Resources for Early Career Researchers: A Collection of Guides & Perspectives
Science today—how we do it and how we communicate it—is a rapidly evolving landscape with technological advancements, cultural shifts, and global change. Early career researchers (ECRs) are not only training in these dynamic and competitive environments but also challenging norms and creating solutions so that science can advance in productive, responsible, and sustainable ways.
FACETS is highly supportive of ECRs. To help them navigate through these new challenges and achieve a successful career, we are providing a collection of perspectives on philosophical and practical aspects of research, academia, and science publishing.
This curated Collection includes resources on inclusive language in writing a grant, communicating science effectively, the responsible use of social media, working with Indigenous communities, and more.
New submissions welcome
This is an ongoing collection and will be continually updated with relevant articles published in FACETS.
To have your article considered for this collection, at step 3 of the submission process in ScholarOne specify that your manuscript is intended for the Resources for Early Career Researchers Collection.
- OPEN ACCESSLong-term ecological research (LTER) projects are considered valuable training grounds for graduate student researchers, yet student voices are largely absent from discussions of LTER merits in the literature. We aimed to identify benefits and challenges encountered by current and former graduate students in conducting graduate research within LTER projects. To explore graduate student experiences and perspectives, we conducted a survey comprising both closed-ended questions (i.e., multiple choice and Likert scale) and open-ended questions. From the responses, we identified emergent categories related to positive and negative experiences using sentiment analysis. We found agreement with purported benefits in areas including networking and access to established field sites and protocols. However, participants also identified data accessibility, authorship decisions, communication, and interpersonal conflicts as significant sources of challenges. We synthesized survey results with existing literature to provide actionable recommendations for principal investigators in four main areas (data, authorship, communication, and management) through an LTER lens. In addition to providing longitudinal data, LTER projects offer graduate students both physical and methodological infrastructure that can serve as the scaffold for new research questions to be developed. However, the likelihood of success of student research, as well as the success of the students themselves, can be improved when the needs of graduate students are prioritized.
- OPEN ACCESS
- P.J. Duke,
- B. Richaud,
- R. Arruda,
- J. Länger,
- K. Schuler,
- P. Gooya,
- M.M.M. Ahmed,
- M.R. Miller,
- C.A. Braybrook,
- K. Kam,
- R. Piunno,
- Y. Sezginer,
- G. Nickoloff, and
- A.C. Franco
Improving our understanding of how the ocean absorbs carbon dioxide is critical to climate change mitigation efforts. We, a group of early career ocean professionals working in Canada, summarize current research and identify steps forward to improve our understanding of the marine carbon sink in Canadian national and offshore waters. We have compiled an extensive collection of reported surface ocean air–sea carbon dioxide exchange values within each of Canada's three adjacent ocean basins. We review the current understanding of air–sea carbon fluxes and identify major challenges limiting our understanding in the Pacific, the Arctic, and the Atlantic Ocean. We focus on ways of reducing uncertainty to inform Canada's carbon stocktake, establish baselines for marine carbon dioxide removal projects, and support efforts to mitigate and adapt to ocean acidification. Future directions recommended by this group include investing in maturing and building capacity in the use of marine carbon sensors, improving ocean biogeochemical models fit-for-purpose in regional and ocean carbon dioxide removal applications, creating transparent and robust monitoring, verification, and reporting protocols for marine carbon dioxide removal, tailoring community-specific approaches to co-generate knowledge with First Nations, and advancing training opportunities for early career ocean professionals in marine carbon science and technology. - OPEN ACCESSEarly career researchers in developing countries like Nepal have faced many barriers while learning and practicing research integrity. Having easy access to appropriate resources for learning research integrity is essential to ensure academic integrity in higher education in Nepal and promote responsible research practices. This paper presents an approach to collective learning that will help stakeholders initiate learning and foster research integrity at their own level. Methodologically, the learning interventions were conducted in four phases: preparation, planning, implementation, and learning. Throughout the process of each phase, social exchange theory and collaboration in social learning were considered as new literacy models to promote research integrity knowledge. The interpretation of experiential learning interventions led to the development of the 4Co collective learning model. This model is contextually applicable for gaining deeper knowledge and skills and new networks of research integrity. With the purposes of awareness and development, this article is divided into two sections: the first part explores the actions taken and the second explores experiential learning that provides insights about the 4Co collective learning model.
