SemOpenAlex |

SemOpenAlex

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2811022769> ?p ?o ?g. }

Showing items 1 to 62 of 62 with 100 items per page.

W2811022769 endingPage "350" @default.
W2811022769 startingPage "343" @default.
W2811022769 abstract "Today's graduate students are entering academic and scientific communities that are rapidly changing. Collaborations across disciplines and sectors are becoming more common (Redman et al. 2004, Adams 2012), and graduate students often provide key linkages in these collaborations (Rhoten and Parker 2014). While solid advice on selecting academic supervisors and departments is extensive for prospective graduate students (e.g., Smith et al. 2016), traditional trainee–supervisor relationships are evolving and often expanding to include these more collaborative projects. Such collaborations among scientists are now often formalized into funded scientific research networks (Adams 2012). Research networks generally consist of several to many researchers organized to address problems under a common theme. Given the wide diversity of research networks (e.g., Table 1), navigating and understanding research networks can be challenging for incoming graduate students, who may have limited knowledge of the structure of research communities. Graduate students who are part of scientific research networks may have much different experiences than those students entering more traditional academic structures. For example, graduate students involved in network-related research may be in direct communication with government scientists, industrial partners, or faculty outside of their own university, or may have those individuals acting on supervisory committees (e.g., dissertation committees). As such, advice for graduate students on research networks is sorely needed. To acknowledge and bridge this information gap, we characterize a wide range of research networks and reflect on the benefits and drawbacks of engaging in scientific networks as graduate students. Finally, we conclude with a perspective on engaging in network-related research as former graduate students and members of the Canadian Network for Aquatic Ecosystem Services (CNAES). CNAES is a national research network composed of approximately 165 researchers from 11 universities, four government agencies, and three industry partners developed to identify new tools and synthesize knowledge for understanding Canada's freshwater ecosystems and the diverse societal benefits they provide. Newly admitted graduate students in the sciences develop many new professional relationships and enter several communities that operate at varying scales. The most traditional and smallest community includes the graduate student and their supervisor, and potentially other graduate students working in the supervisor's laboratory. The relationship between a graduate student and their supervisor is arguably the most important when attending graduate school. Supervisors provide graduate students with leadership, mentorship, financial support, and personal support, but also must be objective when evaluating students’ abilities, for example, when providing letters of recommendation or feedback on a student's work. Scaling up, graduate students also enter a departmental community at their home university, consisting of other graduate students, supervisors, and departmental staff. This community represents colleagues that may share similar academic interests and can present opportunities for collaboration, socialization, and encouragement. However, in many cases, research within a department spans a wide range of topics and the best-suited collaborators may be at other institutions. As such, academic supervisors and their graduate students are increasingly engaging in larger-scale communities—research networks, which are becoming more and more commonplace in science (Adams 2012). Generally, research networks are funded to advance specific areas of study or address particular problems within a broad disciplinary, geographic, or temporal scope, which may benefit from partnerships between academia, government, industry, and independent interest groups. Research networks can range in size and structure from a few select members across a handful of organizations to multi-thousand-member establishments with research efforts and products spanning the globe (Table 1). Ultimately, the goals and funding availability for research networks shape their size and structure. For example, a network formed to address a complex, interdisciplinary research question will be inherently different from one formed to coalesce the resources within disciplines, such as intellect and training, datasets, technology, methodology, and/or experimental materials (e.g., field sites, samples). Accordingly, these larger-scale communities formed by research networks, while providing a range of experiences and potentially career-defining opportunities for a graduate student, can also be difficult and intimidating to navigate. Globally, there are thousands of research networks, spanning from regional to national to international in breadth, scope, and membership. Some of these networks are macro-research networks (1000s of members) that often focus on the curation of big data. For example, Ameriflux is a mega-research network that collates raw carbon, water, and energy flux data collected from hundreds of study sites around the world—resulting in hundreds of scientific publications and a more complete understanding of terrestrial ecosystem processes (ameriflux.lbl.gov). Such efforts provide opportunities to understand phenomenon at continental and global scales, often fundamentally advancing a field of study. Micro- and meso-scale research networks (10s–100s of members) often emphasize student training and shared intellect through smaller collaborations. For example, student training and novel environmental, social, and technological research are often emphasized in the meso-scale research networks funded through Canadian governmental agencies (e.g., Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Strategic Networks). Each one of these government-funded networks produces a suite of publications while training dozens to hundreds of graduate students for the next step in their respective careers. The students involved in these research networks are provided with more opportunities to participate in value-added training programs administered through the network, with both the benefits and drawbacks of such an experience. Training here can cover a variety of topics from discipline-specific laboratory training to broad skills-training like scientific communication. The path to joining a research network as a graduate student or postdoctoral fellow