“The best time to start writing iswhen you’ve done about 50% of your project. Don’t wait until you’ve finished 95% of your project to start writing because you’ll probably waste a lot of time if you do. By that time, a lot of data you collect may not be relevant to your narrative.Periodically you have to step back [from your bench work] to ask yourself: “What aspects of my project remain new and exciting?” By about midway through your project, you should start to see the big picture — which may be different than your original idea! — and you should focus your energy on that.”
“The writing that I’m most proud of was the same writing I struggled with most. It is a story for Notices of the American Mathematical Society about the research I’ve done, why I find problems in biology to be interesting to mathematicians, and how I learned to work with interdisciplinary collaborators. It was very daunting — there’s so much vulnerability in telling your story. What really helped was participating in the spring 2022 faculty writing retreat. It was great to be part of a writing community — to come together, set goals, learn some strategies. But mostly it was great just having people there and establishing that this is what we’re doing for the day. Writing doesn’t have to be miserable!”
“What I’d like to say to new graduate students rotating in my lab is: ‘What you’re really going to be doing over the next 4 – 5 years is you’re going to write a lot, so let’s focus on that.’ But I think that would scare a lot of people off. Recently I did focus on writing with a rotation graduate student – which I had never done before – and it worked pretty well. I had an idea for a synthesis paper that I wanted to work on and he wanted to engage at that level. He reviewed the literature that is relevant to the work he’d do if he joined my lab and, although I guided him to topics that I wanted him to think about, the project was open enough that he could explore and incorporate his ideas. It was fun! We had a live document and co-wrote it as a team.”
“Writing is something that you have to do, but it can also a pretty daunting task with high stakes! Something that really helped me get my writing going back when I was a grad student was to define “writing” broadly. I read this book by Stephen King, and he said something that really resonated with me: “Every time I’m thinking about writing, I’m writing.” That really stuck with me! Now, by the time I actually sit down to write a paper, I’ve already worked on it a lot. That work happens sort of naturally in the shower or when I’m riding my bike or driving my car. I start by figuring out what the punch line of my story is. Then I think: what are effective figures that communicate this story? Then I work on the figures and I call this “writing”! Before I even start writing sentences, I have a brainstorming session with myself to identify key words, ideas, and results I want or need to emphasize. Then I draw the connections between them. By the time I have done all that, I have a solid structure to follow to write the paper without having written a word.”
“While I enjoy the whole writing process, one thing I love about writing is the detail-oriented part of it. I love copy editing! When a paper has been accepted for publication and I get the page proofs, I have a “proof party”. First, I let the lab know that the proofs came, and all the co-authors contribute their edits. Then, I print out the paper, sharpen my Dixon Ticonderoga #2 pencil, go to a cafe, order a special coffee, and I sit down to edit. With the proofs, I finally get to see how the article really looks. It’s a real paper now. I feel a real sense of accomplishment and am proud of my lab – what a treat!”
“It is often said that scientists should do a better job communicating to the public so I felt like I should at least try to see if I could walk the walk, not just talk the talk. The challenge is that when you write a scientific paper, you generally know what the rules are, but there are really no formal guidelines about how to write for non-technical audiences. You could write in a million different ways! So it’s exciting but also a little bit terrifying.
I’ve written a couple of articles for Natural History magazine and, there, I assumed my readers had probably gone to college (but not necessarily). What I wanted to do was paint a picture in their minds about something that would interest them – a wonderment, a mystery, or an appreciation of nature’s beauty — and then try to backfill in the more technical side of things, including bringing some molecular biology to the natural history audience.
My first article was about how the diversity of body plans in animals came about. My hook was that the world is full of all kinds of crazy creatures with an incredible range of morphologies, body sizes, physiologies, behaviors, and reproductive systems. I started by describing echinoderms, which have one of the weirdest body plans. I introduced the larva, which has a very sensible organization; it has a front and a back end, a left and a right side, a belly and a back, a mouth and a gut. It looks like a normal animal, it’s just tiny. Then, it undergoes this crazy metamorphosis and comes out pentaradial! So what is going on there? That’s the sort of wonderment that I was trying to tap into.”
“As I transitioned from a postdoc to a faculty member, the biggest challenge in writing was finding the time to do it as my schedule became very fragmented. Early on, I participated in a 12-week Faculty Success Program with National Center For Faculty Development & Diversity (NCFDD), and they challenged us to write 30 minutes every day. This practice is not only a way to make consistent progress with our writing, but it is also a way to make sure we are engaging with our science daily. When we put our writing aside for weeks, we forget all the connections. But if we are writing every day, even for only 30 minutes, we keep those ideas in our mind for the rest of the day as we are doing everything else a scientist does. We see connections, get new ideas, and the practice allows us to stay in conversation with our writing.
We have to show up for our writing, the same way we show up for our teaching. It is critical for our success, and we have to hold ourselves accountable. Even if we are tired, even if we are not inspired, even if we are sad – we have to show up. Some days we’re going to feel more inspired and we will do more, other days we may not feel that inspired, but we still will have accomplished something.”
