the-aps.org>committees >trainee advisory committee

2005 Trainee Advisory Committee Report

In its second year, the Trainee Advisory Committee (TAC) has formed subcommittees and began making progress on our projects, and completing initial projects. The Committee’s discussions remain focused by the charge from the APS Council. The Committee met twice during its second year, once during a two-day fall meeting in Bethesda and again at the 2005 Experimental Biology meeting. The fall meeting proved instrumental in getting the Committee’s projects well underway.

TAC Trainee Survey

The TAC conducted a Trainee Survey with the help of the APS staff. Each TAC member sent email messages to their respective Section listservs asking trainees and new investigators to participate in the survey via a link to an online survey site. The survey included ranking the importance of several issues (e.g., balancing work and family, mentoring, grantsmanship, and teaching) and a few short answer questions. Responses from both APS member and non-member graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and new investigators were requested (along with status identification) to allow assessment of needs from many perspectives.

A total of 224 people completed the survey. Graduate students composed 38% of the respondents, postdoctoral fellows 33%, and new investigators 20%. These results are already focusing many of the Committee’s efforts (email newsletter, trainee web page, EB workshop, etc.) and are being shared with the Education, Careers in Physiology, Women in Physiology, and Porter Physiology Development Committees as well as with the APS Membership and Marketing Departments. The survey was viewed as being very successful for the Committee in verifying the main issues faced by trainees and holds promise for future feedback and suggestions from the APS trainees. 

Trainee Advisory Committee Symposium, Experimental Biology 2006

The TAC discussed the upcoming symposium slot and selected the topic, “Transition from Postdoc to New Investigator,” for its first EB session. Specific speakers and session format is being finalized. The TAC will work with the Women in Physiology and Career Opportunities in Physiology Committees, as both those Committees would like to plan complimentary sessions. Representatives from all three committees will work to make sure the three sessions do not overlap in content.

Trainee Email Newsletter and Web Page

Email Newsletter: The TAC decided to use the previously established trainee listserv, which was initially populated with all student members, as the vehicle for the trainee email newsletter. Messages are sent out on a monthly basis by APS Education Office staff and include relevant APS and other news, notice of award opportunities, and postdoctoral position openings. Hamblin and Stocker work with APS staff to develop the content, ensure the newsletter comes out on a monthly basis, and provide content relevant to the Committee charge. This spring, Hamblin and Stocker also developed a special e-newsletter issue containing a list of all relevant EB/IUPS career sessions for trainees. Each Committee member distributed the special list via their section listservs as well as the trainee listserv. The list was very well received as indicated by comments and emails from trainees as well as regular APS members.

Web Page: The Committee is working on developing the TAC page to include links to relevant materials on the APS web site as well as elsewhere. Announcements of the new material can be sent out via the trainee listserv. One of the questions the committee hopes to address at its fall meeting is whether there should be a larger trainee website behind the members-only firewall and how the APS website can provide support for undergraduates who are involved in physiology research to promote their continued work in physiology.

Trainee Committee Representatives

Last fall the TAC discussed which APS Committees should have trainee representatives. That request was sent to the Committee on Committees, which then passed it along to the appropriate committees for a vote at their EB committee meeting. As a result, the Committee hopes to catalyze additional trainee input to APS activities coordinated by a number of committees.

Sectional Responsibilities

Most of the TAC members have been asked by their sections to write short articles on the Committee’s activities for their section newsletter; many have already done so, providing reports on TAC activities and suggestions to trainees on making the most of meetings, etc. All TAC members were encouraged to write articles to increase the visibility of the Committee and of trainees. As each member writes a brief article, they post it to the Committee listserv and share with others on the Committee. Then the other Committee members can include that article and either expand on it or focus on another aspect of the Committee’s activities, allowing for more material to be in each section’s newsletter.

