Top
SCIENCE. STORIES. IMPACT.

iBiology

Bringing the World's Best Biology to You

Shaping the Future of Research

00:00:15.00 Hi, I'm Sara, and I'm a post-doc at Boston University Medical School.
00:00:18.00 I'm Gary, and I'm a post-doc at Tufts University.
00:00:22.00 I'm a Kristen, and I'm a post-doc at Harvard Medical School.
00:00:25.00 I'm Jessica, and I'm also a post-doc at Harvard Medical School.
00:00:31.00 We are part of an organization that serves as an informal, grass roots group
00:00:33.00 of post-docs interested in the structure of the scientific enterprise.
00:00:39.00 A lot of grad students and post-docs have conversations about the work force, funding issues
00:00:42.00 around the proverbial water cooler.
00:00:44.00 at beer hour or online. We wanted to create a forum
00:00:49.00 for early career researchers to get their voices out to the public.
00:00:54.00 So when we started on this, there was a lot of converstations going on at the higher scientific research enterprise
00:00:59.00 for many senior scientists in terms of the problems they saw with the way that science is structured and science is being done.
00:01:04.00 We really felt there was a need for junior so early career researchers to get involved into this conversation.
00:01:12.00 So we wanted to find ways we can get early post docs and graduate students other early career researchers involved in these conversations.
00:01:19.00 We could also see change in the joy in the performing of science, and a lot of motivation to try to make the system efficient,
00:01:30.00 to make people happier to do science in a more productive environment
00:01:36.00 My motivation in helping to organize the Future of Research is to really help educate
00:01:41.00 early career scientists on what is already out there and what is new,
00:01:46.00 and also to understand myself so that we can better work as a group to advocate for shaping the future of research
00:01:56.00 So all of this started with some conversations that's part of the Harvard Medical School post-doc forums.
00:02:02.00 I was running this as a way for post docs to get together and talk to one another about both their science and other issues going on they are interested in.
00:02:09.00 We had a discussion about a paper that came out from Alberts, Kirschners, Tilghman, and Varmes
00:02:17.00 and about some of the problems they raised and what they thought with biomedical research.
00:02:21.00 One thing we realized was that post docs in particular were really interested in these conversations
00:02:26.00 and really invested in talking about these ideas, and having ideas of their own.
00:02:34.00 So some of it was their own frustration with the hurdles and problems they face in the lab
00:02:37.00 and really having a voice and making a change in the structure of science and how science is being down.
00:02:43.00 So from this, we moved to talking to a group in Boston that is now known as
00:02:48.00 the Boston Post-docs Association that consists of many post-docs in and around Boston.
00:02:56.00 So we approached this group, maybe we can come together as a group of post-docs around Boston
00:03:00.00 to put together a symposium about some of the issues that were brought up in this paper that I mentioned as well as other papers.
00:03:07.00 And so we came together with this really great group of people so
00:03:09.00 we think this worked really well because we had a group of post-docs from many institutions
00:03:13.00 with different background and interests, different skill sets. So having this diverse group of people,
00:03:18.00 who very often we would have different ideas about things but we were able to talk about them and
00:03:24.00 come to find consensus among different opinions and find ways we could move forward
00:03:29.00 in a productive fashion, and use this energy and motivation to really make a difference in science
00:03:34.00 to do what we could to try to make science a better place and a more productive place for everyone
00:03:40.00 So this led to a symposium that we held in Boston, last October.
00:03:47.00 That's right, it was a two-day symposium that comprised of two components. First was talks from experts who had thought a lot about
00:03:54.00 the structure of the enterprise, funding, and all these issues, diversity, which we were all concerned about.
00:04:00.00 So we opened with discussion forums from leaders people who have been involved previously .
00:04:11.00 Then, the second day, we hosted interactive workshops for all of our participants as well as the speakers.
00:04:17.00 The format of these workshops was intended to get voices from every single participant.
00:04:23.00 So rather than have a session where one person who is more vocal who might "take over" the room
00:04:31.00 we used posted notes and invited participants to write posted noted and write reponses to our prompts on the wall
00:04:37.00 We went through and categorize them, found commonalities,
00:04:41.00 and we identified themes and ultimately the points we thought were most important.
00:04:46.00 The workshops were divided into four groups.
00:04:51.00 We had issues with the structure of the work force, that is how people move through their scientific career.
00:05:00.00 How people move from graduate school to their scientific career, from post-doc, to perhaps senior scientists, PI, and into industry.