“I used to think I was crazy because I like to listen to really passionate soundtracks and heavy metal when I write. But it was very affirming to read On Writing by Steven King, who reminds us that writing is often painful and, when you get stuck, listening to music can inspire you. When I am in the early stages of writing and I just want to creatively flow – when it doesn’t matter how it connects together and I just want to get it out – I listen to very passionate stuff like Disturbed and the soundtrack to Inception. I think music like this allows you to get out of your head, to get unstuck, and to think differently. Other times I need background, ethereal music like the soundtrack to the Thin Red Line. And, of course, sometimes I write in silence when the writing requires me to get into a calm place with deep thoughts and to structure those thoughts in an organized manner.
I often tell people that good writing is like a good piece of music where there is a theme that you will hear at the beginning, the middle, and the end. I tell everyone in my lab to listen to Rimsky Korsakov’s Scheherazade and to listen for the theme that threads through the entire piece of music, over and over. Everything has to be connected! For good writing, everything has to have a purpose.”
“The writing I primarily do right now is in the service of teaching, particularly writing assessment questions at high levels of cognitive thinking. I’m always looking for inspiration so I’ll often start by reading something in the research literature. I teach Molecular Biology (Bio201L) and there are a lot of fun molecular mechanisms to get students to think about and there is a lot of logic that goes into thinking about those mechanisms. The questions I write tend to be based on that logic and being able to put multiple things together to answer a question.
For example, I’ll read about a human disease that is understood at the molecular level – a disease that students haven’t seen before – and make a question out of that. I’ll give students the background information about the molecular mechanism and then ask: If this component of this mechanism were to be deleted, then what would be the outcome? That’s how people do experiments in genetics, and our students get really good at thinking this way!”
“As a non-native English speaker, when I went to graduate school I intentionally made it my goal to write scientific manuscripts in English. At first, I was translating what I was reading in English into Japanese, then writing in Japanese, then translating that into English. Eventually, I found out it was actually a lot easier to write in English because the language structures are completely different. At some point, I made a conscious choice not to use Japanese at all when I am reading, thinking, or writing about science. I still love reading all other things in Japanese, like a good novel, but I found it very helpful to limit science to one language.
My advice to other non-native English speakers is to start with small things like listening to science podcasts in English and only reading popular science books written in English. These are easier to understand so, when you are listening or reading, you can practice not translating them.”
“The driving force behind science writing is that we want to tell stories. To map out my story, I often start with writing the abstract part of the paper. You don’t have to limit it to 250 words, but starting with an abstract forces you to really think about what you want to write: why you are doing these experiments, why are they important, why would people want to know this, what approach did you take, what are your main results, and what conclusions will excite people most? Often, the story is not yet complete when I start writing, but I like to do that because it makes me realize, wait a minute, we need to do some additional experiments! Because one can package a story in different ways with the same set of data, trying different versions of an extended abstract seems like a good first step in writing a paper as well as guiding the rest of a project to completion.”
“I do a lot of collaborative writing, but I don’t red-pen my graduate students’ writing anymore. Instead, we sit down together and work through whole sections where one of us reads aloud and the other one edits. It’s awesome because you don’t have to over-interpret what someone’s edits mean, you’re just sitting there, together, talking about how to get the point across as clearly and succinctly as possible. Also, before we submit a revised manuscript, we always, always do a read-aloud as part of our final polish. It is amazing how many messy bits you’ll catch! It really does improve the flow of a manuscript.
I love it and think it has been a major improvement in working with my students as coauthors because when you’re having a conversation about writing, edits and suggestions seem less like attacks and more like improvements. A lot of editing and reviewing can come across as cruel because you were busy or you weren’t clear, which is problematic because writing is so much a part of people’s self-worth. I find that it’s easier to be kind by having a conversation – it’s a pleasant experience as opposed to a painful one!”
“The hardest part of writing is thinking from the mind of the reader – that is critical. I’ve gotten better at doing this by getting criticism from people and understanding why my writing wasn’t working. The more feedback I got, the more I learned how other people read, and then I started reading other people’s writing with that same consciousness and attentiveness of audience. Now, when I am reading someone else’s stuff, I’m trying to figure out why it isn’t working. A big part of becoming a better writer is reading other people’s writing critically.”
Pelin Volkan, Associate Professor of Biology, Duke University
finished 95% of your project to start writing because you’ll probably waste a lot of time if you do. By that time, a lot of data you collect may not be relevant to your narrative.
“The writing that I’m most proud of was the same writing I struggled with most. It is a story for Notices of the American Mathematical Society about the research I’ve done, why I find problems in biology to be interesting to mathematicians, and how I learned to work with interdisciplinary collaborators. It was very daunting — there’s so much vulnerability in telling your story. What really helped was participating in the spring 2022 faculty writing retreat. It was great to be part of a writing community — to come together, set goals, learn some strategies. But mostly it was great just having people there and establishing that this is what we’re doing for the day. Writing doesn’t have to be miserable!”
