scholarly journals A Vertical Peer Mentorship Model to Promote Early Career Development: Implementation and Initial Outcomes

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Frances Haynos ◽  
Kathryn Coniglio ◽  
Helen Burton Murray ◽  
Linsey Utzinger ◽  
Andrea B. Goldschmidt
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Iterative Process ◽  
Opportunity To Learn ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Potential Solution ◽  
Mentorship Program ◽  
Peer Mentorship ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Initial Program

Mentorship is critical for career enhancement and professional development among early career researchers in the behavioral sciences. However, many barriers exist to securing appropriate mentorship, including inadequate supply of advanced mentors, inconsistent quality of mentorship, and diverse mentorship needs. Additionally, there are few training experiences that provide an opportunity to learn effective mentorship approaches and techniques. Vertical peer mentorship programs can provide one potential solution to these common mentorship pitfalls. In this approach, slightly more advanced early career professionals (e.g., post-doctoral fellows) provide mentorship to more junior colleagues (e.g., graduate students), permitting opportunities for both mentorship and mentorship training within the same dyad. Here, we detail one such early career vertical peer mentorship program developed within a subspecialty of psychology (eating disorders). We provide details about the iterative process of developing and refining this program to support mentor and mentee goals. We also provide initial program evaluation data from a subsample of participants completing post-program assessments (n = 109) that indicates that the program was highly acceptable (M = 8.22, SD = 4.25 acceptability on a 10-point Likert scale) and generative of early career productivity (producing > 25 manuscripts published or under review and > 21 conference abstracts) in its initial four years. This manuscript serves to provide a model for developing a successful vertical peer mentorship program and to encourage research in the under-investigated area of efficacious mentorship practices.

scholarly journals Perspectives for early-career researchers on plagiarism and scientific integrity

FACETS ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-25
Author(s):  
Robert G. Young ◽  
T. Fatima Mitterboeck
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Scientific Investigation ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Scientific Integrity ◽  
Predatory Journals ◽  
Early Career Researchers

Lapses in scientific integrity, such as plagiarism, persist in the scientific realm. To be successful and contributory, early-career researchers (ECRs), including graduate students, need to be able to effectively navigate the literature, peer-review process, and scientific research with integrity. Here we discuss different aspects of scientific integrity related to ECRs. Our discussion centres on the concepts of plagiarism and intellectual property, predatory journals, aspects of peer review, transparency in publishing, and false advanced accreditations. Negative elements within these topics may be especially damaging to ECRs, who may be less familiar with the research landscape. We highlight the need for ECRs to approach scientific investigation cautiously and thoughtfully to promote integrity through critical thinking.

scholarly journals What senior academics can do to support reproducible and open research: a short, three-step guide

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivia Kowalczyk ◽  
Alexandra Lautarescu ◽  
Elisabet Blok ◽  
Lorenza Dall'Aglio ◽  
Samuel James Westwood
Keyword(s):  
Policy Change ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Career Stages ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Grassroots Initiatives ◽  
Hiring Criteria ◽  
Quality Of Research

Increasingly, policies are being introduced to reward and recognise open research practices, while the adoption of such practices into research routines is being facilitated by many grassroots initiatives. However, despite this widespread endorsement and support, open research is yet to be widely adopted, with early career researchers being the notable exception. For open research to become the norm, initiatives should engage academics from all career stages, particularly senior academics (namely senior lecturers, readers, professors) given their routine involvement in determining the quality of research. Senior academics, however, face unique challenges in implementing policy change and supporting grassroots initiatives. Given that - like all researchers - senior academics are in part motivated by self-interest, this paper lays out three feasible steps that senior academics can take to improve the quality and productivity of their research, that also serve to engender open research. These steps include a) change hiring criteria, b) change how scholarly outputs are credited, and c) change to funding and publishing with open research. The guidance we provide is accompanied by live, crowd-sourced material for further reading.

scholarly journals How to find the right postdoctoral position for you

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. e6
Author(s):  
Dominic M. D. Tran ◽  
Aaron Veldre
Keyword(s):  
Research Output ◽  
Academic Career ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Strong Focus ◽  
Postdoctoral Position ◽  
Academic Job Market ◽  
The Right ◽  
Quality Of Research

The increasingly competitive academic job market has forced PhD graduates in psychology, neuroscience, and related fields to maximize their research output and secure grant funding during the early postdoctoral period of their careers. In the present article, based on a Q&A session presented at a research retreat (Brain and Behaviour Lab, University of Sydney) in February 2018, we draw on our firsthand experiences of navigating the transition from graduate student to postdoc. We offer practical advice to students who may be nearing the end of their PhDs and planning their first steps toward an academic career. Although the postdoc experience is varied, it is important for early-career researchers to make optimal choices to increase their chances of securing a continuing academic position. Ultimately, the goal of a postdoctoral position should be to develop all the facets of an academic career, but with a strong focus on the quantity and quality of research outputs.

