Next Steps for Mind, Brain, and Education: Strengthening Early‐Career Development

Gotlieb, Rebecca; Pollack, Courtney; Younger, Jessica W.; Toomarian, Elizabeth Y.; Allaire‐Duquette, Geneviève; Mariager, Nadja Marie

doi:10.1111/mbe.12197

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Simultaneously, trainees spend time at the School observing classrooms, building rapport with staff and students, and refining their questions and methods of inquiry. Trainees working with the Center are thus introduced to scientific work as fundamentally collaborative and partnership-driven, an element that is imperative for exemplary MBE training (Gotlieb et al, 2019).…”

Section: Graduate Research Training Via Mbe Partnership-buildingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emerging Insights from a Research-Practice Partnership Approach to Educational Neuroscience

Toomarian,

Gosavi,

Hasak

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advances in the field of Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE) have been limited by a fundamental separation between university-based neuroscience laboratories and school communities, constraining the field’s ability to collaboratively devise research studies germane to child development. This commentary explores the assertion that the persistent obstacles in MBE work may stem from how we structure these partnerships. We examine this premise through a detailed case study of a research-practice partnership that has successfully implemented a range of innovative programmatic elements, including the establishment of specially-trained liaisons, situating a neuroscience lab within a school, and actively involving practitioners and students in research. An analysis of the values that iteratively emerged from this approach may encourage other MBE stakeholders to consider affordances of this model when embarking upon future partnership endeavors.

show abstract

Section: Graduate Research Training Via Mbe Partnership-buildingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emerging Insights from a Research-Practice Partnership Approach to Educational Neuroscience

Toomarian,

Gosavi,

Hasak

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, Gosavia & Toomarian (2024) proposed a framework to engage young learners in MBE research, based on the Middle School Research Assistant Programme they implemented over one academic year with six students between the ages of 12 and 14. Scientific equipment such as electroencephalography (EEG) was located directly in a middle school, with educational neuroscientists co‐constructing research projects with the students.…”

Section: Special Issue Summary: Why Co‐production?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cockerham et al (2024) integrated a participatory action research method with guided inquiry. And in Gosavia & Toomarian work, (2024) semi‐structured interviews were used, as well as the analysis of EEG readings and of research findings themselves, as part of the projects led by students.…”

Section: Special Issue Summary: How Is Co‐production Achieved?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They demonstrate the prerequisites that children can refine their understanding of the brain (Allix et al, 2024), share their views about pedagogical interventions (Duff, 2024), identify (Hamilton, 2024) and lead different research tracts (Allix et al, 2024; Cockerham et al, 2024). An interesting commonality of these articles was that expected findings (e.g., enhanced self‐control after mindfulness (Duff, 2024); improved research skills after explicit instruction (Gosavia & Toomarian, 2024)); were as revealing as unexpected findings (e.g., mindfulness' contribution to longer term outcomes (Duff, 2024); students' views on expected and real emotional states such as sadness (Hamilton, 2024)). All of the articles point out the complex protocols of working with young children and adolescents, but also result in findings that make it clear that the investment of time and permissions is worth it.…”

Section: Special Issue Summary: How Is Co‐production Achieved?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Involving Young Learners in Mind, Brain and Education Research

Massonnié,

Tokuhama‐Espinosa,

Fern‐Pollak

2024

Mind Brain and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For two decades, the field of Mind, Brain and Education (MBE) has shed light on learning mechanisms. However, the direct involvement of young learners in the design and creation of research projects, while steadily emerging, is still rare. More researchers are beginning to see the benefits of co‐construction of not only research questions but also experimental design and analysis based on young learners' ideas. Recognizing that learning is inseparable from social relationships and well‐being, the papers in this special issue respond to two main questions: (1) Why co‐production? (2) How is co‐production achieved? We hope that this special issue will invite discussions about the different domains within MBE research in which learners' input and collaboration can be valuable. We invite readers to take into consideration the diversity of methods which are represented in this special issue to engage young learners and collect their perspectives.

show abstract

“…), access to psychosocial support for doctoral and postdoctoral trainees is important because the lack of this support (or perceived lack of support) can have a negative effect on trainee confidence or efficacy in their ability to perform and succeed, in turn leading to attrition or dropout (Abedi & Benkin, 1987;Littlefield, Taddei, & Radosh, 2015;Maher, Wofford, Roksa, & Feldon, 2018). Empirical evidence has shown that psychosocial support can come from a variety of sources including supervisors, nonsupervisor faculty, and peers (Baker, Pifer, & Griffin, 2014;Flores-Scott &, Nerad, 2012;Gardner, 2007;Gotlieb et al, 2019;Grant-Vallone & Ensher, 2000;Jazvac-Martek et al, 2011;Lovitts, 2001;Meschitti, 2019), each of whom may provide different types of resources and advice. We also know that interpersonal relationships, both supervisory and peer, provide important social and psychological support for student success in many dimensions (Curtin et al, 2016;Weidman & Stein, 2003), and we expect that cohort members provide this support for career development, as well.…”

