Tag: Researchers

  • Trump’s upheavals worry job-hunting postdoctoral researchers

    Trump’s upheavals worry job-hunting postdoctoral researchers

    Julia Barnes, a National Science Foundation postdoctoral research fellow, was watching President Donald Trump’s speech to Congress last week when she heard him refer to her work as an “appalling waste” that needs to end.

    In a list of expenses he called “scams,” Trump mentioned a $60 million project for Indigenous peoples in Latin America.

    “Empowering Afro-Indigenous populations in Colombia, South America, is exactly what I do,” Barnes said. “My project is explicitly DEI, and it is DEI-focused in a foreign country.” The Trump administration has targeted both foreign aid and diversity, equity and inclusion.

    Even before the speech, she knew her work helping such communities, which have faced atrocities, was under threat. Barnes said officials at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, where she’s based, last month asked her not to travel to Colombia for a planned research trip. She’s taken further precautions herself out of fear that she’ll be forced to repay any NSF grant money she uses, she said.

    She’s not using the money at all—even to pay herself, she said. “I’m drawing on my savings right now to pay rent and pay for groceries,” Barnes said. She’s also teaching at another university and freelancing for a nonprofit. (An NSF spokesperson pointed Inside Higher Ed to an agency webpage that says activities such as travel “are permitted to proceed in accordance with the terms and conditions of existing awards.”)

    “It’s pretty devastating,” she said. “This is the highest position I’ve ever gotten in my career. This is my dream job to do this research; it’s a cause that I care about very deeply.” She said, “It really breaks my heart to see this shift in values away from what I had initially hoped would become a tenure-track professorship and something—something greater.”

    Postdocs like Barnes are worried about their careers amid the tumult of the Trump administration, which has frozen federal funding; canceled grant review meetings; slashed National Institutes of Health payments for indirect research costs; targeted diversity, equity and inclusion activities without clearly defining DEI; and laid off swaths of federal research agency employees.

    Many of those actions have been in flux as judges block and unblock the administration’s orders amid courtroom fights, and as federal officials walk back terminations and other cuts. But university officials nonetheless appear unnerved, with some restricting Ph.D. program admissions and pausing hiring.

    “There’s a very complicated feeling in spending close to a decade of time and energy pursuing this type of career,” said Kevin Bird, who’s on the job hunt. He’s nearing the expiration of his stint as an NSF biology postdoc research fellow at the University of California, Davis, and said he’s always tried to work at public universities because he values their mission.

    “The whole process of striving for this for so long and making the sacrifices—to think it’s worth it—and then kind of having the entire system be attacked and sort of collapse in uncertainty has really been an unpleasant thing to experience,” Bird said.

    The White House didn’t provide an interview or statement last week.

    Looking Overseas

    Counting her undergraduate days, Amanda Shaver said she’s spent 19 years building a science career. Now an NIH postdoc fellow at Johns Hopkins University, she said she feels “so close to the finish line of trying to do everything right for so many years to get a faculty position”—only for it to now “feel unattainable.”

    Shaver said meetings to consider the career transition NIH award she applied for have been postponed, and she wonders whether Trump officials actually axed the program because they considered it a DEI initiative. The NIH didn’t respond to Inside Higher Ed’s requests for comment last week about the program’s status.

    Looking at the overall future of research and higher education in the U.S., Shaver said, “Things are not good.” She’s applying to positions in other countries.

    In the meantime, she awaits word on what’s happening with her NIH Pathway to Independence Award application. This award—also known as K99/R00—provides recipients money to finish work during their postdoc stints and then start labs at new institutions, Shaver said. “It really sort of elevates you in the candidate pool” for faculty jobs, she said.

    But Shaver—who describes herself as from a low-income family and a disadvantaged school district—said she applied for a version of the award known as MOSAIC, which is meant to keep talented people from underrepresented groups in the biomedical sciences field. That makes it a potential target of Trump’s anti-DEI crusade.

    Shaver said the MOSAIC website disappeared temporarily, “and people thought that they just weren’t in existence anymore, and people were told to not submit those.” But she had already applied; a study section of faculty was supposed to meet in February to consider the application, she said. That was postponed once, and last week she received an email saying it’s been postponed again until May, she said.

    “I don’t know if they will actually meet or not,” Shaver said. She might apply for the regular version of the award in the future but will then have lost an application cycle and can only keep applying until the fourth year of her postdoc stint, she said.

