Abstract:One sentence summary: Networking is an important activity that features in many career success stories; vital for accessing communities, it is a recognised competency in the job-search process, helping bioscience PhD students and postdoctoral researchers to gain an advantage in an intensely competitive job market. Editor: Beatrix Fahnert † Sarah Blackford, http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9386-2413
ABSTRACTWith an ever more competitive global labour market, coupled with an ever-increasing population of PhD-qualified… Show more
“…For example, while we currently offer extensive training in grant writing, we might reexamine how we teach other forms of scientific writing, and for different audiences. We might also consider intentionally embedding networking skill-building opportunities into the curriculum, particularly given the importance of networking to alumni’s career success [ 11 ]. Our growing number of program graduates and expanding alumni base may offer additional networking opportunities for current students and recent alumni.…”
Over the past two decades, graduate programs have sought to meet the rising need for cross-disciplinary biomedical and translational research training; however, among program evaluation efforts, little is known about student satisfaction with these programs. We report survey results aimed at assessing the overall satisfaction of Molecular Medicine (MolMed) PhD program graduates with their training program and subsequent employment, their research productivity since graduation, and the program elements important for entering their diverse career choices. The survey consisted of quantitative and qualitative instruments and was deployed in June 2020 via email to 45 alumni who had graduated at least two years prior. Investigators assessed mean and median Likert scale data and they conducted a qualitative content analysis on all open-ended narrative survey data using inductive analysis to identify themes. Of the 45 contacted, 26 PhD graduates of the MolMed program responded to the survey. Overall, graduates felt the MolMed curriculum prepared them well for their current career (mean 3.4 out a 4-point Likert scale); and, knowing what they know now, they would likely pursue a PhD degree again (mean 3.7 out of 4). Four overarching themes emerged from the content analysis of the narrative survey data: curriculum and other training experiences; professional skills; importance of a strong advisor/mentor; and, networking and career development. Overall, alumni were satisfied with their MolMed Program experience. They found the curriculum to be strong and relevant, and they believed that it prepared them well for their careers. There may be opportunities to embed additional skills into the curriculum, and the program should continue to offer a strong mentoring and clinical experience, as well as train students for diverse career trajectories.
“…For example, while we currently offer extensive training in grant writing, we might reexamine how we teach other forms of scientific writing, and for different audiences. We might also consider intentionally embedding networking skill-building opportunities into the curriculum, particularly given the importance of networking to alumni’s career success [ 11 ]. Our growing number of program graduates and expanding alumni base may offer additional networking opportunities for current students and recent alumni.…”
Over the past two decades, graduate programs have sought to meet the rising need for cross-disciplinary biomedical and translational research training; however, among program evaluation efforts, little is known about student satisfaction with these programs. We report survey results aimed at assessing the overall satisfaction of Molecular Medicine (MolMed) PhD program graduates with their training program and subsequent employment, their research productivity since graduation, and the program elements important for entering their diverse career choices. The survey consisted of quantitative and qualitative instruments and was deployed in June 2020 via email to 45 alumni who had graduated at least two years prior. Investigators assessed mean and median Likert scale data and they conducted a qualitative content analysis on all open-ended narrative survey data using inductive analysis to identify themes. Of the 45 contacted, 26 PhD graduates of the MolMed program responded to the survey. Overall, graduates felt the MolMed curriculum prepared them well for their current career (mean 3.4 out a 4-point Likert scale); and, knowing what they know now, they would likely pursue a PhD degree again (mean 3.7 out of 4). Four overarching themes emerged from the content analysis of the narrative survey data: curriculum and other training experiences; professional skills; importance of a strong advisor/mentor; and, networking and career development. Overall, alumni were satisfied with their MolMed Program experience. They found the curriculum to be strong and relevant, and they believed that it prepared them well for their careers. There may be opportunities to embed additional skills into the curriculum, and the program should continue to offer a strong mentoring and clinical experience, as well as train students for diverse career trajectories.
“…External networking can lead to career opportunities outside of the current organization (e.g., knowing someone at an organization that has an interesting job offer), which are important in science. In science, careers are not made in the organization, but in the community (Kauffeld et al, 2019; Blackford, 2018; Gross & Jungbauer-Gans, 2007). For a professional career, somebody usually has to leave the home university.…”
The present study investigates the relationship of PsyCap with objective and subjective career success. Based on conservation of resources theory (COR Theory) and psychological capital theory (PsyCap Theory), we assume that career-specific resources, in particular protean career attitude, career planning, and internal and external networking, are important mechanisms that mediate the relationship between PsyCap and both outcomes. We tested our assumptions by means of time-lagged path analysis with R and the lavaan package in a sample of 1110 German academic scientists. Our results indicate a positive relationship between PsyCap and career success. However, we found differential effects regarding the assumed mediation for subjective and objective career success. The effect of PsyCap on subjective career success is mediated by protean career attitude and career planning. The effect of PsyCap on objective career success is mediated by external networking. Our results strengthen the research of PsyCap as a predictor of career success. However, the results also imply that the relationship between PsyCap, career-specific resources, and both aspects of career success is more complex than expected.
“…Peer review offers not only mentoring and professional development but peer support in general also offers unique psycho-social benefits of emotional support from colleagues with shared experience and/or career stage (Cree-Green et al 2020, Dickson et al 2021. This unique benefit is particularly important for individuals from marginalized or under-represented groups in academia (Blackford 2018, Brommer & Eisen 2007, Eisen & Eaton 2017, Yadav & Seals 2019. Being a postdoc can be much more isolating compared to being a PhD student (Bruckmann & Sebestyen 2017) due to lack of cohesive cohort and fewer individuals at the same career level per lab.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The participants were further emotionally bolstered by the act of helping others to improve their materials and the idea that as a community, early-career academics all rise by helping each other. Community building as a career development strategy provides opportunities (Blackford 2018), especially for historically excluded groups, to build social capital and networks that may enhance their career opportunities (Alfred et al 2019). Similar peer review programs could fulfill the same function by providing peer support and mentorship for early-career academics at their institutions, particularly for those who may lack that support elsewhere.…”
In order to successfully obtain a faculty position, postdoctoral fellows or postdocs, must submit an application which requires considerable time and effort to produce. These job applications are often reviewed by mentors and colleagues, but rarely are postdocs offered the opportunity to solicit feedback multiple times from reviewers with the same breadth of expertise often found on an academic search committee. To address this gap, this manuscript describes an international peer reviewing program for small groups of postdocs with a broad range of expertise to reciprocally and iteratively provide feedback to each other on their application materials. Over 145 postdocs have participated, often multiple times, over three years. A survey of participants in this program revealed that nearly all participants would recommend participation in such a program to other faculty applicants. Furthermore, this program was more likely to attract participants who struggled to find mentoring and support elsewhere, either because they changed fields or because of their identity as a woman or member of an underrepresented population in STEM. Participation in programs like this one could provide early career academics like postdocs with a diverse and supportive community of peer mentors during the difficult search for a faculty position. Such psychosocial support and encouragement has been shown to prevent attrition of individuals from these populations and programs like this one target the largest leak in the pipeline, that of postdoc to faculty. Implementation of similar peer-reviewing programs by universities or professional scientific societies could provide a valuable mechanism of support and increased chances of success for early-career academics in their search for independence.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.