Because all of the TAC members are appointed by their respective section, each section was asked to begin identifying how it plans to name a successor to its TAC member. Most of the sections developed a method for selecting their TAC representative during their Steering Committee meetings at EB. In addition, some sections chose to extend the term of their current representative to allow for one-third of the TAC members to rotate off each year, rather than half as is currently scheduled to happen.

The Cardiovascular Section and TAC representative Hamblin have initiated a CV Trainee committee to promote interaction and involvement of trainees in their Section.  This seems an informative additional model to increase trainee participation within APS Sections and aid in selecting a future sectional TAC Representative.

Postdoctoral Issues

Committee Chair Caroline Sussman remains involved in the NPA on its Diversity Committee and another Committee member (Golder) has joined the NPA International Issues Committee. Both report on activities from the NPA to keep the Committee up to date. APS has also become a sponsoring society member.

Fall Meeting

The TAC held a 1.5-day fall meeting last year. This meeting allowed Committee members to accomplish much more than they would have been able to do in a conference call. The meeting allowed the Committee to develop a recommendation for Council on student membership dues (which was subsequently approved by Council), finalize the trainee survey, begin planning for a symposium at EB 2006, discuss the trainee newsletter and web site, receive a detailed report on the NPA, and have a general discussion of issues facing trainees today. The TAC would like to hold another fall meeting in 2005 to continue its work on a number of important fronts.

Appendix A: Trainee Survey Results

1. Breakdown of respondents

The survey was targeted at graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and new investigators. The large majority of both those who started (77%) and completed (91%) the survey were in one of these three categories. Therefore, the survey attracted responses primarily from the intended target group.

2. New Investigator (n=61)

Of the new investigators responding, equal numbers were in tenure-track and non-tenure track positions. However, it should be noted that more than a quarter of the new investigators responding to the survey did not indicate whether or not they were in tenure-track positions.

3. Membership

Half of the graduate students, two-thirds of the postdocs, but almost all the professional students, new investigators, and established investigators responding were APS members.

4. Section Affiliation

Many of those respondents indicating they were not APS members still answered this question and selected a sectional affiliation. Most of the sections have reasonable representation in the respondents overall. No CNS, Teaching, or Water & Electrolyte Section graduate students responded. There were no postdoctoral fellows responding from the Teaching Section
 

4b. Developing Your Professional Skills (total results: n=237)

On a scale where 5 = very interested and 1 = not at all interested

When asked about professional skills they were most interested in learning about, the top two choices for graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and new investigators were lab and personnel management and teaching guidance (how to prepare for a teaching career). Being a mentor was also a highly-rated choice.

5. Professional Activities (total results: n=237)

On a scale where 5 = very interested and 1 = not at all interested

When asked about the professional activities that they would like to learn more about, for all three groups (graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and new investigators), grant opportunities was the number one topic. Award opportunities were also highly rated by all three groups. Graduate students and postdoctoral fellows also expressed interest in travel funding information while new investigators were interested in learning more about grant reviewing.

6. Job Hunts and Advancement (total results: n=237)

On a scale where 5 = very interested and 1 = not at all interested

Not surprisingly, the number one choice for graduate students and postdoctoral fellows was developing skills for job searches and interviews. New investigators were especially interested in advancement and promotion. This was also a highly rated topic among graduate students and postdoctoral fellows, along with learning more about career options.

7. Institutional/legal/policy issues (total results: n=237)

On a scale where 5 = very interested and 1 = not at all interested

When asked about institutional, legal, and policy issues, compensation (salary) and benefits were the top tow topics of interest for all three groups. There was only moderate interest expressed in international issues.

8. Balancing work and family (total results: n=227)

On a scale where 5 = very interested and 1 = not at all interested

All three groups expressed interest in learning more about time management (getting everything done at work and at home) and balancing a two-career family. Information on relocating was also rated of interest to these groups.