    “The NIH is the worldwide leader in biomedical research,” she said. “And canceling different types of grants or delaying funding and firing people that are really qualified at the NIH, cutting the indirect costs at universities—all these things collectively are really harming the research industry.”

    She added, “It doesn’t make any sense—I think to any voter—to want to dismantle biomedical research … it’s like a degradation of an entire system that is built on facts and knowledge.”

    Amid the upheaval, it can be hard to tell whether university job cuts stem from Trump’s actions or other factors. Bird, the NSF postdoc at UC Davis, said searches for two tenure-track faculty positions he applied for have been canceled since Trump took office. One of the institutions he mentioned, North Carolina State University, told Inside Higher Ed the search is now progressing, and the other, Clemson University, said its search was canceled to “attract a broader and more qualified candidate pool” and the position will be reposted soon.

    Whatever the reasons for those cuts, “many people I’ve talked to now at institutions are feeling the crunch or feeling the concern about what the next few years might hold if the NIH cuts go through, if any aspect of the indirect rate shifts happen,” Bird said. “It’s kind of forcing a lot of universities to really plan for the worst, I think.” So far, a federal district court judge has blocked the NIH from implementing such cuts.

    He lamented the attacks on efforts to recruit into science more first-generation students and students from historically excluded groups. These attacks change “what the job I could even have would be like—if part of the job isn’t taking that mindset of broadening participation and bringing people into the career path like I was,” said Bird, who comes from a small town and a low-income family.

    All this turmoil is pushing him to start “broadening my horizons,” including looking at positions in Europe or other parts of the world that hopefully “will have more stable science institutions and stable higher education,” he said.

    Job cuts at federal research agencies and universities may increase competition-—and uncertainty—among those trying to take the next step in their careers. Julia Van Etten said, “I have a lot of friends who’ve lost their jobs” as early-career researchers in federal agencies.

    Van Etten, an NSF postdoc research fellow at Rutgers University at New Brunswick, said she’s looking for faculty jobs. But “it’s uncertain how many of those jobs will exist going forward.”

    “There’s a lot more people on the job market here,” Van Etten said. “There’s a lot of uncertainty on the job market here. There seems to be a general feeling that the overseas job markets—if they’re not already—are going to become saturated.”

    “It just feels like the job market is kind of bleak,” she said.

    Van Etten said the government—through funding from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Department of Energy and other agencies—has already invested much in her education and work. And she’s invested time that might have been wasted.

    “I spent my entire 20s in grad school and working to get my Ph.D.,” she said. “And no one gets a doctorate just for the pay, right? I really love what I do, and I think my work in basic research is really important. And, for the first time in my entire life, I’ve had to start thinking about what I would do if I wasn’t a scientist anymore.”

    Source link

  • Researchers’ comfort, uses of AI vary by region, discipline

    Researchers’ comfort, uses of AI vary by region, discipline

    Most researchers are interested in using artificial intelligence in their work, and 69 percent believe AI skills will be critical within two years. However, more than 60 percent say a lack of guidelines and training present a barrier to their increased use of AI, according to a study the publishing giant Wiley released last week.

    The study asked nearly 5,000 researchers worldwide about how they currently use AI, and the findings revealed variations by geography, discipline and career phase.

    It found that 70 percent of researchers want clearer guidelines from publishers about acceptable uses of AI, and 69 percent want publishers to help them avoid potential pitfalls, errors and biases.

    Although the vast majority of researchers had either heard of or used Open AI’s ChatGPT, only about a third had heard of other popular tools, such as Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot, and even fewer used them.

    And among those who do use AI, fewer than half use it for its top five uses, which include help with translation (40 percent), proofreading and editing scholarly papers for publication (38 percent), brainstorming/ideation (26 percent), reviewing large amounts of information (24 percent), and discovering the latest relevant research (24 percent).

    The study also found geographic variations in AI use.

    Researchers in China and Germany were most likely to have used AI to support their work—59 percent and 57 percent, respectively—compared to a global average of 45 percent. In the Americas, which includes the United States, only 40 percent of researchers surveyed said they have already used AI to conduct or write up research.

    Researchers also expressed differences in enthusiasm for adopting the tools now, depending on field and career phase.

    Among the early adopters of AI were researchers in computer science (44 percent), medicine (38 percent), corporate (42 percent) and health care (38 percent), as well as early-career researchers (39 percent). Business, economics and finance researchers (42 percent), and those in the academic sector (36 percent), wanted to keep pace with the average rate of use and adoption.