- OPEN ACCESSMore and more research institutions are implementing courses in research integrity (RI). Recent studies indicate that teachers of RI courses are increasingly adopting a “phronetic” approach to their teaching, where the focus is on nurturing values and practical wisdom—what Aristotle called phronesis. When adopting a phronetic approach, it is important to understand what phronesis in relation to RI entails and how and to what extent an RI course can contribute to the development of research phronesis. This paper contains a practice-based discussion of the realistic aims of RI courses and a first step towards a specification of the skill set necessary for developing research phronesis drawing on experiences from the PhD courses on Responsible Conduct of Research at the University of Copenhagen. We discuss the limited extent to which research phronesis can be taught in short courses and examine the broader implications of this for the role of RI courses in the training of good researchers.
- OPEN ACCESSThe performance of graduate students in research varies greatly across countries due to various factors, mainly socioeconomic and linguistic. The current situation is critical because the wealthiest countries are also the most linguistically equipped to navigate the English-dominant landscape of academia. Here, we assess the language of citations and the publishing performance of graduate students from three French-speaking countries: Algeria, Canada, and France, where Algeria is the least English proficient and the most economically disadvantaged. We found that the bibliography of PhD theses were English dominated in all regions (72.5% in Algeria compared with >93.1% in Western countries), whereas those of Masters theses were French dominated in Algeria (63.3%), relatively bilingual in France (47.6% French), but English dominated in Canada-Québec (94.7%) and Canada-BC (98.7%). Algerian PhD students produced fewer papers, were less likely to publish in journals with calculated impact factors, and received fewer citations than students who graduated from universities in France or in two Canadian provinces, British Columbia and Québec. Our results suggest that the economic and linguistic disadvantages faced by graduate students from non-Western backgrounds affect their academic performance, highlighting important issues in facing future global challenges.
- OPEN ACCESSShortcomings in the rigour and reproducibility of research have become well-known issues and persist despite repeated calls for improvement. A coordinated effort among researchers, institutions, funders, publishers, learned societies, and regulators may be the most effective way of tackling these issues. The UK Reproducibility Network (UKRN) has fostered collaboration across various stakeholders in research and are creating the infrastructure necessary to advance rigorous and reproducible research practices across the United Kingdom. Other Reproducibility Networks, modelled on UKRN, are now emerging in other countries. Canada could benefit from a comparable network to unify the voices around research quality and maximize the value of Canadian research.
- OPEN ACCESSScientists, like all humans, are subject to self-deceptive valuations of their importance and profile. Vainglorious practice is annoying but mostly harmless when restricted to an individual’s perception of self-worth. Language that can be associated with self-promotion and aggrandizement is destructive when incorporated into scientific writing. So too is any practice that oversells the novelty of research or fails to provide sufficient scholarship on the uniqueness of results. We evaluated whether such tendencies have been increasing over time by assessing the frequencies of articles claiming to be “the first”, and those that placed the requirement for scholarship on readers by using phrases such as “to the best of our knowledge”. Our survey of titles and abstracts of 176 journals in ecology and environmental biology revealed that the frequencies of both practices increased linearly over the past half century. We thus warn readers, journal editors, and granting agencies to use caution when assessing the claimed novelty of research contributions. A system-wide reform toward more cooperative science that values humility, and abhors hubris, might help to rectify the problem.
- OPEN ACCESS
- S.J. Cooke,
- N. Young,
- M.R. Donaldson,
- E.A. Nyboer,
- D.G. Roche,
- C.L. Madliger,
- R.J. Lennox,
- J.M. Chapman,
- Z. Faulkes, and
- J.R. Bennett
For better or for worse, authorship is a currency in scholarly research and advancement. In scholarly writing, authorship is widely acknowledged as a means of conferring credit but is also tied to concepts such as responsibility and accountability. Authorship is one of the most divisive topics both at the level of the research team and more broadly in the academy and beyond. At present, authorship is often the primary way to assert and receive credit in many scholarly pursuits and domains. Debates rage, publicly but mostly privately, regarding authorship. Here we attempt to clarify key concepts related to authorship informed by our collective experiences and anchored in relevant contemporary literature. Rather than dwelling on the problems, we focus on proactive strategies for creating more just, equitable, and transparent avenues for minimizing conflict around authorship and where there is adequate recognition of the entire process of knowledge generation, synthesis, sharing, and application with partners within and beyond the academy. We frame our ideas around 10 strategies that collectively constitute a roadmap for avoiding and overcoming challenges associated with authorship decisions. - OPEN ACCESS
- Elizabeth A. McCullagh,
- Francesca Bernardi,
- Monica Malta,
- Katarzyna Nowak,
- Alison R. Marklein,
- Katie Van Horne,
- Tiffany Lee Clark,
- Susan J. Cheng,
- Maryam Zaringhalam, and
- Lauren L. Edwards
