The Post Doctoral Research Associates Program Manorama M. Khare, PhD Evaluator, WISEST; Senior...
-
Upload
scot-hunter -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
2
Transcript of The Post Doctoral Research Associates Program Manorama M. Khare, PhD Evaluator, WISEST; Senior...
The Post Doctoral Research Associates Program
Manorama M. Khare, PhDEvaluator, WISEST; Senior Research Specialist, Center for Research on Women and Gender
Mo-Yin S. Tam, Professor of Economics PI, WISEST; Vice-ProvostOffice of Faculty Affairs, UIC
March 12, 2010
WISEST FACULTY FOCUS
Women in Science and Engineering System Transformation www.uicwisest.org
A WISEST (UIC NSF ADVANCE IT Grant) Program
The goal of the WISEST Initiative is to increase the number, participation, and leadership status of women - majority and minority - in academic science and engineering through institutional transformation at UIC.
www.uicwisest.org
The WISEST Postdoctoral Research Associates Program
WISEST postdoc program Cohort (5 URM postdocs) Goal: mentor postdoc to
become a faculty member Engaged in research of
choice of postoc (matched with a mentor)
Mentored by a cadre of mentors
2 -year program (2007-2009) Funded jointly by WISEST
and the academic units Structured training/skill &
career building program
Standard postdoc program Individual with an advisor Goal: mentor psotdoc to be
successful in a specific research project
Engaged a research program funded by the advisor’s grant
Mentored by the advisor
Length varies Funded by the advisor’s grant
No formal program
Working with NPA
Program created by working with the National Postdoctoral Association (NPA) Diversity Sub-committee
Components recommended by the NPA:Proactive RecruitmentProgram Components
MOU between advisors and post doc associate Individual Career Development Plan (ICDP) Career Building Seminar Series
Outline
– Recruitment• Finding URM STEM women
• Application Process
• Applicant Pool
• Applicant Selection
• Final Candidates
– Key features of the program• Matching research interests
• Cadre of mentors
• Structured training and skill building
– Assessment of the Program
– Where are the postdocs now?
– Cost of the Program
– Lessons learned
Recruitment: Finding URM STEM women
Intensive Proactive Search
Advertised through job sites such as
• Science Careers.org
• Naturejobs.org
• The Scientist
• Sciencejobs
Recruitment: Finding URM STEM women
Intensive Proactive Search
NPA contacts: National Research Council Ford Foundation Diversity Fellowship Program Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate-National
Science Foundation (AGEP) National Postdoctoral Association MentorNet SACNAS Postdoc Committee UNCF/Merck Postdoctoral Science Research Fellowships AAAS MiSciNet: Minority Scientists Network
Recruitment: Finding URM STEM women
Intensive Proactive Search
Science and Math Organizations:
American Indian Science and Engineering Society American Physical Society Committee on the Status of Women in
Physics Association for Women in Mathematics Society of Women Engineers The Woman Astronomer
Recruitment: Finding URM STEM women
Using the SUCCEED search training model for recruitment
Faculty called departments and their contacts to identify potential candidates
Recruitment: Finding URM STEM women
How did we find the final 5 candidates
- All 5 through web advertisements
- 1 also had worked for another ADVANCE program
Recruitment: Application process
Two Part Application Process
Part 1: Eligibility requirements – Candidate had to be a U.S. citizen or permanent
resident– Candidate must have completed a doctoral degree
in a STEM field as of August 2007– Other reviewed materials: reference letters,
papers/abstracts, CV, career statement
Recruitment : Application process
Two Part Application Process
Part 2: Invitation to apply
Candidate was required to identify a research advisor at UIC Candidate & potential adviser collaboratively
submitted a research project
Recruitment : Applicant Pool
African-American
18%
Asian14%
Caucasian18%
Latina18%Native
American/ Asian
Americn4%
Not Available
28%
Race/Ethnicity of Applicant pool
Recruitment : Applicant Pool
Where were the applicants from?
• 3 Illinois• 21 other states• 1 UK• 3 Not available
Recruitment : Applicant Pool
What disciplines did they represent?