00:05:06.00 The next was the funding structure, how is it that grants are awarded.
00:05:12.00 What are the types of science that are encouraged by different types of funding.
00:05:19.00 Next, the mechanisms of training.
00:05:22.00 What do the training programs in the academic systems actually train people to do,
00:05:27.00 and what should they train people to do.
00:05:29.00 Finally, incentives, what are the incentives that drives what science is done.
00:05:35.00 Is the science that's done the most creative and reproducible
00:05:40.00 or is it perhaps we are distracted by chasing impact factors and other requirements that may not necessarily achieve these aims.
00:05:49.00 So we began each of these workshops by asking participants to identify problems they see in the current system
00:05:57.00 and then we grouped those, we categorized them and ask them to identify solutions.
00:06:01.00 Part of this was we really wanted to get pass just seeing the problems.
00:06:05.00 It's really easy to get together to talk about the things we hate, don't like,
00:06:10.00 but we wanted to get past that and try to find productive ways we could start coming up with ideas
00:06:15.00 of what we would like to see changed in the system.
00:06:17.00 What would our ideal system be?
00:06:19.00 How we could maybe achieve that.
00:06:21.00 So in this case we are focusing on post docs and early career researchers,
00:06:26.00 but we also wanted to involve other stakeholders.
00:06:28.00 For the speakers and the panelists, we had focused not just on members of academia, but also member of industry,
00:06:35.00 people who specialized in economics to come together
00:06:39.00 and give us hopefully a broader view of the scientific system,
00:06:44.00 to help give us a jumping off point for what might be the ideas we could have
00:06:48.00 to move forward and make science the ideal we'd all like to have.
00:07:00.00 To add our voices to the conversations. We wanted to have a productive and reasoned response
00:07:07.00 to the conversation that is happening, and to the things that have come forth from the senior scientists.
00:07:16.00 We took all of the ideas and solutions in the various workshops in the symposium,
00:07:22.00 and we decided to write up a white paper, to find consensus, recommendation
00:07:28.00 that would add to the voice that we wanted to put forward from junior researchers.
00:07:35.00 So we came up with 3 main conclusions to the white paper.
00:07:40.00 The first was talking about stability in funding, and investment in early career researchers.
00:07:47.00 With a lot of variation in funding in the current political climate, and in the way funding is structured
00:07:56.00 And in particular, in funding of early career researchers that's made more accountable
00:08:06.00 we also looked at connectivity amongst young researchers and alosbetween different levels of researchers.
00:08:13.00 So we feel that post docs and grad students should come together and talk about these issues
00:08:20.00 And get together to talk about advocacy, and we will talk more about that in our next video
00:08:26.00 And we also feel that the young researchers should alos communicate with researchers younger than them
00:08:33.00 and also with senior researchers, it's a conversation that is productive amongst all levels of the academic infrastructure.
00:08:40.00 And we also feel that this can be achieved by researchers coming together within their scientific societies
00:08:47.00 talking about their science and also talking about the issues that affect their communities as well.
00:08:52.00 Third conclusion that we drew was that there needs to be more transparency.
00:08:57.00 In the sort of data that we are collecting apart our early career researchers,
00:09:03.00 the academic work force and infrastructure as a whole
00:09:08.00 And we feel that there should be a lot more collection of career outcomes for early career outcomes,
00:09:16.00 from graduate programs to post doctoral programs
00:09:20.00 And the data should be made publically available from each institution, so we can see where people are ending up with their training,
00:09:29.00 what kind of careers people are going into? What kind of employment they are ending up
00:09:34.00 Whether those kinds of careers are beneficial to PhD holders
00:09:40.00 So we produced this white paper and published it in F1000 research.
00:09:45.00 We were pleasantly surprised by the response we had from the academic community.
00:09:50.00 It was very serious interest in the voice we were trying to present,
00:09:57.00 and we had our opinions being sought by a lot of different stakeholders from a lot of different areas of science.
00:10:04.00 And we really feel that that productivity, that voice we were able to give should be continued further,
00:10:11.00 and connecting with that talking about some of the issues with data collection, as I mentioned before
00:10:16.00 So why should you care?
00:10:23.00 I think one thing is this has been a discussion talking about the structure of the work force,
00:10:28.00 and the way science has been done, the discussion has been going on for a long time
00:10:33.00 Especially in terms of post docs and the positions they play in the scientific work force.
00:10:38.00 So the National Academies had their first reports on the post docs in the 1960s and they have produced a number of reports since then