“What I’d like to say to new graduate students rotating in my lab is: ‘What you’re really going to be doing over the next 4 – 5 years is you’re going to write a lot, so let’s focus on that.’ But I think that would scare a lot of people off. Recently I did focus on writing with a rotation graduate student – which I had never done before – and it worked pretty well. I had an idea for a synthesis paper that I wanted to work on and he wanted to engage at that level. He reviewed the literature that is relevant to the work he’d do if he joined my lab and, although I guided him to topics that I wanted him to think about, the project was open enough that he could explore and incorporate his ideas. It was fun! We had a live document and co-wrote it as a team.”
“Writing is something that you have to do, but it can also a pretty daunting task with high stakes! Something that really helped me get my writing going back when I was a grad student was to define “writing” broadly. I read this book by Stephen King, and he said something that really resonated with me: “Every time I’m thinking about writing, I’m writing.” That really stuck with me! Now, by the time I actually sit down to write a paper, I’ve already worked on it a lot. That work happens sort of naturally in the shower or when I’m riding my bike or driving my car. I start by figuring out what the punch line of my story is. Then I think: what are effective figures that communicate this story? Then I work on the figures and I call this “writing”! Before I even start writing sentences, I have a brainstorming session with myself to identify key words, ideas, and results I want or need to emphasize. Then I draw the connections between them. By the time I have done all that, I have a solid structure to follow to write the paper without having written a word.”
“While I enjoy the whole writing process, one thing I love about writing is the detail-oriented part of it. I love copy editing! When a paper has been accepted for publication and I get the page proofs, I have a “proof party”. First, I let the lab know that the proofs came, and all the co-authors contribute their edits. Then, I print out the paper, sharpen my Dixon Ticonderoga #2 pencil, go to a cafe, order a special coffee, and I sit down to edit. With the proofs, I finally get to see how the article really looks. It’s a real paper now. I feel a real sense of accomplishment and am proud of my lab – what a treat!”
“It is often said that scientists should do a better job communicating to the public so I felt like I should at least try to see if I could walk the walk, not just talk the talk. The challenge is that when you write a scientific paper, you generally know what the rules are, but there are really no formal guidelines about how to write for non-technical audiences. You could write in a million different ways! So it’s exciting but also a little bit terrifying.
As I transitioned from a postdoc to a faculty member, the biggest challenge in writing was finding the time to do it as my schedule became very fragmented. Early on, I participated in a 12-week Faculty Success Program with National Center For Faculty Development & Diversity (NCFDD), and they challenged us to write 30 minutes every day. This practice is not only a way to make consistent progress with our writing, but it is also a way to make sure we are engaging with our science daily. When we put our writing aside for weeks, we forget all the connections. But if we are writing every day, even for only 30 minutes, we keep those ideas in our mind for the rest of the day as we are doing everything else a scientist does. We see connections, get new ideas, and the practice allows us to stay in conversation with our writing.
“I used to think I was crazy because I like to listen to really passionate soundtracks and heavy metal when I write. But it was very affirming to read 
“The writing I primarily do right now is in the service of teaching, particularly writing assessment questions at high levels of cognitive thinking. I’m always looking for inspiration so I’ll often start by reading something in the research literature. I teach Molecular Biology (Bio201L) and there are a lot of fun molecular mechanisms to get students to think about and there is a lot of logic that goes into thinking about those mechanisms. The questions I write tend to be based on that logic and being able to put multiple things together to answer a question.
“As a non-native English speaker, when I went to graduate school I intentionally made it my goal to write scientific manuscripts in English. At first, I was translating what I was reading in English into Japanese, then writing in Japanese, then translating that into English. Eventually, I found out it was actually a lot easier to write in English because the language structures are completely different. At some point, I made a conscious choice not to use Japanese at all when I am reading, thinking, or writing about science. I still love reading all other things in Japanese, like a good novel, but I found it very helpful to limit science to one language.
“The driving force behind science writing is that we want to tell stories. To map out my story, I often start with writing the abstract part of the paper. You don’t have to limit it to 250 words, but starting with an abstract forces you to really think about what you want to write: why you are doing these experiments, why are they important, why would people want to know this, what approach did you take, what are your main results, and what conclusions will excite people most? Often, the story is not yet complete when I start writing, but I like to do that because it makes me realize, wait a minute, we need to do some additional experiments! Because one can package a story in different ways with the same set of data, trying different versions of an extended abstract seems like a good first step in writing a paper as well as guiding the rest of a project to completion.”
“I do a lot of collaborative writing, but I don’t 
“The hardest part of writing is thinking from the mind of the reader – that is critical. I’ve gotten better at doing this by getting criticism from people and understanding why my writing wasn’t working. The more feedback I got, the more I learned how other people read, and then I started reading other people’s writing with that same consciousness and attentiveness of audience. Now, when I am reading someone else’s stuff, I’m trying to figure out why it isn’t working. A big part of becoming a better writer is reading other people’s writing critically.”