FIELD OF SPECIALIZATION (N=28) Biology 6 (21.4%) Earth & Environmental Sciences 4 (14.3%) Chemical Engineering 3 (10.7%) Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Mechanical Engg, Computer Science
2 (7.1%) each
Civil Engg, BioEngg, Electrical Engg 1 (3.6%) each Not Available 2 (7.1%)
Recruitment : Applicant Pool
A total of 28 applications received
• 13 (46%) completed Part 1• 10 (36%) invited to complete Part 2• 6 (21%) completed Part 2• 6 offers; 5 (18%) accepted
Recruitment : Applicant Selection
Selection of final candidates was based on:
Matching of postdoc research interest with a UIC STEM faculty member
The merit of the collaboratively designed research project submitted
Recruitment: Final Candidates
5 URM women postdocs were hired
– 1 African American; 3 Latinas; 1 Native American/Asian
– 1 Chemical Engineer; 1 Earth Scientist; 3 Biologists
Key features: Matching Research Interests
Serving research interest of postdocs (funded by WISEST and the department)
External Mentors
Research Interests of STEM faculty
Research Interest of Postdoc
Example A: a postdoc interest being intersection of 3 faculty interest (3 mentors)
Example B: a postdoc interest partially matched by one faculty member: brought in an external researcher (1 internal and 1 external mentor)
Key Features: Cadre of Mentors
Multi-member Mentoring Team:– The research advisor– The departmental mentor– The WISEST facilitator– The WISEST Director– An external mentor (optional )
Key Features: UIC Facilitator Model
Features:– One from each department– The group meets monthly– Facilitators are mentors– Facilitator contributes to training
Key Features: Structured Training and Skill Building
The Postdoctoral Institute for Career Development and Academic Diversity
– Is a series of skill building seminars and panels on topics such as: Setting Goals & Objectives; Work-life Balance; Research Integrity & Data Management; Managing Research Projects; the Job Search; Grant writing; Getting Funded; Getting Published & Increasing your Visibility; Preparing an Application Package; Obtaining & Negotiating a Faculty Position; Proposal Presentations; Developing a Research Program, not just a series of projects; Gender & Culture Issues & Dynamics in Academe; The Complete Application Package
– Sessions were conducted by faculty from UIC, experts in specific topics, scientists from Argonne Labs.
The Postdoc Institute
1. Balancing personal and professional life
2. Research integrity, data management, managing your research
3. Getting mentored, networking. Cultivating "sponsors." Setting up collaborations
4. The job search: finding the right match
5. Overview of the funding process NSF. NIH, DOE, DoD
6. Getting published. Responding to reviewers
7. Panelists discuss each submitted proposal in turn
8. Preparing an application package I:CV, cover letter, research statement/proposal, teaching philosophy
9. Preparing an application package II:finding a suitable niche, positioning oneself in the faculty job market
10.. Search Committee review of submitted application package
11. Preparing for the campus interview, negotiating an offer
12. Giving a job talk (research proposal)
13. A 30-min mock job interview one-on-one with a senior professor of the hiring department
14. Research presentations formal 50-min talks by participants on their completed work to host department
15. Anatomy of an NSF proposal. Preparing a budget for an NSF CAREER proposal.
16. Getting started, Staffing your laboratory
17. Your role as a lab leader, building & sustaining an effective team
18. Final progress report
Application package review bypanel
Casestudies
Panel discussion
One-on-oneinterview
Proposal review by panel
Manuscript review
Team-on-one
Presentation followed by discussion
Informal job talk (proposal) to mockSearch committee
IV.5. Slides from UIC NSF Mid-Award Visit
Assessment of the Program
How do we assess One on One interviews with the post doctoral
associates before and after the 2 year program
Survey with the mentors after the program to learn about their experience and get their recommendations for the future.
Assessment of the ProgramInterviews with postdoctoral associates
Topics covered in baseline and follow up interviews include: Experience with program
– i.e. How would you describe your experience with the program and the people involved?
Goals for the program– i.e. Do you feel you have achieved these goals you set out for
yourself? Personal strengths and weaknesses
– i.e. What do you see as your main strengths as a candidate for academic positions?
Program strengths and weaknesses– i.e. What do you see as the main strengths of this fellowship
program? Perception of specific program components
– i.e. Are there any specific components you would like to see modified or added onto the program?
Assessment of the ProgramFindings from postdoc interviews
Experience with the program
Both before and after the 2 year program the words the postdocs used to describe the program were: wholistic, constructive, supportive, informative, and educational.
