Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

4 Outcomes for the Markey Scholars
Pages 30-58

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 30...
... For the results of the analyses of CVs, CRISP, and citation data presented in this report, the .05 level of significance is used. Career Progression Interestingly,MarkeyScholarshadheldsignificantlymorepostdoctoral fellowships than top-ranked or competitive candidates.
From page 31...
... Markey Scholars reached tenure significantly faster with an average of 5.4 years in the professoriate, compared to 7.1 and 7.8 years for top-ranked and competitive candidates.
From page 32...
... As shown in Table 4-3, Scholars were slightly more productive than the individuals in the two comparison groups. While top-ranked and competitive candidates had roughly the same number of mean journal articles at 36.5 and 34.8 respectively over the 14-year period, Scholars had a higher mean number of journal articles during the period at 44.1, or better than 3.1 articles per year.
From page 33...
... for Scholars in that cycle. To assess the impact of these journal articles, the committee also counted the number of citations for them through 2004.
From page 34...
... The source of the data for the number of journal articles were CVs obtained from each individual included in the study (cycles 6 and 7 were excluded from this analysis due to an insufficient number of up-to-date CVs for individuals in the comparison groups) and citation data for each of the articles obtained from a custom database provided by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)
From page 35...
... OUTCOMES fOr THE MArKEY SCHOLArS TABLE 4-4 Mean and Median Number of Citations per Individual and Mean Citations per Article for Markey Scholars, Top-Ranked Candidates, and Competitive Candidates Years of Years of Number with Citation Data Cycle Articles Citations Scholars Top-Ranked Competitive 1 1985-1998 1985-2004 16 2 10 2 1986-1999 1986-2004 12 7 10 3 1987-2000 1987-2004 16 5 5 4 1988-2001 1988-2004 15 7 6 5 1989-2002 1989-2004 15 8 3 ALL 74 29 34 Years of Years of Mean Citations per Individual Cycle Articles Citations Scholars Top-Ranked Competitive 1 1985-1998 1985-2004 4,141 401 1,095 2 1986-1999 1986-2004 2,593 1,961 1,822 3 1987-2000 1987-2004 5,133 2,448 1,114 4 1988-2001 1988-2004 3,596 1,210 2,311 5 1989-2002 1989-2004 3,223 2,869 828 ALL 3,808 2,007 1,503 Years of Years of Median Citations Cycle Articles Citations Scholars Top-Ranked Competitive 1 1985-1998 1985-2004 3,200 401 1,004 2 1986-1999 1986-2004 2,261 549 1,643 3 1987-2000 1987-2004 4,003 2,176 584 4 1988-2001 1988-2004 1,733 1,299 922 5 1989-2002 1989-2004 2,381 2,486 586 ALL 2,475 1,426 980 Years of Years of Mean Citations Per Article Cycle Articles Citations Scholars Top-Ranked Competitive 1 1985-1998 1985-2004 69 17 28 2 1986-1999 1986-2004 85 68 59 3 1987-2000 1987-2004 126 61 39 4 1988-2001 1988-2004 79 51 50 5 1989-2002 1989-2004 79 53 38 ALL 86 55 43
From page 36...
... TABLE 4-5 Differences in Grant Awards Among Markey Scholars, TopRanked Candidates, and Competitive Candidates Markey Top-Ranked Competitive Significant Outcome Measure Scholar Candidate Candidate Difference Number of NIH Grants 3.3 3.2 1.9 Yesa Years to First NIH Grant 3.5 4.1 3.9 No Number of R01 Grants 1.8 1.5 0.9 Yesa Years to First R01 Grant 4.0 5.6 5.6 Yesb aMarkey Scholars are significantly different from competitive candidates only. bMarkey Scholars are significantly different from both top-ranked and competitive candidates.
From page 37...
... The Scholars' citations, on average, were higher both per article and per individual. While Scholars obtained significantly more NIH grants, and R01s in particular, than competitive candidates, there was no statistical difference when comparing Scholars and top-ranked candidates.
From page 38...
... More males among competitive candidates reported a developing period of independence than Markey Scholar males. TABLE 4-7 Percentage Claiming Independence, by Degree and Group Ph.D.
From page 39...
... The top-ranked and competitive candidates used a variety of alternate support mechanisms to fund their postdoctoral training period. The majority of top-ranked candidates (66 percent)
From page 40...
