scholarly journals 3297 What do early career researchers need? Exploring early career researchers’ learning needs to develop an Emerging Investigator website

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 77-77
Author(s):  
Janice Lynn Gabrilove ◽  
Layla Fattah ◽  
Fatima Nabizada-Pace ◽  
Inga Peter ◽  
Alan Moskowitz
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Personal Development ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Learning Needs ◽  
Research Skills ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Mount Sinai

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Early career researchers at Mount Sinai have access to a wide range of resources and support. It can, however, be challenging for new investigators to know where to find information and who to ask for help. To address this issue, an Emerging Investigators website was conceived to bring together resources, provide educational support and foster a community of early career investigators at Mount Sinai. In order to ensure this resource effectively meets the needs of this cohort of researchers, and to determine the scope and content of the proposed website, a series of focus group interviews were undertaken with early career researchers at various stages of their careers. The aims of these focus groups were to 1) explore the self-perceived challenges faced by early career researchers that could be addressed through education and / or support, 2) explore the self-perceived learning needs of early career researchers that are not currently being addressed at Mount Sinai, 3) determine the website content that early career researchers would find valuable to support them in their development. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A convenience sample of early career researchers at Mount Sinai were contacted for participation (N = 20). A total of 13 participants responded and three focus groups were conducted, one with the KL2 scholars (N=4), one with TL1 postdocs (N=4) and one with PORTAL students (N=5) during Spring 2018. Participants were initially asked to consider the challenges that early career researchers face. They were subsequently asked to consider which of these challenges they thought could be addressed through education or support. Participants were then asked to consider what they wished they knew more about in relation to research knowledge, skills or behaviors. Participants were finally asked to discuss the resources or support they thought would help them to manage the challenges or meet the learning needs they identified. The interview questions were semi-structured to allow the conversation to flow, and to allow the participants to discuss issues of importance to them. At the end of the discussion, participants were asked to rank their top priorities for inclusion in an Emerging Investigators website, up to a maximum of 3 per person. Focus group sessions lasted between 1 and 1.5 hours. All key points were captured by the participants on flip-chart paper and sticky notes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Interview data was transcribed and thematic analysis was used to identifying patterns or themes within the data. A theoretical thematic analysis was conducted, driven by the specific research questions. Each segment of data that was relevant to the research questions or captured something interesting was coded. These codes were examined and further grouped into six key themes that were consistent across all three focus groups. These themes were categorized as: Mapping the research pathway, Research skills, Personal development, Mentorship, Community of Practice and Opportunities at Mount Sinai. Within each of these themes, more specific codes align directly with learning needs for early career investigators at Mount Sinai. When asked to prioritize topics for inclusion in the website, the pre-doc PORTAL students selected research skills that included statistics, navigating the IRB and writing and publication, as well as mapping the research landscape at Mount Sinai. Both the post-doc TL1s and the KL2s also selected some research skills such as scientific writing and conference presentation, but also prioritized personal development and “soft skills” such as leadership, management, collaborating with others and finding a work-life balance. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The themes articulated by the focus group participants have formed the basis for developing the Emerging Investigators website. Each of the key themes will be reflected in the learning and resources provided on the website. The prioritization of topics differed between groups, reflecting the different stages and levels of experience of these researchers. As a result, the website provides key learning and “top tips” suitable for all levels of early career researchers, but with links to further reading and resources for those at a more advanced level who are interested in learning more. In addition, the reported need for communication, collaboration and social interaction with peers and other researchers across Mount Sinai resulted in the addition of further web-based resources such as a discussion forum, a blog to feature research and provide a sounding board for research efforts, and a calendar of events targeted specifically at early career researchers. The focus groups provided much valued insight to underpin this project and ensure that a valuable resource is created that will meet the needs of early career researchers. The website is currently under development with a view to launch a pilot site in early 2019.

scholarly journals 4468 Evaluating the Emerging Investigators Website as an Educational Resource for Early Career Researchers

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (s1) ◽  
pp. 61-62
Author(s):  
Layla Fattah ◽  
Inga Peter ◽  
Jenny Lin ◽  
Janice Lynn Gabrilove
Keyword(s):  
Phase 1 ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Educational Value ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Content Relevance ◽  
Mount Sinai ◽  
Initial Survey

