Extending a Research Fellowship Posted on November 19, 2007 Terence A. Ketter (bio) considers the pros and cons of prolonging one's training experience.

Going into fellowship experience, it makes a lot of sense to be focused and not try to do everything at once, and when I first came to the NIH, was very interested in pharmacology and clinical trials and understanding how to run those sort of things. During the time I was with the NIH, I got interested in brain imaging. So this could be considered a lack of focus or developing a diversion, therefore also had training in brain imaging and that contributed to the length of time I was there.

I think there are probably both assets and liabilities in doing that kind of thing, and certainly looking at it in hindsight, had I left the NIH sooner, then I would have set up my own shop sooner and would have had that much more momentum. And so I think people who are in a training experience, they need to know that no matter how pleasant their training environment is, there is some kind of a time penalty for being there and not setting up your own operation.

On the other hand, the kind of information I got by staying longer influenced the quality of the operation, in that it had not only clinical trails but also brain imaging. I certainly learned, through this whole process, that for one single individual to do both those things, that’s too much, and that focus is important. On the other hand in terms of mentoring people and coordinating an effort with respect to doing imaging and clinical pharmacology, having experience in both has been enormously beneficial. So I think there are trade-offs on prolonging your training experience versus getting out there and getting started on your own.

« Back to Article