    Finally, researchers in the life sciences (38 percent), physical sciences (34 percent) and government sector (34 percent), as well as late-career researchers (34 percent), were more likely to take a more cautious approach and favor later adoption of AI.

    Source link

  • Supporting the careers of researchers means innovation, not isolation

    Supporting the careers of researchers means innovation, not isolation

    The phrase attributed to Sir Isaac Newton, “if I have seen further, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants,” is often used as a metaphor for research and innovation: how each great thinker builds on the thoughts and research of others, the unending column of prize winners and esteemed fellows pursuing academic endeavour.

    However, the environment I sought as a researcher and aim to enable as a university leader is more of a supportive collective, certainly one with a much less precarious base.

    Perhaps the most important lessons learnt during my own research career was that the giants of research, innovation and knowledge exchange whose shoulders we are more often standing on are not the senior staff but rather the PhD students, early career researchers, postdoctoral fellows and technicians, who turn challenging questions posed into the most exciting innovative answers. And often without the bias of doing things the way we have in the past.

    Untangling

    Achieving the UK’s priority of innovation and the growth it drives requires a long-range vision to set direction matched with agility to rapidly pivot as new opportunities arise. This agility needs a skilled research workforce and the attraction of the brightest minds into roles at all stages of a research and innovation career.

    However, these giants, whose shoulders we balance UK innovation on, need long-term confidence to initiate a career which currently has precarity baked in. Growing investment to support research and innovation is needed, but investment in equipment, facilities and consumables will not succeed without engaged and enabling expertise.

    Alongside this, regional disparity of funding, low research cost recovery, and increasing regulatory demands are posing the question of how much research can any university afford to undertake. The simple answer may appear to be to do less, or divert funding to specialist institutes without dual responsibility for teaching – however, this would undermine the agility that is underpinned by broad expertise, civic and industrial partnerships and infrastructure which resides across our higher education institutions.

    Fixing this knotty problem needs a systematic approach, balancing external and internal funding alongside improved recovery of the true cost of research. With restrictions in the sector and reduced internal funding impacting decisions, it is imperative to not forget the essential role of the precarious base on which our research activity in the UK is built – and to support it accordingly.

    Concordat priorities

    My commitment to career development and recognition of researchers is why I am excited to be continuing the great work led by Julia Buckingham as the incoming chair of the Researcher Development Concordat Strategy Group, which oversees the Researcher Development Concordat.

    The concordat was first published in 2019, building on agreements of funding bodies and universities over a decade earlier. The current signatories are over 100 higher education and research institutes, who commit to the principles of environment and culture, employment, and career development for researchers in our institutions and 17 funding agencies who set grant holder requirements relating to the concordat commitments.

    The concordat has recently undergone a review which identified future areas of focus to achieve continued effectiveness. Three priorities were identified:

    First, agreeing a set of shared principles to define the characteristics of a positive environment for research culture, and second, working to a shared set of research culture values with measurable indicators of progress. We seek to align a set of shared broad principles to define the characteristics of a positive environment for research culture. While these must link to the REF people, culture and environment measures, they need to be high-level shared principles and ensure that they define measurable indicators of progress to avoid confusion across multiple agendas. These also need to be high enough level to ensure a collective agreement to deliver whilst also accommodating the diversity and breadth of higher education institutions and research organisations.

    The third priority is simplifying the bureaucracy. This is essential in a sector with ever-growing demands of attention and associated costs to deliver. While we must maintain accountability, we need to simplify the bureaucracy to work in service of our principles and values, not dictate them. In short, we must simplify for our communities how the different national concordats can complement rather than compete for attention. To achieve this, we are reviewing and reforming reporting requirements to achieve better alignment and to incorporate them into existing reporting where possible. We are working with other bodies to align data and reporting requirements.

    I am also keen to work with industry body representatives to understand and reduce barriers to the movement of careers from academia to industry and vice versa. This porosity of career is needed for both innovation and rapid business adoption of innovative ideas. For this porosity to support innovation and growth we also need to enhance engagement from the industry to support researchers throughout a changing career.

    While this work is delivered by the concordat strategy group, the concordat is collectively owned by the sector and continued engagement is needed to ensure the concordat is fit for purpose. Given this, we are looking for engagement in future work, more details about which can be found on the concordat webpage. I look forward to working with higher education institutions, industry, funders, the Researcher Development Concordat Strategy Group, and individuals to deliver our collective commitments.

