Welcome to this.
Within the activities developed by the Doctoral School
and within the European Doctoral Day.
I would like to welcome you to this 6th Congress
of the International Doctoral School.
First of all, I wanted to thank you.
I wanted to thank all of you for being here,
both doctoral students and researchers.
The coordinators, the doctoral programs, all of you
involved in this, and particularly, of course, the
doctoral school headed by its director.
And of course, to José María Martel, who is vice president
of the Council, particularly for Scientific and Technical Research.
Thank you so much for being here with us and dedicating your time
to us and being willing to give us the plenary session.
And first of all, I'm going to give the floor to the person responsible
for and the author of this entire meeting, who is the one who has truly
brought it to fruition and who is so successfully leading our International
Doctoral School forward.
Mariluz, please.
Thank you very much, Vice-Rector.
Well, the Vice-Rector has already given the welcome, but please allow me, on
behalf of the International Doctoral School of the Rey Juan Carlos University,
to formally welcome you to this 6th Congress of the School.
We also celebrate today the European Doctoral Day, May 13th.
We have also joined a European network in which many
institutions across Europe are celebrating this day,
and on the European PhD website you can also find this
Congress as the activity with which the Rey
Juan Carlos University is celebrating it today.
Well, you know very well because you are now in the middle of
developing a doctoral thesis, that research is fundamental
and that especially today, the generation of knowledge,
and not only the generation, but the transfer of it, becomes
the fundamental axis of all economic progress, social progress in general.
In this sense, doctoral studies are not only the
culmination of the highest level of training that
can be acquired, but through research, the aim is
precisely to transfer to society all of
the ideas you present in your doctoral theses.
That's why we think meetings like this are very positive, because
they undoubtedly help you to spread the word and also to make contact
with other people who are in the same situation as you.
The specific case of the International Doctoral Congress of the Rey Juan
Carlos University brings together all branches of knowledge.
As you will have seen in the program, which is a broad program, it is a
complete
program where all branches of knowledge are present.
Please allow me to give you some data because we are very satisfied.
We have achieved a fairly interesting success rate.
We have received a total of 165 proposals for participation that will be
developed; not all of them, because some were not selected, but they will
be developed in poster format and in communication format.
We have 250 registered participants, and there is a significant representation
here now, but more will be arriving throughout the day, and it's all very
interesting.
82% of these proposals are from doctoral students and doctoral
students from outside the Rey Juan Carlos University.
In other words, we have opened a space, in this case to all of Spain,
because we have doctoral students from all over Spain.
Throughout the day we have prepared an intense academic program.
First, there will be a plenary presentation by the Vice President of
Scientific and Technical Research of the Higher Council for Scientific
Research, Dr. Martel, where he will provide us with his strategic vision
on the development of the impact of the research career.
Let's develop.
After that, there will be a pause in the available program.
We will develop seminars, knowledge programs taught
by experts who will talk about methodologies, research
tools, and scientific foundations in each of the disciplines.
There will be a seminar.
Then you will all have to divide up among those seminars the one that interests you
most.
We have also prepared tables with presentations and desserts,
which is really where the doctoral students make
their contributions, the ones they have sent us.
And as I was saying, beyond the data, this congress
represents a space for meeting, collective learning and network building.
And I will conclude by thanking all the
people who have made this day possible.
We've been working on this event for months.
Firstly, to the doctoral students, both to the management team represented
by the different sectors in the different areas and to the technical
administrative staff in management and services.
I would like to make a special mention of Gonzalo Viñuales and Alejandro,
from the Administration and Services staff, who have dedicated many hours.
But I would also like to thank, of course, the speakers, both in the plenary
session and in the various seminars, the evaluators of the proposals who
have also done a great job, the moderators of all the tables, and of
course,
also the doctoral students and PhD candidates who are the true protagonists
of this day.
I encourage you then to make the most of today, let it serve, as I say,
as a meeting place and to continue building together
and promoting the advancement of knowledge.
Thank you so much.
Thank you very much, Mariluz.
Well, she has reflected it well and I wanted to highlight some
element that is closely linked to how we interpret the doctoral school at the
university.
The doctorate, as she so rightly said, is not just the final stage of an
educational career, it is really the beginning of a professional
activity that has an objective which is to transform, to truly transform the
world.
Any social change we want to have, any technological change,
any element, is necessarily based on research, right?
100% of it is developed and takes place from universities,
but often that initial seed, that idea, sometimes a little
absurd, has often been born in a university and often has been
born from a young researcher in training, who are the ones who
sometimes assume more risks, with an idea that they have.
And we, as directors, sometimes take the risk on
their own hopes and their own energy, because in the
end, it is really the doctoral students who drive
research and who truly have a greater impact.
An important element of our university is that it changes, and that
drive is really very transversal to all areas of knowledge.
When one analyzes the Rey Juan Carlos University, one realizes that we are
practically present in all areas: the humanities, the arts, legal sciences,
economics—I could mention all the doctoral programs we have that cover
everything from these aspects to the most technological and health sciences,
and I am also grateful that they have given us the opportunity to have this
magnificent setting.
And that's because the King Juan Carlos University is truly very cross-cutting
with society.
When one analyzes what the Rey Juan Carlos I University is like
in the doctoral program, it is also a reflection of this.
It is truly perhaps the university most for the people of Madrid
and truly also open to the entire community, to everyone, to the entire
country and beyond.
We are opening our borders to incorporate more researchers in
training from abroad and also established researchers.
Within this effort there is one element that we are working on very
intensely at the International Doctoral School, and that is
adapting it to the circumstances we have right now.
And one of the biggest circumstances is that we have a huge demand
from doctoral students, and one of the first efforts we are making
is to increase the number of students we admit into our programs.
It is essential that all students who want to participate
and all professors who want to lead can find in the doctoral
school a forum to coincide with these interests of
development, training and professional development.
And that's what we want to do, provide this and gradually
adapt our structures to the circumstances
and to our capacity to keep developing.
The students.
You know that a doctoral thesis is a complex step; it's a marathon, not a
sprint.
One either finishes or doesn't have a degree, doesn't have a master's degree.
And now suddenly you say now comes a very long period
too, like all the stages that require a lot of effort.
In the end, I believe it produces great satisfaction, and
our goal within the doctoral school and within the university
itself is that the challenge and the struggle are
found above all in the scientific aspects.
We will try to roll out the red carpet for everything else so that you
can do it with as much ease as possible within this very complex
environment in which we have to operate, and which, well, sometimes limits
everything we would like to do.
But well, what I also want is for it to have a favorable environment,
and I think these days are this particular day.
I think it's an excellent place for you to do that, so you can see, compare,
and receive information from people who have already done that work.
We were all there not too long ago, or maybe a little
longer, but it's etched in our memories.
Those stages in life, in life that truly leave their mark on you.
You don't mention when I was in high school, when I was in
college, when I did my thesis, enjoying it and finding in us
companions for everything you want to develop
and to help and accompany you in this development.
So none of that, just that this Congress, this day,
be productive and enriching for everyone.
And that's all, thank you and welcome to this day.
Let's begin then with the plenary presentation.
I am going to give a brief introduction of the
speaker, José María Martel Berrocal.
He is a prominent researcher in the field of mathematics.
