The Background

Most of you are probably aware of the GRE or Graduate Record Examination. Those applying for graduate programs are required to report scores from this standardized test. The GRE, along with the resume/curriculum vitae illustrating depth and breadth of experience, GPA, letters of recommendation, and an essay are evaluated for acceptance into many graduate programs. Although the weight given to the applicant’s GRE varies among institutions, many schools and departments require the GRE and set minimum scores for application/acceptance. Typically top institutions and programs institute a high minimum GRE score to reduce the number of applicants and to ensure highly accomplished applicant pools. However, to what extent does the GRE predict success in graduate school? Does the GRE accurately measure an applicant’s ability to synthesize and apply knowledge, acquire and assimilate new information, or familiarity with mathematics, vocabulary, biology, history, chemistry, etc.?

Criticisms of the GRE

Critics of the GRE, myself included, feel that the GRE does not evaluate any of these but simply provides a metric for how well a person can master GRE test-taking procedures.  ETS, the nonprofit that administers the test, states “the tests are intended to measure a portion of the individual characteristics that are important for graduate study: reasoning skills, critical thinking, and the ability to communicate effectively in writing in the General Test, and discipline-specific content knowledge through the Subject Test” However, the Princeton Review guide states, “ETS has long claimed that one can not be coached to do better on its tests. If the GRE were indeed a test of intelligence, then that would be true. But the GRE is NOT [emphasis original] a measure of intelligence; it’s a test of how well you handle standardized tests.” Indeed, training for the test, either in a GRE course or with a book, involves more learning test-taking strategies rather than a focus on acquirement or application of specific knowledge, i.e. “cracking the system”. Before the days of computerized exams, more math questions were included on the test than the average mathematically literate undergraduate could solve in the designated time period. To prep for the math section of the GRE, I and others learned not geometry or algebra, or even logic, but rather methods, i.e. cheats or tricks, to quickly move through the question. Of course, these tricks provide little help when math is encountered in either academia or the real world.

Who evaluates and writes the questions on the GRE? The Princeton Review states “You might be surprised to learn that the GRE isn’t written by distinguished professors, renowned scholars, or graduate school admissions officers. For the most part, it’s written by ordinary ETS employees, sometimes with freelance help from local graduate students.” Unfortunately, I am not able to retrieve information about question writers online either from ETS or other sources, so there is little I can comment on. However, the lack of transparency and accessible information should give all of us pause.

I am from the old guard and took my GRE with a No. 2 pencil with which I spent hours incessantly filling little circles. Modern tests are computerized and use a computer-adaptive methodology. Simply, the difficulty of questions is automatically adjusted as the test taker correctly or incorrectly answers questions. A complicated formula is used based on the level of questions and how many you answered correctly to determine your “real GRE score”. There is a substantial criticism of the computer-adaptive methodology. One, if a test taker suddenly encounters an easy question mid-exam, they may deduce they have not been performing well thereby affecting their performance through the rest of the exam. Test takers may also be discouraged if relatively difficult questions are presented earlier on. Second, unequal weighting is given to questions, with earlier questions receiving more and setting precedent for later questions, biasing against test takers who become more comfortable as the test continues. ETS is aware of these issues. In 2006, they announced plans to radically redesign the test structure but later announced, “Plans for launching an entirely new test all at once were dropped, and ETS decided to introduce new question types and improvements gradually over time.”

The GRE, a financial burden for students.

The GRE is expensive to take, $160 per test for U.S citizens.  Most students will take it at least twice to try to get their score higher.  This encouraged by both academia and ETS.  If you buy GRE prep books, which is also encouraged, you could easily be out another $100.    At the minimum,  a student is putting out $420.

It is often encouraged that the prospective graduate student also takes a GRE prep course.  I will use Kaplan as an example, but there are others.

• In person course $1,299 or in person plus $1,699 (link)
• Life online $999 or live online plus $1,399 (link)
• Tutor $2,499 (link)

By the time you count in missed work hours for test taking and preparation, transportation to the test (mine was 1-hour from my college), and various other expenses, a student could easily be out a significant amount of money.   It is also an additional $27 to have your own GRE test scores sent to more than the 4 “free” schools that come with the test.

So is the GRE finding us the best students or simply the richest?

