to admit a study’s limitations instead of trying to meet preconceived expectations, Jacob adds
This is kind of like what we talked about in class. We mentioned when writing our grant proposals that it is acceptable to write about how we would be limited or struggle to gather data in certain aspects. I like that this is encouraged, because it feels more open and creates less pressure.
Grants can be more speculative and more self-promotional than papers are
I really like that this was mentioned and elaborated on. I didn't really think about the fact that a grant can be more of a "self-promo" then a formal write-up. In a sense, it is like an advertisement of what could happen if you were given the money.
Jacob remembers cramming in words instead of getting to the point.
I think it can be important to remember that there is always a time and place to fit as many impressive words as possible to make yourself sound knowledgable. However, sometimes simplicity is best, and the more concise you are, the easier it is for your reader to understand your purpose. Your knowledge about the subject should be evident without having to use jargon and large words that just end up confusing the reader.
Even on the day when you win the Nobel prize,” she said in a 2017 graduation speech at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, “sceptics may question whether you really know what you’re doing.”
This point catches my eye for a few reasons. Part of me thinks that it's unreasonable to question someone who has done so much for the field and contributed in ways that led to receiving the Nobel prize. However, I also appreciate that everyone is held to the same standard, regardless of your past accomplishments and contributions. It not only keeps the field competitive, but allows newcomers to have just as much of a shot.