Women continue to be underrepresented and less visible in the fields of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM). 500 Women Scientists created and launched in January 2018 a global (>140 countries to date), online, open-access directory of women in STEMM fields. This directory—recently renamed gage—now also includes gender diverse persons (i.e., additional underrepresented genders) in STEMM fields. The purpose of the directory is to make these scientists’ expertise easier to locate and access for conference organizers, journalists, policy makers, educators, and others. Here, we undertake an assessment of the directory using surveys, Google Analytics, and focus groups to understand its efficacy and direction to date and identify future improvements we pledge to undertake. Through this assessment—conducted externally and in accordance with privacy protocols by Concolor Research—we identified who and how people are using our directory, why people signed up to be a resource, and areas for improvement. Through such assessment, we can learn how to enhance the directory’s efficacy and our broader efforts to boost the visibility of underrepresented people in STEMM. - OPEN ACCESSGovernment imposed lockdown measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in widespread laboratory closures. This study aimed to examine the impact of this disruption on graduate students and postdoctoral fellows completing laboratory-based research in Canada. We used an anonymous online survey and semi-structured interviews to document the experiences of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows during laboratory closures and following the transition to working from home. We employed a mixed-method approach using survey and interview data to identify shared experiences, concerns, and supports. The emotions reported by respondents at different points during laboratory closures align with the Kübler-Ross model of grief following change. Respondents describe closure processes as chaotic and confusing, primarily resulting from inconsistent communication. Respondents reported increased indications of distress while working from home. Concerns about how COVID-19 might impact trainees were identified, including decreasing competitiveness of applicants while limiting future employment opportunities. Finally, we outline five types of supports that can be implemented by supervisors and administrators to support graduate students and postdoctoral fellows to return to the laboratory. Overall, we document shared experiences of respondents during the COVID-19 laboratory shutdown and identify areas of improvement in the event widespread laboratory closures occur in the future.
- OPEN ACCESSBoth the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG) explicitly emphasized the role of educators in “reconciliation.” Alongside this, conservation practitioners are increasingly interacting with Indigenous Peoples in various ways, such as in the creation and support of Indigenous protected areas and (or) guardian programs. This paper considers how faculty teaching aspiring conservation practitioners can respond appropriately to the TRC and MMIWG Inquiry while preparing students to engage with Indigenous Peoples in a way that affirms, rather than questions Indigenous knowledge and aspirations. Our argument is threefold: first, teaching Indigenous content requires an approach grounded in transformational change, not one focused on an “add Indigenous and stir” pedagogy. Second, we assert that students need to know how to ethically engage with Indigenous Peoples more than they need knowledge of discreet facts. Finally, efforts to “Indigenize” the academy requires an emphasis on anti-racism, humility, reciprocity, and a willingness to confront ongoing colonialism and white supremacy. This paper thus focuses on the broad change that must occur within universities to adequately prepare students to build and maintain reconciliatory relationships with Indigenous Peoples.
- OPEN ACCESSOpen access (OA) allows for peer-reviewed research to be freely accessed and there has been a collective shift from both researchers and publishers towards more OA publishing. OA typically occurs either through article-processing charges (the gold road) or via self-archiving (the green road); the former can be expensive, while the latter has seen minimal uptake. The gold road of OA has led to predatory publishers and, to some, questionable publications. Here, I used publicly available grant information in Canada and combined this with individual publishing statistics to test a variety of factors and their influence on OA publishing. I showed that an individual’s award amount, H-index, and gender did not influence the proportion of OA articles they published, but an individual’s H-index scaled with the number of OA publications. Institute size influenced OA publishing patterns, with researchers at large universities (i.e., >20 000 full-time students) publishing proportionately more OA articles than medium and small institutes. I discuss the potential for this pattern to build on pre-existing systemic biases when it comes to funding and publishing.
- OPEN ACCESSBackground: The objective of this study was to determine the presence of a set of prespecified criteria used to assess scientists for promotion and tenure within faculties of medicine among the U15 Group of Canadian Research Universities.Methods: Each faculty guideline for assessing promotion and tenure was reviewed and the presence of five traditional (peer-reviewed publications, authorship order, journal impact factor, grant funding, and national/international reputation) and seven nontraditional (citations, data sharing, publishing in open access mediums, accommodating leaves, alternative ways for sharing research, registering research, using reporting guidelines) criteria were collected by two reviewers.Results: Among the U15 institutions, four of five traditional criteria (80.0%) were present in at least one promotion guideline, whereas only three of seven nontraditional incentives (42.9%) were present in any promotion guidelines. When assessing full professors, there were a median of three traditional criteria listed, versus one nontraditional criterion.Conclusion: This study demonstrates that faculties of medicine among the U15 Group of Canadian Research Universities base assessments for promotion and tenure on traditional criteria. Some of these metrics may reinforce problematic practices in medical research. These faculties should consider incentivizing criteria that can enhance the quality of medical research.
