The benefits of workshopping graduate fellowships: a how-to guide for graduate students and early career scientists

Mims, Meryl C.; Hodgson, Emma E.; Kuehne, Lauren M.; Siple, Margaret C.

doi:10.4033/iee.2016.9.6.n

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is merit in this approach to provide training in a number of competencies required by all graduate students, for example, critical thinking, hypothesis development, experimental design, rigor, and reproducibility, in addition to scientific writing. A second strategy is to develop F31 grant writing workshops/bootcamps/writing groups for students working on a fellowship application 45,46 . Different levels of assessment of the success of these programs were performed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A second strategy is to develop F31 grant writing workshops/bootcamps/writing groups for students working on a fellowship application. 45,46 Different levels of assessment of the success of these programs were performed. Student surveys demonstrate that the students felt that they learned useful information, improved their skills, and gained confidence in grant writing.…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Student surveys demonstrate that the students felt that they learned useful information, improved their skills, and gained confidence in grant writing. 42,[44][45][46] Evaluation of the quality of proposals demonstrated improvement over the duration of one granting writing course. 44 The success rates of fellowship applications from participants in two of these programs exceeded the national average.…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…44 The success rates of fellowship applications from participants in two of these programs exceeded the national average. 42,46 In the assessment of one program, participants in the program were compared with non-participants from the same institution. Submission rates and success rates for the participants were approximately twice that of nonparticipants.…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Research productivity and training support for doctoral students in the biological and biomedical sciences

Schaller

2023

FASEB BioAdvances

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Training of doctoral students as part of the next generation of the biomedical workforce is essential for sustaining the scientific enterprise in the United States. Training primarily occurs at institutions of higher education, and these trainees comprise an important part of the workforce at these institutions. Federal investment in the support of doctoral students in the biological and biomedical sciences is distributed differently than the distribution of students across different types of institutions, for example, public vs private. Institutions in states that historically receive less federal support for research also receive less support for doctoral student training. Doctorates at different types of institution exhibit little difference in research productivity, with the exception of citations, and subsequent receipt of additional NIH awards. Thus, training outcomes, which are related to the quality of the student and training environment, are similar across different institutions. Research productivity of doctoral students does not correlate with the number of F31s awarded to an institution. Factors that correlate with F31 funding include R01 funding levels and program size. The findings suggest strategies for institutions to increase success at securing F31s and modification of policy to promote more equitable distribution of F31s across institutions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Research productivity and training support for doctoral students in the biological and biomedical sciences

Schaller

2023

FASEB BioAdvances

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Pre- and postdoctoral programs and scientific societies increasingly offer grant-writing courses, seminars, and workshops to address this training need. 4–8 Similar efforts have occurred across academic health centers. Clinical and Translational Science Award hubs offer a variety of programs to early-career faculty including intensive grant-writing training for KL2 scholars, assistance to community–academic teams seeking research funding, and a workshop-based curriculum plus mentorship for those transitioning to research project leadership roles.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

The Proposal Preparation Program: A Group Mentoring, Faculty Development Model to Facilitate the Submission and Funding of NIH Grant Applications

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

How professional development can be supported for health and care research methodologists: results of the PROfesSionnal develoPmEnt for Research methodologists (PROSPER) e-Delphi and consensus study

Iflaifel,

Williamson,

Mitchell

2024

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveResearch methodologists play a pivotal role in health and care research, yet they face many challenges relating to their professional development. The PROfesSional develoPmEnt for Research methodologists study was designed to understand and prioritise the professional development and capacity-building needs of research methodologists in the UK.Design, setting and participantsThree-round electronic Delphi (e-Delphi) survey, with input from stakeholders in the development of the candidate list of professional development aspects followed by a national consensus meeting of health and care research methodologists in the UK.Main outcome measuresRated importance of each professional development aspects on a 9-point scale.Results207 participants gave their consent to participate in the e-Delphi survey. 189 (91%) completed round 1 and 76% completed all three rounds. In round 1, 35 professional development aspects were rated by priority, with 21 additional aspects suggested by participants and included in subsequent rounds. Rounds 2 and 3 involved rating 56 aspects: 22 achieved ‘consensus in’, 20 were ‘consensus out’ and 14 had ‘no consensus’. The top ‘consensus in’ aspects were supportive line managers, clear career pathways and promotion criteria and time for training. A consensus meeting with 18 participants rerated the 14 ‘no consensus’ aspects, adding three more to the final list. The final list includes 25 priority areas for research methodologists’ professional development.ConclusionsThis study has established the priorities from a professional development perspective for research methodologists. These priorities particularly focus on the importance of support from others, training and development, the value and recognition of the role, employer/contractual agreements and methodological research funding. The list of priorities could help individuals, managers, employers and research funders to improve professional development opportunities and could form the start of the development of a ‘methodologists’ charter’.

show abstract

The benefits of workshopping graduate fellowships: a how-to guide for graduate students and early career scientists

Abstract: Grant and fellowship proposal writing are key skills for professionals in scientific and research-driven fields, and early exposure and training in proposal writing

Cited by 3 publications

References 5 publications

Research productivity and training support for doctoral students in the biological and biomedical sciences

Research productivity and training support for doctoral students in the biological and biomedical sciences

The Proposal Preparation Program: A Group Mentoring, Faculty Development Model to Facilitate the Submission and Funding of NIH Grant Applications

How professional development can be supported for health and care research methodologists: results of the PROfesSionnal develoPmEnt for Research methodologists (PROSPER) e-Delphi and consensus study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About