Next week I will be hosting Ryan from AnswerThis who will show you how you can best use this tool to ethically use AI in your research. I’ll be sharing more later this week as we’re still discussing the content. Will you be there?

Good news this week - I have just been invited to join the GPTZero ambassador programme and will be running a professional development session on ethical use of AI. Would you be interested in attending? P.S. GPTZero is one of the tools that we use to identify if text was created by AI or human - it's pretty advanced to the extent it can track which elements of the document were pasted and which were written.

Hi @Dawid Hanak and everyone in the community, I’m applying for an academic fellowship. I’d be grateful for feedback on my letter of application (kind of cover letter), especially from people outside my field (physics), since the panel is interdisciplinary. What the fellowship assesses in the letter (3 criteria): 1. Preparedness/track record relative to career stage. 2. Quality, significance, originality of the proposed research + alignment with the fellowship's bequest 3. Why Durham: how persuasive the case is that Durham’s environment (facilities/expertise/groups) is right for the project and aligns with department strategy. What the cover letter must include: - A brief outline of the research in simple, non-technical language (≤200 words). - A statement explaining how the research satisfies the Addison Wheeler bequest: ‘to encourage efforts for increased knowledge of people and their make-up so as to enable them to make better use of their life here on Earth’ - An explanation of why I’m a suitable candidate for the fellowship. What I’d love feedback on: - Is the ≤200-word non-technical project outline understandable to a non-specialist? - Does the letter make a convincing “why me” case quickly? - Does the “why Durham” paragraph sound specific and persuasive (not generic)? - Any sentences that feel unclear, too technical, or repetitive? Thank you.

I'll be sharing details of the next training later this week. Based on your inputs, it'll focus on how to make sure your work is novel & original and, thus, easy to publish. To make it relevant, let me know what do you struggle with in this regards. I'll make sure to cover it in the training.

Thanks again to everyone who joined the live Research Signature Story session — brilliant questions and examples from the group. Do this now: 1. Download the Quick Start Workbook The Research Signature Story – Quick Start Workbook gives you: - The 5 core principles in one place - The 4-part framework (Audience – Theme – Spark – Proof point) - Templates for your 30-second and 150-word versions - A 14-day plan so this doesn’t stay “nice theory” Download it below! Use it while you watch the replay and you’ll have a first usable draft by the end. 2. Share your 30-second story for feedback Once you’ve done a first draft, post it in the community: - Start your post with: “My 30-second story – Draft 1” - Paste your 2–4 sentences - Add one line on who you’re targeting (academics / industry / policymakers / public) I’ll scan these over the week and jump in with specific, practical feedback. Want to go deeper? Join the Premium tier If this training and workbook help you get clarity, Premium is where we keep building on this every month. Premium members get: - Webinar vault – access to all past trainings and replays - Workbooks and templates – including paper writing, visibility, and collaboration tools - Paper Writing Workshop + Masterclass – practical guidance on writing papers journals actually want - Ongoing sessions on publishing, LinkedIn, and industry collaborations Pricing is intentionally kept affordable: - Monthly: $9/month (cancel anytime) - Annual: $5/month (billed $60/year, save 44%) If you’re serious about turning your research into publications, visibility, and opportunities, Premium gives you the structure, tools, and support to do it. 👉 Check out the Premium options here:https://www.skool.com/research-career-club-8446/plans