Training Scientists to Make the Right Moves - Howard Hughes ...

Training Scientists to Make the Right Moves
course, talked about how beginning scientists can approach someone about
starting a collaboration as well as the risks and benefits of sharing work,
responsibility, and credit.
In the 2005 course evaluation, respondents thought that the most useful topics
were authorship issues, balancing collaborations with independent
research, tips on what makes a collaboration work and what doesn’t, how to
distinguish between help and a collaboration, how to say no to projects, and
the pitfalls of collaboration time commitment with respect to getting ready
for tenure review. Several participants commented that, although it was interesting
to hear about different paths to successful collaborations, they would
have preferred less “personal storytelling” and more time for either Q&A or
discussion of a case study. They also noted that they preferred the presentations
that dealt with the small-scale collaborations in which junior faculty are
usually involved. Participants wanted to learn more about how to initiate a
collaboration, how to negotiate authorship, and how to work with seniorlevel
collaborators. Others wanted more discussion about the roles of
physician-scientists and basic scientists in a collaboration.
Gender Issues in the Laboratory
The topic of gender issues was included in the 2005 course in the form of a
one-hour lecture, titled “Sex and Science.” Topics included working with
women in science and being a woman in science. Research was presented on
why women are poorly represented in the leadership of science. Following
the lecture, participants were presented with two case studies to work
through with a facilitator over lunch. Participants were asked to discuss what
they would do as women faculty members and as colleagues.
Feedback from the 2005 course evaluation indicated that this session was
well received by participants. In particular, they valued the discussion of the
case-study exercise, which revealed the presence of unintentional gender bias
using the examples of letters of recommendation. They also liked the nonconfrontational
nature of the speaker’s presentation and her use of data in
documenting bias. Participants wanted more information on how to address
bias in themselves and in others. They also wanted more discussion of
minority issues and how to handle sexual harassment. They wanted more
case studies with real-life examples and solutions. Several participants suggested
having a panel format instead of a single speaker or having a panel
discussion at the end of the lecture to discuss topics raised in the lecture.
Getting Funded
This topic was covered in the 2002 and 2005 courses in two-hour sessions
that used much the same format: Twenty-minute presentations by three
speakers, followed by a Q&A period. In 2005, the session was taught by representatives
from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National
Science Foundation (NSF), and a senior academic scientist. They focused
their presentations toward beginning investigators who are writing their first
grant proposals. The session also included information about basic budgeting
principles, such as what constitutes a reasonable budget, direct versus indirect
costs, managing salaries across grants, equipment ownership, and tracking
expenditures to manage current funding and prepare for the next grant cycle.
106