... The attitude of many who were among the top-ranked or competitive candidates was highlighted by one who stated: The separation between being a success and being a disaster is razor thin. I am fortunate that I hae a good position, a lab, am funded.
From page 41...
... Transition from Postdoctoral or Fellow Status to First Professional Position When asked about their job search process, many Scholars commented that they were invited to apply for positions by members of the Markey Selection committee or by individuals who were speakers at the Markey Scholar annual meetings. Many of the Scholars noted that they had several job offers, sometimes more than five at a time.
From page 42...
... When M.D.s or M.D./Ph.D.s were queried as to why they opted to stay at their fellowship institutions despite the typical lack of startup funds, several clinical Scholars cited that the deciding factor was that they were "intertwined" in a support system
From page 43...
... Scholars reported that startup packages for those who stayed at their fellowship or postdoctoral institution were less than packages for those who moved to new institutions. Some Scholars reported uncomfortable negotiations with their future department chairs who tried to reduce packages because Markey Award funds were seen as filling the need, and that they would have really appreciated some additional guidance from the Markey Committee members.
From page 44...
... Faculty Years: Funding The majority of the Scholars considered the Markey award as having a positive influence on their subsequent funding efforts. But, as one Scholar said, "I never saw it mentioned on a pink sheet," meaning this isn't the
From page 45...
... Teaching loads for top-ranked and competitive candidates were similar to those of Scholars. Scholars estimated that their mentoring or attending duties averaged around 25-30 percent of their work effort.
From page 46...
... The Scholars' trainees (graduate students, fellows and postdoctoral fellows) have gone into a variety of careers: academic, biotech, industry and "other." Networking The Scholars repeatedly mentioned that attending the annual Scholars meeting was a wonderful experience.
From page 47...
... Many of the Scholars reported serving on Scientific Advisory Boards for biotechnology companies while maintaining their academic appointments. Starting with Class 3, we added a question to the survey instrument to assess how prevalent this observation was in reality.
From page 48...
... Many of those who went into the biotechnology industry confessed that they would never have considered that a career option when they were staring as postdoctoral fellows. Rather, they ended up taking advantage of unexpected opportunities, or taking a risk on a new entrepreneurial venture.
From page 49...
... As a postdoctoral fellow at a major academic institution, you are on a high plateau of basic research; it is the be all and end all of life. I think my perspectie has broadened since then.
From page 50...
... (Scholar) I considered doing a residency for the next two or three years at the time that I applied for the Markey Award, but when I got it I decided not to pursue a residency.
From page 51...
... Several of them intimated they had maintained their licenses as either a "security blanket" or to supplement their basic research faculty salaries. It may be that the Markey award helped the Scholars to commit definitively to research careers.
From page 52...
... My research really impacts on my clinical work -- the question is what other tools can I use to help the patients? Translational research is the driing force in my lab -- the real motiation, but I hae to admit that I hae neer got the "ah hah" feeling with the patients and then ran back to the lab to do an experi ment.
From page 53...
... It is interesting to note, however, that over half of the Scholars indicated plans for future participation in translational research. Roughly the same percentage of individuals from the candidate groups were involved with patient research and clinical trials, especially those candidates who were working in pharmaceutical firms and heading up clinical trials was their primary function.
From page 54...
... (Scholar) I really like the idea of bridge funding, and if they are looking for new funding models, I would like to see someone consider funding a person around the year point of a junior faculty position.
From page 55...
... Several Scholars noted that they felt their department was getting a "free ride" and that they were especially resentful, therefore, when the department chair tried to offer a reduced startup package. Clinical Scholars noted that as they were providing clinical service, at least some of their salaries should have come from the clinical department.
From page 56...
... The earlier class members had very fond memories of the Markey program and appeared extremely grateful for the opportunity to prove their scientific merit. Subsequent classes, while still grateful, frequently expressed the opinion that if they had not received the Markey award, they would have gotten "something else" of equal value or merit; that is, the Markey award was wonderful, but it was just one of several awards for which they could have applied and would have received.
From page 57...
... They should target additional funds to further down the career pipeline to early mid-career plus institutional reforms to proide a more stable and better enironment for dual career people. (Candidate)
From page 58...
... EVALUATION Of THE MArKEY SCHOLArS PrOGrAM scientific proposal, letters of recommendation, and productivity. The candidates believed that since they spent a significant amount of time and effort preparing a proposal, the least they could expect in return was some sort of guidance on how to improve subsequent proposals.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.