Educational Testing Services: a multinational operation, complete with for-profit subsidiaries

So who is ETS? They are a nonprofit 501(c)(3) created in 1947, located in Princeton, New Jersey. In an article from Business Week…

”Mention the Educational Testing Service, and most people think of the SAT, the Scholastic Aptitude Test that millions of high schoolers sweat over each year in hopes of lofty scores to help ease their way into colleges. But if ETS President Kurt M. Landgraf has his way, Americans will encounter the testing giant’s exams throughout grade school and right through their professional careers. Landgraf, a former DuPont executive brought to the organization in 2000 to give ETS a dose of business-world smarts, has a grand vision for the cerebral Princeton (N.J.) nonprofit. Worried that the backlash against college testing means a lackluster future for the SAT and other higher-ed ETS exams, Landgraf has been trying to diversify into two growth markets: tests and curriculum development for grade schools, where the federal No Child Left Behind Act has spurred national demand for testing, and the corporate market, where Landgraf sees potential growth in testing for managerial skills. By 2008, he hopes expansion in these two areas will more than double ETS’s $900 million anticipated 2004 revenue. “My job is to diversify ETS so we are no longer reliant on one or two major tests,” he says.

Does this sound like language applied to a nonprofit? From the New York Times…

It has quietly grown into a multinational operation, complete with for-profit subsidiaries, a reserve fund of $91 million, and revenue last year of $411 million… Its lush 360-acre property is dotted with low, tasteful brick buildings, tennis courts, a swimming pool, a private hotel and an impressive home where its president lives rent free… E.T.S. has come under fire not only for its failure to address increased incidents of cheating and fraud, but also for what its critics say is its transformation into a highly competitive business operation that is as much multinational monopoly as nonprofit institution, one capable of charging hefty fees, laying off workers and using sharp elbows in competing against rivals… ”E.T.S. is standing on the cusp of deciding whether it is an education institution or a commercial institution,” said Winton H. Manning, a former E.T.S. senior vice president who retired two years ago. ”I’m disappointed in the direction they have taken away from education and public service.”

In response to growing criticism of its monopoly, New York state passed the Educational Testing Act, a disclosure law which required ETS to make available certain test questions and graded answer sheets to students.

For all practical purposes, ETS has grown into a for-profit institution trading on its nonprofit status to create a monopoly (read the New York Times and Business Week articles for more alarming revelations). For example,

• As of the Spring of 2018, 24,141 graduate students were enrolled as graduate students in Louisana.
• Let’s assume that the applicant pool into Louisiana graduate programs was 2:1 (they are probably considerably more competitive), so 48,282 applicants took the GRE.
• At $160 per test (its actually $190 for non-US students), that generates $7,725,120 for just the current body of graduate students.
• If we assume the near 50,000 applicants represent the cumulative applicants over a typical 5 years Ph.D. program, i.e. represent multiple cohorts, then ETS generates conservatively $1,545,024 per year from Louisiana alone.

In 2016, ETS brought in $1,609,201,000 dollars in revenue.  You read that right. One. Point. Six. BILLION. Dollars.   Most of that revenue, over 97% comes directly from testing.    You can find the complete financials from 2016 backward at ProPublica.  ETS also markets through one of their subsidiaries, and for-profit, a test book at $33.89 (at Amazon). “We prepare the tests-let us help prepare you!”  It is unclear the total revenues these subsidiaries bring in.

The GRE does not predict success in graduate school

But what of the original question? To what extent does the GRE predict success in graduate school? A meta-analysis in 2001 by Kuncel et al. demonstrated that correlations between GRE scores and multiple metrics of graduate performance were low. Correlation with graduate GPA ranged from 0.34-0.36. With performance as evaluated by departmental faculty the correlation ranged from 0.35-0.42, time of degree completion ranged from -0.08-0.28, citation count ranged from 0.17-0.24, and degree attainment from 0.11 to 0.20. While encouraging these correlations are positive (in most cases) and even accounting that GRE is supposed to be evaluated in the context of other materials (but often are not), these correlations are not that impressive. Do we need the GRE scores to evaluate applicants? Interesting, the same study also demonstrated that undergraduate GPA performed equally well as the GRE.

