i National Institute of General Medical Sciences

     

     

         

   

INVESTING IN THE FUTURE

N AT I O N A L I N S T I T U T E O F G E N E R A L M E D I C A L S C I E N C E S

ST RAT E G I C PLA N F O R BI OM E D I C A L
 

A N D BE H AV I O RA L RE S E A RC H TRA I N I N G
 

2011

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Institute of General Medical Sciences
National Institute of General Medical Sciences

               

     

All individuals pictured in this publication were supported

by NIGMS training programs.
                       

                       

                       

                       

                     

                     

                     

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2  THE FUTURE OF DISCOVERY

4  WHAT IS SUCCESS?

5  THE NIGMS VISION FOR

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL

RESEARCH TRAINING

7  KEY THEMES AND SPECIFIC ACTIONS

12  LOOKING FORWARD

13  LISTENING TO STAKEHOLDERS

15  REFERENCES
         

                   

             

                 

                     

                         

                         

                       

                     

             

                       

                 

                       

               

                      

       

                     

                     

               

                     

                   

                     

                     

THE FUTURE OF DISCOVERY
 

The National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) of the

National Institutes of Health (NIH) has a long­standing commitment to

fostering a highly capable biomedical and behavioral research workforce.

Science and the conduct of research continue to evolve, though, as do

workforce needs. It is our responsibility to stay attuned to these new needs

and opportunities. As Director of NIGMS, I want to be sure that all of our

activities related to the training of scientists are aligned with our commitment

to build an excellent, diverse research workforce to help achieve the NIH

mission, now and in the long term.

Toward that goal, in 2010 the Institute launched a process to examine our

activities and general philosophy of research training. The coming pages

describe the result of that process. In summary, the NIGMS Strategic Plan for

Biomedical and Behavioral Research Training presents several actions that

relate directly to four key themes. A detailed, contextual discussion of these

themes begins on page 7.

At the outset of this endeavor, we reasoned that since NIGMS­sponsored

training does not operate independently—indeed, it is a subsystem within

a complex training network—the Institute needed to gather information and

data to understand the major influences and trends. In so doing, we noted

several realities about the current biomedical and behavioral research training

landscape in the United States. As we collected input and analyzed current

NIGMS programs, we took into account each of these concepts, which are

articulated below.

■	 NIGMS is only one of many funders of research training. Although NIGMS

views research training as a critical activity and a key component of our

Congressionally mandated mission, the Institute is only one of many funders

of research training in the United States. Most predoctoral and postdoctoral

research trainees, even if they receive NIH support, also receive funds from

non­NIH sources. In fact, NIH­sponsored training grants and fellowships

account for a minority of all U.S. biomedical and behavioral research trainingrelated dollars.1 Although research training is a core responsibility for NIGMS,

because the Institute has a limited source of funds available for this endeavor,

our role in this arena is to focus on quality rather than quantity.

■	 The most prevalent mode for support of research trainees—for both

NIGMS and NIH—is research project grants, most often R01s. As we

undertook this assessment of NIGMS­sponsored research training, we

considered it crucial to look broadly at training as it occurs in its many

forms. A large proportion of pre­ and postdoctoral trainees are supported

via research grants, and this fraction has risen steadily over the last decade

and a half. This situation exists because many members of NIH­funded

research teams include graduate students and postdoctoral researchers

who engage in research as a key component of their training activities.

2 National Institute of General Medical Sciences
                

                 

               

               

                   

                    

                         

                     

       

   

     

         

       

   

         

■	 Many different career outcomes that can contribute to the NIH

mission are available to trainees. It is evident that today’s biomedical

and behavioral research trainees receiving some level of NIH support

continue to seek a range of career paths.2 NIGMS recognizes the various

avenues in which a well­trained scientist can make meaningful contributions

to society. These include research careers in academia, government or

the private sector as well as careers centered on teaching, scientific policy,

patent law, communicating science to the public and other areas.

■	 Time to scientific independence is longer than it has ever been, likely

too long. We know that in addition to the observed shifts in the types

of careers sought and obtained by research trainees, the amount of time

spent in training is longer than ever. The average age of recipients of a first

NIH R01 grant—admittedly just one measure of independence—is now

42 years.3 In the mid­1970s, only 10 percent of recent doctorates remained

postdoctoral trainees after 3 to 4 years. Today, that fraction has grown

considerably, with 40 percent of recent doctorates still in postdoctoral

positions after 3 to 4 years.4

■	 The U.S. biomedical research workforce does not mirror U.S. diversity.

One of the most important issues facing biomedical and behavioral research

is the fact that our nation’s workforce does not look like America.5 In 2008,

the make­up of the U.S. population was slightly more than 60 percent

Caucasian. By 2050, the Census Bureau predicts, this proportion will drop

below 50 percent, due largely to growth in the Hispanic population. Existing

data from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and other sources shows

a striking lack of correlation in the level of representation among research

trainees, and even more so among science and engineering faculty.6,7

It is no secret that the practice of biomedical and behavioral research is

a time­ and labor­intensive exercise, with administrative responsibilities that

extend beyond addressing the key activities of conducting innovative research

and mentoring trainees. Staying funded and assuring access to high­quality

resources is a necessary part of the job. NIGMS is sensitive to, and is making

a conscious effort to reduce, any potential administrative burdens that may

coincide with proposed changes to research training.

Active discussions among various sectors of the biomedical and behavioral

research community are consistent with our own observations and conclusions

about gaps and opportunities in research training.8,9,10 Ultimately, a healthy

biomedical and behavioral research enterprise requires that government,

academia, industry and other partners work together toward common goals

that recognize the essentiality of high­quality mentoring and career guidance

for the next generation of scientists. Our future, the future of discovery, and

the utilization of such discovery for the benefit of humankind depend on it.

Throughout this document,
 

the term “trainee” is used
 

broadly to represent students
 

and postdoctoral scholars
 

supported by any type of funding.
 

Jeremy M. Berg, Ph.D.