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The aim of this project is to assess the usability and acceptance of a web-based educational resource for early career researchers. The Emerging Investigators website is designed to bring together resources, provide educational support and foster a community of early career researchers throughout the Mount Sinai Health System (MSHS). Locally designed and built, this web-based platform is developed using the principles of Community of Inquiry (COI), which considers how the design of online learning environments might best create and sustain a sense of community among learners. Developing a resource that meets the needs of this cohort of researchers requires an iterative implementation strategy guided by user feedback. A formal website roll-out strategy and accompanied evaluation aims to determine the design, navigability, content, relevance and educational value of this online resource from a user perspective. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: In order to ensure this resource effectively meets the needs of this cohort of researchers, a mixed process of evaluation and design was utilized. An initial phase 1 survey was conducted with TL1 and KL2 scholars. Surveys consisted of standardized questions with answers arranged as Likert-type scales and additional written responses to collect valuable qualitative data. A convenience sample of early career researchers at Mount Sinai were contacted for initial survey participation (N = 10). A total of 3 junior faculty KL2 scholars, 3 TL1 post-doc and 4 TL1 pre-doc scholars responded to the survey. Participants were initially asked to comment on design, functionality and usefulness of content on a Likert scale with qualitative comments to support the given scores. They were subsequently asked to consider what key topics or resources were missing from the website. Based on the initial survey, changes were made to the format and content of the Emerging Investigators website to improve content relevance and usability. For phase 2, an evaluation rubric was developed to assess design, navigability, content, relevance, along with three key COI criteria to determine the educational value of this online resource. The rubric will be utilized to collect feedback in the wider phase 2 roll out of the website. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The first phase of survey feedback shaped overall design of the resource. The second phase will comprehensively evaluate the value of the website in the context of teaching and learning for emerging investigators. Ten surveys were captured in the first phase. Data collection is ongoing for the second phase. Phase 1 feedback was primarily qualitative, and valuable in informing overall design choices and content. Overall the website was well received, with participants commenting on the value of the resource in terms of content and educational value. Participants particularly appreciated the regularly updated calendar function and the links provided to a wide range of resources. Functionality issues, such as broken links, were reported by participants and repaired for phase 2. Further topics of content were identified, and additional links and multimedia resources were added to address this feedback. The second phase evaluation is ongoing with data collection being conducted via an evaluation rubric. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The Emerging Investigators website, developed using the principles of COI provides key learning, reading and resources for early career investigators in a format that is well received by a sample group of early career researchers at Mount Sinai. The website has aimed to address the reported need for communication, collaboration and social interaction with peers and other researchers across the MSHS through the addition of further web-based resources such as a LinkedIn page, a blog to feature research and provide a sounding board for research efforts, and a calendar of events targeted specifically at early career researchers. These were highlighted as areas of particular value by the participants. We anticipate the results of phase 2 rubric-based evaluations will provide actionable data that will lead to further refinement of the website, an optimized interface, and improved usability.

scholarly journals Education and training policies for research integrity: Insights from a focus group study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishma Labib ◽  
Natalie Evans ◽  
Rea Scepanovic ◽  
Panagiotis Kavouras ◽  
Andrea Reyez Elizondo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Education And Training ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Focus Group Study ◽  
Formal Element ◽  
Inductive Thematic Analysis ◽  
And Training

Education is important for fostering research integrity (RI). Although RI training (a formal element of RI education) is increasingly provided, there is little knowledge on how research stakeholders view institutional RI education and training policies. Here, we present insights about research stakeholders’ views on what research institutions should take into account when developing and implementing RI education and training policies. We conducted 30 focus groups, engaging 147 participants in 8 European countries. Using a mixed deductive-inductive thematic analysis, we identified five themes: 1) RI education should be available to all; 2) education and training approaches and goals should be tailored; 3) motivating trainees is essential; 4) both formal and informal educational formats are necessary; and 5) institutions should take into account various individual, institutional, and system-of-science factors when implementing RI education. Our findings suggest that institutions should make RI education attractive for all, and tailor training to disciplinary-specific contexts.

scholarly journals Establishing Psychological Safety to Obtain Feedback for Training Programs: A Novel Cross-Specialty Focus Group Exchange

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 454-459
Author(s):  
Daniel Saddawi-Konefka ◽  
Shannon E. Scott-Vernaglia
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Psychological Safety ◽  
Formative Feedback ◽  
The Other ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Rich Information ◽  
Fear Of Retaliation