    The Researcher Development Concordat Strategy Group secretariat is jointly funded through funding bodies from the four nations: Research England, the Scottish Funding Council, Medr (previously HEFCW), and the Department for the Economy in Northern Ireland. I thank them for their continued support.

    Source link

  • Positive change for disabled researchers might need managing and leading

    Positive change for disabled researchers might need managing and leading

    Among the university initiatives which aim to amplify traditionally marginalised voices, disabled researchers are now throwing their metaphorical hats into the ring.

    I am a member of a disabled researchers’ network and in a recent meeting, the question we asked ourselves were central to the raison d’être of the group.

    How do we position ourselves? How do we manage the strength that comes with having a diverse group, while ensuring that all voices are heard equally? And – perhaps most crucially – what are the positive outcomes towards which we can orientate our group and our activities, within the existing structures?

    Perhaps thinking about this via the lens of the overused yet helpful notion of “leadership and management” could help to clarify the tensions and dichotomies facing disabled students and inform next steps.

    Vital functions

    Leadership and management have separate and “vital functions” within any organisation – management is focused on efficient and reliable operations day-to-day, while leadership drives an organisation into the future.

    These two concepts, so often put together and both crucial for an organisation to flourish, in some ways work against each other – as Professor Tony Bush explains,

    Managerial leadership is focused on managing existing activities successfully rather than visioning a better future.

    “Management” inevitably involves some element of instinctive resistance to change which threatens to destabilise routines and known outcomes. In my experience and from the personal anecdotes of disabled colleagues, it is apparent that we have experienced inflexibility in processes and resistance to adjustments which would have facilitated our research activities.

    Maybe at least some of this resistance comes from a fear that equilibrium would be disrupted; giving the benefit of the doubt seems helpful in avoiding the “us” and “them” stance which is an obstacle to positive collaboration and moving beyond the past to the desired future.

    The reality is that this is difficult to navigate. When our voice is an unexpected interruption, when the thorny issue of inclusive practices is raised, relationships can be affected. How can we lead the research environment within HE towards being more truly inclusive without ruffling too many feathers?

    Leadership demands the flexibility to move towards future aims, or in the words of Roselinde Torres, being:

    …courageous enough to abandon a practice that has made you successful in the past.

    While we might not want the HE sector to “abandon” all current practices, it is apparent that change is needed to ensure true equality of access and opportunity. A model of “success” which marginalises disabled researchers is not true success; our argument is difficult to refute, and I’m sure nobody would openly do so.

    However, agreement in principle is not the same as action in practice.

    Fine by me

    Everyone readily agrees with the idea of an inclusive research environment; but not everyone is proactively engaged in making this a reality, particularly when it disrupts the status quo.

    Perhaps the crucial difference in perspective between the manager and the leader is that of immediate deliverables versus long-term strategic outcomes; and perhaps this can be used to consider the collective in the wider context of the university.

    As disabled researchers, we are our own “leaders”; a label we may not seek out or desire, but which nonetheless can be seen in our daily activities, thought processes and planning.

    We have to think ahead, mitigating barriers which non-disabled researchers simply do not have to navigate; and this difference is nobody’s fault, but it is useful to be aware of it in this discussion. This art of looking ahead is identified by Torres as one of the necessary traits for effective leadership; she explains:

    “Great leaders are not head-down. They see around corners, shaping their future, not just reacting to it.

    My point isn’t to suggest that disabled researchers are somehow better leaders than their non- disabled colleagues; but we have developed certain characteristics out of sheer necessity. As disabled researchers, indeed disabled individuals, we have to “lead” from the outset to overcome the barriers which are our daily reality.

    Encountering barriers

    We may face the uncertainty which comes with managing a chronic, long-term condition which dictates whether we are well enough to work on a specific date, at a specific time, and over which we have no control. For me, my modus operandi is to work ahead of every deadline – often perceived as being over-competitive – because I know that I may suddenly be forced into a work hiatus which, without this buffer, would put me behind.

    We may encounter access issues – workspaces, and transport to those workspaces, which do not meet our most basic needs. Physical barriers – often assumed to be the most readily addressed – still exist. We may need to call ahead to ensure that we can simply get into the room – let alone have a seat at the table. In 2024, it feels like we should be further along than this.

    As disabled researchers, in work and in life, we are in strategy mode constantly; looking ahead around every corner; planning for the next barrier we need to demolish if we are to continue moving forward.

    We are forced to strategize – even when we don’t want to. Therein, perhaps, lies the rub.

