As an undergraduate researcher you are not expected to know everything about proper lab etiquette. You are simply a student in training, ideally for graduate school. You will be appointed a research mentor, which will be a graduate student, post-doc, or your Primary Investigator (PI). Who ever your mentor is, they have more experience in the lab and therefore it makes sense that they would have more authority in the lab.  When you have a question related to your research project they should be able to answer without hesitation. Well this is almost always true. What happens when you reach aroadblock in your experiment? Who do ask for help? Your research mentor? What if you ask your research mentor for help and you don’t agree with them?

There was a disagreement that I had with my mentor when I was working in the Fygenson lab at UCSB. I was working on an experiment designed to compare two measuring apparatus’ to see which of the two provides the most precise data. My experiment consisted of formulating vesicles with a mass of approximately 100 attograms. The experiment requires two buffers that osmotically match and have a large density mismatch in order to achieve the required mass. The vesicles were to be formulated in a dense buffer, which would induce a mass increase upon the vesicle by filling the hollow interior. The second buffer would act as the dispersant.

Sucrose and glucose were the buffers originally selected, each at a one molar concentration. Complications arose when we were unable to distinguish the difference between the nanoparticles from the sucrose buffer and vesicles themselves on one apparatus. We decided to change the experiment by lowering the concentration to ~50mM and introducing polyethylene glycol 6000 (PEG 6000) in replacement of sucrose. The increase in molecular weight difference between the PEG and glucose made it possible to reduce the concentration of the buffers. Unfortunately, complications also occurred with the new PEG buffer. The osmolarity data of the PEG buffer was inconsistent.

I decided to approach my graduate mentor with the problem. She asked me to repeat the process in front of her so that she could give input on the situation. She concluded that my technique in measuring the osmolarity of the buffers was incorrect, causing me to collect bad data. I was unsure of what the problem was at the time, but I was confident it had nothing to do with my technique. I have experience with the osmometer and am quite familiar with the data collecting technique.

I proceeded to the UCSB library website, searching the Web of Science for an explanation. I was fortunate to find a publication that addressed my problem. Apparently, PEG displays erratic behavior that prevents one from measuring its osmolarity. It has a property that disturbs the interactions between its molecular structure and water. As the concentration of PEG solution increases, the disturbance of interactions between the molecular structure and water also increases.

I went to my graduate mentor with good news; I had found the real problem. There was clearly a power differential between my graduate mentor and I. I decided not to start an argument when faced with this disagreement as she obviously has more lab experience than I. Yet, I still went to her with good news. I determined that the only way to prove I was correct is to find evidence. I believe I handled the situation in a professional manner.

So when in doubt, do your research, find evidence that will back up your argument,  and you will be able to prove your point.

Overcoming the Stereotype

This past summer I undertook an undergraduate research position at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). I worked in Dr. Roman Stockers microfluidics group analyzing the physical interactions between Phytoplankton and Marinobacter. I was in awe when I received the phone call from Monica Orta the program director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Summer Research Program (MSRP). I had been accepted into one of the most prestigious summer research programs in the country. You can only imagine the intimidation that I felt when I accepted the offer.  I was in disbelief because I had this ideal that people who accepted into prestigious programs as physics majors were students who had 4.0 GPA, 3 excellent letters of recommendation, publications under their belts, and well, white male protégés. It’s a little ridiculous to idealize the type of student in this manner, but that is what I thought about. I am far from this idealization. I am physics major who does not have a perfect 4.0 GPA, I had 2 excellent letters of recommendation, no publications under my belt, and I am a Mexican-American female who had no idea what physics was until my last year in community college.

When I met the stocker lab I was surprised to find that I was one out of the three women who were in the research group and 1 out of 30 who made up the lab group. It was a bit intimidating but I didn’t let that get in my way. The lab was made up of physicists, mechanical engineers, and biologists. I consider my self a physicist, I mean after all I am getting a degree in physics. Right?! Well, some of the physicists who are part of the research group didn’t think so.  There was a certain occurrence where one physicist pulled the stereotype card on me. The Stocker lab was in the process of conducting interviews for a new lab manager. One of the interviewees had just come out of the group interview with the Post-Doc physicists, who by the way were all men. She came up to me to introduce herself and I noticed that the tag was still on her newly purchased cardigan. I told her right away. She was embarrassed and asked one of the physicist why they didn’t tell her anything. The physicist responded, “Well you were just in a room full of physicist, we don’t notice those types of things”. I quickly responded with, “So, am I not considered a physicist?” I was really bothered by the comment this guy had made. The MIT student population lacks diversity.  This is nothing new.

I wanted to bring up this topic because I feel it’s important in science. I can only speak for the physics field, but I am sure there is a lack of diversity in all sciences. I am a 5’10 woman who loves to put make up on, follows fashion, loves rap music, has a social life, and loves physics. My mom has no education whatsoever and works in the fields. My dad didn’t finish grade school and works as a poker dealer at a casino. No one in my family went to college; I am the first.  I am a Mexican-American first generation low-income minority student in the physics field. I don’t let that get in my way. I have been conducting research since 2011, the year I transferred to UCSB. I participated in the National Center for Earth-Surface Dynamics REU at the University of Minnesota, the Mathematics Engineering Science Achievement program at my community college and UCSB, the McNair Scholars Program at UCSB, MSRP at MIT, and the Center for Energy Efficient Materials internship at UCSB.  So, if by any chance you don’t fit the stereotype of your field of study, don’t dwell on it. You have accomplished by far more than the typical (inset major here)ist because you have had to overcome your own obstacles to be where you are at today. So, go ahead and apply for that Undergraduate Research Position you’ve have your eye on and see what happens.