He currently holds senior management responsibilities in the Spanish
scientific system.
As Vice President of Scientific and Technical Research at the
Spanish National Research Council, I assumed strategic
responsibilities related to the planning, coordination and
development of science policy, as well as promoting research careers in Spain.
With a PhD in Mathematical Sciences from the Autonomous University of Madrid,
he has developed a solid and recognized scientific career in the field of
harmonic
analysis, equations, partial differential equations and the geometric theory of
measure.
In 2005 he joined the CSIC as a Ramón y Cajal researcher, becoming part of
its staff as permanent personnel in 2008 and in 2013 he was distinguished
with a piano publishing console and is a research professor at the Institute
of Mathematical Sciences, where he has held the positions of vice-rector
and director and has also been director of the Center for
Theoretical and Mathematical Physics of the CSIC.
His profile combines extensive experience in cutting-edge research
with deep knowledge of the scientific system and career paths in the
field of and more, making him a particularly authoritative voice to
address the challenges and opportunities of the research career in the current
context.
Chema, we want to expressly thank you for agreeing to
participate in giving this plenary presentation.
First of all, let me begin by thanking you for the
invitation and thanking the Vice-Rector, Director
Mariluz, and Joaquín for the opportunity and their kind words.
It is certainly a pleasure to be able to
participate here today with you all in this.
In this opening conference of this
International Doctoral School in.
As I said in the presentation, I am a researcher, I am a mathematician who has
spent many years studying mathematics.
But it is true that in recent years I started a bit with the management aspect
by directing
the Institute of Mathematical Sciences on the campus of the Autonomous University
and
lately I dedicate myself more to management from the vice-presidency of
the CSIC and I have very little time left to do mathematics.
Virtually none, but I'll do math again.
I think she was saying it.
Joaquín said.
It is true that we researchers have this internal thing
that drives us, we are driven by science, we are driven
by curiosity, we are driven by knowledge and we all enjoy what we do.
I'm going to.
When I was thinking a bit about how to approach
this conference, I wanted two things.
One is, firstly, that it might serve a little as motivation for those of
you in the front rows, who already come from the world of research.
Nothing I'm about to say will surprise us.
But of course, there are many young people here, some of whom have been
working on their theses for a short time, others for a longer time.
And well, it's true that it's always good, or I've always
liked, to learn from others or to look at the science career from another point of
view.
So my idea is, in the first half, to talk a little about the
research career, and when we talk about the research career, we'll see.
We need to think about the research career, a bit about the big picture and
not so
much about the academic career, which is only one of the options.
Partly because of how we do science?
He does a little more thinking. And then 1/2.
Since I come from the CSIC and I have to talk a little about my book, I will
talk a little about the CSIC and the opportunities that the Higher Council
for Scientific Research presents in order to be able to pursue research careers.
I think we all have them today.
Of course science exists, science is transforming the world, artificial
intelligence is transforming everything, but especially science.
For example, you can have a mammogram and artificial intelligence
is being used to detect micro tumors that a human eye could no longer see.
Or one can think of the COVID vaccine, which was a
significant scientific breakthrough based on
accumulated knowledge, as we will see below.
One can think of the beloved or desired quantum computing,
which is being worked on, quantum communications, nuclear
fusion as an unlimited source, and see having genetic editing
that allows us to have a genetically modified organism that
has to do with the development of vaccines, even with making
agricultural products much more sustainable, much more resilient.
The energy transition, all the research being done on new sustainable
energy developments, the developments, the robots that are here in Spain,
you don't see many robots, but if you go to countries like China
and Japan, they are already interacting in many places.
Climate change or the climate emergency.
I really like to call it a long-term investigation by people who have
been researching and warning that this is coming, and materials
development, global health, space exploration.
In other words, I believe that science has always played a very important
role in history, changing the course of human history.
But in recent years we can see how science is transforming the world in a
radical way.
But there is not only a transformation from a technological point of view, in
terms
of the developments it makes, but it also transforms us as a society.
For example, we can now state that life
expectancy has increased by six years since 2000.
This is because there is science behind it, because we have increasingly better
hospitals, better medicines, better care that makes us better.
Vaccines prevent 5 million deaths a year.
Behind the development of vaccines and many years of research, from the first
vaccines
to those we have recently had, such as the COVID vaccine, we can talk about how
an
improvement in the quality of people's lives has been achieved.
We can also talk about communications.
Communications are moving at an astonishing speed.
Nowadays we all carry a mobile phone.
Sure, what are you guys doing now?
Writing my thesis.
When I started my thesis there was no telephone.
Well, I don't know if there were mobile phones back then, I didn't have a mobile
phone, I was already a bit older when that happened.
Nowadays we all carry a mobile phone, we communicate
instantly, we search instantly and we have information in real time.
Robots and drones are being developed that can assess from space by color.
Whether there are pests where fertilizers should be applied or not, we are talking
about precision agriculture, autonomous vehicles, and smart mobility that reduces
emissions.
Everything that is observed from space, that is, projects
like Copernicus that allow us to act, allow us to prevent crises
and allow us to see what is happening when there is, when there is a fire,
robotic surgery.
In other words, it's not just technological development,
but also how science changes us as a society.
But there is also another aspect that changes us as a person.
When a society is scientifically cultured, scientifically trained,
there is one very important thing which is critical thinking.
When you receive or read a news story or watch a TikTok video,
which is probably what you do, you have to use critical
thinking to see if what you're seeing reflects reality or
not, and this has a lot to do with the scientific knowledge behind societies.
To be more democratic, to be more egalitarian, we need
societies, we need societies that are formed.
Scientific culture helps us understand how science exists within
society, the association, the one we live in.
Problems are becoming increasingly complex, and only
through science can we solve them. This includes the problem
of misinformation—that is, behind TikTok and Instagram,
these videos that entertain us so much when we're
scrolling—there's a lot of contamination, a lot of
misinformation, deliberately created to change people's
behavior and create a scientifically educated, scientifically
literate society. This literacy, in the scientific sense,
fosters critical thinking, which makes us better people.
And a very important thing is that decisions must be made based on evidence,
and there is almost always scientific evidence to support decision-making.
When our politicians make a decision and a society has to be
confined because of the coronavirus or in the case of hantavirus, what should be
done?
And what is the protocol?
How long does a person have to incubate a disease?
It's because there is scientific evidence behind the
decisions, and scientists often work on recommendations for decision-making.
Politicians make the decisions, but it's very good to think about
and make science a part of those scientific decisions,
because that will make us better as a society.
And of course, if one wants to understand all this impact that science
has on people, on society, on technological developments, then it is
important to talk about what the cycle is, the cycle of science.
Science is born from curiosity, and curiosity has always
been born from it and will always advance from curiosity.
Of course, one cannot think of the mRNA vaccine as if someone came one morning
and said,
"I'm going to make a learn vaccine," or not; this comes from much earlier.
It doesn't come, for example, from thinking about what the...
In other words, thinking about the fundamental
elements we have in our lives, how a cell works?
What is the simplest element that describes how a cell works?
Genetic predisposition, DNA studies, RNA?
And one might think that's simply a curiosity about how it works?
In the case of quantum physics, one can think about how atoms work, how the
universe works.