Director, NIGMS

January 2011

http://www.nigms.nih.gov 3
         

       

     

       

   

   

                 

                     

                   

                     

               

We all know that being
 

a professional scientist
 

is more than simply doing
 

experiments.
 

— PARTICIPANT, NIGMS RESEARCH TRAINING

STRATEGIC PLAN STAKEHOLDER MEETING

WHAT IS SUCCESS?

I

n the current knowledge­based economy, assuring the existence of a

well­trained scientific workforce is more vital than ever to the future of

our nation’s health and global competitiveness. But how do we achieve

this goal? How can we know if we are taking the appropriate actions

toward growing a capable biomedical and behavioral research workforce?

More fundamentally, do we know success when we see it?

■	 For society, success is having a strong and diverse cadre

of creative thinkers and innovative problem solvers.

■	 For a research institution, success is advancing knowledge

through teaching and the conduct of research.

■	 For an individual, success is acquiring the skills and

knowledge to obtain and enjoy a successful and rewarding

scientific career.

Beyond the abstract, though, a successful career means different things

to different people.

For example, many researchers cherish the excitement and novelty that

life as a bench scientist brings. Indeed, an academic research career has

many pluses, including freedom to explore the unknown, flexibility and

variability in daily routine, travel and exposure to diverse cultures, and the

opportunity to make an impact on health that could affect many people.

Moreover, researchers generally enjoy a good reputation: A 2009 report

revealed that 70 percent of Americans surveyed believe that scientists

contribute “a lot” to society’s well­being.11

However, a multitude of factors affect the supply and demand for

science­related jobs, especially those in academia. Several decades ago,

for example, trainees completed their doctorates and—entering a wellmatched labor market—had their choice of a range of tenure­track

academic research positions. Today, only a small proportion of students

who earn an American science doctorate will obtain the type of faculty

position that enables them to apply for the highly competitive grants that

support academic research.

Thus, not all trainees choose an academic path today, nor should they.

In an increasingly technical world, a variety of professions benefit from

well­trained scientists who address critical societal needs. Many trainees

possess the skills and passion to contribute their scientific expertise to the

worlds of business, policy, teaching or writing. A mid­1990s survey from

the Council of Graduate Schools—the “Ph.D.s–Ten Years Later” study—

found that 10 to 13 years after degree completion, more than half of those

with science and engineering doctorates in biochemistry, computer science

and electrical engineering were employed in academia. The remainder

worked in industry, government or a range of other settings.12

Supply and demand will continue to shift, both from predictable events

and from unforeseen circumstances. Regardless, NIGMS considers it vital

that research training adopt a modern view of the multiplicity of meanings

of success. Thus, the Institute believes that success is best defined

4 National Institute of General Medical Sciences
   

     

           

               

           

       

           

         

         

         

   

       

           

         

       

   

           

           

       

       

         

       

     

   

         

   

       

         

             

         

   

   

           

             

         

         

       

       

           

through basic competencies acquired throughout a trainee’s graduate

and postgraduate period. Success means that a well­trained scientist:

■	 is conversant in a common set of biological/biomedical

principles;

■	 can identify an important problem and knows how
 

to address it;
 

■	 has a range of career options and the ability to choose
 

among them; and
 

■	 is competitive in his or her chosen field, interest area,
 

specialty or discipline.
 

While NIGMS recognizes that defining success is best achieved through

recognizing the above competencies that serve an array of employment

outcomes, the Institute does not believe that “anything goes.” Rather,

NIGMS is committed to research training as a directed, intentional activity

that fosters individual creativity through quality mentoring, as well as one

that encourages trainees to take responsibility in pursuit of finding rewarding careers that fit their personal skill sets.

NIGMS is fully aware that many of the actions required for achieving

this goal fall outside the Institute’s purview, as well as that of NIH. Yet

that does not diminish the need for NIGMS to recognize and expect quality

research training that strikes an adequate balance between breadth and

depth. Doing so will enable the greatest degrees of freedom for the

scientists of tomorrow.

THE NIGMS VISION FOR

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL

RESEARCH TRAINING

NIGMS plays a significant role in biomedical and behavioral research

training funded by the Federal Government, supporting nearly half of all

NIH­sponsored predoctoral students in training programs at colleges,

universities and medical centers across the country. In addition, as noted

earlier in this plan, NIGMS supports the majority of its trainees on research

project grants, or R01s. Because training is a core element of the NIGMS

mission, the Institute takes very seriously its leadership role in encouraging

practices and approaches that prepare trainees for research as well as a

range of other valuable and productive scientific careers.

NIGMS recognizes that fostering fundamental change to achieve this

goal can be challenging. It is also clear that the needs and opportunities

presented in this plan cannot be fully addressed or pursued by NIGMS alone.

Indeed, implementing many of the objectives will require a healthy, active

partnership among all stakeholders engaged in high­quality research training.

THE POSTDOC EXPERIENCE:

FINDING A GOOD FIT

Choosing a postdoctoral position that is

a good fit is one of the most important

decisions in a trainee’s career path.

While seeking interesting and meaningful

science is one component of this decision, other factors include a potential

advisor’s training track record (where do

trainees end up?); the training environment (is collaboration encouraged?);

career options (will the experience

provide exposure to various paths to

success?); and, of course, personal

chemistry with the faculty advisor.

The National Postdoctoral

Association worked with NIH and NSF

to establish a standard definition of a

postdoctoral scholar13 as:

“An individual who has received
 

a doctoral degree (or equivalent)
 

and is engaged in a temporary
 

and defined period of mentored
 

advanced training to enhance
 

the professional skills and
 

research independence needed
 

to pursue his or her chosen
 

career path.”
 

The expansive range of career

options available to scientists today

calls for a wide array of skills, including

the ability to communicate clearly and

persuasively; good management skills;

effective business development and

operational abilities; and a careful eye

to the role of ethical, social and legal

parameters that impact the conduct and

results of science. An effective postdoctoral training experience goes beyond

doing advanced research and increasing

knowledge in a given area and nurtures

the above­mentioned skills.

http://www.nigms.nih.gov 5
         

   

                

           

           

     

           

       

       

         

   

         

             

         

           

         

       

             

       

             

                 

       

           

            

           

         

     

                 

         

               

             

     

           

         

               

         

   

       

               

         

             

             

             

             

 

 

 

NIGMS AND RESEARCH TRAINING

NIGMS is one of 27 NIH institutes and centers.