00:10:46.00 So they have brought many of the issues facing post docs, how post docs and what part they play in the larger scientific work force
00:10:53.00 And maybe some of these aspects should be changed, [00:10:56: 00] or how we might do some of these differently in the future
00:10:59.00 And though this may seem a truly daunting task to change the way science is done,
00:11:06.00 I think it's really important that we all get involved in this discussion
00:11:09.00 We have 3 responses from people who says the problem is too big, we can't tackle them. The first is
00:11:16.00 Even though they are really challenging, that doesn't mean we shouldn't address them.
00:11:19.00 There are many problems in the world, and we all be in pretty bad shape if no one wanted to tackle them
00:11:25.00 Number 2, we believe this is a pretty good time to do this.
00:11:31.00 With investment from the NIH in terms of the new investment awards, the advisors committees to the directors,
00:11:37.00 work force report, and attention from prominent scientists
00:11:41.00 like the others you will be hearing about in this video series, we really feel that the time is right to take action.
00:11:48.00 And third, we feel that even these issues are what we early career researchers might feel personally very acutely,
00:11:55.00 our real motivation for doing this is for the future scientific future that we want to inhabit.
00:12:00.00 We want a world where science is efficient, productive, creative, reproducible.
00:12:08.00 To create this, we need to focus on ways to make science more efficient
00:12:13.00 And productive for all players.
00:12:17.00 As a public enterprise, we owe this to all Americans we are invested in this, not just ourselves.
00:12:26.00 Part of making science the best that it could be, the most productive for this country
00:12:30.00 is part of making science more attractive to young people to take part in the scientific work force
00:12:36.00 and want to come be a part of it, and work and be creative to something that could make a big difference.
00:12:44.00 So we want to attract both talented and diverse work force.
00:12:49.00 And not only attract them but retain them, so they want to stay in science and want to keep at it and keep working on those discoveries.
00:12:57.00 It's really important that everyone gets involved.
00:13:00.00 Anyone can get involved, at any of those levels. Now we are going to talk about how you can get involved.
00:13:06.00 Today we are talking more about who is it we want to get involved.
00:13:15.00 The who is about anybody. Yes, we are early career scientists, post docs at the moment.
00:13:20.00 But we want to engage anyone from high school students, the community, right up to senior scientists
00:13:26.00 there's many ways you can get involved. You can get directly involved in the symposium itself and the various aspects of the symposium
00:13:34.00 and the symposiums that are going to take place around the country.
00:13:38.00 But you can also get involved by communicating, getting the information out there
00:13:42.00 advocating for many of the things that you've heard about today.
00:13:46.00 So Derrick is going to tell us a little more about how you can get involved.
00:13:53.00 Obviously you can get involved by looking at our website, helping us out, we'd appreciate it.
00:13:59.00 Having more people in the community help us. On the website, you can also find information about various meetings that are happening across the country.
00:14:09.00 But you can also get involved in so many other ways.
00:14:12.00 There're things like commenting on papers that are produced, writing responses, writing blog posts and responses to that type of things
00:14:23.00 You can also get involved in discussions at your institutions with your scientific societies.
00:14:28.00 Bascially, trying to find many avenues for getting involved, for getting the voice of early career researchers heard, to participate fully,
00:14:41.00 help add discussions and ideas into the general conversation
00:14:43.00 It's important that we contribute our voice to try and add toa similar level as the senior academics who are discussing this.
00:14:55.00 There's been a trend in recent meetings who are discussing this
00:14:59.00 That have gone from having only senior scientists who participate, to having more post docs and grad students
00:15:07.00 within the meetings and the conversations.
00:15:10.00 We feel that it's very important that our voice is not distinguished from that of the senior scientists
00:15:17.00 Some meetings have made protected time for post docs and grad student ideas,
00:15:22.00 which is great among our communities to have a real protected time in conversation
00:15:30.00 But it also can mean that those ideas can be set aside and distinguished from the ideas of senior scientists.
00:15:37.00 So some other meetings have included grad students and post docs,
00:15:40.00 but not distinguishing their ideas as coming from them as opposed to ideas from the senior community
00:15:45.00 And we should also try to also not only the academic community,
00:15:50.00 but people in industry, in all forms of science, careers including the public within that discussion.
00:16:03.00 And more avenues we find trying to get involved with that, the better we can make our scientific endeavor.
00:16:12.00 So we look forward to particulating with you in the future. Thanks for watching!

