging public speaker and storyteller, and his talks generate standing-room-only crowds at conferences. In this episode, we talked about his trajectory in his career and life and challenges facing Asian and Chinese American scientists and engineers.

My guest today is Eric Mazur, professor of physics and applied physics at Harvard University. He is also a creator and entrepreneur in the area of technological resources for classroom teaching. He is known for his research in ultrafast optics and condensed matter physics, and also for his extensive work in the teaching methodology known as Peer Instruction. Attending one of his lectures on teaching as a graduate student was one of the formative experiences of my professional life. He is a true pioneer in active learning in science and engineering education, and was practicing and espousing the benefits of “flipped classrooms” long before the word came into common usage. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe to the IDEAs in STEM Ed podcast and the IDEA Center at UC San Diego channel on YouTube for early access to the episodes.

This is a bonus crossover episode to get some visibility for my new interview podcast, IDEAs in STEM Ed. If you've reached this episode, please do me a big favor and search for "IDEAs in STEM Ed" and subscribe! Everything I put up I do for free, and this will help me a ton. Thanks! Malika Jeffries-EL is a professor of chemistry and Materials Science and Engineering, and associate Dean of the graduate school, at Boston University. She is an organic materials chemist and polymer engineer focusing on organic semiconductors. That is, the type of materials used in organic light-emitting displays, biosensors, solar cells, and other next-generation thin-film devices. She is well known on social media and in the community for her work on equity in academia and in the sciences. I first got to know Malika through her work on conjugated polymers when I was a graduate student, when one name kept appearing over and over. Her early work on molecular engineering of semiconducting polymers and their combination with nanostructured materials was an inspiration to me during my grad school and postdoc days. She is joining me today to talk about her work, her mentoring, and her new role in university leadership, and what she has learned.

This is a bonus crossover episode to get some visibility for my new interview podcast, IDEAs in STEM Ed. If you've reached this episode, please do me a big favor and search for "IDEAs in STEM Ed" and subscribe! Everything I put up I do for free, and this will help me a ton. Thanks! In this episode of IDEAs in STEM Ed, Darren Lipomi sits down with Professor Andrea Armani. Andrea is the Ray Irani chair in Engineering and Materials Science and Professor of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science at the University of Southern California. Her laboratory uses a mixture of tools from chemistry, physics, engineering, and biology, and bridges the disciplines of materials science, medical imaging, and nano photonics. Among many awards she has earned over her career, she is the recipient of the Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers in 2010, and recognized as a World Economic Form Young Global Leader in 2015. Andrea is perhaps known as much for her scientific work as she is for her advocacy of students, young faculty, and women in science. She regularly organizes events stressing the importance of mentoring, careers in and outside of academia, and equity issues in science. We're honored for her to join us today.

My guest in this episode--my first ever livestream--is my UCSD colleague, Professor Brian Keating. Brian is a Chancellor's distinguished professor of physics at UC San Diego, co-director of the Arthur C Clarke Center for the imagination, host of the Into the impossible podcast, YouTuber with 30k subscribers, and writer of the scientific memoir “Losing the Nobel Prize.” Brian is joining me today to discuss his new book, Into the impossible, thinking like a Nobel prize winner. Lessons from Laureates to Stoke Curiosity, Spur Collaboration, and Ignite Imagination in your life and career. The book is a distillation of conversations with nine different Nobel prize winners in physics on his podcast, into the impossible. The book deals not with the technical details of their discovery, but rather with the collaborations involved, the importance of working in a team, curiosity and the process of discovery, and also personal insecurities. Topics include: Is this a science book or a self-help book? Why should we care about Nobel Prize winners? Do they really suffer from the Imposter Syndrome or know what it is? Does high-level academic work allow service? That is, were any of these people ever Department Chair or Associate Dean? Did any of them have a podcast? ;) Is partisanship and rivalry helpful in advancing science?

