Faculty perceptions and knowledge of career development of trainees in biomedical science: What do we (think we) know?

Citizenship status and career self-efficacy: An intersectional study of biomedical trainees in the United States

This study examines the intersectional role of citizenship and gender with career self-efficacy amongst 10,803 doctoral and postdoctoral trainees in US universities. These biomedical trainees completed surveys administered by 17 US institutions that participated in the National Institutes of Health Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training (NIH BEST) Programs. Findings indicate that career self-efficacy of non-citizen trainees is significantly lower than that of US citizen trainees. While lower career efficacy was observed in women compared with men, it was even lower for non-citizen female trainees. Results suggest that specific career interests may be related to career self-efficacy. Relative to US citizen trainees, both male and female non-citizen trainees showed higher interest in pursuing a career as an academic research investigator. In comparison with non-citizen female trainees and citizen trainees of all genders, non-citizen male trainees expressed the highest interest in research-intensive (and especially principal investigator) careers. The authors discuss potential causes for these results and offer recommendations for increasing trainee career self-efficacy which can be incorporated into graduate and postdoctoral training.

Development and Assessment of a Sustainable PhD Internship Program Supporting Diverse Biomedical Career Outcomes

A doctoral-level internship program was developed at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with the intent to create customizable experiential learning opportunities for biomedical trainees to support career exploration, preparation, and transition into their post-graduate professional roles. We report the outcomes of this program over a five-year period. During that 5-year period, 123 internships took place at over 70 partner sites, representing at least 20 academic, for-profit, and non-profit career paths in the life sciences. A major goal of the program was to enhance trainees' skill development and expertise in careers of interest. The benefits of the internship program for interns, host/employer, and supervisor/principal investigator were assessed using a mixed-methods approach, including surveys with closed- and open-ended responses as well as focus group interviews. Balancing stakeholder interests is key to creating a sustainable program with widespread support; hence, the level of support from internship hosts and faculty members were key metrics analyzed throughout. We hypothesized that once a successful internship program was implemented, faculty culture might shift to be more accepting of internships; indeed, the data quantifying faculty attitudes support this. Furthermore, host motivation and performance expectations of interns were compared with results achieved, and this data revealed both expected and surprising benefits to hosts. Data suggests a myriad of benefits for each stakeholder group, and themes are cataloged and discussed. Program outcomes, evaluation data, policies, resources, and best practices developed through the implementation of this program are shared to provide resources that facilitate the creation of similar internship programs at other institutions. Program development was initially spurred by National Institutes of Health pilot funding, thereafter, successfully transitioning from a grant-supported model, to an institutionally supported funding model to achieve long-term programmatic sustainability.

Increasing faculty support, respect, and ability to help doctoral students explore non-academic research career opportunities

We examined the role of the NIH-funded Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training (BEST) program at Wayne State University in increasing faculty (1) support for doctoral students exploring non-academic research opportunities, (2) respect for non-academic research, and (3) ability to help students with non-academic research career exploration. Ninety-seven faculty participated in one or more BEST activities over a five-year period. Fifty-three of those faculty (55%) completed an online survey about their participation in the program and their support, respect, and ability to help students explore non-academic research careers. Sixteen of these faculty were also interviewed in depth about their perspectives on the role professional development can play in enhancing faculty perspectives about non-academic research career options for their students. The survey and interview data reveal some changing perceptions of BEST faculty participants in their attitudes toward and respect for non-academic research careers, as well as in their ability to help students in career exploration. These faculty perceptions correlated with their level of participation in BEST activities. Importantly, this study also showed that some faculty believe they lack the experience and connections outside of academia to adequately support doctoral students' career exploration. The results of this NIH-funded BEST program on faculty attitudes underscore the influence of federally funded programs in changing institutional attitudes towards supporting student career choices that have broad societal impact.

Using stakeholder insights to enhance engagement in PhD professional development

There is increasing awareness of the need for pre- and post-doctoral professional development and career guidance, however many academic institutions are only beginning to build out these functional roles. As a graduate career educator, accessing vast silos and resources at a university and with industry-partners can be daunting, yet collaboration and network development are crucial to the success of any career and professional development office. To better inform and direct these efforts, forty-five stakeholders external and internal to academic institutions were identified and interviewed to gather perspectives on topics critical to career development offices. Using a stakeholder engagement visualization tool developed by the authors, strengths and weaknesses can be assessed. General themes from interviews with internal and external stakeholders are discussed to provide various stakeholder subgroup perspectives to help prepare for successful interactions. Benefits include increased engagement and opportunities to collaborate, and to build or expand graduate career development offices.