Even [ETS], warns that there’s only a tenuous connection between test scores and success in graduate school. According to the ETS report, “Toward a Description of Successful Graduate Students,” “The limitations of graduate school admissions tests in the face of the complexity of the graduate education process have long been recognized.” The report acknowledges that critical skills associated with scholarly and professional competence aren’t measured by the GRE… Perhaps more alarmingly, as with the SAT, high GRE test scores time and again tend to correlate with a student’s socioeconomic status, race, and gender. Research dating back decades from the University of Florida, Stanford, New York University, the University of Missouri, and  ETS has shown that the GRE underpredicts the success of minority students…ETS studies have also concluded the GRE particularly underpredicts for women over 25, who represent more than half of female test-takers.  [link]

Death to the GRE

In recap, the GRE is a financial burden to students, poorly predicts graduate student success, and has biases associated with socioeconomic status, race, and gender with profits going to a $1 billion revenue “nonprofit” company.  It is abundantly clear, we need to rid academia of the GRE.  Thankfully, I am not the only one to believe this.  Two physics professors in op-ed in Nature (open-access) called for the same.

This is a call to acknowledge that the typical weight given to GRE scores in admissions is disproportionate. If we diminish reliance on GRE and instead augment current admissions practices with proven markers of achievement, such as grit and diligence, we will make our PhD programmes more inclusive and will more efficiently identify applicants with potential for long-term success as researchers.

As well as the President of the American Astronomical Society,

 It’s a matter of great concern to all of us: failing to draw from the full pool of talent weakens our profession. It’s vitally important to train leaders who will help our profession achieve true equity and inclusion, and thus the strongest possible astronomical community.

In a bold move shortly after, the American Astronomical Society adopted a policy to encourage departments to make the GRE optional or to stop using it.  What has followed is a wave of schools and departments dropping GREs (link, link).  Joshua Hall, Director of Admissions at UNC (on Twitter @jdhallphd) maintains a list of all biology and biomedical programs who have dropped GREs from the applicant process.  

Your next step? If your department, school, and university still use the GRE, it is time to call the faculty together and kill the GRE.

UPDATE 1: Follow the #grexit hashtag on Twitter

The post Let’s Kill the GRE first appeared on Deep Sea News.

Critics of the GRE, myself included, feel that the GRE does not evaluate any of these but simply provides a metric for how well a person can master GRE test taking procedures. ETS, the nonprofit that administers the test, states “the tests are intended to measure a portion of the individual characteristics that are important for graduate study: reasoning skills, critical thinking, and the ability to communicate effectively in writing in the General Test, and discipline-specific content knowledge through the Subject Test” However, the Princeton Review guide states, “ETS has long claimed that one cannont be coached to do better on its tests. If the GRE were indeed a test of intelligence, then that would be true. But the GRE is NOT [emphasis original] a measure of intelligence; it’s a test of how well you handle standardized tests.” Indeed, training for the test, either in a GRE course or with a book, involves more learning test taking strategies rather than a focus on acquirement or application of specific knowledge, i.e. “cracking the system”. Before the days of computerized exams, more math questions were included on the test than the average mathematically literate undergraduate could solve in the designated time period. To prep for the math section of the GRE, I, and others, learned not geometry or algebra, or even logic, but rather methods, i.e. cheats or tricks, to quickly move through the question. Of course, these tricks provide little help when math is encountered in either academia or the real world.

Who evaluates and writes the questions on the GRE? The Princeton Review states “You might be surprised to learn that the GRE isn’t written by distinguished professors, renowned scholars, or graduate school admissions officers. For the most part, it’s written by ordinary ETS employees, sometimes with freelance help from local graduate students.” Unfortunately, I am not able to retrieve information about question writers online either from ETS or other sources, so there is little I can comment on. However, the lack of transparency and accessible information should give all of us pause.

I am from the old guard and took my GRE with a No. 2 pencil with which I spent hours incessantly filling little circles. Modern tests are computerized and use a computer-adaptive methodology. Simply, the difficulty of questions is automatically adjusted as the test taker correctly or incorrectly answers questions. A complicated formula is used based on the level of questions and how many you answered correctly to determine your “real GRE score”. There is substantial criticism of the computer-adaptive methodology. One, if a test taker suddenly encounters an easy question mid-exam, they may deduce they have not been performing well thereby affecting their performance through the rest of the exam. Test takers may also be discouraged if relatively difficult questions are presented earlier on. Second, unequal weighting is given to questions, with earlier questions receiving more and setting precedent for later questions, biasing against test takers who become more comfortable as the test continues. ETS is aware of these issues. In 2006, they announced plans to radically redesign the test structure but later announced “Plans for launching an entirely new test all at once were dropped, and ETS decided to introduce new question types and improvements gradually over time.”