These are questions of scientific curiosity, and fundamental
research comes from that scientific curiosity.
Sometimes it's called basic science.
There's no need to make a distinction. That is, science is science, and there is
good science and bad science.
But there is a fundamental research that seeks not so much the
solution, but to understand things, and that is fundamental.
In other words, if you're researching, you can't think about developing
a vaccine if you don't know what you're working with.
One cannot understand how an ecosystem system works if one does not know how it
is working.
No, he can't.
You can't think you have fiber optic communication and infrastructure
if you don't know what communications are and how light propagates;
that fundamental information is very important.
We live in a world, an increasingly practical world, in which we all seek
immediacy and often we don't.
We don't stop to think that behind that immediacy there has to
be an accumulated knowledge of history, which is what makes us, what makes us
advance.
Sure, these days we just tap our phones, open GPT Gemini for whatever,
and it automatically tells you what's available.
But of course, how much accumulated knowledge is behind it, and when that
fundamental
research is mature, when you start to see technological developments, there is
not a technological development, but fundamental research behind it.
And this is an important thing to keep in mind, because many times in the
world we live in we find ourselves in this predicament of whether one does
basic science or applied science; science is science, but it
does not always have to be based on previous knowledge.
There are technological developments, there are prototypes, there
are demonstrators; that is, science evolves and there
comes a point when science ends up impacting society.
Doesn't all science that begins with curiosity impact society?
For me, the best example is the photo of the black hole.
I don't know if you've seen it in newspapers.
At one point, a photo of a black hole was taken.
Several teams participated.
What's the point of this? None.
What is the purpose of a photo of a black hole?
Deep down it's useless, but it's very useful.
Because?
Because it helps us understand the universe, because it allows
us to advance as humans in knowledge, and because, believe it or
not, behind the picture of the black hole there is a lot of technology
that has been developed that is useful to us in our daily lives.
In other words, many of the advances, for example, GPS, first
come from developments related to space exploration.
So one might think that one should only do science, the kind that is useful and
has an impact; one shouldn't do science on everything, and there are things
that, even if they are useless, end up being useful, or there are things that
never leave fundamental research.
But as civilized people, as thinking beings, we have the
obligation to advance on the frontier of knowledge and it
always comes from a seed, it always comes from a curious question, from a question.
There may be times when it's serendipity, but all scientific and technological
advances always stem from the curiosity of a researcher.
Science is changing and today, as I was saying, the problems we have are
complex and when they are complex we have to give complex answers.
What we have, and what is clearly visible today, is that science has to be
multidisciplinary.
Challenges such as global health, because global health
requires everyone to work together, from chemists who design
or work on drug design, to people who do biomedicine, who see
how those drugs will act on people, to people in social sciences
who study the impact of a disease on our residence, or people
who study the spread of viruses or people who study how COVID
was transmitted through surfaces.
In other words, all of this involves putting different branches of science
together to work towards the same goal.
And if one talks about climate change, energy, food,
technology, science is multidisciplinary.
But that doesn't mean we all have to be multidisciplinary.
Some are lucky enough to be so; there aren't many highly capable people who
know everything and can do everything.
But generally, science today is highly specialized. It's not about knowing
chemistry, physics, mathematics, or some other artificial license.
What I need to do is specialize and surround myself with multidisciplinary
teams.
And this is how science works.
Science.
Today there are very important examples.
All.
For example, medical imaging devices.
Behind medical imaging there are mathematical problems, there are
physical problems with applications to the health field, and behind the
development of biology is an example of multidisciplinary science.
All biophysical microscopy processes.
How does that work?
Someone was telling me at a biology institute that when you get a cut,
because the cut closes and your ear doesn't grow back, well, this is a
study that requires knowing biology, but it also requires knowing
physics, data science and materials science; that is, all the developments
you can see there today require things that approach multidisciplinary.
But as I say, it must be emphasized that this does not mean that we have to be
multidisciplinary, but rather that we should surround ourselves with
multidisciplinary environments and that great challenges require great
collaborations.
And that is also the title of that conference.
Is it science or an international school?
Science today, we can also say, is a global science.
Of course, you guys now, going back a bit to those of us who are a few years
old, when I started my thesis there was hardly anything to search for
articles, they would send you the articles by email, you didn't
ask for an email address, a library or they would send it to you.
Today you want to find an item that is currently available.
It's much easier.
When I arrived there was already email, but I almost got the feeling.
But some of you may not have even had email and work was done many years ago.
Science was done by letter.
Look at how communications, immediacy, and what it does to us today...
So, even if you don't have to go that far, right?
But before and after the pandemic, there was a change
in the way we do science using videoconferencing.
Well, before, nobody even considered going to an online conference, and
nowadays we're surrounded by things you can connect to, what they're doing at
Harvard, MIT, or wherever.
So, nowadays science is global and also requires globality.
Because?
Because science is a collaboration of.
We're not going back to the same thing.
If one wants to move forward, one needs to have the best
experts, and perhaps the best expert in computational
biology is not here; he is in Valencia, or in Germany, or in China.
So I think that nowadays it is very important to think that science,
moreover, does not understand the boundaries of borders.
These are restrictions that we, as democratic societies, impose on them.
But science doesn't understand those boundaries.
And it is also very important to remember that science is not done in just one
house.
There are many environments in which one can do science; we have the
more academic environments, such as a university.
I come from the same research background, but science is also
done in hospitals and in public administration itself, which
uses science to make decisions, and science is done in startups.
In these companies that emerge from an innovative idea, science
is done in companies or also in international organizations.
The ecosystem is very varied, it is very diverse, and when we talk about
scientific careers we have to keep in mind that the ecosystem is very varied.
Now I'm going to talk a little bit about that, but no, one doesn't have to think
that the only scientific career is the traditional career, and it's very
important, a little bit.
Returning to the topic of making it visible, if we are thinking about
the impact that science often has on the lives of citizens,
then today research and innovation go hand in hand.
Many years ago, or not so many years ago, it seemed that the one who did
research and innovation was the only one who stood out. But nowadays,
everything is much more interconnected, and now research is not just
about publishing papers, which is important, but also about patenting,
protecting results, collaborating with companies, and providing advice.
There are many ways: spin-offs are created, patents are obtained,
applications
are made, and technology is transferred. It is very important to remember that
research and innovation is not just about investing, especially if it
is a small amount, but rather that it is all part of the same process.
Are there no lines where what is research up to this point becomes innovation?
Things have to go hand in hand to truly advance, and
scientific entrepreneurship is
fundamental in the advanced society we have.
Scientific entrepreneurship ranges from the discovery of
ideas to their transfer, protection of results, and creation.
Not all researchers have to end up creating a spin-off.
Again, we can't think that we're all going to be experts in five things: write
many very good papers, and create many very good companies.
Everyone has to find their own space and it ends up having a bit of an impact.
Today, and in many technologies such as technological advancement,
public-private collaboration is very important.
I believe that here, both from the university community and the research
organizations,
we are placing great importance on this public-private collaboration that also
helps us move forward.
One of the simplest examples is the topic of clinical trials.
A clinical trial is impossible for one person to undertake
alone; it is something that depends on public money.
Because a clinical trial of any medicine costs so much
money that a public system would be unable to do it.
