Many thanks to:

The Carnegie FoundationGeorgetown UniversityMichigan State UniversityOhio State UniversityUniversity of IllinoisUniversity of MinnesotaUniversity of VermontUniversity of Wisconsin

George WalkerChris GoldePat HutchingsAssociation of Neuroscience Departments and Programs (ANDP)

CID participants!

What is a catalyst for change?

CID: a catalyst for change

Q: How do we train our scholars? Can we do it better?Cultivate intellectual communityConsider purpose, consider goalsCreate stewards of the discipline

Revisiting our CID work:What are the mechanisms?How to make them available?Sustainability?

Agenda

1.Where are we now?- Assessing the CID’s long-term

impact

2.Where are we going?- Ongoing innovations

3.How do we get there?- breakout discussion

The Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate (CID) was a multi-year research and action project intended to support departments' efforts to more purposefully structure their doctoral programs. The initiative had three interacting elements: a conceptual analysis of doctoral education, the design of experiments in departments, and dissemination of research results. In 2004 during the initiation of the CID project within the Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology at Boston University School of Medicine, a student survey was distributed to all graduate students within the department as a descriptive assessment of the state of the department. Student opinions on topics including curriculum, professional development, career guidance, time to completion of degree, advisor mentorship, and department climate were measured. Based on the results of this survey as well as participation in many dialogues with partnering CID departments, five focused changes were made to improve the doctoral program in the Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology. These changes included:

• revision of the qualifying exam process.• formalization and refinement of the Vesalius Program.• development of a professional skills course for first year graduate students.• the development of a student representative organization.• the development of an alumni network.

Revisiting the Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate

Trials, successes and failuresM.E. Estevez, K.C. Dominick, P.R. Bergethon, T. Hoagland, M. MossDepartment of Anatomy & Neurobiology, Boston University Schools of Medicine

Query: Students in the Department receive training in professional ethics via coursework or seminars. AgreeDisagree2004 65% 23%2008 82% 9%.Query: Students in the Department receive training in professional skills such as public speaking, grant writing, and publications. AgreeDisagree2004 31% 62%2008 64% 27%

Background -2004

Methods -2008 Conclusions…and the survey says!!

Professional Skills Course

The successful implementation and some change in satisfaction indices to over 80% of the CID initiatives suggests an enduring effect of the CID. We believe that there may be value for continued longitudinal characterization in the future.

Student Representation and CommunicationVesalius Program

Development

Rationale: - Neuroscience is one of the most rapidly growing disciplines, producing Ph.D.s faster than the availability of jobs in the traditional academic medical track. At the same time there is a sharp decline and great need for individuals trained and able to teach in the biomedical sciences, particularly in gross anatomy and neuroanatomy. In response, the Department, several years ago, created the Vesalius Program, named after the 16th-century Belgian father of anatomy. The program is designed to train graduate students to become effective teachers in the biomedical sciences.Problem:The Vesalius Program needed more formal structure, defined rubrics, and a concrete identity. The Solution: see diagram below and related poster nearby.

-serve as teaching assistants 1 semester per year in the medical and dental school courses of anatomy, histology, or neurosciences.

-Attend annual T.A. orientation*

-Receive mid- and end-semester written evaluations to include in teaching portfolio*

-Receive opportunities to teach formal lectures in the medical or dental school courses.

In addition to the regular requirements, students on the Vesalius track take the following two courses:

- GMS AN804: “Teaching in the Biomedical Sciences I”, 2 credits, methods and theory

- GMS AN805: “Teaching in the Biomedical Sciences II - Practicum”, 4 credits, mentored teaching practicum experience*

All Students: Vesalius Students:

Now, in 2008 we have assessed the relative short term results of these changes that were inspired by our participation in the CID by resurveying students. All members of the current PhD program were invited to participate in this survey thatMeasured satisfaction in a variety of areas of PhD Student life.