So who is ETS? They are a nonprofit 501(c)(3) created in 1947, located in Princeton, New Jersey. In an article from Business Week…

”Mention the Educational Testing Service, and most people think of the SAT, the Scholastic Aptitude Test that millions of high schoolers sweat over each year in hopes of lofty scores to help ease their way into colleges. But if ETS President Kurt M. Landgraf has his way, Americans will encounter the testing giant’s exams throughout grade school and right through their professional careers. Landgraf, a former DuPont executive brought to the organization in 2000 to give ETS a dose of business-world smarts, has a grand vision for the cerebral Princeton (N.J.) nonprofit. Worried that the backlash against college testing means a lackluster future for the SAT and other higher-ed ETS exams, Landgraf has been trying to diversify into two growth markets: tests and curriculum development for grade schools, where the federal No Child Left Behind Act has spurred national demand for testing, and the corporate market, where Landgraf sees potential growth in testing for managerial skills. By 2008, he hopes expansion in these two areas will more than double ETS’s $900 million anticipated 2004 revenue. “My job is to diversify ETS so we are no longer reliant on one or two major tests,” he says.

Does this sound like language applied to a nonprofit? From the New York Times…

It has quietly grown into a multinational operation, complete with for-profit subsidiaries, a reserve fund of $91 million, and revenue last year of $411 million… Its lush 360-acre property is dotted with low, tasteful brick buildings, tennis courts, a swimming pool, a private hotel and an impressive home where its president lives rent free… E.T.S. has come under fire not only for its failure to address increased incidents of cheating and fraud, but also for what its critics say is its transformation into a highly competitive business operation that is as much multinational monopoly as nonprofit institution, one capable of charging hefty fees, laying off workers and using sharp elbows in competing against rivals… ”E.T.S. is standing on the cusp of deciding whether it is an education institution or a commercial institution,” said Winton H. Manning, a former E.T.S. senior vice president who retired two years ago. ”I’m disappointed in the direction they have taken away from education and public service.”

In response to growing criticism of its monopoly, New York state passed the Educational Testing Act, a disclosure law which required ETS to make available certain test questions and graded answer sheets to students.

For all practical purposes ETS has grown into a for profit institution trading on its nonprofit status to create a monopoly (read the New York Times and Business Week articles for more alarming revelations). For example, Duke had 8,303 graduate applications for the fall of 2009, at $190 per test that is $1,577,570 for just one school for one year. From all schools, ETS in 2007 pulled in $880 million, and $94 million in profit after expenses. ETS also markets through one of their subsidiaries, and for profit, a test book at $23.10 (at Amazon). “We prepare the tests-let us help prepare you!”

But what of the original question? To what extent does the GRE predict success in graduate school? A meta-analysis in 2001 by Kuncel et al. demonstrated that correlations between GRE scores and multiple metrics of graduate performance were low. Correlation with graduate GPA ranged from 0.34-0.36. With performance as evaluated by departmental faculty the correlation ranged from 0.35-0.42, time of degree completion ranged from -0.08-0.28, citation count ranged from 0.17-0.24, and degree attainment from 0.11 to 0.20. While encouraging these correlations are positive (in most cases) and even accounting that GRE is supposed to be evaluated in the context of other materials (but often are not), these correlations are not that impressive. Do we need the GRE scores to evaluate applicants? Interesting, the same study also demonstrated that undergraduate GPA performed equally well as the GRE. Why then do we need $190 test loaded with faults and biases when GPA is sufficient?

I end by saying good luck to my wife who faces the GRE this fall.

The post Why We Need To Dispense With The GRE first appeared on Deep Sea News.

