Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

4 Transitioning to Independence
Pages 65-80

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 65...
... However, as also explained in Chapter 2, postdoctoral researchers have long been 1  In this report, "biomedical" refers to the full range of biological, biomedical, behavioral, and health sciences supported by the National Institutes of Health.
From page 66...
... Trainee status, for example, typically entails low wages relative to the postdoctoral researcher's educational background, and studies indicate that it can take up to 15 years after degree attainment for the postdoctoral cohort to catch up in salary compared to the non-postdoctoral cohort. To the extent that trainees are forgoing higher wages2 and benefits for a limited time period in exchange for meaningful oppor­ tunities to advance their long-term career goals, this trade-off is not controversial.
From page 67...
... • All research institutions should, following best practices, identify or provide an institutional ombudsperson to resolve fairly and expedi tiously conflicts and concerns between PIs and postdoctoral ­ esearchers r related to training experiences. For the purposes of this report, "postdoctoral researchers" are advanced trainees who, by definition, are entitled to receive training and mentoring regardless of the funding mechanism that supports them.
From page 68...
... Finally, the use of RPG funding for postdoctoral researchers makes it more difficult to monitor the number of postdoctoral researchers and to assess their career progress. Even if the number of fellowships and training grants were to be increased substantially as recommended below, postdoctoral researchers will remain supported largely through RPGs for the near future, given that only 10 percent of postdoctoral researchers are currently supported on federal fellowships and traineeships.6 Nonetheless, select changes in the RPG application and peer review could hold both the PI and the institution accountable for postdoctoral research training and thereby reduce disparities between training experiences.
From page 69...
... . The collection of a modest fee for each postdoctoral researcher would create a partial funding source for institutional programs, including those that enhance training activities that occur outside the research laboratory, and would provide postdoctoral trainees with the resources, skills, and knowledge needed to succeed within and outside of academe.
From page 70...
... . OPTIMIZING THE DURATION AND SUPPORT MECHANISMS FOR POSTDOCTORAL TRAINING All postdoctoral researchers should be offered a mentored transition to independence and opportunities to develop skills and acquire substantive knowledge in their area of intended research.
From page 71...
... In the public input received by this committee, a broad array of individuals and organizations shared the view that postdoctoral researchers should receive mentored training. As examples from the latter, the AAMC stated that "the research community should begin to dis­ ntangle ‘workforce' from ‘training'," and e the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology recommended action to "help mitigate the current dualism that graduate students and postdoctoral researchers face as trainees AND employees." To address this persistent challenge, the committee recommends an approach to ease postdoctoral researchers off a funding mechanism that does not explicitly promote a mentored transition to an independent career, while also presenting a natural check-point, well before
From page 72...
... should expand existing awards or create new competitive awards to support postdoctoral researchers' advancement of their own independent research and to support professional development toward an independent research career. Both domestic and foreign ­ post­ octoral researchers should be eligible for these awards.
From page 73...
... Recommendation 4.2 seeks to address the concern that the current number of available fellowships is much smaller than the number of postdoctoral r ­esearchers, and it has declined in real terms over time even though previous reports have recommended its increase, as noted in Appendix B Of postdoctoral researchers specifically supported by NIH in 2016, approximately 79 percent were supported on RPGs and 19 percent on a fellowship or traineeship.12 To begin to shift the training system away from RPGs and toward a more beneficial platform for the next generation of researchers, the committee strongly advocates for a substantial increase in the proportion of postdoctoral researchers supported by F-type and K-type awards.
From page 74...
... Therefore, postdoctoral researchers with strong potential to establish their own research programs (from all populations, including non-domestic, underrepresented ethnic and racial minorities, women, and individuals with disabili 15  NIH Data Book. Primary Source of Support for Postdoctorates.
From page 75...
... The committee is aware that the current number of postdoctoral awards is grossly insufficient to support postdoctoral researchers who would, under the suggested 3-year cap, be required to transition from RPGs. An additional and serious complication relates to the current restrictions on the capacity of foreign postdoctoral researchers to be supported on F-type training fellowships, T-type institutional training grants, or K-type mentored career awards, with the exception of the K99/R00 Pathway to Independence award.
From page 76...
... These may include, but are not limited to • the implications for PIs, including, in particular, the potential for a nega tive impact on newly established and resource-limited laboratories and ESIs; • the consequences of imposing rigid timing constraints for independent research career progression, especially for underrepresented groups, in cluding women, ethnic minorities, and persons with disabilities; • the potential to favor incremental or conservative research over more inno­ ative proposals if postdoctoral researchers must compete success v fully for fellowships in their second year; • the potential for an adverse effect on internationally trained Ph.D.'s; and • the consequences of differential overhead rates on research grants versus fellowship (F-type) and career development (K-type)
From page 77...
... It was not always this way; the percentage of postdoctoral researchers supported on these mechanisms has skyrocketed in recent years. These recommendations seek to ease the postdoctoral research population away from this funding mechanism.
From page 78...
... The development of programs and support mechanisms that encourage early-career researchers to engage with the small business enterprise can provide critical preparation for biomedical research trainees, including postdoctoral researchers, to become biomedical innovators and advance economic growth. To achieve this endpoint, the NIH SBIR/STTR program should be modified to enable grants/contracts to small businesses that aim to reduce the cost of research.
From page 79...
... A separate avenue for cultivating independent research opportunities for talented biomedical trainees and creating more opportunities for them in the private sector would require Congress to extend or establish an employment tax credit for R&D firms that hire new Ph.D.'s, M.D.'s, and M.D.-Ph.D.'s. By lowering the cost of hiring researchers, a tax credit should stimulate employment in R&D.
From page 80...
... 2016. Dipping in the policy mix: Do R&D subsidies foster behavioral additionality effects of R&D tax credits?


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.