Qualifying Exam Revision

Query: There are adequate resources in the Department in case of perceived abuse or misconduct towards graduate students. AgreeDisagree2004 41% 26%2008 82% 18%.Query: Students in the Department are treated with respect. AgreeDisagree2004 69% 23%2008 91% 9%

Query: I feel my voice is heard when I have concerns or issues within the Department. AgreeDisagree2004 37% 56%2008 64% 27%

…and the survey says!!

…and the survey says!!

…and the survey says!!

Query: Teaching experience available through the department is adequate preparation for an academic/teaching career. AgreeDisagree2004 69% 12%2008 64% 9%.

Query: I found my qualifier exam a good tool for assessing my progress/knowledge in the field. AgreeDisagree2004 27% 19%2008 27% 9%

The overall goal of this new course is to provide a formal opportunity to address two topics that had been left to the discretion of individual graduate advisors. The first is to provide students with training in some of the professional skills. The second is to provide a forum for discussions of research ethics in the specific context of their work.

Student representation has a three formal structures:

• GMSSO Graduate Medical Sciences Student Organization) – with representation at the Division Level

• Departmental Omsbudsman for all graduate students

• Student representation (2) on the Graduate Advisory Committee

The Qualifying Examination was changed from a high stakes content-summative assessment to an authentic assessment model using an NRSA grant format with oral defense as the evaluation procedure. Formative feedback is provided to students during the QE process.

Following successes of a student-chaired CID team we developed a Student Action Committee (SAC)

A new leadership committee that encourages development of professional identityA continued venue for students to discuss gaps in the graduate program and launch changes to address these issues

Focus on: Graduate curriculum

Developed a summer curriculum for incoming 1st year studentsSAC partnership with faculty-led IPN Curriculum Committee to optimize 1st year curriculum

MentoringInitiated discussions improving student-faculty mentoring relationshipCompletion of a student-faculty mentoring questionnaire and retreat exercise to demonstrate how this might be discussed between mentor-mentee

Intellectual CommunityCreated monthly Tea Time Discussions Instituted a two-day annual retreat organized by studentsBegan a monthly Neuroethics forum

Professional developmentUtilized Mentor/student teaching partnershipsHeld inaugural Alumni Career Panel

Georgetown University Interdisciplinary Program in Neuroscience

(IPN)

The CID and the Neuroscience Program: the Formation of Scholars at Illinois

Program Coherence

Intellectual Community

Claudia Lutz, Margaret Ferris, Patty Kandalepas, Molly Kent, Samit Shah, Samuel Beshers Neuroscience Program, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

OrientationSfN

Night

Student Involvement

Awards

Professional Development

Program

Annual Reports

Tracking the

Discipline

Careers

Core curriculum

Guidelines

Professional Identity

? Diverging trajectories

Setting expectations

?

?

A reflection on participation in the CID: Improvement in graduate student training through increased student

involvement and ownershipKatharine Northcutt1, Deborah Soellner1, Jessica Poort1, Michael Schwartz2, and Cheryl Sisk1

1Neuroscience Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI2Biology Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Recent changes to Neuroscience Research Forum seminar course:

• organized by students instead of faculty

• includes wide variety of topics• succeeding in graduate school

• career/life preparation

• other science issues (letters to congress, animal rights discussions)

Results of these changes:

• students feel more involved and have experience organizing course

• students play active role in training experience

• students feel more prepared to make career decisionswww.neuroscience.msu.edu

GPN at the University of Minnesota

Successful CID initiativesRevision of the oral and written preliminary examsImprovement of GPN faculty membership policiesFormation of GPN student board

Future DirectionsReinforce communication between the student body and facultyCreate a network for student travel presentations at nearby schools