In this episode, I discuss the reasons why science and engineering professors always seem to be on the road, including the good and bad aspects. For example, the joy and excitement of meeting old friends in new places and sharing scientific discoveries, as well as the sacrifices that one makes in terms of time with one's students and family. I'll also discuss why I believe most of this travel is gratuitous and hard to justify after the birth of a child and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

This is a highly personal, idiosyncratic, unrehearsed talk I gave to my own research group on scientific publication and peer review, when I was on the verge of 100 papers. I hesitated a long time in posting this, but I think it accurately represents my thinking on society vs. for-profit journals, the value-add of publishing, the harm done by careless referee reports, alternatives to traditional publication, and some thoughts on patents vs. publications.

This is the full version of my thoughts on choosing a grad school and a PI/lab. I gave this talk for the American Chemical Society East Bay California Section and the American Women in Science virtual seminar series, and the organizer was kind enough to let me repost my side of the presentation, here. The Q&A topics are as follows: 26:56 If the chances of getting a faculty position is only 5%, should I even bother if I don't get into a top-10 school? 30:49 If we indicate diverse research interest on our personal statement, are we digging ourselves a hole? 31:31 Do I need to have a paper in order to get into a top lab? 32:29 How did Covid affect graduate admissions the last two years? 33:40 How do you find the research interests of PIs? 34:34 How many PIs at each institution should you want to work for before deciding to go to that school? 35:29 Do graduate programs admit students as a pool or do they admit directly to professors' labs? 36:33 What are the red flags that tell you that you should not join a particular lab? 37:16 If I thought I wanted to do the PhD, would it ever make sense to apply to a terminal MS and then switch up once I'm there? 38:20 How should I make the decision between two different research groups who pursue similar topics? 39:56 How should I interpret it if a PI does not return my email? 40:58 If I know that a lab doesn't have a lot of funding but I want to join anyway, would it make sense to TA every semester? 42:16 What is the process for switching labs if you find that you're in a toxic environment? 44:53 If I want to go to industry after my PhD, when should I bring this up to my prospective advisor? 46:15 If I want to join an industry that is concentrated in one location (as in biotech in Boston or the Bay Area), should I go to grad school in the same location? 47:51 Do students who have an academic gap between undergrad and grad school have an advantage or disadvantage?

In this episode, I read a short essay I wrote on effective scientific writing, with references to Strunk and White, Steven Pinker, and George Whitesides. The original article was published in Chemistry of Materials, 2021, 33, 11, 3865–3867, original publication date, June 8, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater... This reading was done with permission from the American Chemical Society.

This is my combination of travel diary plus comedy routine at the Loft at UC San Diego. Warning: this episode contains explicit language. The episode works without the slides, but if you're interested, there is also a YouTube version, located here https://youtu.be/RtLRrp7Gd9w

This episode is a distillation of everything I learned being close to the founding of a few research-based startups and also my experience from Stanford Ignite (mini MBA program). This is a talk I gave to an undergraduate audience made up of students majoring in nanoengineering, chemical engineering, and bioengineering. I hope it serves as a primer on the language of startups that someone who has never heard of, e.g., "venture capital," can use to learn more.

This episode is a cross-posting from The Soft Matter Show, hosted by Amal Narayanan. We covered many topics, including my responses to the following questions: You have worked in the Northeast and West Coast of the United States. Have you ever noticed any differences in the work culture across them? What were some of the deciding factors that inspired you to pursue a career in academia? How did you develop an interest in chemistry/chemical engineering? What was your experience working in Whitesides and Bao research groups? Other than Science, What have you learned from your PhD and Postdoc PIs that help you to run your current lab? Can you tell me about some of the recent findings from your lab? What are some of the unique expertise that you are cultivating in the Lipomi Research Group? Workflow and projects in the lab? What do you think is the future of sensors and haptics-related technologies? What are the real-life implications of the research in your lab? When hiring a lab member, what are the factors that you consider? How do you judge these factors? How to apply for M.S., Ph.D., or Postdoc in your lab? Can you tell me about your online presence and if that has an impact in your research? What is the future of molecular podcasting? In one of your podcast episodes, you mentioned that you may write a book for academics. Can you tell me about it? How do you manage time to be a professor, PI, YouTuber, and Podcast host? What are your thoughts for the next generation of scientists?