Assessment of the ProgramFindings from postdoc interviews – Goals
Goals at the start of the program Make a decision on the career to
pursue Learn new research techniques &
skills needed to be successful in an academic position
Develop and strengthen teaching skills
Be confident about mentoring students
Gain experience in writing and submitting grants
Produce at least 2 publications from the 2 years of work
Outcomes at the end of the program 3 postdocs reported meeting all of the
goals, 2 met some of the goals 4 of 5 reported learning new skills
All improved their teaching skills, in the words of one of them “I used my mentors to get advice on how to structure a class…. I created the class and I had not had the experience before.”
All published at least one paper
Assessment of the ProgramFindings from postdoc interviews – personal
strengths and weaknesses as a candidate
Strengths Research experience and
skills (4 of 5 report) Publications (2 of 5) Expanded network of
researchers and collaborators (2 of 5)
Funding record (1 of 5) Awareness of subtleties and
challenges of academia
Weaknesses (varied) Lack of focus on a single
research area Lack of skill in a specific
methodology Lack of grant writing
experience Adequate teaching
experience – developing a course
Assessment of the ProgramFindings from postdoc interviews – program
strengths and weaknesses
Program Strengths
Postdoc Institute Seminars Developing their own
research proposals The mentoring team
Program Weaknesses
Research Funding
“Money is a weakness because none of us are truly independent from the work of our mentors.”
Assessment of the ProgramFindings from postdoc interviews
Overall impressions: 4 of 5 postdocs reported that their experience was very
successful the program opened up new opportunities for them in regard to
networking and developing their skills for an academic position. One said, “I learned things that I didn’t know I even needed to
learn.” Working as a cohort - “I think the post doc world can be
isolating and it was great to be brought in with a group at the same time.”
Assessment of the Program On-line survey for Mentors
Topics covered include: Experience as a WISEST mentor
– i.e. Please rate the importance of the benefits you have experienced as a WISEST mentor.
Mentor/mentee relationship– i.e. What factors were enablers/ barriers to your
relationship with your mentee? Mentee skills
– i.e. Do you think your mentee is ready to enter the academic job search process?
Perceptions of program components– i.e. How useful were the Post Doctoral Institute seminars
to your mentee? Overall experience with program
– i.e. Would you be a mentor again?
Assessment of the ProgramFindings from the Mentor Survey – Description of Mentors
Total of 18 mentors were sent the survey– 12 internal; 6 external
Total of 9 responses (response rate 50%)– 7 internal; 2 external
7 mentored one postdoc, 1 mentored 2 postdocs, and 1 mentored 3 postdocs
Role of the Mentor
Assessment of the ProgramFindings from the Mentor Survey – Reasons why they chose to be a mentor
Mentees need your experience, Potential to learn from your mentees, Help conducting their research. Personal satisfaction, relationship building,
recognition from your department/UIC, and networking were other factors mentioned
Assessment of the ProgramFindings from the Mentor Survey – Enablers and Barriers to successful mentoring
Enablers
Initiative of the mentee Common research interests Support from the
department
Barriers
Lack of initiative from the mentee
Lack of time Conflicting personalities
Assessment of the ProgramFindings from the Mentor Survey – Most time spent
The top three skills mentors spent most of their time on
Research skills Networking Grant writing
Assessment of the ProgramFindings from the Mentor Survey - Overall comments
Overall the mentors were satisfied with the program Need to provide travel and research money Include more networking
– “Networking with STEM women faculty at UIC and in neighboring institutions is also very important and was not a formal component of the program.”
Needed more guidance about their roles as mentors
Where are these postdocs now
Two were offered and accepted tenure track positions
One was offered a tenure track position but chose to do another post doc
One accepted an adjunct research faculty position
One did not inform WISEST of future plans
Cost of the Program
Required matching of salary from the departments
Total cost per postdoc for 2 years ~ 100,000 with full medical & dental benefits
Donated time from the advisors and mentors Office space, adminstrative support from the
department
VIII. Lessons Learned
Additional research and travel funding should be provided by the program
Program is resource and labor intensive, but this is necessary for success
Features contributed to the success– Serving the postdoc interest– A strong mentoring relationship– Training and skill building postdoc institute
Disciplines of post docs should mirror institutional need for tenure-faculty. This process is more likely to mutually benefit the post doc and the institution.
“A holistic way of training post docs is ideal and desired. I haven’t had to trade off my research productivity to have a more holistic program.”