9. Where would you be interested in accessing information on these issues?

(total results: n=226)

On a scale where 5 = very interested and 1 = not at all interested

The survey asked where respondents would prefer to access the information on the career topics in which they had just expressed interest. The top choice for all three groups was via website, followed by electronic (email) newsletter, and EB symposia. Less interest was expressed in attending separate workshops or holding online discussions, although new investigators gave a high rating to holding small group discussions at EB.

10. Did you attend the following meetings? (n = 226)

When asked about attendance at key meetings for postdoctoral fellows (e.g., National Postdoctoral Association and the National Academy meeting on postdoctoral fellows), only a few respondents had participated in one or both of these meetings. When asked about attendance at EB in the past year, surprisingly, less than half of the graduate students had attended and only about half of the postdoctoral fellows had attended. The majority of new investigators (70%) had attended.

11. What did you like/dislike about the NPA meeting?

13. What did you like/dislike about the NAS meeting?

15. If you didn’t attend the EB meeting, why not?

When asked why they did not attend EB, the most common response was lack of funding (n=21). Other frequently cited reasons were that EB was not their top priority meeting (n =12), they had timing conflicts with other activities (e.g., experiments, teaching, moving, and other meetings) (n =17), no data to present (n =9), and being a new student or new to APS (n =20). Interestingly, 11 respondents indicated that they weren’t aware of the EB meeting. There were only a few comments indicated that respondents did not attend EB because it doesn’t meet their needs.

16. Of those who attended EB, did you bring your family to EB?

The survey also asked respondents who attended EB whether they brought family members with them. Very few had done so (n -15 total). Postdoctoral fellows were most likely to have brought family members (21 percent) and the children who attended were young (8 years or younger).

17. What is (are) the age(s) of your children?

6 - no children

6 months

1, 3, 5 yrs

3, 5 yrs

2, 8 yrs

4, 6 yrs

2, 8 yrs

18. Of those who attended EB, how helpful would it be to have child-oriented activities at EB?

Only new investigators indicated it would be helpful to have child-oriented activities at EB but there was not overwhelming interest even for them (61%). Postdocs were next most interested (45%). The remainder of the groups were basically neutral on the issue.

19. Suggestions

Suggestions for making EB more family friendly included modeling programs after the SACNAS meeting, providing children’s activities and family tours and events, allowing family members to attend meeting sessions with paying registration, and providing shuttle buses between the convention center and the hotel.

20. Other societies’ activities

21. Other suggestions for TAC

When asked for suggestions for the Trainee Advisory Committee, very few respondents made specific suggestions. Several commented that the survey had made them aware of the existence of the TAC and that there should be additional efforts to both inform trainees of the TAC’s activities and APS offerings for trainees and to involve new APS members and trainees in Society activities. One respondent suggested, “Become more proactive about integrating new members such as myself.  I seem to be primarily responsible for determining how to become involved with the APS.” Other suggestions included providing a forum for discussion about education, pay more attention to the training of non-Americans (reflecting differences in the training process in other countries), and offering more trainee advising and expanding the mentoring program, One trainee recommended that the committee use methods that can benefit the most trainees, rather than just a small group.

22. Do you want to receive the TAC email newsletter? (n = 224)

At the end of the survey, respondents could sign up for the TAC email newsletter which is sent monthly from the APS Education Office. Of all survey respondents, 69% elected to sign up for the newsletter. Postdoctoral fellows (78%) and graduate students (73%) were most likely to enroll but 61% of new investigators also signed up.

Comments from Staff:

Because the online sectional survey attracted responses from the primary target groups, it could become a regular feed back tool for the TAC when input is needed from those groups. Also, the survey served as a good means to raise awareness of the TAC and APS activities for trainees.

Trainee newsletter: It will be important to remember that the newsletter also goes to new investigators. Therefore, topics that they expressed interest in should be covered in the newsletter as well.

Caroline R. Sussman, Chair

Committee Action Items

• Council accepted the report of the Trainee Advisory Committee.

• Council authorized funds for a 1.5-day fall meeting of the Trainee Advisory Committee.