Fig 1.
It takes a village to raise a science writer.
There are many resources to provide instruction, support and feedback on writing to graduate students (and their advisors!). Leaning on these can reduce the burden on the advisor and allow the student to get a broader perspective on writing.
Fig 2.
Ignore the GenAI elephant in the room at your own risk.
Low risk applications such as correcting grammar and syntax can save a great deal of time, are embedded in your word processor, and if used appropriately can also enhance learning. Using GenAI to perform higher level tasks is potentially transformative for those who have already mastered their field, but it can allow trainees to bypass learning that is key to their future scientific success. You need to balance the benefits with the drawbacks and find your own comfort level. Figure based on the 4Ts pyramid [6]. Elephant was generated using MS CoPilot.
Fig 3.
Process and timeline for co-producing a scientific manuscript.
Panel A depicts the collaborative process for a single section of a manuscript or a small-scale project such as a conference abstract. The cycles of drafting, reviewing and revising all take time and effort for both partners and multiple exchanges are required to get to a final document. For an abstract, if both parties are focused it may take 2-3 days to get to a final product, but a larger project like a thesis chapter could take a month or more. Panel B shows how this process is repeated to complete a manuscript. Progress can be expedited if each of you work on different sections at the same time (e.g., the mentee starts on the Methods section while the mentor reviews and comments on the Outline), but this requires clear communication about the status of each section and feedback needed. Panel B also highlights how the process becomes more efficient as you become more adept at working together (compare green, early partnership, to gold, mature partnership).