typically starts by finding a supervisor to study under who actively participates in network-related research (Fig. 1). Less common is for a student to join a network and then look for a supervisor among members, as projects are often funded at the curation of a research network. Actively participating in scientific networks often means that graduate students attend network-related conference calls, webinars, workshops, general meetings, and conference sessions. These gatherings bring together individuals with differing backgrounds and occupations but similar interests, providing graduate students with the opportunity to meet a variety of young to accomplished professionals, often representing different sectors (e.g., academia, government, industry). Exposure to professionals from a diversity of sectors is an important feature of research networks because it provides graduate students the opportunity to expand their professional network and can be useful for gaining exposure to opportunities after completing their degree. As academic positions are increasingly difficult to obtain (Cyranoski et al. 2011, Powell 2015), these networking opportunities can also inform graduate students of alternative careers in their field. For graduate students who are on the academic track, networks can provide an opportunity to meet other academics and facilitate future postdoctoral research positions. In addition to the direct benefits of having a broader social and scientific community of colleagues, actively engaging in a research network can enhance the opportunity for “planned happenstance.” Planned happenstance describes when unplanned, serendipitous events are turned into learning and career opportunities (Mitchell et al. 1999). For example, planned happenstance could represent the situation where a graduate student attends a conference or meeting and is presented with a job opportunity. Although these interactions may be unplanned, actively engaging with colleagues and the scientific community is required to maximize the success of these opportunities. By engaging in a research network and participating in network-related initiatives, graduate students can increase the likelihood of chance career opportunities occurring for them, but ultimately, it is the student's willingness to seek out these potential connections that may lead to further learning and career opportunities. Bringing together a diverse group of individuals from academia, government, and industry in the form of a research network can provide graduate students with a more interdisciplinary perspective. Interdisciplinary work is at the forefront of scientific advancement as researchers tackle increasingly complex problems that span social, economic, and scientific disciplines. One of the main barriers in interdisciplinary collaboration is the discipline-specific jargon that can impede communication among collaborators. In a traditional academic setting, graduate students are hyperexposed to their personal discipline and have limited conversation with scientists outside their field of study. However, network-related meetings can provide graduate students with the opportunity to engage with other disciplines, increasing their ability to communicate complex ideas to a diverse audience, learning how researchers in other fields think about research questions, and potentially increasing overall productivity (Savage 2017). The availability of discipline-specific training opportunities for graduate students varies greatly among graduate programs and universities. Thus, access to a wider variety of technical expertise is particularly important for graduate students who may have limited access to training opportunities during their graduate work. Research networks may facilitate access to one-on-one technical guidance and training on particular laboratory or analytical procedures at other universities, or among laboratories of industry and government partners. More experienced researchers may feel more compelled to provide advice and follow-up with graduate students affiliated with their network as networks can provide researchers with a sense of greater research output via these collaborations. Finally, in addition to the transfer of skills between network researchers, graduate students may also have the opportunity to incorporate data collected by collaborators to enhance the scope and breadth of their findings (Porter 2010). Finally, research networks provide graduates students with opportunities to develop important soft skills such as leadership, budget management, time management, and communication via their participation on various network-sponsored committees, projects, and webinars. Although these opportunities may present themselves through traditional graduate programs, involvement in research networks can provide (and require) an additional source of leadership and project management roles that graduate students can capitalize on. For example, networks may have committees consisting of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows designed to promote a series of network-related objectives (e.g., increasing collaboration among members, organizing working groups, consolidating skill-based training opportunities). Research networks may also provide workshop-based training opportunities on broad topics often neglected among undergraduate and graduate degree programs. For example, the ability for scientists to communicate their research clearly and in a comprehensive manner is increasingly recognized as an imperative skill for researchers and students to possess, yet it is often underemphasized in undergraduate and graduate student training (Brownell et al. 2013). Research networks can provide an additional opportunity for graduate students to develop better communication skills through workshops and by having their students present their research orally at network meetings, visually via the use of poster presentations, and through the writing of manuscripts and project summaries followed by constructive feedback from network mentors. Furthermore, additional funding may be available for graduate students to apply these communication skills in presentations at both academic and non-academic conferences and meetings. Overall, soft-skill training opportunities within networks are likely to be more specific to a graduate student's personal research than general opportunities at their home university and therefore more relevant to the career path of the student. When joining a research network, an important consideration for graduate students is the time that must be committed to network activities. Graduate students’ schedules are jam-packed with courses, teaching, research, writing, and hopefully activities to help maintain