1. Love and Pain…Like Sunshine and Rain. Welcome to Deep-Sea Science.  Before you start, you better realize what exactly you are heading into.  Deep-sea science can be both extremely rewarding and extremely heart breaking.  To be a deep-sea scientist is to be one part scientist, one part explorer, and three parts masochist. The logistical difficulties and financial requirements of sampling an environment covered with miles of water will pretty much make every project you want to do either impossible or close to it.  While other graduates students and scientists in your department drive a truck down to their field site and take samples till the cows come home, you will be having a nervous breakdown because of insufficient data.  A project that takes other scientists a weekend and $250 to do will take you three years and $250,000. So, deep-sea science is not for the faint of heart.  However, if you can manage to get a chance (which likely will not happen), then you will probably discover something new, a species, a habitat, a process, or a biological adaptation. Deep-sea science is a young field compared to many other science disciplines.  You will never be at a loss for questions, because most of the answers are still unknown.  Too bad you won’t be able address all of them.  I write this with tongue-in-cheek of course, but I am serious.  This is a tough field and doing deep-sea science isn’t easy.  Think about this for some time before you move to number 2.
2. You Won’t Be Jacques Cousteau. Are you still here?  Well, now you better realize a few other things.  You are not going to be rich or famous.  You will not ride on Zodiacs chasing after charismatic megafauna.  You are not likely to spend every day riding around in a sub wearing a red stocking hat.  One week per year, one month if you are lucky, you will spend at sea.  How that time will fly by!  You will spend the rest of the year analyzing that material.  You will spend most of the remaining year writing.  Writing proposals, grants, papers, emails, etc. I hope you like to write. When you are not writing you will be doing menial and repetitive tasks.  Entering numbers into Excel, counting snails, programming, picking absurdly small organisms out of mud, mixing chemicals, these are the tasks that will fill your day.  You will also be spending a lot of time on a computer.  Not Facebooking, Ichatting, surfing the web for fun, playing the newest game.  O’ no my friend, your computer will be the vessel of menial tasks. Thankfully, those menial tasks may actually produce some sort of scientific product (but see Number One).
3. Proving Yourself, Again, Again, and Again. From the time you make your first contact with a potential advisor to the time you are full professor, you will have to prove yourself again and again.  Publishing papers, obtaining grant money, getting positions, getting tenure, etc will all require an exhaustive and thorough review process of everything you’ve done.  If this doesn’t sound like fun then you should reconsider now.
4. I Took Underwater Basket Weaving, What Other Classes Will I Need? Before you even think about graduate school you need to think about the classes you had as an undergrad.  Hopefully you have had multiple basic biology courses (ecology, physiology, evolution, genetics, microbiology) and paired that with some basic level physics, chemistry, and geology.  You don’t necessarily need an undergraduate degree in Marine Biology.  My own degree is in basic biology. Invertebrate Zoology will be a must and you better get an A in it (or ichthyology if you prefer the verts).  The deep sea and all of its weird creatures will challenge everything you learn.  Don’t start off behind.  I would require any potential graduate student to have a firm grasp of math and statistics (Calculus 1, Linear Algebra, and Basic Stats at least).  Modern science is increasing more quantitative.  Now we move to advanced modeling and analytical methods.  You can start learning them now or later.  Not required, although important, would be a basic logic course.  Good science is good logic.  Getting the basics can only help.  You should also make sure you can write well or at least sufficiently (see Number 2). Some basic understanding of mechanics and engineering would be plus as you deal with temperamental oceanographic equipment.
5. Your Training Begins Now and You Are Already Behind. If you have made it to this point, then you are still behind.  You will need to start brushing up on everything deep sea.  Obviously, DSN is a good first step.  Pick a copy of Silent Deep, Deep-Sea Biology, or The Ecology of Hydrothermal Vents.  Better yet pick up all three and read them all.  When you start emailing people about graduate positions you don’t want to sound like an idiot.  Hopefully these books will give you some idea of exactly which subject you would like to research. Yes, you have to be more specific than “deep-sea biology”. If you find all this reading (that in the next step) burdensome or boring then consider another field.  You need to be passionate about the subject (see Numbers 1-3) so you should want to do this.  In fact, reading about the deep sea should be your idea of great way to spend an evening or weekend. You should feel like this is the greatest thing since sliced white bread.  If not, … well, this is not for you.