This Talk
Speakers: Jessica Polka, Sarah Mazzilli, Gary McDowell, Kristin Krukenberg
Audience:
  • Educators of Adv. Undergrad / Grad
  • Researcher
  • Educators
Recorded: July 2015
More Talks in On Scientific Training
All Talks in On Scientific Training

Talk Overview

In the fall of 2014, a group of postdocs in Boston organized a two-day symposium for graduate students and postdocs at Boston University. Their goal was to educate attendees on the problems that threaten the sustainability of the research enterprise and their livelihoods, and to discuss potential solutions. The postdoc group, called the Future of Research (FOR), has since evolved into a national network of graduate students and postdocs. FOR members work toward shaping policies that will lead to better science and a more productive, efficient, and satisfied scientific workforce. Watch them discuss the origins of their group, the conclusions that emerged from the symposium, why scientists should care, and how to get involved.

Speaker Bio

Jessica Polka

Jessica Polka

Dr. Jessica Polka is the Executive Director of ASAPbio, a non-profit organization that works to address the efficiency by which scientists share their results by promoting innovation and transparency in life sciences communication. As part of her advocacy work, Polka served as president of the board of directors of Future of Research, and is a… Continue Reading

Sarah Mazzilli

Sarah Mazzilli

Sarah Mazzilli completed her PhD in Molecular Pharmacology and Cancer Therapeutics at Roswell Park Cancer Institute/University of Buffalo in 2013. She then joined the laboratory of Dr. Avrum Spira in the section of Computational Biomedicine at Boston University School of Medicine. In the Spira laboratory, she develops models to elucidate the molecular events involved in… Continue Reading

Gary McDowell

Gary McDowell

Gary McDowell is a postdoctoral researcher at Tufts University and a Visiting Scholar at Boston College. He is also a member of the organizing committee with the Future of Research group. After training in chemistry, he moved into studying biochemistry and developmental biology in Xenopus laevis and has worked on non-canonical forms of ubiquitylation and mass… Continue Reading

Kristin Krukenberg

Kristin Krukenberg

Kristin Krukenberg is currently an analytical scientist at Shire. Before moving to Shire, she was a postdoctoral scholar at Harvard Medical School where she was a founding member of the Future of Research group and one of the lead organizers of the Future of Research Symposium in 2014. As a graduate student at the University… Continue Reading

More Talks in Biomedical Workforce

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

iBiology and iBiology Courses are part of the Science Communication Lab (SCL). Our mission remains the same, to connect people to science. However, our focus has shifted to producing and evaluating cinematic films for education and the public, which you can find on the Science Communication Lab website. For more information, please see this blog post!