The Institute’s mission is focused primarily

on basic research and research training. The

majority of the NIGMS budget14 funds individual

research project grants, mainly R01 grants,

with approximately 10 percent15 of the NIGMS

budget funding research training programs16

and individual fellowships for predoctoral and

postdoctoral trainees.

Although NIGMS is considered NIH’s “training

institute” by virtue of the number, breadth and

forward­thinking features of its training programs,

the Institute readily acknowledges that the bulk

of NIGMS­ and NIH­supported graduate students

and postdoctoral scholars receive support from

research grants throughout at least part of their

training. Notably, R01­supported training support

has risen substantially in the past few decades

(Figure 1), and this trend is expected to continue.

NIGMS­sponsored training covers a wide

spectrum of topical areas relevant to the

Institute’s mission. However, and in contrast to

the philosophy and practice of various categorical

NIH institutes, NIGMS­funded training aims to

provide broad­based skills and approaches applicable to a range of different fields and careers.

The NIGMS training investment continues to

set a high standard for research training as it

relates to research skills and the acquisition of

career­related knowledge. The Institute recognizes the broader effects of its institutional

training grants and other research training

policies for their impact on many students and

faculty beyond those supported by NIGMS

training programs.

The recruitment and retention of researchers

who collectively bring diversity to the pool of

NIH­funded scientists has been a long­supported

activity at NIH, and a mission­specific endeavor at

NIGMS. Diversity programs began at NIH in 1972.

This emphasis grew, and now NIGMS hosts and

manages a range of programs in this area.

National Institute of General Medical Sciences

FIGURE 1. Many trainees (graduate students, A, and postdoctoral scholars, B) are supported on

research grants, not through training programs.

SOURCE: NIH, NSF­NIH SURVEY OF GRADUATE STUDENTS AND POSTDOCTORATES IN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

YEARS 

NUMBER OF POSTDOCTORATES 

0 

2,500 

5,000 

7,500 

10,000 

12,500 

15,000 

17,500 

20,000 

Non-Federal Sources 

Research Grants 

Traineeships 

Fellowships 

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 

FIGURE 1B Biological and Medical Sciences 

Postdoctorates by Source of Support 

0 

2,000 

4,000 

6,000 

8,000 

10,000 

12,000 

Fellowships 

Research Assistantships 

Traineeships 

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 

FIGURE 1A NIH Support of Graduate Students 

NUMBER OF GRADUATE STUDENTS 

YEARS 

6
               

                 

                   

                     

                     

               

     

         

       

              

             

           

           

           

                 

     

             

                 

                 

                   

                           

                   

         

                 

               

                   

             

                   

               

             

                 

               

                       

                   

                 

         

           

       

       

   

       

     

   

The NIGMS Strategic Plan for Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Training results from extensive stakeholder input combined with a careful

and thoughtful analysis of NIGMS core values and activities. The key

themes listed below constitute our vision for the future of research training; specific actions related to each theme appear in the next section.

■	 Research training is a responsibility shared by NIH,
 

academic institutions, faculty and trainees.
 

■	 Research training focuses on student development,
 

not simply selection of talent.
 

■	 Breadth and flexibility enable research training to
 

keep pace with the opportunities and demands of
 

contemporary science and provide the foundation
 

for a variety of scientific career paths.
 

■	 Diversity is an indispensable component of research
 

training excellence, and it must be advanced across
 

the entire research enterprise.
 

KEY THEMES AND SPECIFIC ACTIONS

THEM E I: RES EARCH TRAINING IS A R ES PONS IBILIT Y S HAR ED

BY NIH, ACAD EM IC INS TITUTIONS, FACULT Y AND TRAINEES.

Several contributors influence the activities and outcomes of students and

postdoctoral scholars. Although many in the scientific community look to

NIGMS to provide leadership in research training, the Institute acknowledges,

and expects, the sustained efforts of multiple partners toward achieving

successful outcomes in research training as well as fostering the cultural

change that is needed to do so. In gathering input for this plan, the Institute

heard about many programs—as well as about faculty who mentor individual trainees—that have experimented successfully with novel teaching

methods and expanded career guidance such as unconventional modes of

“on­the­job” training. However, such faculty and institutions have sometimes

hesitated to promote and/or continue these activities for fear of faring

poorly when their grant applications are reviewed.

Actions associated with this theme speak to the need for cooperation,

collaboration and clear communication among all parties involved in

research training within the biomedical and behavioral sciences.

Action: Articulate more clearly NIGMS’ aims and expectations for highquality research training. All research trainees should become proficient

in a set of competencies that enable the pursuit of a successful scientific

career. NIGMS will examine and communicate its criteria to recognize the

range of program elements and outcomes that promote optimal learning,

foster innovation and advance quality training.

No two students are the same

or develop along the same

trajectory, so mentoring must

be continually customized,

adjusted and redirected to

meet each student’s needs.

— JO HANDELSMAN, IN ENTERING MENTORING1 7

http://www.nigms.nih.gov 7
         

                 

               

                       

                   

               

                   

           

                 

         

                 

                     

                 

               

                 

                 

                 

               

                   

                     

                 

   

               

                       

                 

                 

                   

                   

                     

                 

               

                     

               

               

             

               

                 

                   

                   

                     

                 

         

         

       

         

      

       

               

      

       

         

       

           

               

       

       

   

            

             

       

           

           

           

       

CAREER PLANNING

For decades, trainees and advisors have

monitored progress and productivity, and

taken steps toward achieving career goals.

Recently, however, some professional organizations—recognizing the value of planning

and an increasing need for it in the complex

world of modern science—have created

templates18,19 that simplify this process.