Topics covered in this episode: 0:00 The life of a professor sounds really stressful. Knowing what you know now, would you still go into academia? 4:21 Professors spend a lot of time writing grants and doing administration. Do you ever want to go into the lab and do experiments on the bench? 9:30 Where does a public university get its money and how is it distributed? 13:35 How much money does it cost to hire a graduate student, and how does this investment affect who you hire? 20:04 How do you feel about productivity hacks, like batching similar tasks? 23:08 Are undergraduate researchers a negative cost to the lab since they pay tuition to get training? 24:17 What happens if a PI can't get a grant? Does the lab go bankrupt? 26:48 What happens to the students and postdocs in a lab that loses its funding?

In this episode, I address the following questions. For a short video tour, see the accompanying video on YouTube "What does a professor do?" 0:05 What does a professor do? 1:29 Why did I want to be a professor? 2:57 What is a typical day like? 5:51 What is nanoscience? 8:56 What do you need to know to be a nonscientist? 10:12 What do you work on?

Topics addressed: 0:00 What's easier, giving talks with slides or talks with no slides? 0:51 What are some strategies for avoiding non-words, like um, like, and so? 4:00 Is it calming to hold onto an object when giving a presentation? 5:42 What's the best way to prepare for a Q&A session? 9:00 What level of complexity should you prepare your spoken remarks? 12:15 How do you get better at giving talks? 15:06 Is it possible to be too polished in your presentation style? 16:19 Are there strategies for giving effective talks over Zoom? How does it differ from giving talks in person? 21:31 How has your experience been giving talks over Zoom for more than a year?

In this episode, I respond to questions related to scientific writing, and coming up with new ideas in scientific research. To what extent should we minimize jargon in scientific writing? Is it acceptable to use literary techniques like metaphor in scientific writing? If I have a lot of data for a single figure, how do I organize it so that the figure isn't overwhelming? Different readers are expecting to get different things from a paper. How do you organize the content, and what do you put in each section, from the title to the methods? (Credit to George Whitesides in my description of what should be in the first introductory paragraph of a paper.) How do you write the abstract to draw the reader in? What's the difference between the abstract and the introduction? How do you select a research topic that combines separate disciplines? Should you “follow your passion” or focus on developing skills? How do you know how your own skills can help inform the selection of a research topic? Should one expect their skills and their passion to align?

This episode is a short conversation between me and my senior PhD student, Andrew Kleinschmidt, who had recently suffered a brain injury. As part of his rehabilitation, one of his assignments was to conduct an interview about science. We covered some pretty existential topics as well, including the question "if you got hit by a bus tomorrow, would you have done enough?"

One of my students interviewed me for a class on leadership. I was honored he chose me for this assignment. Here are some of the topics we covered: What were some formative experiences that influenced your career trajectory? Is it better to seek a range of experiences or to focus in a single area? What are the values that underlie effective leadership in research? Do you have a mentor or role model? What advice would you give to a college undergraduate about to enter the job market, especially during Covid?

In this episode, I share my thoughts on a variety of topics related to starting out in an undergraduate or graduate research lab. Whom should you ask for a letter of recommendation? How can you spot bad work environments? What are the red flags? How do you identify a positive fit? When do you know if you should drop a bad project? When applying to grad school, should I stay in the same field or try something different? How can you figure out what a lab is working on when you don't yet “speak the language”? How much agency do undergrads typically have in choosing a project within a research group? Suppose you have a good idea of what you want to work on as an undergraduate or graduate student. How do you find the labs doing the work you want to do?