    Because we are proactive in reducing our barriers, we have an expectation or at the very least a hope that our colleagues, managers and in the broadest sense our employers will adopt the same stance.

    When this is reduced to box-ticking exercises rather than a meaningful, consultative approach, this damages morale. When we must ask for adjustments – sometimes more than once – resentment builds; and if adjustments are promised then not delivered, relationships can suffer irrevocable damage.

    We lead because we have to

    Yet we continue to “lead” on this out of necessity; our voices are loudest on these issues for the simple reason that it impacts us the most, especially when organisations don’t get it right. From the discussions we’ve had within our network, I know that this can be a lonely experience, with researchers feeling marginalised, unable to voice their concerns to a listening ear, and finding that speaking out can result in feeling left out.

    So how can we move collectively towards change? Perhaps we can take inspiration from the eight-step change model proposed by leading business consultant John Kotter. Here, a structured approach is described which will move a workforce collectively towards change.

    Perhaps one of the most useful elements of Kotter’s framework is Step 2: “Build a guiding coalition”. What does this mean? It means that individuals of influence and power within an organisation need to be involved in change, or it may be rejected. This is a viable model: disabled researchers partnering with stakeholders across the sector to promote our vision of a fairer, more equitable research environment where lived experience is valued and the need for a continuous programme of improvement is recognised.

    When all is said and done, this isn’t really a radical proposition. There are outcomes we want to achieve, and we need partners to achieve them. We need our voice to be heard at a strategic level. We need champions for inclusion to be nominated across the HE sectors, with a clear remit to work with disabled researchers to enact meaningful change. Activism isn’t incompatible with collaborative working any more than research is.

    Both activism and research address a need, a gap in knowledge, a difficult dilemma, or an important issue, and ask the question: how can we do better, and why aren’t we doing better? This then leads to the next research question…and the next… and the next… and so ad infinitum.

    There is no limit to how much we can learn or improve, and there should be no end to our willingness to keep learning and improving. This is surely integral to the whole ethos of higher education. We need to have open communication; create opportunities for conversations which might be challenging; and cultivate curiosity about how we can better understand one another and facilitate inclusive working environments.

    Even in the most highly competitive business arenas, research has shown that a work culture which prioritises “psychological safety” – an environment where individuals feel secure enough to share their perspectives, both positive and negative – is the gold standard for employee productivity and happiness at work.

    A recent study involving the work-life balance and happiness of women working in the financial sector concluded that:

    …having diverse teams that can be honest allows for better outcomes.

    At the heart of the change we are seeking is simply the opportunity to be honest in an environment which encourages this. So let’s blur the boundary between leadership and management; let’s have honest, if sometimes challenging, conversations; and let’s embark on this journey together.

    Source link

  • A Game Changing App for Faculty Researchers!

    A Game Changing App for Faculty Researchers!

    Consensus – A Game Changing App for Faculty Researchers

    Today, I started to utilize a new AI app for my research. This app, Consensus, is a game changer for faculty researchers. I wish that I had this app in graduate school – it would have definitely made life easier!

    Step 1 – Here are some screen shots of the software. You can type a question in the box (yes, a question) and the system does the work. Yes, the work that you would usually have to do!

    Step 2 – Then, AI does the rest. You receive AI-powered answers for your results. Consensus analyzes your results (before you even view them) and then summarizes the studies collectively.

    Step 3 – You can view the AI-powered answers which review each article for you.

    *I would also encourage you to review the article independently as well.

    Step 4 – View the study snapshots! Yes, a snapshot of the population, sample size, methods, outcomes measured, and more! Absolutely amazing!

    Step 5 – Click the “AI Synthesis” button to synthesize your results. Even better!

    Step 6 – Use the “powerful filters” button. You can view the “best” research results by: a) population, b) sample size, c) study design, d) journal quality, and other variables. 

    I plan to make a video soon, but please take a look at this video to discover exactly how Consensus can help you in your research! 

    ***

    Check out my book – Retaining College Students Using Technology: A Guidebook for Student Affairs and Academic Affairs Professionals.

    Remember to order copies for your team as well!


    Thanks for visiting! 


    Sincerely,


    Dr. Jennifer T. Edwards
    Professor of Communication

    Executive Director of the Texas Social Media Research Institute & Rural Communication Institute

    Source link

  • Gift Guide for Professors, Researchers, and Grad Students 2023

    Gift Guide for Professors, Researchers, and Grad Students 2023

    What are the best gifts for academics in 2023?