For example, the NIH intramural research

program requires individual development

plans (IDPs) for all of its trainees.20

In support of the use of IDPs, a 2003

Sigma Xi survey of postdoctoral trainees,

“Doctors Without Orders,” observed that

postdoctoral success—as measured by

the number of publications and the absence

of postdoctoral trainee/mentor conflict—

correlated with only two factors: a structured

postdoctoral program and taking advantage

of career/professional development programming.21 IDPs are a tool for identifying and

achieving professional development needs

and career objectives during training as

well as a vehicle to facilitate communication

between trainees and their mentors.

Action: Examine and adjust the allocation of NIGMS training resources

across and within scientific areas and institutions. NIGMS will reconsider

how it allocates training funds in order to meet its priorities, mission and

obligations, and to promote a better integration of research training within

institutions. These strategies aim to increase responsiveness to changing

needs in the biomedical workforce; avert duplication of effort; and also

enhance efficiencies in recruitment, retention, diversity and mentorship.

Action: Promote the identification and exchange of effective methods to

continually improve all research training activities. NIGMS encourages

training programs and approaches that are adaptive. By identifying strengths

that help define good examples, the Institute will facilitate and promote a

collaborative process that invites faculty and educators within and across

institutions to share experiences, outcomes and “best practices.”

Action: Monitor and evaluate NIGMS’ training activities, and adjust

as needed to achieve desired goals and outcomes. NIGMS will capture

appropriate current baseline data on its training activities and establish

data­driven mechanisms to evaluate outcomes. The Institute will also stay

apprised of trends, developments and actions that impact training but are

outside the purview of NIH. Periodic analyses will be provided to grantees

and applicants via the NIGMS Web site and other channels.

THEM E II: RE S E A R C H T R A I N I N G F O C U S E S O N S T U D E N T

D E V E L O P M E N T, N O T S I M P LY S E L E C T I O N O F TA L E N T.

Today’s biomedical and behavioral research environment doesn’t always

put the needs of the trainee first. Indeed, as NIGMS gathered input from

stakeholders across the country, the Institute identified a broadly articulated

dissatisfaction with the attention trainees receive. One of the principal

deficits was said to be in the mentoring associated with R01­supported

training, both predoctoral and postdoctoral. NIGMS asserts that training is

an intentional, not incidental, endeavor, and that the process of guidance and

teaching need not diminish research productivity. In fact, many investigators

believe that research training and laboratory productivity are synergistic.

Actions related to this theme address the notion that those who train—

faculty and other mentors—must recognize and understand the strengths

and limitations of trainees and tailor training strategies appropriately.

Action: Strongly encourage the use of individual development plans

(IDPs) on all NIGMS­sponsored training and research awards. NIGMS

believes that IDPs are an essential ingredient of all NIGMS­sponsored

research that supports any training. The Institute envisions that these plans

will also be very beneficial for designing, monitoring and measuring trainee

progress and success. This action will promote a clear definition of the

roles and expectations of students, postdoctoral scholars and faculty from

the outset of any training experience.

8 National Institute of General Medical Sciences
                               

       

 

 

AVERAGE AGE 

45 

44 

43 

42 

41 

40 

39 

38 

37 

36 

M.D.-Ph.D. 

Ph.D. 

M.D. 

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 

               

                   

           

                       

                 

                   

                 

               

             

             

               

                       

           

                 

                   

                 

             

     

                 

               

                     

                     

                         

                 

                   

               

   

       

           

     

       

         

   

   

FIGURE 2 Average Age of First-Time R01-Equivalent 

Principal Investigators by Degree 

FISCAL YEARS 

FIGURE 2. The amount of time spent in training has risen substantially over the last few decades.

SOURCE: NIH OFFICE OF EXTRAMURAL RESEARCH

Action: Establish guidelines for, and strongly encourage, training plans

for all R01s and other research grant applications that request support

for graduate students or postdoctoral trainees. Competencies in scholarship are the desired outcome of high­quality training in any of its various

forms. NIGMS believes that all grantees supporting students and postdoctoral scholars on research grants should prepare training plans to assure

quality mentoring and career guidance throughout the training period.

Action: Encourage institutions and faculty to identify and adopt

evidence­based practices so that students receive the mentorship

necessary to develop essential career skills. Mentors serve multiple

roles throughout a scientist’s development, and their guidance and influence

are critical to trainee success. As a consequence, it is paramount that all

NIGMS­supported research trainees have access to high­quality mentoring.

NIGMS strongly encourages institutions and their faculty to seek available

resources and time to help foster effective mentoring skills. NIGMS also

underscores the need for trainees to actively seek multiple mentors—within

departments and institutions, across institutions and with nonacademic

scientists and personnel.

Action: Encourage institutions and their faculty to accelerate time to

scientific independence for all trainees. The rising time to independence

is a concern that is well recognized by the entire biomedical and behavioral

research community (Figure 2), and various steps have been taken to reverse

the trend. NIGMS supports all efforts that aim to set trainees free to explore

and individualize their careers as soon as possible after receiving their

degrees, and the Institute encourages research institutions to revisit the

traditional demands and expectations of research training that extend

trainee time commitments.

There’s an elephant in the

room ... at the end of the day,

most graduate students are

working in laboratories with

PIs [who] are focused on

one thing: productivity.

— PARTICIPANT, NIGMS RESEARCH TRAINING

STRATEGIC PLAN STAKEHOLDER MEETING

http://www.nigms.nih.gov 9
         

MENTORING: ANCIENT ART,

CURRENT NECESSITY

The relevance and importance of mentoring

date back to ancient times. In his epic

poem The Odyssey, the Greek poet Homer

described Mentor as a “wise and trusted

counselor” charged by Ithaca’s King Odysseus

to care for his belongings when he left to

fight the Trojan War.

The value of good mentorship has stood

the test of time, and indeed, mentoring spans

virtually all endeavors and professions. It has

been a mainstay of research training since

the first experimentalists took apprentices

under their wing. But today, the best

research training goes well beyond this

traditional apprenticeship model. Modern

science is increasingly a team endeavor that

weaves together ideas and approaches from

multiple disciplines. It is not uncommon, and

it is often encouraged, for trainees to seek

multiple mentors who can provide guidance

on various aspects of career development.