6. Meet Google Scholar, Your Brand New Friend For the Next Several Months Now with all that basic level deep-sea knowledge comes the advanced stuff.  Use Google Scholar to search for primary literature on deep-sea topics.  You are looking to do a few things. 1) You want to know about all the new advances in deep-sea science (DSN can help you). 2) You want to know who are the movers and shakers in the field, both the legends and the new an upcoming movers and shakers. 3) You are looking for specific topics in deep-sea science that interest you.  Some deep-sea publications can be had online without subscriptions or library access.  There will be several you cannot get.  Don’t fret! Search for the first author’s website to see if they have posted the pdf on their lab’s website.  If not, don’t hesitate to email the first author or corresponding author (sometimes different) for a pdf.
7. You Can Study Anything You Want, You Just Better Know What It Is. As you begin looking for potential Ph.D. advisors, you will definitely be asked what specifically you want to research.  You better have an answer.  You will probably want to pick a focal organisms or entire group (mine’s gastropods, KZ’s is anemones and vent critters, Peter’s is coral).  The most successful programs come from people having a focal taxon that provides the framework to address larger questions.  However, this not the complete story.  You need to have a specific question or topic.  Don’t worry there is no wrong answer here.  Scientists in the field just want to see you have put more thought in this than “deep-sea squid are totally sweet, and I need to work with them.”  A good example would be “The factors determining the geographic distributions of species X” or “the evolution of Y’s adaptations to the deep”. After you state the topic you are interested in, be prepared to answer why. Numbers 4 and 5 will help you narrow your ideas and present new ones.  Most papers and the books above will leave off with questions that are outstanding in the field.
8. Ivy League, Great Surfing, Party School? It Doesn’t Matter! One of the biggest mistakes people usually make when applying for grad school is choosing the institution instead of the person they want to work with.  Sure the Ivy League is nice and the name recognition will help a little or living near the beach would be totally sweet, but ultimately they are not that important.  Your success will be measured by your own research and the products from that (i.e. publications).  Instrumental to this is picking a laboratory and an advisor who will provide both the research topic and the support you need.  Start by using your background readings to identify people whose research you find interesting and match your own interests.  Pick someone who is currently active in the field and publishing. They will be more likely to have the financial and field support you need.  Whatever you do, do not accept a position if you have not met the advisor or, more importantly, their graduate students.  Remember you will be spending a lot of time with this person over the next 5-8 years.  This is all about “fit” and if you “don’t fit” then things could go horribly wrong.  Current graduates students will always be honest about what its like working with Dr. X, and what their department is like.  In my own career, I choose not to work with one scientist because their graduate students were generally negative about their time in the lab.  Once you pick the advisor, the school will be picked for you.
9. Email, Email, and Email some more. Once you find the person (and hopefully, people) you would like to work with (you want options) then you email them.  You want to make contact with this person.  Express your interest in their research.  Ask them questions about their research.  Ask for pdf’s of their work.  Ask them if they have graduate opportunities in their laboratory.  Ask them if you can come and visit. You are interviewing this person as much as they are you, so do not waste the opportunity to gain more information.  Don’t worry if they don’t immediately respond, they will be busy or even away at sea.  Send a reminder (two max).  If they don’t respond to you, or if you get a negative response, this is not bad.  In either of these cases you probably don’t want to be that person’s graduate student anyway.
10. The GRE, Why It Hates You, and All The Other Stuff You Need To Get Into Graduate School. The GRE is a SOB but a necessarily evil.  Take it and score high, no problem.  Score low, things are not over but more become difficult.  In my experience, the GRE measures less what you know but rather how well you can take a test.  Although expensive, it would be well worth the money to take a GRE course.  Now in actuality the GRE is just single metric in which your application is viewed.  A high GPA, research experience, and a well-articulated essay go much further and can outweigh any GRE score (as long as you are above a minimum standard, but even that can be flexible).  If you are still an undergraduate (or even not) get some (any) research experience.  It shows dedication to and a familiarity with working in a laboratory or doing research.  Those experiences can also lead to strong letters of recommendation, which you will also need.  You don’t want your only letters coming from a course instructor with whom you took one class.  Now, here is the part that no one ever mentions.  Having a strong faculty advocate for your admission is essential.  This is why Number 9 is so important.  Typically, all the graduate applicants files are passed around the department and faculty are asked to make their picks.  If a faculty member wants you they will serve as an informal advocate in your behalf.  “I know so-so’s GRE’s are low, but I have had great interactions with this person, they visited the lab, they have X,Y,Z, and ultimately I think they will be a great fit.”
11. You Better Make Sure You Really Love This.  See Number 1

The post So You Want to Be A Deep-Sea Biologist? first appeared on Deep Sea News.