- OPEN ACCESSSocio-economic barriers to participation in science are harmful to the enterprise. One barrier is the phenomenon of scientists paying for expenses related to the conduct of research that are not reimbursed (which we termed “Scispends” for social media discourse). We conducted an online survey that asked self-selecting respondents to report the amount of money they spent on nonreimbursed expenses, including both costs incurred in the past 12 months and one-time startup costs associated with their current position. We received 857 responses that met criteria for inclusion and reported descriptive statistics summarizing nonreimbursed expenses across career stages. We found the median total of nonreimbursed expenses for the past 12 months was $1680 and the median one-time expenses were $2700, and that as a proportion of income these expenses were highest for those earliest in their careers. We found 13% of respondents spent more on unreimbursed expenses than they earned in a year. All cost categories were skewed, with most respondents reporting little or no expense, whereas a minority experienced high expenses. These results should be interpreted with caution due to survey’s exploratory design, but they suggest that formal surveys should be conducted by scientific societies, funding agencies, and academic institutions to properly assess the causes of nonreimbursed expenses and determine how this barrier can be minimized.
- OPEN ACCESSGuidance on improving the visual aspects of science communication range from “recipe”-style instructions to hyper-focused aspects of data visualization. Currently lacking in the peer-reviewed literature is a primer in graphic design tailored to a high-level overview of basic design principles and associated jargon related to layout, imagery, typeface, and colour. We illustrate why these aspects are important to effective communication. Further, we provide considerations on when to solicit professional assistance and what to expect when working with graphic designers. Having the fundamental principles of good design in your toolbox facilitates the production of effective visual communication related to your research and fruitful scientist–designer collaborations.
- OPEN ACCESSComputational methods, coding, and software are important tools for conducting research. In both academic and industry data analytics, open-source software (OSS) has gained massive popularity. Collaborative source code allows students to interact with researchers, code developers, and users from a variety of disciplines. Based on the authors’ experiences as graduate students and coding instructors, this paper provides a unique overview of the obstacles that graduate students face in obtaining the knowledge and skills required to complete their research and in transitioning from an OSS user to a contributor: psychological, practical, and cultural barriers and challenges specific to graduate students including cognitive load in graduate school, the importance of a knowledgeable mentor, seeking help from both the online and local communities, and the ongoing campaign to recognize software as research output in career and degree progression. Specific and practical steps are recommended to provide a foundation for graduate students, supervisors, administrators, and members of the OSS community to help overcome these obstacles. In conclusion, the objective of these recommendations is to describe a possible framework that individuals from across the scientific community can adapt to their needs and facilitate a sustainable feedback loop between graduate students and OSS.
- OPEN ACCESS
- Eleanor Haine-Bennett,
- Hilary B. Bergsieker,
- Imogen R. Coe,
- Andrea Koch-Kraft,
- Eve Langelier,
- Suzanne Morrison,
- Katrin Nikoleyczik,
- Toni Schmader,
- Olga Trivailo,
- Sue Twine, and
- Jennifer E. Decker
Science and engineering research excellence can be maximized if the selection of researchers is made from 100% of the pool of human talent. This requires policies and approaches that encourage broad sections of society, including women and other underrepresented groups, to participate in research. Institutional policies, interpersonal interactions, and individuals’ attitudes are drivers of workplace culture. Here, some new evidence-based and systematic approaches with a focus on culture are proposed to foster women’s inclusion and success in science and engineering. - OPEN ACCESSThreshold concepts describe the core concepts that people must master if they are to effectively think from within a new discipline or paradigm. Here, I discuss threshold concepts relevant to the science and practice of sustainability, unpacking the persistent challenges and critiques that sustainability has faced over the decades. Sustainability is immensely popular, but also endlessly critiqued as being naïve, vague, and easy to co-opt. I argue that these challenges can be traced to sustainability’s status as a robust, alternative world view to the industrial, neoliberal paradigm. The threshold concepts discussed below are troublesome, and new learners face significant challenges when trying to learn them and move into the paradigm. Here, I review five threshold concepts that are widely discussed as important to sustainability: complexity, collaborative institutions, multiple ways of knowing, no panaceas, and adaptability. This list is not intended as comprehensive but exemplary of sustainability as a pluralistic paradigm. Recognizing the special status of these and other threshold concepts within sustainability, and the linkages and dependencies among them, is an important advance for sustainability education and practice. I also offer some suggestions on classroom activities that have proved effective in helping people through the process of learning these concepts.