Action

Student Handbook

Website

Student Board

Student Body

Student Body

Student Board

Student Board DGS

Steering Committee

Student Rep

DGS Standing GPN Committee’s

The Current Pathway

The Idealized Pathway

ActionAction

Student Handbook

Student Handbook

WebsiteWebsite

Student Board

Student Board

Student Body

Student Body

Student Body

Student Body

Student Board

Student Board DGSDGS

Steering Committee

Steering Committee

Student RepStudent Rep

DGSDGS Standing GPN Committee’sStanding GPN Committee’s

The Current PathwayThe Current Pathway

The Idealized PathwayThe Idealized Pathway

Quantitative analysis of the Neuroscience Graduate Studies Program at The Ohio State

University: A follow-up on the Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate R. E. White, M. R. Detloff, E. L. Hoschouer, P. G. Popovich, D. M. McTigue, R. J. Nelson

Neuroscience Graduate Studies Program, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 43210

Highlight of Original CID Convening•Two-day retreat held at Deer Creek Resort and Conference Center

•Goal: Reflection on depth and breath of the NGSP program

•Small group discussions with facilitators

•Opportunity for interaction between students, faculty, and program directors

•Allowed students to provide feedback on the program

The Current NGSP Program•Both numbers and diversity of students and faculty have increased

•Laboratory training

•Core facilities with cutting-edge equipment

•Interdisciplinary centers

•Training in multiple model systems and research skills

•Students are able to participate in community outreach programs

•NGSP and the OSU Graduate School provide career training opportunities

•NGSP graduates hold both teaching and research-oriented post doctoral positions

Post-CID Update 11/2008Jenny Dahlberg, M.S.

Faculty, student and alumni surveys returned generally positive feedback. Areas needing improvement were identified and addressed:

A) Resolved discrepancies between student/faculty perception New Senior Professional Development Course supplements certain topics

B) Improved student/advisor communication Student/faculty evaluations following rotations Annual student “report card” distributed to committee members Annual advisory committee meeting reports (including prelims &

dissertation)

C) Developed non-traditional career paths Neuroscience & Public Policy Dual Degree Program: 3 enrolled students Teaching Opportunities:

Teaching Fellows in Neuroscience Program (TFN), Delta Program, PEOPLE New (numerous) outreach events:

Brain Awareness Week, Science Alliance, Science Expeditions

htttp://ntp.neuroscience.wisc.edu

Department(6 students)

University-wide(30 students)

Exemplary feature = Grad Student Journal Club

Innovation = Basic Science of Neurological Disease

Training objectives•To establish a core knowledge in all students of the areas of molecular, cellular, developmental, systems and biobehavioral neuroscience.•To train individuals who can understand, create and undertake hypothesis-based approaches to research.•To train individuals in a variety of techniques and approaches to studying the nervous system.•To develop a keen sense of analytical thinking and logic in the evaluation of one's own work as well as that of others.•To create effective teachers and communicators of neuroscience. •To foster independence in thinking, laboratory work, teaching, and communicating

http://www.uvm.edu/~neurogp

Creating an Intellectual Community

Infrastructure

Centralize institutional knowledgeMaintain two-way access

Facilitate dialoguesWithin departmentsBetween institutions

Big Ten CID Conference: Training for Careers,

Sustaining the PassionConveningSmall group /Whole group discussions on specific questionsKeynote speakers: Diane Witt (NSF), Michael Zigmond (SSEP Pittsburgh)BeerMechanism: participants responsible only for travel to UIParticipants: G’town, IN, IL, Louisville, MN, OSU, WI

Diane WittHer career pathWhat program directors can’t doThe many faces of science

Michael ZigmondSurvival skillsCareer planningKnow yourselfFind mentors

Graduate Recruiting and

Training

A Passion for Neuroscience: creating and sustaining

Foster achievementRemove unnecessary hurdlesDevelop professional identityBuild relationship to communityExplore career prospects

George Walker

Small Group Discussion Questions

1.What elements in your program foster communication with other departments/programs/institutions?

2.What elements hinder it?

Where are we going?How do we get there?Communication innovationBetter scientistsBetter science

Keep people talkingObtain institutional supportMore research