« Prev Next »
I recently learned of a new grant from the National Institute of Health (NIH) that is intended to support broader graduate and postdoctoral training in academic institutions, namely to help prepare trainees for non-academic careers. I'm glad that there is now official recognition (I consider it official when there's money involved) of a need for transitional training for academic researchers. It's also encouraging to see they are trying to help those already in the pipeline.
But to be honest, what exactly can an academic institute do to broaden training and help those who want to change careers? I remember weekly seminars from my graduate school days that involved alumni speakers who joined the non-academic workforce and came back to talk about their experiences. A very similar routine took place at my postdoctoral institution. While it was nice to see that others have made that transition and survived, it was also obvious that their transitions involved mostly persistence and luck. All those talks simply showed that it's possible to establish an alternative career; while I, and everyone else who attended those seminars, were far more interested in how we can do the same. We would ask the speaker, of course, but would inevitably receive vague advice about doing anything that is remotely related to a desired career in order to obtain relevant experience. OK...but how were we supposed to find time to do that? The answer is you don't have the time. At least, not if you are working as a full-time researcher. So, that means you will either have to have an understanding PI who will allow a flexible work schedule while you retrain, quit research and get an entry level position in your desired field, or be unemployed while you retrain for another career and hunt for a relevant job. There really aren't much support, if you don't want to be a researcher anymore...you're on your own.
How may this new NIH grant change that? Well, the purpose of the grant included "Collaborations with non-academic partners are encouraged to ensure that experts from a broad spectrum of research and research-related careers contribute to coursework, rotations, internships or other forms of exposure". I'll agree that increased expose to non-academic opportunities will most likely help, but how will the grant be applied to support this goal? Will the money go to the PI, who may have to hire additional laboratory staff while his or her trainee is at an internship or taking classes? Will it provide aid to trainees so they may pay for coursework or work full-time in unpaid internships? Will it be used to compensate non-academic partners, who may be losing time and money to train a newbie?
Based on the wording of the grant, my interpretation is the money will fund a program within an academic institution (i.e., expand the career center). Hopefully, it will increase useful services at career centers beyond the usual resume-writing, mock interviews, and career development seminars they usually run. If the increased staff will help obtain internship opportunities, organize them, and help connect trainees to these opportunities--that may be useful. But I think none of these services will address the fact that trainees who are trying to graduate or publish don't have time or have too many other responsibilities to take advantage of these opportunities. Increasing exposure to opportunities is not the same as supporting retraining. The former sounds great, but the latter is what trainees need.