- OPEN ACCESS
- Steven J. Cooke,
- Vivian M. Nguyen,
- Dimitry Anastakis,
- Shannon D. Scott,
- Merritt R. Turetsky,
- Alidad Amirfazli,
- Alison Hearn,
- Cynthia E. Milton,
- Laura Loewen,
- Eric E. Smith,
- D. Ryan Norris,
- Kim L. Lavoie,
- Alice Aiken,
- Daniel Ansari,
- Alissa N. Antle,
- Molly Babel,
- Jane Bailey,
- Daniel M. Bernstein,
- Rachel Birnbaum,
- Carrie Bourassa,
- Antonio Calcagno,
- Aurélie Campana,
- Bing Chen,
- Karen Collins,
- Catherine E. Connelly,
- Myriam Denov,
- Benoît Dupont,
- Eric George,
- Irene Gregory-Eaves,
- Steven High,
- Josephine M. Hill,
- Philip L. Jackson,
- Nathalie Jette,
- Mark Jurdjevic,
- Anita Kothari,
- Paul Khairy,
- Sylvie A. Lamoureux,
- Kiera Ladner,
- Christian R. Landry,
- François Légaré,
- Nadia Lehoux,
- Christian Leuprecht,
- Angela R. Lieverse,
- Artur Luczak,
- Mark L. Mallory,
- Erin Manning,
- Ali Mazalek,
- Stuart J. Murray,
- Lenore L. Newman,
- Valerie Oosterveld,
- Patrice Potvin,
- Sheryl Reimer-Kirkham,
- Jennifer Rowsell,
- Dawn Stacey,
- Susan L. Tighe,
- David J. Vocadlo,
- Anne E. Wilson, and
- Andrew Woolford
Various multiple-disciplinary terms and concepts (although most commonly “interdisciplinarity,” which is used herein) are used to frame education, scholarship, research, and interactions within and outside academia. In principle, the premise of interdisciplinarity may appear to have many strengths; yet, the extent to which interdisciplinarity is embraced by the current generation of academics, the benefits and risks for doing so, and the barriers and facilitators to achieving interdisciplinarity, represent inherent challenges. Much has been written on the topic of interdisciplinarity, but to our knowledge there have been few attempts to consider and present diverse perspectives from scholars, artists, and scientists in a cohesive manner. As a team of 57 members from the Canadian College of New Scholars, Artists, and Scientists of the Royal Society of Canada (the College) who self-identify as being engaged or interested in interdisciplinarity, we provide diverse intellectual, cultural, and social perspectives. The goal of this paper is to share our collective wisdom on this topic with the broader community and to stimulate discourse and debate on the merits and challenges associated with interdisciplinarity. Perhaps the clearest message emerging from this exercise is that working across established boundaries of scholarly communities is rewarding, necessary, and is more likely to result in impact. However, there are barriers that limit the ease with which this can occur (e.g., lack of institutional structures and funding to facilitate cross-disciplinary exploration). Occasionally, there can be significant risk associated with doing interdisciplinary work (e.g., lack of adequate measurement or recognition of work by disciplinary peers). Solving many of the world’s complex and pressing problems (e.g., climate change, sustainable agriculture, the burden of chronic disease, and aging populations) demands thinking and working across long-standing, but in some ways restrictive, academic boundaries. Academic institutions and key support structures, especially funding bodies, will play an important role in helping to realize what is readily apparent to all who contributed to this paper—that interdisciplinarity is essential for solving complex problems; it is the new norm. Failure to empower and encourage those doing this research will serve as a great impediment to training, knowledge, and addressing societal issues. - OPEN ACCESSInuit Nunangat, including Nunavik, is seeing an ever-increasing number of research projects. While mainstream approaches to research are colonial in nature and have historically contributed to the oppression of Indigenous peoples, a new paradigm is now emerging from Indigenous recommendations. Researchers are encouraged to collaborate with Inuit or Northern communities, organizations, and governments and to develop communication strategies to keep local populations informed. This paper focuses on outreach activities organized on several occasions throughout the Ice Monitoring project, in which we participated as PhD students. We share details on this periodic outreach program, which included a Facebook page, hosting an information table at the Co-op store, activities with high school classes, and participation in Raglan Mine’s Environmental Forum. We also discuss lessons learned and the transformation of our practice.