The use of a book club to promote biomedical trainee professional development

Professional development for biomedical doctoral and postdoctoral trainees is vital, especially due to the increase in individuals pursuing non-faculty career paths. We created a professional development-focused discussion group between trainees and faculty/staff by utilizing a book club format in which monthly small group meetings occurred over an 8-month period. A pre- and post-survey consisting of Likert and free-response questions was completed by participants. Results demonstrated that after the book club, trainees: 1) were more knowledgeable about a variety of career paths; 2) had improved awareness of their interests in relation to their career; 3) were more knowledgeable of their transferrable skills; 4) were more comfortable engaging with their PI and completing/updating an Individual Development Plan; 5) were more likely to find mentors in addition to their PI to address career specific needs; and 6) were more likely to seek opportunities to conduct informational interviews or experiential learning. Additionally, we found that faculty/staff: 1) were more knowledgeable about careers outside of academia; 2) had greater consideration for their mentee's values and interests in relation to their career; 3) had a better understanding of their mentee's transferable skills; and 4) were more comfortable engaging with their mentee about their career path and addressing an Individual Development Plan. Overall, we found that the utilization of a book club consisting of trainees and faculty/staff as a professional development tool was beneficial for both groups of participants, and this format is feasible for use in biomedical education professional development.

Building skill-sets, confidence, and interest for diverse scientific careers in the biological and biomedical sciences

Many biological science PhD graduates are increasingly pursuing careers outside of academia. Subsequently, PhD training programs are increasing their efforts to broaden their awareness of diverse career opportunities, with a firm knowledge of the skills necessary for success. At Yale University, for two semesters we have offered a new course for graduate students in the biological sciences titled "Skills Development for Diverse Scientific Careers" (BBS 550b). This course addressed career-related topics not covered in any curriculum at Yale such as how to run clinical trials, the business side of biotech, how to convert CVs into resumes, and resilience for early career scientists. We sought to better equip students to think broadly about their career options by exposing them to non-academic biomedical career avenues. Furthermore, the course fulfilled a gap in current curricular offerings to prepare students for multiple science career trajectories. Results on a pre-post course survey demonstrated increases in students' interest for, knowledge of, and confidence in securing a position in multiple nontraditional career sectors. Intentional course design can provide an adequate foundation to broaden awareness of myriad career options available to bioscientists. Broadening student knowledge and interest levels will contribute substantially to developing a robust scientific workforce.

A cross-institutional analysis of the effects of broadening trainee professional development on research productivity

PhD-trained scientists are essential contributors to the workforce in diverse employment sectors that include academia, industry, government, and nonprofit organizations. Hence, best practices for training the future biomedical workforce are of national concern. Complementing coursework and laboratory research training, many institutions now offer professional training that enables career exploration and develops a broad set of skills critical to various career paths. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded academic institutions to design innovative programming to enable this professional development through a mechanism known as Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training (BEST). Programming at the NIH BEST awardee institutions included career panels, skill-building workshops, job search workshops, site visits, and internships. Because doctoral training is lengthy and requires focused attention on dissertation research, an initial concern was that students participating in additional complementary training activities might exhibit an increased time to degree or diminished research productivity. Metrics were analyzed from 10 NIH BEST awardee institutions to address this concern, using time to degree and publication records as measures of efficiency and productivity. Comparing doctoral students who participated to those who did not, results revealed that across these diverse academic institutions, there were no differences in time to degree or manuscript output. Our findings support the policy that doctoral students should participate in career and professional development opportunities that are intended to prepare them for a variety of diverse and important careers in the workforce.

Taking ownership of your career: professional development through experiential learning

Experiential learning can facilitate the development of transferrable skills necessary for success in attaining tenure and promotion in academia. In this article, we discuss the benefits of designing and implementing an individualized professional development experience or practicum. By doing this, we describe the experiential learning component of the Accomplishing Career Transitions (ACT) Program of the American Society for Cell Biology. The ACT program aims to assist postdoctoral trainees and junior faculty from backgrounds underrepresented in STEM as they strive to transition into tenure-track positions and ultimately attain tenure at research-intensive or teaching-intensive academic institutions.

Postdocs' advice on pursuing a research career in academia: A qualitative analysis of free-text survey responses

BACKGROUND

The decision of whether to pursue a tenure-track faculty position has become increasingly difficult for undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral trainees considering a career in research. Trainees express concerns over job availability, financial insecurity, and other perceived challenges associated with pursuing an academic position.