It's an example of collaboration where you leave the lab,
end up working with mice, create models, and eventually conduct a clinical trial.
There is a lot of public-private collaboration and many of the
technological
developments we see come from collaboration with business.
Because?
Because the company is a consumer of innovation and science, right?
In other words, companies need to have good communications, companies need to
have secure communications.
For example, they used to bring up the topic of quantum computing,
when quantum computing is actually all the algorithms used to
encrypt our WhatsApp conversations, or when we pay with a credit
card. These computers could corrupt them because they could make
a comparison so fast that there's an algorithm that deals with
breaking down a very large number into the product of two primes,
which is impossible to do in real time today.
Well, this can be done.
Sure, you can say, well, they're going to steal my money.
But of course, if we think about a large company like Telefónica,
like Boeing, like Airbus or any of the large companies, if they
suddenly get into your system and obtain all the information you have, you have a
problem.
In fact, right now, as it is already known that this is a reality,
many, many times these hackers that you hear
about are dedicated to what are called Arabs.
In other words, you take all the encrypted information that you can
decrypt in the future, and I take your phone and make a copy of it.
It's useless to me now because you can't find it, but when tomorrow I haven't
given you the quantum encryption, I'll have your entire past.
This is a demand that companies and banks have; if they don't update their
cybersecurity systems, they're going to have a problem,
and so will we as a university and as a public body.
In other words, we protect our knowledge.
If we expose all our knowledge, what will happen to our patents?
Therefore, we must also consider that the company is a...
The company is a demanding technology company and also asks us
scientific questions that we have to answer.
But of course, science is all about this.
Very nice, but science is done by people, it's done by those of
us who are here now, some less, some more, you who are in your studies.
Doctorate.
Science is done by people, and in fact, the driving force of science is talent,
and this is undeniable.
And of course, that means we need curious people,
creative people, people with a passion
for discovery, a passion for work.
Science requires a lot of work.
We also need people who are in continuous training.
In other words, science moves so fast that after a while you
become outdated, so it has to be people who are constantly learning.
We also need solid and sustainable scientific careers.
Spain and Europe are currently experiencing, or have experienced, a
golden age in science, with very stable careers and public investment.
But those of us who are a bit older have seen critical moments for society.
With the 2008 crisis, many of our scientists left for other countries
because there were no opportunities here.
Sure, that's a loss of talent that makes you stagnate, that is, lose your driving
force.
If you don't have someone to turn the ignition key, you can't drive the car.
That's why it's so important to have stability in a scientific
career, and a scientific career needs to be somewhat
stable, as we need it to be part of the ecosystem.
As we said before, science is done in many places; it is done
here in universities, in research, in hospitals.
We need an ecosystem that also allows the flow of people, because
what is certain, and this is very clear in many places, is that it
is not the best thing in the world to think that one
I'm going to do my thesis here, King Juan Carlos, I'm going to do my postdoc, King
Juan Carlos has become King Juan Carlos.
Science works best when there is exchange and when there is a flow of people.
That's why we need an ecosystem, as the phrase below says; without talent and
without
a commitment to sustainable scientists, nothing. Transformative science.
And that's something we need to be clear about.
And you are the driving force behind the transformation of science, of the years,
of the years to come.
And that's what I was saying earlier.
The scientific career has changed a lot and is changing a lot.
I think that if you look at the classic model, already a bit black and white and
perhaps
a bit old-fashioned, the classic model was one, he was finishing his career.
I'm going to get good grades.
You did your thesis, you went on a postdoc.
It is true that at that time it was almost mandatory to leave Spain because
otherwise they
were not going to let you return and you would end up as a teacher, or at a
university, or at a research center.
And this was practically the career path for 90% of the people who
fell by the wayside, which is a business and many times it was seen
almost as a failure and I had to leave research to go work in a bank.
Today this is completely different, because a scientific career is much more
than an academic career.
There are careers in the academy and you have to pursue careers in the academy.
This is fundamental.
In other words, the professors who teach at
universities are scientists and have to be scientists.
Well, to give good classes, there have to be people who...
In other words, we cannot think that if there is no basic research being done in
research
centers, the university will be nothing, because a company is not
going to invest in basic research because it is not profitable.
So there has to be an academic career, but there are also careers of
researchers who finish their thesis and go to a great company.
We need to work to create researchers.
They end up in companies. Why?
Because that will make companies develop and innovate more because now we will
talk more.
Do you want to develop this capacity for innovation during your doctoral studies?
There are also careers dedicated to management.
I myself am now an example that I will leave management and return to doing
science.
But there are people who leave the scientific career and dedicate themselves
to
management, One of the leading funding agencies in Spain and the State Research
Agency, which is the one that finances our future research.
The agency's current director was a theoretical physicist.
I think he was saying things, I don't know if about strings or something like
that.
At one point in his life he left medical research for management and he tells me
so.
That was a decision in my life to dedicate myself to management, wasn't it?
In other words, there are alternative careers, there are careers
that are not essentially academic, that are necessary.
Some careers end up involving making political decisions.
In fact, more scientists or political decisions are needed because of how we
have our minds furnished.
Scientific consulting is a career in itself, outreach.
There are wonderful science communicators who come from science and whom you
will see many times on your social networks, careers that are geared towards
knowledge transfer.
The ecosystem is very diverse, and the research career is not its only one.
There are many paths, and we must remember that each person has to find
their own way.
This is already the case.
I'm going to talk a little more about the more scientific career, not the more
academic one.
In Europe, they have been reflecting for some time on how to
standardize and how to have a scientific career in Europe.
So that one can know where one is.
Because, of course, as we said before, science is global, so maybe someone is
doing their thesis here.
Then he goes on to do a postdoc in Germany and ends up with a permanent
position in Switzerland.
So it was often not easy to understand the different systems
of the more academic career, how they worked.
And there is a document that I invite you to look at that is in the faith.
The Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology, which
is called El País, where using the European model of.
It defines the research career in four main blocks: blocks R1, R2, R3, and R4.
From the early stages of research to leadership, research leadership.
And those are the phrases, that is, R1 six.
Most of those.
This is the predoctoral phase, the phase where you are doing
research training, learning to investigate, to develop, to
think critically, to acquire scientific skills, and this phase is fundamental.
In other words, there are no shortcuts here.
A few months ago, with one of the people, the CSIC has a
scientific advisory committee made up of researchers from
Spain and abroad and who are super smart people who don't
always give us much inspiration and talk to a person who.
Isabel Fariñas, a person who works in Valencia, is a wonderful neuroscientist.
He has won a National Prize and he told us how the brain works, he says.
When one thinks about the brain, I think it's a very important thing for science.
The brain works because of the stimuli you see and because of its
capacity for anticipation, like you have a... I'm not a neuroscientist,
but this is what I was told and it convinced me.
So, since one already has past experience, one knows that if one
presses the light button, the light turns on, right?
You know that if you turn the clock, it lights up and you can see the time.
You know, for example, when you turn on the car keys in the car, or when you turn
on the television, or when you play music, your ear expects to hear
something.
So it's another part of the stimuli, let's
say, and a kind of anticipation.
