The Next Generation of Biomedical and Behavioral Sciences Researchers Breaking Through (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Transparency, Shared Responsibility, and Sustainability
3 Transparency, Shared Responsibility, and Sustainability
Pages 49-64
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 49... ...
This and the following chapters present recommendations reflecting the committee's strong view that addressing these challenges and creating a better path forward for the nation's emerging biomedical researchers is not the sole responsibility of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) , but is rather a shared responsibility of stakeholders throughout the entire biomedical research enterprise.
|
From page 50... ...
illustrates that NIH has been responsive to calls for action, but NIH is not, nor should be, the sole driver of efforts to support the next generation of researchers. The committee, therefore, has concluded that the need exists for an umbrella coordinating body to serve as an ongoing, independent forum for analyzing and addressing challenges confronting the biomedical workforce in a sustained m anner, and to monitor implementation of the recommendations set forth in this and other reports.
|
From page 51... ...
, that coordinates standards development for the smart grid and brings together public and private stakeholders to interact and accelerate standards harmonization and to advance the interoperability of smart electric grid devices and systems. 5 See, e.g., supra note 2, Infragard managed out of NIPC)
|
From page 52... ...
The participants in the BREC would be drawn from a diverse set of organizations and entities, including associations of academic institutions, federal agencies, industry groups, and not-for-profit organizations, including those that represent postdoctoral fellows and graduate students and those that advocate for the research enterprise. Membership can be set initially by an ad hoc sponsoring group consisting of the above stakeholder organizations, after which the BREC could choose its own members.
|
From page 53... ...
Therefore, the committee makes the following recommendation: Recommendation 3.1 Congress should establish a Biomedical Research Enterprise Council (BREC) to address ongoing challenges confronting the Next Generation of Biomedical Researchers.
|
From page 54... ...
A recent evaluation of the IRACDA program shows promising recruitment of underrepresented populations into the program, as well as a high rate of transition into academic careers compared to those postdoctoral researchers supported by Ruth L Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA)
|
From page 55... ...
granting colleges, schools and departments, to make a commitment to providing prospective and current students with easily accessible information."9 The AAU statement stated explicitly that such data should include student demographics, average time to finish a degree, financial support, and career paths and outcomes both inside and outside academia. 9 See https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2017/09/20/aau-sets-expectation-data-ransparency t Ph.D.-program-outcomes (accessed November 22, 2017)
|
From page 56... ...
, and occasionally when hosting privately funded fellowships, the rationale for declining to share these data with prospective students is weak. Some institutions are not collecting and publishing such data because they fear that the necessary cost and time to do so would be prohibitive or that publication of career outcomes data would negatively affect their recruitment efforts, but the RBR effort found those fears to be unfounded.
|
From page 57... ...
However, before taking a step as dramatic as reducing the number of students admitted to biomedical Ph.D. programs, it is crucial to understand the actual population of trainees, the duration of postdoctoral training, career trajectories and aspirations of trainees, changes in these data over time, and the type of research versus non-research positions that Ph.D.'s ultimately secure, including data on whether these placements are in the United States or abroad.
|
From page 58... ...
Currently, NIH contributes funds to support NSF's Survey of Doctoral Recipients and Survey of Earned Doctorates. Additional efforts to synthesize data would benefit from the empirical infra structure built since 2015 by the Institute for Research on Innovation and Science (IRIS)
|
From page 59... ...
the National and International Survey of Doctoral Recipients (SDR) databases and Survey of College Graduates (NSCG)
|
From page 60... ...
Over the past decade, the size of grant awards has not tracked with research inflation as measured by the Biomedical Research and Development Price Index calculated by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Today, investigators must fund their research with an award that is worth approximately 80 percent of its value 10 years ago.15 The decline in funding in constant dollars, and the resulting sharp increase in competition for the available funding, has also meant that NIH has had fewer opportunities to address enduring barriers to groundbreaking research for the next generation of biomedical researchers.
|
From page 61... ...
specifically to provide additional funding for ESIs and EEIs to "promote the growth, stability and diversity of the biomedical research workforce."16 NIH Director Francis Collins explained in a June 8, 2017, letter that the funding required to carry out this policy would be drawn from commitments already made in the 2017 NIH base budget, and then, pending the availability of funds, investment in the initiative would increase to $1.1 billion per year after 5 years. Although the NGRI could address many of the funding challenges unique to ESIs and EEIs, its current structure requires NIH to support it with funds currently allocated to other initiatives and research needs.
|
From page 62... ...
If Congress provides no additional funding for NIH, and funds cannot be reallocated within the agency, then many of the trends discussed throughout this report (e.g., increasing age to securing an R01-equivalent grant, decreasing representation of NIH-supported investigators under age 50, enduring barriers to diversifying the research workforce, and prevailing lack of accountability for the training and mentorship of postdoctoral researchers) may very well continue, or even worsen. If Congress provides no additional funding and NIH reallocates funds from research grants, then these problems could continue and even pose addiional challenges when investigators try to secure subsequent NIH fund t ing.
|
From page 63... ...
2016. Institutional Research and Academic Career Development Awards (IRACDA)
|
From page 64... ...
64 NEXT GENERATION OF BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES RESEARCHERS Zolas, N., N Goldschlag, R
|
Key Terms
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.