METHODS

To help further elucidate the benefits, challenges, and strategies for pursuing an academic career, a diverse sample of postdoctoral scholars ("postdocs") from across the United States were asked to provide advice on pursuing a research career in academia in response to an open-ended survey question. 994 responses were qualitatively analyzed using both content and thematic analyses. 177 unique codes, 20 categories, and 10 subthemes emerged from the data and were generalized into two thematic areas: Life in Academia and Strategies for Success.

RESULTS

On life in academia, postdoc respondents overwhelmingly agree that academia is most rewarding when you are truly passionate about scientific research and discovery. 'Passion' emerged as the most frequently cited code, referenced 189 times. Financial insecurity, work-life balance, securing grant funding, academic politics, and a competitive job market emerged as challenges of academic research. The survey respondents note that while passion and hard work are necessary, they are not always sufficient to overcome these challenges. The postdocs encourage trainees to be realistic about career expectations and to prepare broadly for career paths that align with their interests, skills, and values. Strategies recommended for perseverance include periodic self-reflection, mental health support, and carefully selecting mentors.

CONCLUSIONS

For early-career scientists along the training continuum, this advice deserves critical reflection before committing to an academic research career. For advisors and institutions, this work provides a unique perspective from postdoctoral scholars on elements of the academic training path that can be improved to increase retention, career satisfaction, and preparation for the scientific workforce.

Applying Experiential Learning to Career Development Training for Biomedical Graduate Students and Postdocs: Perspectives on Program Development and Design

Experiential learning is an effective educational tool across many academic disciplines, including career development. Nine different institutions bridged by the National Institutes of Health Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training Consortium compared their experiments in rethinking and expanding training of predoctoral graduate students and postdoctoral scholars in the biomedical sciences to include experiential learning opportunities. In this article, we provide an overview of the four types of experiential learning approaches our institutions offer and compare the learning objectives and evaluation strategies employed for each type. We also discuss key factors for shaping experiential learning activities on an institutional level. The framework we provide can help organizations determine which form of experiential learning for career training might best suit their institutions and goals and aid in the successful design and delivery of such training.

Scientific Writing Workshop Improves Confidence in Critical Writing Skills among Trainees in the Biomedical Sciences

Written communication is a key research skill, yet the current model of pre- and postdoctoral training in the biomedical sciences lacks consistent formal training in this area, leading to crises of confidence when tackling research writing. A 15-hour non-credit workshop, "Secrets of Successful Scientific Writing," was developed in collaboration with an experienced instructor of scientific writing. The workshop consisted of six 2.5-hour sessions and was offered six times; a total of 126 trainees attended over these six offerings. Topics included strategies to engage the audience, principles of psychological linguistics to maximize sentence effectiveness, conventions of biomedical journal writing, technical writing and the history of scientific publishing, and two sessions on grant writing. Student confidence in and familiarity with targeted writing skills were assessed by self-evaluation questions administered immediately before and after each session. The workshop was determined to be effective at improving the confidence of participants regarding specific writing skills in the biomedical sciences, with all but two of the measures showing that the workshop had a large effect size. We conclude that a short, structured workshop can help improve the confidence and knowledge of pre- and postdoctoral writers, preparing them to better meet the writing challenges of their professional careers.

The NIH "BEST" programs: Institutional programs, the program evaluation, and early data

Biomedical research training has undergone considerable change over the past several years. At its core, the goal of graduate and postdoctoral training is to provide individuals with the skills and knowledge to become outstanding scientists and expand knowledge through the scientific method. Historically, graduate school training has focused on preparation for academic positions. Increasingly, however, a shift toward preparation for a wider range of career options has emerged. This is largely because most biomedical PhD graduates do not become Principal Investigators in academic laboratories. Here we describe an National Institutes of Health Common Fund program with the major goal of culture change for biomedical research training and training that prepares individuals for a broader expanse of careers in the biomedical research enterprise. These "Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training" (BEST) awards, issued in 2012 and 2013, provided support to institutions to develop innovative approaches to achieving these goals, as a complement to traditional training. Awardees were tasked with catalyzing change at their institutions and sharing best practices across the training community. Awardees were required to participate in a cross-site evaluation that assessed the impact of BEST activities on three main areas: (a) trainee confidence and knowledge to make career decisions, (b) influence of this added activity on time in training, and (c) ability of the institutions to sustain activities deemed to be beneficial. Here we present the fundamental approach to the BEST program and early evaluative data.