This happens to us many times when someone is speaking; we anticipate
what they are going to say, and that is what magicians use when they do
their tricks, because what they generate is distress or a zone where
you don't feel comfortable, because what you see with
your stimuli is not what your brain expects to see.
And that's why we're suddenly surprised.
What's wrong with us scientists? Scientists have taught us that the
brain has to work here because we've been taught that we work based
on evidence, and that takes a long time to acquire.
That's why it takes so long to write a thesis.
During the thesis and during scientific training, one is continually
learning that what one has to base oneself on is scientific evidence, on
data, on things.
In other words, in an experiment, you have to see what you're testing,
and that takes a lot of time. That's why it's often difficult
to fool scientists about certain things. Why?
Why is our brain so much more accustomed to looking
for these things that suddenly make us wonder, how
can what I'm seeing in a graph be saying?
Sometimes in political debates we see someone suddenly pull out
a graph with distorted scales, and anyone who has ever seen a graph
will say, "You say that on that graph it's growing,"
and then look at the graph and it's decreasing.
So we scientists are very used to working on scientific
principles, and I don't know if we are often aware of them.
And of course, as is often the case, it's also true that, like everything else,
maybe you have people at home who also work in science, but the way we
scientists work and think is different.
That's why he speaks a little before the one about the head.
That's phase one, although this doesn't end here, but the first
phase includes getting your brain used to working on evidence,
because science always has to look at the evidence.
All series work more or less the same.
Then there may be more things that are more or less applied, because in the
laboratory
it can be more theoretical thinking and that is the first phase one.
The second phase is when you have already done your thesis and you start a little
in the first predoctoral phase, you are emerging a little, you start to have your
own line, but you don't have it.
The third phase, the network, is when you are already established as a researcher.
I am a researcher, I have my own line of research, but maybe you don't have that
leadership.
You still depend on a group where you have a boss who is already starting to
become completely independent.
And the 4th phase is when it's scientific leadership.
And this, this is a bit of a review that has been done of how to
classify, and if we take it to the Spanish system, so that we
know what opportunities there are, or the figures that we know
in the more academic career, which correspond to R1, R2, RT,
R4, or it invites other forms that the document deserves, which
is much more complete about this. Well, we can think of R1 in
predoctoral training, from the FPU grants, from the FPI grants,
or now they are called PIB from the ministry, we have things
that are research introduction programs or doctoral programs,
regional contracts, industrial doctorates, training, the
path to the doctorate. R2, which are the first, let's say, 1/1
of the postdoctoral stage, not postdoctoral, junior
postdoctoralists, such as the Juan de la Cierva Program, the Marie Curie.
There are predoctoral contracts, that is, there we have 1/1.
Then he evolves into an established researcher.
In Spain we have the Ramón y Cajal program, which is an example of R3 or of
getting involved in many times getting involved in one.
It's not R2 and the beginning of R3. There are regional
talents in the Community of Madrid, for example.
There are talent programs in almost every community.
And then the more established part and leadership comes
when one is already permanent in universities, units.
In research centers where there is something missing.
For example, in universities there are contracted doctoral staff, university
degree holders, and professors.
At CSIC we have scientist, tenured professor, researcher, research
scientist.
Those are once you already have your permanent position; it's independent.
There are different stages, that is, not everyone has to be a professor.
There are people who stay, but let's say one is scientifically
independent and that's a bit like how the one who
appears in Europe with the Spanish system is transferred.
But as I said, that's the more academic part.
But we also have to consider that there are other careers that are also
fundamental to fixing science from a scientific management perspective,
since nowadays all universities have managers of people who are dedicated to
project management.
Project management is not just the administrative part of the justification
box, but
also people who are dedicated to finding projects, working on project evaluation,
accompanying them, and the mysteries of project management.
There are many.
In my team I have people who have chosen that path, that is, people who
have done their theses and after the thesis have decided I want to
dedicate myself to scientific management and it is a job, I assure you, very, very
rewarding.
My life is quite complicated and I don't have time to prepare such beautiful
talks,
so the person who helped me prepare this talk is someone who comes along, who has
that
path, that is, who helps me, who helps us prepare projects and who,
thinking together, helps us to decide what we can talk about?
At a conference in the Carlos region, we were thinking together, if it helps,
well, with those ideas, and there is a scientific management aspect that is
very important, all the technical work, that is, there are people who from the
beginning want to be a technician and dedicate their work to being a laboratory
technician, but there are other careers of personnel who say, look, I have
done my thesis, I have done my doctorate, but that thing of being all day asking
for projects and competing and doing papers is not for me.
I prefer to get my hands dirty in the lab.
Well, some people choose a technical career.
It's also a very interesting career.
Scientific advice, scientific advice is essential.
That's what I was saying.
The decisions these politicians make must be backed by scientific evidence, advice,
and support.
I'm telling you from experience.
At the CSIC, decisions such as whether cod, sardines or halibut
can be fished depend on scientific work behind them that tells you what the
stocks are.
This is fundamental and it not only has an impact on what we put in, but also
an impact on the territory, an impact on the sector, an impact on what many
families eat. Good advice can make the Spanish production system grow or
it can cause a certain area of ​​Spain to run out of resources because there
are no resources, it hasn't been done, the right decision isn't made.
There are also many people who go to work in large infrastructure projects.
In other words, I don't know if you know much about CERN, the place where they
found the Higgs boson.
In Europe there is a whole type of professional with amazing technological
developments, dissemination and scientific communication.
It is also an emerging career, which is already very advanced, and there are
people who are professionals, they are popularizers and they do a great job.
Because?
As I said before, it is essential that science permeates society and the whole
issue of scientific data management, because science produces millions of data
points.
And now this is also a professional opportunity.
And then it is also essential to consider that careers are no longer linear,
as we said before, only the academic one, that there is a lot of mobility between
sectors.
Mobility.
Sometimes it's a path with several paths.
There needs to be mobility of people going from academia, companies
going from academia, the administration going to that sector, and people going
back and forth.
And I think that's what makes us better. Why?
Because, once again, it's about creating an ecosystem.
In other words, we have to get used to the fact that, very importantly,
we're used to researchers, professors, and university staff who might
leave for a ministry for a few years, then come back, or go to a company,
or stay, or go somewhere else. NG, for example.
I believe it is fundamental because in the end the ecosystem is very varied
and in ecosystems, as you well know, there will be biologists here who know
much more.
More than I know about this.
I will keep the biology.
The ecosystem is not just what happens to an individual
species, but how species interact with each other.
And this is a fundamental part.
The doctorate has a certain value, as I mentioned before with the example of
neuroscience.
A doctorate has value in itself, in how our mind works.
When we do science, our mind works. We are taught to work in a way
that is possibly not the same as how it works in other fields.
In a doctoral program, it's encouraged; you have to solve problems.
A doctorate that doesn't solve the problem isn't a doctorate.
Critical thinking is fundamental because every scientist
starts with hypotheses and ends up with a thesis.
This is critical thinking.
You need to find the procedure.
There needs to be creativity, depth, innovation, and management of
uncertainty.
That is to say, of course, perhaps you, those who have been working on your
thesis for a while,
have encountered difficult moments where suddenly, something attacks you and you
get stuck.
And this is so, but it's part of it, it's part of what makes us good scientists.
If we all had the answers to the question of what the
purpose of science was, we would learn a lot, not just from success.
