Faupel-Badger Jessica M, Raue Kimberley, Nelson David E, Tsakraklides Sophia
*Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-9712;
Westat, Inc., Rockville, MD 20850.
CBE Life Sci Educ. 2015 Mar 2;14(1):ar1. doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-06-0102. Epub 2015 Feb 11.
Published evaluations of career preparation of alumni from long-standing postdoctoral fellowship programs in the biomedical sciences are limited and often focus on quantitative analysis of data from extant publicly available sources. Qualitative methods provide the opportunity to gather robust information about specific program elements from structured postdoctoral training programs and the influence of this training on subsequent career paths of alumni. In-depth interviews with a subset of the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program (CPFP) alumni (n=27), representing more than 25 years of the program's history and multiple career sectors, were conducted to assess alumni reflections on the training environment and career preparation during their time in the CPFP. NVivo software was used to analyze data and identify major themes. Four main themes emerged from these interviews, including: the value of structured training curriculum, mentorship, transdisciplinary environment, and professional identity. Even when reflecting on training that occurred one to two decades earlier, alumni were able to highlight specific components of a structured postdoctoral training program as influencing their research and career trajectories. These results may have relevance for those interested in assessing how postdoctoral training can influence fellows throughout their careers and understanding salient features of structured programs.
对长期存在的生物医学博士后奖学金项目的校友职业准备情况的公开评估有限,且往往侧重于对现有公开来源数据的定量分析。定性方法提供了一个机会,可以从结构化的博士后培训项目中收集有关特定项目要素的有力信息,以及这种培训对校友后续职业道路的影响。我们对美国国立癌症研究所癌症预防奖学金项目(CPFP)的一部分校友(n = 27)进行了深入访谈,这些校友代表了该项目25年以上的历史和多个职业领域,以评估校友对在CPFP期间的培训环境和职业准备的看法。我们使用NVivo软件来分析数据并确定主要主题。这些访谈中出现了四个主要主题,包括:结构化培训课程的价值、导师指导、跨学科环境和职业身份。即使是回顾一二十年前的培训,校友们也能够指出结构化博士后培训项目的特定组成部分对他们的研究和职业轨迹产生了影响。这些结果可能与那些有兴趣评估博士后培训如何在整个职业生涯中影响研究员以及了解结构化项目的显著特征的人有关。