Nevertheless, not everyone is born a

gifted teacher. Effective mentoring may not

come naturally to all scientists who operate

a laboratory staffed with personnel at various

levels of experience and ability. Many professional organizations and scientific societies

have published mentoring guides that highlight evidence­based practices, and most

scientific conferences host sessions devoted

to the value and art of excellent mentorship.

An effective mentor serves many roles:

faculty advisor, career counselor, skills

consultant and role model. The relationship

is a blend of personal and professional, but

the underlying core elements include trust,

respect, understanding and empathy.

THEM E III: BREADTH AND FLEXIBILITY EN ABLE RESEAR CH

TRAINING T O KEEP PACE WITH THE OPPORTUNITIES AND

DEMANDS OF CONTEMPORARY SCIENCE AND PROVIDE THE

FOUNDATION FOR A VARIETY OF SCIENTIFIC CAREER PATHS .

The NIGMS mandate is to support the training of the biomedical and behavioral researchers of tomorrow. But one clear and overarching theme that

has emerged throughout the development of this plan is the need to change

the perception of what constitutes a successful training outcome. The idea

that success is limited to academic research careers must be modified and

broadened to include those careers in industry, government, education, communications, law and other sectors that require sophisticated research skills.

Because these nonacademic career opportunities exist and are attractive to

many trainees, NIGMS believes that research training must be both broad

and flexible. NIGMS also recognizes the value of training experiences that

foster an ability to work effectively in a range of research settings. Creating

a vibrant learning culture for diverse students and work styles is an effort

that rewards all participants.

Actions related to this theme address the understanding that students

and postdoctoral scholars benefit from exposure to diverse people and

situations throughout training to promote professional success.

Action: Promote inclusion of a variety of perspectives, backgrounds and

approaches among faculty and trainees. Solving problems of importance

in biomedical and behavioral science requires bringing together people with

different cultural and ethnic backgrounds, scientific expertise, working styles

and perspectives. NIGMS believes that research institutions should teach the

skills that foster interactions that will prepare trainees to cross disciplinary

boundaries and promote maximal collaboration.

Action: Encourage exposure to multiple career path options for graduate students and postdoctoral trainees. NIGMS endorses the value of

institutional programs and activities that highlight a variety of careers. The

Institute encourages faculty and institutional staff to explore the availability

of short­ and long­term exposures to a range of scientific careers so that

trainees can fully appreciate the breadth of opportunities available to those

trained for research.

Action: Increase collaboration with societies, professional associations

and other organizations to build awareness of the breadth of scientific

career options and opportunities. NIGMS encourages collaborations

and partnerships with industry, professional organizations and community

organizations that sponsor formal and informal learning about the array of

career opportunities in biomedical and behavioral science. Many existing,

high­quality resources on science careers include publications, Web sites,

speaker’s bureaus, fellowships and teacher­training programs.

10 National Institute of General Medical Sciences
                     

       

 

FIGURE 3 U.S.Demographics and the Biomedical 

Scientist Population 

PERCENTAGE

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

Asian/ 

Caucasian 

Pacific Islander 

Native American/ 

Alaska Native 

African 

American 

Unknown/Other 

Hispanic 

U.S. Population U.S. Population NIH-Supported Science and Engineering 

(2008) (2050) Trainees (2008) Faculty (2003) 

FIGURE 3. The U.S. research workforce does not mirror U.S. diversity.

SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, NSF

   

                 

               

                     

           

                   

               

                           

           

                   

         

                   

                     

           

                 

                 

                         

                     

                     

                       

                       

                     

                   

                       

               

         

     

         

       

       

       

     

   

THEM E IV: DI V E R S I T Y I S A N I N D I S P E N S A B L E C O M P O N E N T

O F R E S E A R C H T R A I N I N G E XC E L L E N C E, A N D I T M U S T B E

A D VA N C E D AC R O S S T H E E N T I R E R E S E A R C H E N T E R P R I S E.

Studies have demonstrated that students trained in racially, ethnically and

otherwise diverse academic settings in higher education acquire important

skills and perspectives that enable them to identify and solve problems of

societal importance.22,23,24,25 Moreover, for some time, the social science

literature has pointed to the value of exchanging different perspectives,

thoughts and ideas in generating productive and inventive solutions.26,27,28,29

Legal decisions have also held that “the type of diversity at the core of a

compelling educational interest is a diversity of individuals—their backgrounds, cultures and life experiences—of which race and ethnicity may

be only two of several determinants.”30

For many years, NIH training grant programs have required applicants

to specify how their proposed programs will recruit and retain trainees from

underrepresented groups.31 Yet despite these long­standing efforts from NIH

and other entities across the biomedical and behavioral research landscape

to increase the number of scientists from underrepresented groups, diversity

across the board still falls far short of mirroring that of the U.S. population

(Figure 3). This situation highlights a stark reality that historically underrepresented groups are now the most rapidly growing segment of the U.S.

population, and thus the need for change is urgent. Equally if not more

troubling is the fact that faculty minority representation is especially low, providing a scant number of role models for youth considering research careers.

Actions related to this theme underscore the need for the government

and institutions to actively pursue, and monitor the impact of, a range of

approaches to enhance diversity in biomedical and behavioral research.

One of the problems that we

hear from our students [who]

go on to postdocs at majority

institutions is how isolated they

feel. You cannot address a

diversity issue by having one

African American student in

your program.