That's very nice.
Many times when we think about science we know and have found the COVID vaccine,
right?
But how many failures were known before?
Those failures have helped us achieve ultimate success.
Science also learns a lot from the failure aspect,
and the doctorate is not just about training
researchers who are people we ultimately transform.
Transforming the world, as we have said before, because science serves to impact
people.
In the end, our way of being, as people.
That was already said in the presentation.
A scientific career is a marathon, not a sprint.
Anyone who thinks this is a race, a sprint, I'll come in here for two years
and achieve something.
He has chosen, he has chosen the wrong path. Why?
Because it's a long race.
A scientific career is very long. Why?
Because deep down, one never stops being a scientist.
And no, it never stops constantly learning, constantly asking questions,
constantly solving problems.
It's a very long career, a very demanding career personally.
That is to say, the.
A scientific career requires many personal sacrifices, that is,
many hours of work, many hours of individual work, many hours in
the laboratory, and where there are no set workdays.
I believe that all of us who like the science of consciousness know that
science could occupy our 24 hours and we would be happy.
One also has to find time for other things, but it is a very demanding
job that involves mobility, as I said before, which nowadays,
one cannot conceive of being in one place, of being in one place.
One has mobility and maybe you have to go abroad for a year, or two
or three or nine years, or stay abroad and that's it.
Not all jobs require that mobility.
There are people who find work, although job mobility is much more common today,
but perhaps they find their job in Madrid.
You're going to Madrid for science.
Many of you here have probably been abroad because there weren't any
opportunities,
because it's part of a scientific career. There isn't much uncertainty;
there are different stages, there are tough times.
Science isn't all sunshine and rainbows; it has its tough moments, and there's
also continuous evaluation in science.
Now we're going to talk a little bit about science.
Because what we are doing is advancing the knowledge we are making, impacting.
Society has to value it, but also, of course, that's a bit like saying the
career isn't
getting bad, sure, but the scientific career, if I'm here it's because I like
it
and I think those of us who are here are here because we like it.
She's super creative.
A scientific career is an opportunity to grow personally and to grow
scientifically,
because even though we say that when you are doing your thesis, your supervisor
tells you or can guide you by the hand, telling you what you have to do.
But as you move forward in that one around, three or four, you are the one
who leads by the hand or the one you create.
A super creative career is very stimulating, very science, and also very
frustrating.
When things fail, it drives you crazy, but when you suddenly have a
breakthrough, or when you have your first paper, or when one day in your
lab, or in your theoretical self in my head, I suddenly saw the first thing I
solved, it's a whole new world.
This is also somewhat of a disadvantage, and it is very transformative.
We don't always see it, but scientists have a
very transformative way of thinking.
ES is not a sprint, it's a marathon and you have to keep that in mind.
That has to be taken into account, of course.
He mentioned very little, not the scientific career.
We are transforming, we are transforming
society, we are advancing in knowledge.
It requires the evaluation of this scientific excellence.
Today, the way we evaluate is changing a lot.
The pressure on the coalition is less, and if the San Francisco
Declaration is heard, we are leaving behind these
hyper-quantitative evaluations, where only
the H-index and cubes and so on were looked at.
To think that it's not just about saying, now it's not going to remove the lapse
and the Q1.
But we shouldn't just look at index one; we have to look at other things, we
have to look, we have to do peer reviews, we have to evaluate qualitatively,
we have to assess the transfer, we have to assess the leadership, we have to
assess the communication skills, the impact that what I mentioned
earlier about the advice has on these fishing vessels.
That doesn't get you a paper, but your advice has a
much greater impact on society than any fact.
Therefore, this also has to be taken into account in the scientific evaluation.
And of course, since the race is not easy, it is essential that we take care
of ourselves.
Since we all have the H for R seal, we know it.
In other words, we can't afford to fall by the wayside
because we haven't taken care of ourselves.
It is very important.
There is a lot of pressure, the science of expression, competitiveness, but you
have to find personal balance.
That's what I'm saying, the hours are endless, but you have to do it with
sanity and because you like it.
But we mustn't give up.
In other words, you shouldn't neglect your mental health because it's very
easy, it's very easy for someone to end up in a bad situation.
So it's very important.
We need brilliant people, but people who take care of us.
And then one thing that happens to us scientists too is that we have to adapt
to the world.
An example is artificial intelligence.
Some of us were caught older, and are still caught older and off guard,
because suddenly they will do everything we used to do.
Our lives can suddenly become intertwined with artificial intelligence, and
suddenly change shape.
Well, this is also a part of our brain's adaptation that we have to make, but it
opens up many challenges.
Artificial intelligence is not meant to eliminate creativity; it simply means
that
there are things we can accelerate, and we need to use artificial intelligence as
an accelerator.
There are no answers in the creation of knowledge.
For example, in Europe they have the RACE program, which is a kind of virtual
institute.
For example, we have our own Artificial Intelligence strategy, where
what we want to do is use artificial intelligence to accelerate knowledge.
In other words, there are many opportunities and new profiles
and new skills are being generated that we must not forget.
And you who are young and prone to youthful attacks, don't miss the train
because it goes so fast that you've missed four stops and you don't even
realize it.
So it's important that we all want digital skills, artificial
intelligence, because it's part of knowledge creation.
That was a bit motivational.
I'm doing a bit badly because I like to ramble, of course, but this is all very
nice, all
very theoretical and now I want to bring it down to earth, I want to bring it down
to earth,
bring it a little closer to my own ground, talk a little about my book.
What do we at the CSIC do to contribute to these scientific careers?
What is the CSIC?
Let's briefly explain what the CSIC is and how we contribute to scientific
careers.
Yes, well, the CSIC is something that the Ministry talks about, which
is the sector, the Spanish system of science, technology and innovation,
and the CSIC is the fundamental pillar of the Spanish system.
What do we do?
We do a bit of what we've said before: research, innovation, transfer,
advice, we look for talent, we do outreach, we seek internationalization.
In other words, like any institution where we do science, the CSIC has to be
this.
That is indeed the largest research organization in Spain, the third largest
in Europe and in the sector worldwide.
That's why I say it's the fundamental pillar.
We have a whole ecosystem of science that makes us very powerful.
We are, for example, members of the European Scientific G6 group.
These are them.
Do you know that in the economic context they talk about the G7, the G8?
There is a G6 of science in Europe that is made up of these centers which
are our equivalents in the International Congress.
Three Germans, the law and the most Planck is in
France, the CNI in Italy and the CSIC in us.
In other words, this is a group like the G7 and G8 groups, a
pressure group where European science is the DA
(Democratic Action) for these organizations.
The CSIC has a very large territorial impact.
Because?
Because we have research centers throughout the territory.
We have centers in all autonomous communities, 121 research centers and
three national centers.
And as you can see there on the map, it is true that in Madrid we have the
majority,
then Catalonia or Andalusia, but we have a center in all the autonomous
communities.
We have a studio, an institute in Rome specializing in delicate
archaeology, a headquarters in Brussels, and a base in Antarctica.
So when I say we're all over the world, it's because...
Because we are.
Those are the numbers for 2024, which is the latest report we have published.
We are already 17,400 people and I think that by the end of the year we will be
able to talk about around 20,000.