ABSTRACT Background Formative feedback from residents is essential to improve residency programs, and focus groups may provide rich information. However, residents may withhold information due to fear of retaliation or speak less candidly to please focus group moderators. Objective We assessed participant perceptions and utility of feedback obtained from a confidential focus group exchange between 2 residency programs. Methods Anesthesiology and pediatric programs at the same institution participated in 2017. Residents voluntarily provided program feedback during 1 of 2 confidential focus groups for each program. Each focus group was moderated by the program director (PD) of the other specialty. The PDs used thematic analysis to identify themes for use by the respective programs in improvement efforts. An anonymous survey was distributed after the focus groups to collect participant perceptions (quantitative and narrative) on this approach. Results Thirteen residents of 140 (9.3%) participated (7 anesthesiology, 6 pediatrics). Thematic feedback from focus groups was largely consistent with known issues, although novel information was also obtained (eg, pediatric interns wanted earlier one-on-one meetings with their PD). Survey data suggest that residents were able to share more meaningful feedback than they would otherwise, and they did not feel that having an external moderator (a PD who may have been unfamiliar with the specialty) was a barrier to discussion. The approach required 6 hours of time for each PD and approximately $200 for dinners. Conclusions The focus group exchange required modest resources, was perceived as safe by residents, and generated robust, actionable feedback for the programs.

scholarly journals How I Learned to Conduct Focus Groups

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maribel Del Rio-Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Human Services ◽  
Group Interaction ◽  
Human Experience ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Focus Group Research ◽  
Group Research ◽  
Research Questions

The use of focus groups may provide researchers with important insights into research questions via participant discussion and interaction. As a human services practitioner and researcher, I became interested in learning how to conduct focus groups in order to apply these steps to my research and gain valuable insights about the human experience that the focus group interaction aims to bring to light. In this review, I will highlight the steps that I took to learn to conduct focus group research and through my experience I hope that readers gain familiarity and clarity into this unique qualitative research approach.

eMentoring a Community of Early Career Researchers to Support and Enable Research Integrated Learning and Professional Skills Development for Undergraduate Medical Science Students

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blake Cochran ◽  
Patsie Polly ◽  
Gwyn Jones ◽  
Anna Rowe
Keyword(s):  
Medical Science ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Skills Development ◽  
Science Students ◽  
Integrated Learning ◽  
Research Skills ◽  
Assessment Task ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Undergraduate Science

Undergraduate student research skills development as part of coursework is challenging. The Research Impact Symposium is an assessment task that is authentic to the discipline of pathology and medical science research within a specialist third year pathology course, Molecular Basis of Disease PATH3205. PATH3205 is offered to science undergraduates at the UNSW Sydney, Australia. This assessment task explicitly addresses the issue of research skills development by developing research practice, teamwork, communication and critical thinking skills for undergraduate science students within a community of research practice. The aims of this study were to evaluate the effectiveness of the eMentoring initiative. Specifically, to investigate research integrated learning and career development learning, to create a Medical Science Research Community and to implement the use of cloud-based communication and collaboration tools, Slack and Microsoft Teams to facilitate the eMentoring of students, as well as support the mentoring community. Key outcomes from the overall approach included mentoring and enabling early career researchers to work with undergraduate science students in mentoring their learning of research skills. Importantly, it aided in scaffolding third year undergraduate students for success in an authentic assessment task by learning and engaging with research integrated learning and career development learning.Furthermore, the shift to remote learning and teaching in 2020 presented the opportunity to develop digital literacy and professional online skills collaboratively and collegially for all members of this community: as students, early career researchers and course leads upskilled together pre-COVID-19 and in response to a rapid transition to remote learning.

Nursing Group Empowerment: Instrument Revision

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-19
Author(s):  
Christina L. Sieloff ◽  
Marty Downey ◽  
Rebecca L. Muller
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Student Nurse ◽  
Focus Group Discussions ◽  
Group Discussions ◽  
Group Empowerment

Background and Purpose:The Sieloff–King Assessment of Group Empowerment Within Organizations (SKAGEO) has demonstrated consistent reliability and validity, although past participants reported the need for revisions to further improve its clarity and ease of use in research. The purpose of this research was to use focus groups to revise the SKAGEO.Methods:Two focus groups were held (seven RNs and one student nurse). Thematic analysis was used to analyze the focus group discussions.Results:Five major themes, and eleven subthemes, were identified as areas for future revisions to further improve the instrument’s clarity and use in research.Conclusions:Revisions in the SKAGEO, based on the areas identified by the focus groups, would result in an instrument that would more easily be understood and incorporated into research.

scholarly journals Move or perish? Sticky mobilities in the Swiss academic context

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Sautier
Keyword(s):  
Personal Development ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Academic Context ◽  
Family Ties ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Scientific Mobility ◽  
Personal Accounts ◽  
Local Family