— PARTICIPANT, NIGMS RESEARCH TRAINING

STRATEGIC PLAN STAKEHOLDER MEETING

http://www.nigms.nih.gov 11
         

                   

               

                 

                 

   

         

                 

               

                 

                 

                     

                 

               

                     

                   

             

                         

                   

           

     

             

               

                 

     

                 

                   

                   

                     

                   

                   

             

                       

                         

       

                 

                         

                 

             

   

             

             

       

   

           

         

         

             

           

         

         

         

         

             

              

   

               

         

       

               

           

       

            

           

            

             

         

           

             

           

         

           

         

             

             

         

               

       

           

         

   

                   

           

       

           

             

     

WHY DIVERSITY MATTERS

Diversity is a term that covers substantial ground,

comprising a range of characteristics: skill set and

life experiences, race, ethnicity, gender, religion,

geographic origin, socioeconomic background,

disability and more. Diversity and excellence are

clearly linked: Several well­designed studies

have concluded that increasing diversity within

academic settings has beneficial effects for all

students and that diversity and excellence are

anything but mutually exclusive concepts.32,33,34

Moreover, specifically related to scientific innovation and problem­solving, social scientists have

long observed the ability of heterogeneous

groups to derive a greater number of alternatives

and perspectives that lead to more complete and

inventive solutions.35,36,37,38

We cannot delay any longer in assuring that

the U.S. biomedical and behavioral workforce

accurately resembles national demographics.

Studies predict that if our country does not succeed in removing disparities in higher education,

especially within science and engineering, significant negative effects on our economic security

and civic development are likely to ensue.39 Legal

precedent substantiates the need for all parties

to move swiftly and definitively to address this

imbalance.40 The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that educational benefits associated with

student diversity, as related to both teaching

and preparing a capable modern workforce, are

compelling as a matter of law.41 Importantly, doing

so must extend beyond achieving “diversity for

diversity’s sake,” “racial balancing” or remedying

societal discrimination.

NIGMS believes that it is essential that

the United States achieves true diversity in biomedical and behavioral research. The challenge

of reaching this vital goal is not simple, however,

and it must be approached thoughtfully. Efforts

intended to promote diversity that are either

mismanaged or left unmanaged can cause

misunderstanding and conflict.42,43

The task upon all of us, as partners in biomedical and behavioral research training, is

timely and consequential. Academia, government,

industry and local communities must continue

to work together toward an innovative and diverse

future of discovery.

12 National Institute of General Medical Sciences

Action: Champion and articulate the societal benefits of a diverse

biomedical and behavioral research workforce that mirrors the diversity

of the U.S. population. NIGMS is committed to meeting this multidimensional challenge. To achieve this goal, collaboration is essential among

government, academic institutions, communities, professional societies

and organizations, and the private sector.

Action: Establish and apply high standards for institutions to actively

recruit, effectively mentor and diligently nurture students through the

completion of their programs. NIGMS will articulate clear diversity expectations in all NIGMS­sponsored funding mechanisms, not just formal training

grants. In addition to bolstering the recruitment of students from underrepresented groups, NIGMS urges institutions and their faculty to implement

approaches that follow and support students throughout their research

training so that trainees are competitive to enter the scientific workforce.

Action: Assure that potential trainees are evaluated in an unbiased and

inclusive manner. NIGMS will examine application and review criteria that

may carry unintentional bias. In turn, the Institute will assure its own ability

to monitor compliance by ensuring that staff and reviewers heed special

considerations for people from backgrounds currently underrepresented in

biomedical and behavioral research.

Action: Encourage institutions to examine their own demographic data

on trainees. NIGMS will urge institutions to examine and address any

gender and racial or ethnic disparities in outcomes among predoctoral and

postdoctoral trainees.

LOOKING FORWARD

Research institutions, government agencies and professional

organizations share the responsibility for assuring that the nation’s

pool of trainees can meet the needs presented by modern society.

Aligning goals and outcomes is paramount to the entire research enterprise’s

ability to ensure excellent training for the next generation of biomedical and

behavioral researchers.

In launching the development of the NIGMS Strategic Plan for Biomedical

and Behavioral Research Training, the Institute’s aim was to identify actions

to assure that NIGMS­sponsored research training remains high­quality, yet

nimble enough to respond to change. There is every reason to believe that

such change will continue, and thus efforts at this juncture will need to be

continually revisited over time.

As it develops implementation plans that support the concepts presented

in this strategic plan, the Institute is committed to transparency and a continued dialogue with stakeholders to explore the most effective and

efficient methods for achieving the plan’s intent.
         

       

         

       

       

   

   

LISTENING TO STAKEHOLDERS

NIGMS organized several avenues through which it collected input

from stakeholders, including faculty members, administrators, current

and former predoctoral and postdoctoral trainees, industry representatives,

representatives of professional and scientific organizations, and other

interested parties. The venues included:

■	 An online questionnaire (open March 2 to April 21, 2010)

■	 Four regional stakeholder meetings:

�	 April 29, 2010, in Philadelphia, Pa.

�	 May 12, 2010, in San Francisco, Calif.

�	 May 25, 2010, in Chicago, Ill.

�	 June 4, 2010, in Atlanta, Ga.

■	 An online Webinar discussion on June 11, 2010

In all venues, NIGMS initiated discussion by asking participants

to respond to the following seven questions:

■	 What constitutes “success” in biomedical research

training from the perspectives of an individual trainee,

an institution and society?

■	 What can NIGMS do to encourage an optimal balance

of breadth and depth in research training?

■	 What can NIGMS do to encourage an appropriate

balance between research productivity and successful

outcomes for the mentor’s trainees?

■	 What can NIGMS do through its training programs
 

to promote and encourage greater diversity in the
 

biomedical research workforce?
 

■	 Recognizing that students have different career goals

and interests, should NIGMS encourage greater flexibility

in training, and if so, how?

■	 What should NIGMS do to ensure that institutions

monitor, measure and continuously improve the quality

of their training efforts?

■	 Do you have other comments or recommendations
 

regarding NIGMS­sponsored training?
 

NIGMS contracted with Ripple Effect Communications to attend all of

the stakeholder meetings and the Webinar, and to independently read and

verify all comments received in response to this request for information as

the Institute developed this strategic plan. Ripple Effect’s summary report

From the point of view of

workplace needs, of course

we need the product of our

biomedical training to go

into all kinds of careers.