Yes, it is in full growth and we currently have almost
7000 researchers, plus the technicians
and the larger technical support staff.
And then notice that since you have about 1800, now there will be 2100.
You will investigate training and management personnel.
There you can see some of our figures showing what the CSIC budget funding is.
It's 1,200,000,000.
Right now I think it will be around 1400.
We have a good number of international projects; we do about 15 per year.
We are such a large institution that we produce, we produce a
lot, and one thing that makes us unique is that we have large
scientific infrastructures, from a base in Antarctica
that we manage, but which is open to science.
In other words, there is a polar program through research projects where one can
find time for Antarctica.
We have scenic ships, a 1500 square meter clean
room in Barcelona, ​​and ocean observation telescopes.
We have a series of high-altitude climbers, for example in Almería.
In other words, we have a series of large infrastructures that are not just for
ourselves; these infrastructures are open to the scientific community.
We have a structural role there.
At CSIC we are organized scientifically, we have practically all
scientific disciplines, we classify ourselves into three areas that
we call global, the area of ​​matter, which is the area that includes
chemistry, materials and then physics, mathematics, robotics and computing.
The society area, which as you can see is the smallest area.
Humanities and social sciences and our largest area is the area
of ​​life sciences and life sciences, from biology and biomedicine,
earth, environment, food science and all the agricultural part,
which is a bit what the CSIC came from, a lot of the agri-food part.
Here you can see the number of institutes.
The Life area is the largest, we have 64 and of life 42 in matter
and 15 in society, which is the smallest area.
And at the CSIC we have been looking at this aspect of multidisciplinarity,
which I mentioned earlier as interdisciplinarity, for some time now,
and it is so important.
How can we make our science more holistic?
I have said before that today science requires synergistic teams of teams from
different areas.
What's happening to the CSIC?
Perhaps we have institutes dedicated to materials science.
Three in Madrid, one in Seville, one in Catalonia, and one in the Basque Country?
Of course, that's why silos are often created.
One is doing his experiment, the other is doing the same, but in the past
that often didn't generate enough interaction between them.
So, what did we do?
We create interdisciplinary thematic platforms that aim to put
multidisciplinary teams together to solve common challenges, big
challenges, with a large scientific, social, and economic impact.
For example, with global health.
Health is a huge challenge. What? What?
CSIC researchers work on global health.
We put them to work together to generate projects, to generate ideas.
We have things like transformation, energy transition, food
allergies, quantum technologies, heritage sciences, and what
I always think we have to remember is that here we have people who do
research from their institutes, but who collectively tackle these problems, which
are complex.
We also have our own internal networks, what we call connections, the others on
the platforms.
These are connections, internal research networks, not so much about
thinking about solving a problem, but about generating within the
institution itself dynamics of collaboration in archaeology, in cancer,
in genomics, in nanomedicine.
In other words, all of this is to try to overcome that thing we have
going for us, which is that we are in the territory, but that often
leads to a lack of collaboration, and we also do a lot of consulting.
For example, a unit was launched some time ago that supports the National
Office of Scientific Advice at UNAM.
We have our own series called Science for Public Policy.
It's all open, that is, you can take the one about plastics, because what we see
is that research is
being done on plastics and pollution, which is being done by the CSIC (Spanish
National Research Council).
And?
And what recommendations are there for those who make
political decisions so they can use science again as evidence?
We have things related to light pollution that one might say is good, but it's a
problem, because, for example, the observation of space depends
on light pollution, and that's where we have our policy series.
We also have a significant social impact; we do a lot of transfer.
Here are some figures showing how many assets
are protected, 40 and 41 million. In terms of
contracted financing, we create about ten companies a year.
We have good numbers and we have our own startups, our own companies.
Well, since March, for example, it's been a skeleton.
I think I missed it on El Hormiguero and I don't want to skip
the advice we're giving on emergencies.
That's a new approach.
We've been through the DANA storm, we've been through the Grazalema floods, now
we're dealing
with the hantavirus, since the CSIC always tries to collaborate with the
administrations.
Well, from a COVID test and vaccine that we gave to the World
Health Organization, the framework, the masks, we created
some masks in an institute in Valencia that were used.
We have our own entrepreneurship transfer ecosystem that also
makes us powerful, and this would be almost the same.
Finally, how can one join the CSIC at the different stages?
What are the programs?
There are those I mentioned before, as I said before, because
from the external opportunities to join CSIC, CSIC has, has,
has FPU from the Ministry, it also has FPI or PIB projects.
For example, in the Ramón y Cajal contract we are welcoming some.
We arrived a few years ago, we reached 130, 140, we are welcoming 100
Ramón y Cajal researchers a year at the CSIC and we also welcome
them with an extra funding package to come with us.
We have the JAE, which is the Board of Studies, which is the origin of the
CSIC, programs to attract people who are doing a master's degree or who are
in the final years of their undergraduate studies so that they come to start
research.
Also everything related to RCS.
We have a job bank system that allows us to hire people under CSIC projects.
We are constantly launching contracts and continuously
collaborating with this generation of talent.
The seal I mentioned earlier is that any scientific organization today has to have
that.
This is something that is not mandatory.
We have mobility programs for our students, for example, you already
know that some of your scholarships or contracts have mobility incorporated when
they do not have it.
We give money so they can have a stay abroad.
We have Max's packages for talent attraction.
At Ramón y Cajal, we have a Momentum program that has
attracted 187 researchers, from pre-docs to
postdocs, who acquire advanced digital skills,
mentoring programs, and professional development.
Our Alumni Network, our program is about our Camino Decir program. We do
everything.
Many of the things you'll see at this university, we do here.
At CSIC we are placing great importance on the learning aspect.
We are not a center, we are a research implementing agency, but we are not a
university center.
However, we collaborate with the Menéndez Pelayo International University, we have
our
own master's degrees, for example, the Master in Quantum Technologies, a
university master's degree with seven other universities.
We have a learning portal with a lot of open content.
You learn.
Period. I'm inviting you.
We have placed a great deal of emphasis on training in artificial
intelligence, and much of the content is open source, which we simply compile from
others.
We have podcasts, we have a micro-credentials program that we've
launched,
we have partnerships with everyone, with Google, with Spanish Radio
and Television, with Web services for everything.
And here we've included a lot of training in artificial intelligence for our
researchers and for everyone.
For all staff.
And to finish, in two minutes we'll be back to the same thing:
a scientific career is a journey, a long journey, a varied
journey, and a journey where the ecosystem and where there are many paths,
many options.
It goes without saying that the scientific career changes over time; it's
not good to think that everyone has to start in academia, ending up in academia
is not that, it's not the end.
What we need to do here is to produce the best professionals,
and this is the mission of all doctoral schools.
We have, we do, we defend about 900 theses a year and
what we want is to train talent and what is talent.
We export and import, and the ecosystem has to be so complex and so
rich that it generates students who go to universities, who go to
other research centers, who go abroad, some of whom can return to
the system, others who stay, because the idea is that there is an
ecosystem where not everyone has to stay in the place where they started.
For science to be good.
There are paths in academia, there are paths in business, paths
in management, knowledge transfer, innovation and social impact.
Science is done.