Field Research: A Graduate Student's Guide

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ezgi Irgil ◽  
Anne-Kathrin Kreft ◽  
Myunghee Lee ◽  
Charmaine N Willis ◽  
Kelebogile Zvobgo
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Graduate Students ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Crisis Response ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Sampling Strategies ◽  
Early Career Researchers

Abstract What is field research? Is it just for qualitative scholars? Must it be done in a foreign country? How much time in the field is “enough”? A lack of disciplinary consensus on what constitutes “field research” or “fieldwork” has left graduate students in political science underinformed and thus underequipped to leverage site-intensive research to address issues of interest and urgency across the subfields. Uneven training in Ph.D. programs has also left early-career researchers underprepared for the logistics of fieldwork, from developing networks and effective sampling strategies to building respondents’ trust, and related issues of funding, physical safety, mental health, research ethics, and crisis response. Based on the experience of five junior scholars, this paper offers answers to questions that graduate students puzzle over, often without the benefit of others’ “lessons learned.” This practical guide engages theory and praxis, in support of an epistemologically and methodologically pluralistic discipline.

scholarly journals How early-career researchers are shaping eLife

eLife ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Patterson ◽  
Randy Schekman
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Independent Group ◽  
Group Leaders ◽  
Early Career Researchers

Journals can benefit from listening to graduate students, postdocs and newly-independent group leaders.

scholarly journals Writing and Research Across the Globe: An Innovative North-North-South-South Collaboration

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 200-222
Author(s):  
Katie Bryant ◽  
Codie Fortin Lalonde ◽  
Rachel Robinson ◽  
Trixie G Smith
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
North America ◽  
Capacity Building ◽  
Program Development ◽  
Southern Africa ◽  
Writing Studies ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Collaborative Project ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Global North

This article is based on various versions of a panel presented at multiple writing centre and writing studies conferences as well as conversations across partners. Our perspectives come from discussions between our four universities before, during, and after an initial global North/global South writing support partnership meeting in the summer of 2018. During that summer, four universities (two in southern Africa and two in North America) partnered to begin a collaborative project of capacity building in the areas of writing centres and writing support across all levels of these universities, offering writing support to undergraduate and graduate students as well as early-career researchers/faculty. In this article, we share some of our ongoing concerns and considerations for ensuring this partnership moves forward in a collaborative, egalitarian, decolonial way that avoids both Western colonial and neo-colonial approaches to capacity building and program development. Reflections in this article can perhaps inform others working in the field of writing centre scholarship wanting to build similar global collaborations.

scholarly journals Journal Reviews and Revisions: Advice from an Early Career Panel Discussion

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Chan Paul ◽  
Dossick Carrie ◽  
Hacker Miriam ◽  
Hartmann Timo ◽  
Javernick-Will Amy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Panel Discussion ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Academic Quality ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Revision Process ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Journal Paper ◽  
Independent Thought

Peer review is a cornerstone of high-quality research. While attending PhD programmes, we mostly interact with advisors, however the academic quality of our work is ultimately judged by a broader range of academic peers. For early career researchers, transitioning into independent thought-leaders requires increasing exposure with our community of peers, and inevitably engaging with review practices - both as authors and reviewers. Whilst many PhD programmes around the world offer training on paper and grant reviews, journal paper reviews remain somewhat vague to many researchers at all levels who haven’t had extensive exposure to advisors, editors, and peers who share their understanding of expectations and best practices. This article provides a discussion of the review and revision process for journal articles, including a check-list for each section.

First person – Ajay Singh

2021 ◽  
Vol 134 (19) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Repair ◽  
Dna Synthesis ◽  
Oocyte Maturation ◽  
Early Career ◽  
First Person ◽  
Animal Biotechnology ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Determining Factors ◽  
Selection Of

ABSTRACT First Person is a series of interviews with the first authors of a selection of papers published in Journal of Cell Science, helping early-career researchers promote themselves alongside their papers. Ajay Singh is first author on ‘ Local DNA synthesis is critical for DNA repair during oocyte maturation’, published in JCS. Ajay is a postdoc in the lab of Dr H. B. D. Prasada Rao at the National Institute of Animal Biotechnology, Hyderabad, India, investigating the quality of and lifespan-determining factors of mature oocytes in mammals.

scholarly journals Survey of Australian STEMM Early Career Researchers: job insecurity and questionable research practices are major structural concerns

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Christian ◽  
Carolyn Johnstone ◽  
Jo-ann Larkins ◽  
Wendy Wright ◽  
Michael R. Doran
Keyword(s):  
Job Insecurity ◽  
Intention To Leave ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Questionable Research Practices ◽  
Community Needs ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Engineering Mathematics ◽  
Quality Of Research

AbstractWe sought to understand the pressures on Early Career Researchers (ECR) in the Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, & Medicine (STEMM) disciplines, collecting data from 658 ECRs working in Australia. Respondents indicated a “love of science”, but most also indicated an intention to leave their position. Decisions were primarily motivated by job insecurity (52%), while grievances included poor supervision (60%), bullying or harassment (34%), inequitable hiring practices (39%) and poor support for families (9.6%). A concerning rate of “questionable research practices” by colleagues (34.1% to 41.1%) was reported to have impacted ECR career advancement. Our study links recent reports that characterise the health of the research industry, providing direct insight from ECRs on job insecurity, workplace culture challenges, and the logical rise of questionable research practices. Internationally, nationally and institutionally the research community needs to improve job security (care for our people) and the quality of research data (our product).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document