— PARTICIPANT, NIGMS RESEARCH TRAINING

STRATEGIC PLAN STAKEHOLDER MEETING

http://www.nigms.nih.gov 13
         

               

     

           

             

                       

                     

                       

                 

               

                    

     

     

   

   

   

     

     

is posted on the NIGMS Web site at http://publications.nigms.nih.gov/

training/Training_Strategic_Plan_Summary.pdf.44 NIGMS received a robust

response from the community—primarily from academia (administration,

faculty, postdoctoral trainees and students) as well as professional societies

(see Table 1). In total, the Institute received 1,653 responses from more than

300 people to its requests for input. However, despite attempts to engage

industry in gathering input, the data collected as part of this process came

primarily from the academic community. Because of the workforce issues

uncovered throughout the analysis, receiving greater input from industry

would have been preferable, and NIGMS continues to seek active, bidirectional communication with this group.

TABLE 1 Distribution of NIGMS Stakeholder Responses

ROLE TYPE TOTAL RESPONSES PERCENT

Faculty 582 35%

Postdoctoral Trainee 257 16%

Administration 212 13%

Student 208 13%

Professional Society 166 10%

Joint Faculty & Administration 120 7%

Industry 41 2%

All Other (includes Government) 67 4%

Total Responses 1,653 100%

14 National Institute of General Medical Sciences
         

           

             

           

           

         

           

             

         

           

             

               

         

           

         

           

                 

                 

           

             

         

             

         

             

             

               

             

           

         

              

           

             

           

             

           

       

             

             

                   

               

             

                   

               

       

                 

         

                     

               

     

                 

             

   

             

               

                   

             

                

               

                 

             

     

         

         

     

       

             

   

               

     

                 

       

       

                   

           

     

REFERENCES

1	 Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.
 

Education and employment of biological and medical
 

scientists: data from national surveys. Available from:
 

http://www.faseb.org/Policy­and­Government­Affairs/DataCompilations/Education­and­Employment­of­Scientists.aspx.
 

Source data from the National Science Foundation. Graduate
 

students and postdoctorates in S&E. Available from:
 

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/gradpostdoc.
 

2	 Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.
 

Education and employment of biological and medical
 

scientists: data from national surveys. Available from:
 

http://www.faseb.org/Policy­and­Government­Affairs/DataCompilations/Education­and­Employment­of­Scientists.aspx.
 

3	 Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.
 

Education and employment of biological and medical
 

scientists: data from national surveys. Available from:
 

http://www.faseb.org/Policy­and­Government­Affairs/DataCompilations/Education­and­Employment­of­Scientists.aspx.
 

Source data from the National Institutes of Health. Research
 

portfolio online reporting tools. Available from:
 

http://report.nih.gov.
 

4	 National Science Foundation. SESTAT: scientists and engineers

statistical data system. Available from: http://www.nsf.gov/

statistics/sestat.

5	 U.S. Census Bureau. Population projections, U.S. interim

projections by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 2000 ­2050,

projected population of the United States, by race and Hispanic

origin: 2000 to 2050. Available from: http://www.census.gov/

population/www/projections/usinterimproj.

6	 Association of American Medical Colleges. U.S. medical
 

school faculty, 2009. Available from: https://www.aamc.org/
 

data/facultyroster/reports/usmsf09.
 

7	 National Science Foundation. National Center for Science
 

and Engineering Statistics data tables. Available from:
 

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf09317/
 

content.cfm?pub_id=3920&id=2.
 

8	 Committee on Underrepresented Groups and the Expansion

of the Science and Engineering Workforce Pipeline; Committee

on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy; Policy and Global

Affairs; National Academy of Sciences, National Academy

of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. Expanding underrepresented minority participation: America’s science

and technology talent at the crossroads. Washington, DC:

The National Academies Press; 2011. Available from:

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12984

(prepublication).

9	 Committee to Study the National Needs for Biomedical,

Behavioral, and Clinical Research Personnel; National Research

Council. Research training in the biomedical, behavioral, and

clinical research sciences. Washington, DC: The National

Academies Press; 2011. Available from:

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12983

(prepublication).

10	 National Institutes of Health. Advisory Committee to the

Director, 101st meeting, December 9, 2010. Available from:

http://nih.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish_id=32.

11	 Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. Public

praises science; scientists fault public, media. Section 1:

public views of science and scientists. Available from:

http://people­press.org/2009/07/09/section­1­public­viewsof­science­and­scientists.

12	 Nerad M, Cerny J. From rumors to facts: career outcomes of

English Ph.D.s: results from the Ph.D.s–ten years later study.

Council of Graduate Schools Communicator. 1999;32(7):1­11.

13	 Ruiz Bravo N, Olsen KL. Letter to Alyson Reed, National

Postdoctoral Association, January 29, 2007. Available from:

http://grants.nih.gov/training/Reed_Letter.pdf.

14	 About 80 percent of $2 billion in FY 2010. National Institute

of General Medical Sciences. Fiscal year 2010 budget, budget

graphs. Available from: http://publications.nigms.nih.gov/

cjs/2010/budget_graphs.html.

15	 About $200 million in FY 2010. National Institute of General

Medical Sciences. Fiscal year 2010 budget, budget graphs.

Available from: http://publications.nigms.nih.gov/

cjs/2010/budget_graphs.html.

16	 Among the most recognized NIH research training mechanisms

is the National Research Service Award (NRSA) program, which

was established in 1974 and renamed in 2002 as the Ruth L.

Kirschstein­NRSA program to honor the former NIGMS director

for her efforts to support biomedical and behavioral workforce

development.

17	 Handelsman J, Pfund C, Lauffer SM, Pribbenow CM.

Entering mentoring: a seminar to train a new generation

of scientists. Madison (WI): University of Wisconsin Press;

2005. Available from: http://www.hhmi.org/catalog/

main?action=product&itemId=272.

18	 Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

Individual development plan for postdoctoral fellows. Available

from: http://www.faseb.org/portals/0/pdfs/opa/idp.pdf.

19	 National Postdoctoral Association. The NPA postdoctoral

core competencies toolkit. Available from:

http://www.nationalpostdoc.org/competencies.

20	 National Institutes of Health. NIH postdoc handbook.

Available from: https://www.training.nih.gov/assets/

Postdoc_Handbook.pdf.

