Measuring effects of trainee professional development on research productivity: A cross-institutional meta-analysis

Abstract

PhD-trained scientists are essential contributors to the workforce in diverse employment sectors that include academia, industry, government, and non-profit 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 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 BEST awardee institutions included career panels, skill-building workshops, job-searching workshops, site visits, and internships. An initial concern was since doctoral training is lengthy and requires focused attention on dissertation research, having students participate in additional complementary training activities might lengthen time to degree and hamper student research productivity. To address this concern, using time to degree and publication records as measures of efficiency and productivity, metrics were analyzed from ten BEST awardee institutions. 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. Furthermore, a few institutions even demonstrated a positive correlation between participation in career and professional development activities and productivity. Our findings suggest that doctoral students should be encouraged to participate in career and professional development opportunities to ensure their preparedness for a variety of diverse and important careers in the workforce.Significance StatementOur study is unique in that it compiled doctoral degree durations at ten different universities, recorded individual participation in career and professional development activities in terms of dosage, and tracked individual engagement in real-time rather than relying on surveys sent to trainees after graduation. Participation in career and professional development activities, including internships, did not decrease efficiency or productivity. Our findings suggest that doctoral students should be encouraged to participate in career and professional development opportunities to ensure their preparedness for a variety of diverse and important careers in the workforce.

Symmetrical and Asymmetrical Modeling: Applying Vitae Researchers’ Development Framework through the Lens of Web 2.0 Technologies for Vocational-Health Education Researchers

“…Results showed web 2.0 technologies positively and significantly mediate the relationship between research competences and research productivity, supporting H4. The previous research findings also confirmed the relationship between RC and RP through web 2.0 technologies [33] among vocational-health education students [90]. Similarly, results showed that research skills help enhance research productivity among vocational-health education students through web 2.0 technologies [91].…”

“…Numerous studies in the field of medical science have emphasized the role of professional training and career exploration programs in building research competence. A recent study by [33] on doctoral students in the biomedical field highlighted that researchers invested in training and development, were more aware of their research competences, and observed productive outcomes in their research work and career. Research competences gained during postgraduate programs help vocational-health education students become expert researchers [9].…”

Using Stakeholder Insights to Enhance Engagement in PhD Professional Development

“…In addition, some faculty stakeholders do not see the value of CPD activities and expressed some concern about the time their pre-and postdoctoral researchers dedicate to these activities. However, recent evidence-based research has shown that participation in internships, career development programming, K-12 outreach programs or IRACDA programs does not lead to increased time to degree or decreased productivity (Brandt et al, 2020;Gamse et al, 2010;Rybarczyk et al, 2011;Schnoes et al, 2018). Pre-and postdoctoral researchers, faculty-administrators and external partners all noted the value of flexible programming to encourage pre-and postdoctoral researcher engagement.…”

“…Foremost among them is the faculty. Data from the BEST Consortium indicated that a large majority of faculty are supportive of career training for various careers and have recognized that pre-and postdoctoral researchers participating in CPD activities were happier and making timely progress toward degree completion -a fact that can be used to recruit additional internal stakeholder engagement from faculty (Brandt et al, 2020;Chatterjee et al, 2019;Watts et al, 2019). Faculty don't always believe they have the knowledge or resources to assist pre-and postdoctoral researchers whose career interests lie outside academia, although they largely support their career pursuits (Engelhardt & Alder, 2020;St.…”

Developing an industry job simulation program for graduate and postdoctoral trainees in life sciences

“…Such opportunities include internships (temporary employment at a trainee level), job simulation (completing projects like those done by professionals but in a non-employment context), job shadowing (observing a professional in the workplace to learn about job expectations), and site visits (observational visits to a workplace) (Council of Canadian Acadmies, 2021;Edge & Munro, 2015;Wart et al, 2020). Experiential learning activities are associated with benefits for trainees including recognition of transferable skills (Sealey et al, 2020;Sinche et al, 2017; Developing an Industry Job Simulation Program 85 et al, 2019), confidence in choosing a career path (Schnoes et al, 2018;Sealey et al, 2020;Yung et al, 2019), facilitating the transition to employment (BioTalent Canada, 2020;Edge & Munro, 2015;Her et al, 2018;Sealey et al, 2020;Yung et al, 2019) and decreased likelihood of pursuing postdoctoral positions as a default (Schnoes et al, 2018), while having little to no negative impact on time to degree completion (Brandt et al, 2020;Lenzi et al, 2020;Schnoes et al, 2018) or research productivity as measured by publications (Brandt et al, 2020). Benefits for employers include a stronger talent pool (i.e., applicants who have sector knowledge, technical skills, and interpersonal skills).…”