AbstractThis article uses a context of increasing institutional demand to be geographically mobile to examine how early-career researchers move across borders. I explore the case of Swiss academia, a particularly competitive and attractive environment with the highest levels of inbound and outbound mobility in Europe. In line with the aims of the European Research Area, an EU programme created in 2000 to foster a pan-European academic labour market, Switzerland funds scientific mobility and promotes extended research trips abroad as tools to boost collaboration and research excellence. Therefore, Swiss institutions have valued mobility for professional and personal development. In the meantime, they have raised concerns about female academics not being mobile and the potential consequences of their local family ties on career inequalities. In this study, I explore how early-career researchers experience mobility and how their personal accounts challenge institutional definitions of being mobile or immobile. I draw on a qualitative analysis of 65 semi-structured interviews conducted for two EU research projects on early-career academics from various backgrounds. I show how empirical data question the traditional—and often gendered—mobile/immobile dichotomy. I also highlight how mobility practices are normalised by the interviewees. Moreover, using the concept of stickiness, I describe a subtle range of sticky-to-stretchy mobility experiences influenced by both structural and individual factors. Finally, through the figure of the geoccasional worker, I question romanticised visions of mobility and stress the need to reconsider mobility as a (gendered) precarity issue rather than as a female problem.

Using focus groups to teach social science research practice

2008 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 24-42
Author(s):  
Jo Lindsay
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Research Participant ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Sociological Research ◽  
Research Skills

Contemporary undergraduate courses in research methods are challenging to teach because of the wide scope of the subject matter, limited student contact hours and the complexity of supervising research projects undertaken by novices. Focus group assignments within class offer an interesting and enjoyable way for students to develop and apply research skills and reflect on the process of being both a researcher and a research participant in social science disciplines. Using focus groups enables deep learning, formative assessment and the development of reflexive research skills. This article discusses the use of focus group assignments as a key assessment tool in a Sociological research methods course taught at Monash University, Australia. The use of focus groups as a teaching tool is further assessed through analysing the reflections and evaluations given by students participating in the course.

scholarly journals Understanding How Parenting & Family Literacy Centres Help Families Experiencing Poverty & Immigration

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleanore Jane Realmo
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Systems Theory ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Family Literacy ◽  
Ecological Systems ◽  
Ecological Systems Theory

This study examines the various ways in which Parenting and Family Literacy Centres (PFLC) can support families in relation to needs that arise from poverty and immigration. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory was used as a theoretical lens in this study. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data collected from 12 focus groups. Three main themes related to immigration and poverty and the supports from PFLCs emerged from the data analysis: (1) Environment; (2) Resources; and (3) Socializing. The findings present the parents’ responses from their participation in the focus group and are an indication of how parents believe PFLCs can support them. Implications of these results are discussed and recommendations for educators are provided.

scholarly journals Defining what a ‘carer’ is and the role they play in in-patient mental healthcare: A focus group study with patients, carers and clinicians

BJPsych Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aysegul Dirik ◽  
Justina Kaselionyte ◽  
Domenico Giacco ◽  
Stefan Priebe
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Hospital Setting ◽  
Mental Healthcare ◽  
Hospital Environment ◽  
Focus Group Study ◽  
Perceived Helpfulness

Background The value of carer involvement has been extensively researched and promoted. However, the field lacks exploration of conceptual issues, which might help to explain why there are widespread difficulties in putting policy into practice in this area, as implementation rates remain low internationally. Aims This qualitative study explored patients’, carers’ and clinicians’ perspectives on the role of carers in mental healthcare, particularly with regards to in-patient settings. Method Sixteen focus groups were conducted with patients, carers and clinicians who have current or previous experience of in-patient settings. A thematic analysis was conducted on the transcripts, exploring two key domains: (a) what a ‘carer’ is, and (b) how the ‘carer’ role is described within the context of the hospital environment. Results Participants diverged in their opinions of what the ‘carer’ role entails, and the perceived helpfulness of it. Issues unique to the in-patient setting were identified, such as the role of the hospital environment in enabling or being a barrier to carer involvement. These differing perspectives and contextual factors had an impact on the position of carers in the hospital setting, as they could be viewed as helpful, a hindrance or as passive visitors, depending on the perspectives of clinicians. Conclusions More clarity and agreement is needed between patients, carers and clinicians in terms of how the ‘carer’ role is defined. This has the potential to improve carers’ experience of involvement in hospital settings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document