21	 Davis G. Doctors without orders. Amer Sci. 2005;93(3, supplement). Available from: http://postdoc.sigmaxi.org/results.

22	 Denson N, Chang MJ. Racial diversity matters: the impact of

diversity­related student engagement and institutional context.

Am Educ Res J. 2009;46(2):322­53.

23	 Gurin P, Dey EL, Hurtado S, Gurin G. Diversity and higher

education: theory and impact on educational outcomes.

Harvard Educ Rev. 2002;72(3):330­66.

http://www.nigms.nih.gov 15
         

                     

             

                     

                 

       

               

           

         

                 

                 

     

                   

           

             

         

             

               

           

             

                 

   

                 

           

     

               

             

               

           

         

             

         

             

                 

                 

     

                   

             

         

           

                 

             

                   

     

               

           

               

               

           

             

           

24	 Gurin P, Nagda BA, Lopez G. The benefits of diversity in education for democratic citizenship. J Soc Issues. 2004;60(1)17­34.

25	 Whitla DK, Orfield G, Silen W, Teperow C, Howard C, Reede J.

Educational benefits of diversity in medical school: a survey

of students. Acad Med. 2003;78(5):460­6.

26	 Hoffman LR, Maier NRF. Quality and acceptance of problem

solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous

groups. J Abnorm Soc Psych. 1961;62(2):401­7.

27	 Hong L, Page SE. Groups of diverse problem solvers can

outperform groups of high­ability problem solvers. P Natl

Acad Sci USA. 2004;101(46):16385­9.

28	 McLeod PL, Lobel SA, Cox TH Jr. Ethnic diversity and creativity

in small groups. Small Gr Res. 1996;27(2):248­64.

29	 Watson WE, Kumar K, Michaelsen LK. Cultural diversity’s

impact on interaction process and performance: comparing

homogeneous and diverse task groups. Acad Manage J.

1993;36(3):590­602.

30	 Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003). Available from:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/

getcase.pl?navby= CASE&court=US&vol=539&page=306.

31	 National Institutes of Health. Frequently asked questions:

recruitment and retention plan to enhance diversity. Available

from: http://grants.nih.gov/training/faq_diversity.htm.

32	 Bowen WG, Bok DC. The shape of the river. Princeton:

Princeton University Press;1998.

33	 Bowen WG, Kurzweil MA, Tobin EM. Equity and excellence

in American higher education. Charlottesville: University of

Virginia Press; 2005.

34	 Bowen WG, Chingos MM, McPherson MS. Crossing the

finish line. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2009.

35	 Hoffman LR, Maier NRF. Quality and acceptance of problem

solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous

groups. J Abnorm Soc Psych. 1961;62(2):401­7.

36	 Watson WE, Kumar K, Michaelsen LK. Cultural diversity’s

impact on interaction process and performance: comparing

homogeneous and diverse task groups. Acad Manage J.

1993;36(3):590­602.

37	 Hong L, Page SE. Groups of diverse problem solvers can

outperform groups of high­ability problem solvers. P Natl

Acad Sci USA. 2004;101(46):16385­9.

38	 McLeod PL, Lobel SA, Cox TH Jr. Ethnic diversity and

creativity in small groups. Small Gr Res. 1996;27(2):248­64.

39	 American Association for the Advancement of Science,

Association of American Universities. Handbook on diversity

and the law: navigating a complex landscape to foster greater

faculty and student diversity in higher education. Available

from: http://php.aaas.org/programs/centers/capacity/

publications/complexlandscape/PDFs/Law_FrontMatter.pdf.

40 Ibid.

41	 Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265

(1978). Available from: http://laws.findlaw.com/us/438/265.html.

42	 Triandis HC, Davis EE. Race and belief as determinants of

behavioral intentions. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1965;2(5):715­25.

43	 Cox TC Jr. Creating the multicultural organization: a strategy

for capturing the power of diversity. San Francisco: JosseyBass; 2001.

44	 Ripple Effect Communications. National Institute of General

Medical Sciences strategic plan for training and career

development: analysis of responses. Available from:

http://publications.nigms.nih.gov/training/

Training_Strategic_Plan_Summary.pdf.

16 National Institute of General Medical Sciences
         

           

             

           

           

             

         

                 

       

       

       

             

     

       

         

         

       

           

         

         

         

         

           

           

         

           

       

           

         

             

           

         

       

         

     

       

         

           

        

       

           

Discrimination Prohibited

Under provisions of applicable public laws

enacted by Congress since 1964, no person

in the United States shall, on the grounds

of race, color, national origin, handicap, or

age, be excluded from participation in, be

denied the benefits of, or be subjected to

discrimination under any program or activity

(or, on the basis of sex, with respect to any

education program or activity) receiving

Federal financial assistance. In addition,

Executive Order 11141 prohibits discrimination on the basis of age by contractors and

subcontractors in the performance of

Federal contracts, and Executive Order

11246 states that no federally funded

contractor may discriminate against any

employee or applicant for employment

because of race, color, religion, sex, or

national origin. Therefore, the programs of

the National Institute of General Medical

Sciences must be operated in compliance

with these laws and Executive Orders.

Accessibility

This publication can be made available

in formats that are more accessible to

people with disabilities. To request this

material in a different format, contact

the NIGMS Office of Communications

and Public Liaison at 301­ 496 ­7301; send

e­mail to info@nigms.nih.gov; or write

to the office at the following address:

45 Center Drive MSC 6200, Bethesda,

MD 20892­6200. If you have questions

or comments about this publication, you

can use the same contact information

to reach the office.

Additional Copies and Web Links

To order additional copies of

Investing in the Future or other free

NIGMS publications, go to http://

publications.nigms.nih.gov/order

or use the contact information above.

Investing in the Future is available online

at http://publications.nigms.nih.gov/

trainingstrategicplan.
National Institute of General Medical Sciences    

Printed           on XX% recycled paper.

Read, Share, Recycle.

NIH Publication    ­ No. 11 7673
 

April 2011
 

http://www.nigms.nih.gov