As a highly theoretical scientist, I'm a scientist of what I call "useless"
science, but we must always remember that science should be about improving
people's lives, and the impact that science ultimately achieves is very
important, always respecting what I said before: that there are
people who do fundamental research and people who make an impact.
I think that's what's important.
Each scientific path is different, but all contribute to collective progress.
Let me finish by saying that for those of us who are a bit older, this is something
we
really like, at least I like it a lot, which was Forges' cartoons.
A little like what? How?
The scientific career has to be diverse for everyone.
We belong to our fathers, to our mothers.
We all have our past.
Some of us come from Spain, others from abroad, some from big
cities, some from small towns, and we are all diverse.
And scientific quality is as varied as each
and every one of us. And each individual step
contributes to something much larger,
which is how society advances by using science.
We need everything, we need diverse talent
for our future, because we have a lot of very
complex challenges that we face.
From the moment you turn on the radio in the morning, you can see that the
challenges are extremely complex, and it is through science that we, as a
society and as humanity as a whole, will be able to move forward.
Thank you so much.
To do well, there are many options.
I mean, I think that when you're halfway through finishing your thesis, you have
to start thinking.
You already know that in the postdoctoral market one can directly search for
postdocs.
There are many abroad, I don't know which one it is, what
your area of ​​work is so you won't have a problem there.
There's a big market, but look, there are many opportunities that you have to
actively seek out.
There are many universities, many centers abroad
that directly offer postdoctoral positions.
There are even projects that have an ERC at
any foreign center that will offer it.
Are there also opportunities in Spain?
It's a bit like what I was saying when you don't finish your thesis, the
Juan de la Cierva program is the same for when you finish your thesis.
Furthermore, they involve a certain degree of mobility, from seeking
financing in Spain to moving around within Spain or seeking
financing abroad and then returning in the end.
There is one, which we see a lot, because we will ultimately be a movement of
people.
There are many, many options, but what one has to
do is become scientifically very competitive.
So we have to try to go.
Perhaps the key is to do the best research, because if you want to return
or if you're left
out, the better the scientific research, the more options you'll have.
Then the flows.
And I, for example, at one time I was there, I did my whole career at the
Autonomous
University of Madrid, I went to the United States, I returned to the
Autonomous
University, then I got a Ramón y Cajal award after returning to, for example.
This is a very natural path, isn't it?
People who go abroad become super powerful.
Then he gets a Ramón y Cajal, the Ramón y Cajal is the contract for joining the
sector.
It is a five-year contract in which there is a commitment from the
institutions to create a permanent position for that person, and we,
for example, right now have selection processes for the incorporation
of scientists, there should be about 400 tenured scientists, which is like a
university fact.
Next year we expect to have 200 of us; we are constantly advertising positions.
Many of these positions are intended to stabilize those.
Ramón y Cajal.
We, our commitment to the Ramón y Cajal program, Vamos, are the first to have
priority.
We make a commitment.
Then we are a public body, so we can't just say you stay, there has to be a
competition,
but like in the competition, and we put forward profiles to keep our Ramón y
Cajal,
so the good thing is to go abroad and there are many dreams of going abroad, to
make a very solid career.
And then there are reintegration programs ranging from postdoctoral contract
offers to regional programs like having to go to the Community of Madrid.
In almost every community there are even Ramón y Cajal programs.
And once you're back in the system, you end up either employed here
or as a university professor or tenured scientist.
But there are plenty of opportunities.
What you need to do is, above all, focus on getting the best possible
training and always try to aim for the best possible place, because
the contacts you make during your postdoc will be the contacts
and networks you have for the future.
I, for example, started doing mathematics here in Spain, in one area
of ​​knowledge. I went on a postdoc, where I learned other things,
and I'm practically doing the things I learned on the job. A lot of
evolution has to do with where you are, and maybe I'm here because of
everything, not just what I did at the Autonomous
University, but also what I did abroad. My joining the CSIC.
Hello, good morning, thank you for the presentation, very interesting.
I wanted to ask a question regarding, for example, the very well structured process
of gathering R2 from R3.
R4 I wanted to ask when that process might not be
in that order, and that's the case I'm in.
When you sometimes go on a PhD, you do the PhD a little later because you have
already started in previous research in some way, because of your research
master's degree, because you work on interesting projects and you come from
the private sector and you get into it.
How is this reflected in university research?
When it is done and when it is finally finished.
And then what future does it have in terms of opportunities, scholarships, and
collaborations?
For example, when you want to apply for an FPI or an FPU grant, you
can't because of your academic record; you can't because you've
been out of university for many years and it's done differently, which has been my
case.
But there is an academic or research record.
What would you recommend as a process to follow when starting a PhD?
Well, no, maybe in that direct way, with a degree, master's, doctorate, the
trajectory changes a bit.
What I was saying is that careers are so varied and so rich that I'm not clear on
many paths.
One can be FPI, one can have been in the company again, but the FPI does
not require you to have had another predoctoral program.
So there are opportunities.
Is it true that in the end this is all a competitive process and maybe in
terms of evaluations it's not always the same, and I think that's what's
changing a lot, because there are those of us who have been around for a
few years, we're more used to the processes, academic standards, degree,
master's or are there no longer degrees, bachelor's, master's, doctorate
and often these profiles of people who come and go, right?
Sometimes, with our own biases, when we evaluate, we don't see them as
such; we say that maybe they've been out for a reason, but I think that's changing
a lot.
I think that right now it is highly valued and there are many people who have
left, companies have
returned, and people who have done their thesis, gone to companies and then
talked about the world of research and the opportunities are the same.
All you need is a solid track record.
What's important is a solid track record and what you can offer.
But it is happening.
I do see people who come and go both years, they come back and I don't see a
problem.
Perhaps it's not true that it's so simple, because when you step outside the
usual circuit, you don't always have this kind of varied career. Also, but
part of my presentation was about that, that the system is changing
in such a way that this is becoming more and more natural.
A few years ago it was unthinkable.
I think that practically everyone who did a thesis had finished their degree the
previous
year and now doesn't; now there are many, many people who are going to do it,
people, for
example, who do their thesis, go to a high school and then return to a
university.
These things are already happening and are becoming more and more normal.
Now
He also spoke about the public system.
We also have some private universities quite close by.
Right now, by the law itself they are going to need doctors, they are going
to remove doctors, which means he has an added doctorate.
And this is a reality.
Because?
Because the law requires it, and he also had a doctorate number.
Why is it not true that in Spain we are not yet
so used to having public universities?
There are universities that do very good research, for example in Navarra, but in
the
United States, where there are many public and private universities and many
of the
best private universities, that's where very good research is done.
That too.
And then there is also the exclusively teaching path.
I believe it is true that if you are not a researcher you always have to be
researched, but there are
people who dedicate themselves to teaching and I think that is also a
possibility.
I mean, I don't think things are changing and maybe we're not
seeing that change yet, but the whole evaluation process is changing.
They are giving more value to many of those things than in the past.
It is true that the grade in the file still matters and will continue to
matter, because
it is also a filter and because you have many applications that you have to
evaluate in a very short time.
So there are things like this, but I think that profiles are becoming more
and more enriched and these kinds of things are being valued more
and more, because the company is also opening its mind.
There's a lot.