Journal Club
The Engaged Participant
The most important skill taught during graduate school is learning how to learn. This is the purpose of journal club. Journal club usually consists of a lead presenter presenting a paper, while participants critique experimental logic, approaches, and interpretations. This is an exercise in active peer-review and enhancing scientific literacy. The result of this is a refined sense of experimental design that scientists apply to their own work. Effective participation requires effective preparation. When possible, try to read the journal club paper at least 3 days prior to the meeting, and read 1-2 reviews on the topic to obtain relevant background information required to identify holes in experimental logic, and theoretical conclusions. Write in margins and on the paper. Look up new techniques, use large blank spaces (title, last page, etc.) to describe unfamiliar techniques.
At the helm
Leading a journal club session is by far more challenging than conducting a lab meeting. Leading a journal club session requires you to understand someone else's work to the point where you can discuss experimental logic, approach, observations, interpretations, and offer critiques within each of these areas. This is often accompanied with a visual presentation that compresses the paper into a 45 minute presentation. This visual is a key advantage in the preparation stage. This allows you to prepare as an engaged reader. A good journal club is based upon a strong foundation for why a particular paper is chosen. Journal club exercises scientific literacy for the purpose of learning from the triumphs and short comings of other groups, and applying these lessons to your own work. Thus, journal club should cover topics that are relevant to your own work, and closely related to the work of others in the room. This maximizes engagement, discussion, participation, and utility.
Visual preparation
Below is a common 'routine' to use when first constructing a journal club presentation. This is based on powerpoint.
1) Read the paper once through quickly
2) Read the paper a second time, this time, prepare 1-2 slides / figure as you encounter the relevant information.
Use the slide comments section to list
Question: Question being asked
Approach: general approach
A) Describe Experimental approach in A
B) Describe Experimental approach in B
Use panel listings to add a critique/discussion point.
Common open questions broadly applicable to any basic science article:
Presentation:
Before describing a single result, define the question, and walk listeners through the experimental setup. Describe what they are seeing, provide orientations to controls, and distinguish experimental groups such that they arrive at the interpretation just before you explicitly state it.
Statistical analysis
Conclusions
Discussion
Critiques
Controls, experimental design?
Q: think of alternative approaches that could be utilized to answer the question
Are they superior? Othoganol experiments? Further support? Feasible?
The most important skill taught during graduate school is learning how to learn. This is the purpose of journal club. Journal club usually consists of a lead presenter presenting a paper, while participants critique experimental logic, approaches, and interpretations. This is an exercise in active peer-review and enhancing scientific literacy. The result of this is a refined sense of experimental design that scientists apply to their own work. Effective participation requires effective preparation. When possible, try to read the journal club paper at least 3 days prior to the meeting, and read 1-2 reviews on the topic to obtain relevant background information required to identify holes in experimental logic, and theoretical conclusions. Write in margins and on the paper. Look up new techniques, use large blank spaces (title, last page, etc.) to describe unfamiliar techniques.
At the helm
Leading a journal club session is by far more challenging than conducting a lab meeting. Leading a journal club session requires you to understand someone else's work to the point where you can discuss experimental logic, approach, observations, interpretations, and offer critiques within each of these areas. This is often accompanied with a visual presentation that compresses the paper into a 45 minute presentation. This visual is a key advantage in the preparation stage. This allows you to prepare as an engaged reader. A good journal club is based upon a strong foundation for why a particular paper is chosen. Journal club exercises scientific literacy for the purpose of learning from the triumphs and short comings of other groups, and applying these lessons to your own work. Thus, journal club should cover topics that are relevant to your own work, and closely related to the work of others in the room. This maximizes engagement, discussion, participation, and utility.
Visual preparation
Below is a common 'routine' to use when first constructing a journal club presentation. This is based on powerpoint.
1) Read the paper once through quickly
2) Read the paper a second time, this time, prepare 1-2 slides / figure as you encounter the relevant information.
Use the slide comments section to list
Question: Question being asked
Approach: general approach
A) Describe Experimental approach in A
B) Describe Experimental approach in B
Use panel listings to add a critique/discussion point.
Common open questions broadly applicable to any basic science article:
Presentation:
Before describing a single result, define the question, and walk listeners through the experimental setup. Describe what they are seeing, provide orientations to controls, and distinguish experimental groups such that they arrive at the interpretation just before you explicitly state it.
Statistical analysis
- For NGS, what reference is used to claim relative difference?
- Would alternate approaches yield the same results? If not, why?
Conclusions
- In what ways have observations been over-interpreted?
- What are the actual observations, and what is required to further support the author's claim?
Discussion
Critiques
Controls, experimental design?
Q: think of alternative approaches that could be utilized to answer the question
Are they superior? Othoganol experiments? Further support? Feasible?