Section: Social Capital and Career Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doctoral Trainee Preferences for Career Development Resources: The Influence of Peer and Other Supportive Social Capital

Clair

Melkers

Rojewski

et al. 2019

IJDS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to understand doctoral and postdoctoral trainee preferences for different models of career development resources and how career-relevant social capital affects these preferences. Background: The supply and demand mismatch within the academic job market is augmented by a growing complaint that trainees are not prepared for a range of careers beyond the academic. So, trainees are often put in a position to seek out resources to navigate their career search processes, yet, the career development strategies that they pursue and the preferences that they have for different types of career development resources is not well understood. Drawing from existing higher education and social capital theory literatures, we examine how trainee preferences for career development resources are shaped by the career support received from their Principal Investigator (PI) and peers, as well as their own self-efficacy. Methodology: We focus on doctoral and postdoctoral trainees in the biomedical science and engineering disciplines at two sites (but involving three institutions) funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training (BEST) Program, a program designed to help prepare trainees for a broad variety of bio-medically related careers within and outside of academic research. Using a survey of both BEST and non-BEST trainees (those not formally in a BEST program), we conducted descriptive and logistic regression analyses of survey data to assess the factors affecting trainee preferences for three different types of career development models: (1) an intensive cohort career development experience (BEST “cohort”), (2) ad-hoc resources (“cafeteria”), or (3) choosing not to seek any career development resources at all. Contribution: This study contributes to the doctoral trainee research base by (1) taking a quantitative approach to cohort based interventions for career development, concepts historically largely examined by qualitative methods, (2) distinguishing among the types and sources of support to better tease out the different types of relationships trainees may have, (3) identifying these issues for both the experiences of the doctoral student and the lesser-studied postdoctoral fellow, and (4) moving beyond a single institution study context by examining data from three different university programs, which allows us to control for institutional and demographic characteristics which importantly is recognized as a significant need in cohort model research. Findings: We find that social capital in the form of a supportive environment and peer support was critical for shaping career development preferences. Cohort programs were particularly attractive to trainees interested in careers outside of academic science and who had low career self-efficacy. Trainees who reported high levels of PI support were less likely to pursue other career development resources, while students reporting low levels of PI support were more likely to choose to participate in a career development focused BEST cohort community. Trainees who reported low levels of PI, department, and peer support were less likely to participate in formal career development events or resources offered by academic institutions. Recommendations for Practitioners: These findings can inform university and career development administrators about the social context in which trainees develop and how that matters for how they prefer and value different formats and intensities of career support. Our recommendations point to the importance of developing (if possible) different models for providing career development resources, so trainees can take advantage of the ones most suitable for them. We further recommend programs consider different marketing strategies for the types of career development programs they offer in order for trainees to understand their options and engage in the resources that make the most sense for them. Highlighting the benefits of cohort based programs will help attract those trainees who desire and need that type of support. This clarity in program goals not only helps to set and manage expectations for trainees to know what the outcomes can be, it also helps to inform programs in terms of what resources to use and measure in helping move trainees along in their own career progression. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend empirically differentiating the different types of support trainees may receive, as our results emphasized that the source of support matters. We also recommend that this study be replicated across different disciplines to assess the extent to which these findings apply universally. Impact on Society: This research is especially important for its impact for the job market and graduate higher education. With the growth in graduate career development training available across U.S. campuses, by designing and targeting the appropriate interventions for career development in academic institutions we can better prepare trainees for their next steps after training as they enter into the job market. Future Research: Future research needs to further examine the black-boxes that are the doctoral student and postdoctoral experiences. This literature is growing, but we need a more concerted effort to understand how factors like support (in its various forms) work with other factors, like career development efficacy. Within this context, future research should look at first generation trainees, as well.

show abstract

Next Steps for Mind, Brain, and Education: Strengthening Early‐Career Development

Cited by 6 publications

References 43 publications

Emerging Insights from a Research-Practice Partnership Approach to Educational Neuroscience

Emerging Insights from a Research-Practice Partnership Approach to Educational Neuroscience

Involving Young Learners in Mind, Brain and Education Research

Doctoral Trainee Preferences for Career Development Resources: The Influence of Peer and Other Supportive Social Capital

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About