personal well-being. Engaging in a network can bring additional expectations for graduate students such as attendance and participation at annual conferences, webinars, and training workshops, and engaging in external collaborations outside the scope of their personal research. Students must therefore be good managers of their time, or they can become overwhelmed. Students may feel pressure to participate in network activities and administrative duties, which can detract from time focused on the student's research project. In some cases, especially for students enrolled in a Master's program, the length of a student's degree is shorter than the life of the network, which can lead to limited or rushed time-frames for outputs and collaborations. In turn, this can result in the loss of motivation to participate in collaborative efforts, leaving these value-added network projects to fizzle out with no final product. Despite these considerations, for many network activities, graduate student participation is voluntary, and students can participate in a network without participating in all network activities. However, as with most professional development, the amount of time and effort a student expends in a research network is likely proportional to the benefits they receive from it. Increased collaborative engagement can come with high expectations on graduate students for output and potentially place high burdens of low-credit work on their shoulders. Low-credit work can take a variety of forms and may include grant reporting, non-peer-reviewed reports, presentations and organization of meetings, as well as research organization activities including emails, attending meetings, and webinars. Measurable research output is a strong predictor of success in achieving academic jobs (Acuna et al. 2012). Therefore, students seeking academic positions should carefully weigh the cost-benefit of engaging in low-credit work, as competition for jobs remains high and is often based on measurable, high-reward scientific output, such as peer-reviewed articles in high-impact journals. While conference presentations, invited talks, and posters show engagement in the scientific community and demonstrate practice in science communication, their measurable rewards are often less significant than peer-reviewed scientific manuscripts (Goring et al. 2014). Scientific networks often necessitate and enhance interdisciplinary research, a noble and promising direction for science. However, while the benefits of interdisciplinary research are wide-ranging (Naiman 1999, Goring et al. 2014), the financial and career rewards for interdisciplinary work among scientists may be low for individuals (particularly in academia), as funding success for interdisciplinary research proposals is typically lower than discipline-specific proposals (Broham et al. 2016). Slow-to-change governmental agencies often fund research contained within disciplinary silos (Goring et al. 2014). In Canada, government funding for science research often comes through either the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, or the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. This creates a clear divide that can create challenges for researchers aiming to tackle interdisciplinary problems that cross the traditional divides of natural vs. social vs. health science research. Furthermore, for students aiming for academic careers, developing a “niche” in scientific research is critical; advertisements for faculty positions are often narrowly focused (e.g., wildlife disease ecology, agroecosystem ecology, microbial environmental metagenomics). Efforts toward interdisciplinary research may lead to more broadly trained individuals, which is less often rewarded in the niche-driven academic job markets. However, broadly trained scientists may present themselves as having more hirable attributes for jobs inside and outside of academia due to their ability to consider problems from multiple angles. For example, government and industry scientists (e.g., consultants) are often faced with addressing complex social and environmental challenges, tasks well-faced by individuals trained in collaborative, interdisciplinary research networks. Clearly, there are positive and negative aspects of most decisions that graduate students will make during the course of their degree program, and it is up to the individual to steer the course in a direction that fulfills their personal goals. After reaching the finish line with a degree in hand, there is time to reflect on how one's education and graduate school experiences have or have not benefited them in the short-term, and how those experiences may influence their future in the long term. Albeit with personal biases, we see network engagement as an activity that positively shaped our experiences in graduate school and will be tremendously beneficial as we transition from “student” to “early career” (Fig. 1). Still, the pathway from starting a degree program and engaging in network research, to receiving a graduate degree and moving into the labor market is not always smooth sailing. For all graduate students, this path is filled with many highs and lows from receiving funds to attend academic conferences to having manuscripts rejected during the peer-review process. However, engaging in scientific research networks provides a larger set of colleagues to call on during such challenging times. Despite the challenges, engaging in this larger-scale community of network researchers from academia, industry, and government provided us as graduate students and postdoctoral fellows a network of colleagues that know our names, know our faces, know our work, support us as scientists, and know our potential for future work. Although having a strong academic transcript, curriculum vitae, and publication record is an important aspect of gaining future employment (van Dijk et al. 2014), having a far-reaching network of colleagues that know you and your work is another, and arguably, more important attribute to have. Research networks can provide this and therefore can be fundamentally important for the success of a graduate student post-degree. This collaboration developed through, and was funded by, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). All authors participated as members of the NSERC CNAES student committee, a committee of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows working to improve the experiences of students within the network by developing training opportunities and improving connectivity among network members. We would like to thank Donald Jackson, David Kreutzweiser, Pedro Peres-Neto, Jennifer Robinson, and Paul Sibley for comments on earlier drafts of this paper." @default.
W2811022769 created "2018-07-10" @default.
W2811022769 creator A5003092403 @default.
W2811022769 creator A5004482696 @default.
W2811022769 creator A5009950279 @default.
W2811022769 creator A5010404899 @default.
W2811022769 creator A5013907741 @default.
W2811022769 creator A5018976857 @default.
W2811022769 creator A5065820094 @default.
W2811022769 date "2018-06-29" @default.
W2811022769 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
W2811022769 title "Are Research Networks Worth the Time for Graduate Students?" @default.
W2811022769 cites W1587511915 @default.
W2811022769 cites W1968900087 @default.
W2811022769 cites W2010917530 @default.
W2811022769 cites W2038210378 @default.
W2811022769 cites W2066127962 @default.
W2811022769 cites W2067433082 @default.
W2811022769 cites W2076230195 @default.
W2811022769 cites W2092533475 @default.
W2811022769 cites W2096735936 @default.
W2811022769 cites W2129402021 @default.
W2811022769 cites W2465739951 @default.
W2811022769 cites W2774006301 @default.
W2811022769 doi "https://doi.org/10.1002/bes2.1413" @default.
W2811022769 hasPublicationYear "2018" @default.
W2811022769 type Work @default.
W2811022769 sameAs 2811022769 @default.
W2811022769 citedByCount "0" @default.
W2811022769 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
W2811022769 hasAuthorship W2811022769A5003092403 @default.
W2811022769 hasAuthorship W2811022769A5004482696 @default.
W2811022769 hasAuthorship W2811022769A5009950279 @default.
W2811022769 hasAuthorship W2811022769A5010404899 @default.
W2811022769 hasAuthorship W2811022769A5013907741 @default.
W2811022769 hasAuthorship W2811022769A5018976857 @default.
W2811022769 hasAuthorship W2811022769A5065820094 @default.
W2811022769 hasBestOaLocation W28110227691 @default.
W2811022769 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
W2811022769 hasConceptScore W2811022769C41008148 @default.
W2811022769 hasFunder F4320334593 @default.
W2811022769 hasIssue "3" @default.
W2811022769 hasLocation W28110227691 @default.
W2811022769 hasOpenAccess W2811022769 @default.
W2811022769 hasPrimaryLocation W28110227691 @default.
W2811022769 hasRelatedWork W1596801655 @default.
W2811022769 hasRelatedWork W2130043461 @default.
W2811022769 hasRelatedWork W2350741829 @default.
W2811022769 hasRelatedWork W2358668433 @default.
W2811022769 hasRelatedWork W2376932109 @default.
W2811022769 hasRelatedWork W2382290278 @default.
W2811022769 hasRelatedWork W2390279801 @default.
W2811022769 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
W2811022769 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
W2811022769 hasRelatedWork W2530322880 @default.
W2811022769 hasVolume "99" @default.
W2811022769 isParatext "false" @default.
W2811022769 isRetracted "false" @default.
W2811022769 magId "2811022769" @default.
W2811022769 workType "article" @default.