    Here are my top picks for professors, researchers, and grad students like you. I hope these gift ideas inspire you.

    Map of readers of The Social Academic blog in 2022

    Get my top recommendations for professional development and wellbeing.

    Thanks so much for visiting The Social Academic blog. People from 175 countries around the world took time to read this year. I am so grateful for you.

    -Jennifer van Alstyne

    The form above subscribes you to new posts published on The Social Academic blog.
    Want emails from Jennifer about building your online presence? Subscribe to her email list.
    Looking for the podcast? Subscribe on Spotify.
    Prefer to watch videos? Subscribe on YouTube.

    Here are 26 gift ideas to inspire you

    Gift guide for academics 2022: a wrapped present with a teal bow sits on a table.

    Presentations, Public Speaking, and Posters

    Fail Proof Slide Design masterclass

    Echo Rivera, PhD brings you a 2 hour masterclass that helps you take your presentation slides from mediocre to memorable. I’ve benefited from Echo’s training myself. I highly recommend it.

    How to Design an Award-Winning Scientific Poster course

    I got to chat with Tullio Rossi, PhD of Animate Your Science last month about his scientific poster course. I knew I just had to share it with you. Have an engaging poster for your next conference.

    Teach the Geek to Speak Society

    Neil Thompson knows public speaking is hard. If you’re in STEM, you need to know how to communicate effectively about your research. Get the Teach the Geek to Speak course program with live monthly coaching calls.

    Academic and Scientific Writing

    Scholarship Success Collective

    Lisa Munro, PhD says, “How would you like to have the community support, structure, accountability, and actual writing instruction you need to get your article written and published so you can start helping us think about the world in new ways even if you’re full of crippling self-doubt about your writing and ideas?” Join the Scholarship Success Collective. This workshop runs January 16/17-April 16/17.

    The Researchers’ Writing Academy course

    Anna Clemens, PhD has a course to help you write clear scientific papers for high-ranking STEM journals. If you’re in the physical, health, life, and earth sciences, this step-by-step system is the only course in scientific writing you’ll ever need.

    Write your book with Dr. Jane Jones

    A program for women in academia to write your book. Stop staring at a blank page wondering what you’re supposed to write. Build your writing skills and practice with support. Dr. Jane Jones of Up In Consulting is here to help you push through the doubt and uncertainty so you get your book written. Join Elevate because you don’t have to write your book alone.

    Teaching

    Teaching College Ultimate Bundle Access

    Get Norman Eng, EdD’s top resources for engaging students online and offline. This bundle pack of shows you the step-by-step methods you need.

    Connecting with the Public and Media

    Power Your Research program

    Do you want major media coverage? Sheena Howard, PhD shares proven strategies to land features in the L.A. Times, New York Times, Washington Post, and more. Get more visibility for your research.

    LinkedIn profile challenge

    I’m Jennifer van Alstyne. Join professors around the world in my training to Update Your LinkedIn Profile for Professors and Researchers.

    This training helps you have an amazing LinkedIn profile!

    Prefer a done-for-you LinkedIn profile with me? Let’s chat about working together 1-on-1.

    The Connected Exec course

    Josie Ahlquist, PhD brings you a self-paced course on digital leadership for Higher Education executives. Learn social media strategy to connect with your campus community online.

    Academic Careers and Leaving Academia

    The Art of the Academic Cover Letter course

    Are you applying for academic jobs? Learn how to write a cover letter for your academic job application. Showcase your record and stand out in the academic job market with this course from Karen Kelsky, PhD. If you don’t already have it, The Professor Is In book is a must read. You’ll need it for the course.

    PhD Career Clarity Program

    Confidently market yourself for the jobs you actually want with Jennifer Polk, PhD’s PhD Career Clarity Program. Dr. Polk has been a career coach for PhDs since 2013.

    If you need help getting clarity on your post academic career, this is the program for you. My fiancé loved this program. It may be great for you too!

    There are live Q&A Zoom meetings. You can add on 1:1 coaching calls when you need personalized support. I hope you’ll check it out. Here’s Jen’s free training for people thinking about leaving academia.

    Build a Business with 1:1 and Group Coaching

    I’ve met so many professors and graduate students running a business. If you want to build a business on part-time hours Cheryl Lau has 1:1 and Group Coaching programs for you. Psst! Cheryl has been my business coach since December 2022.

    Retreats and Conferences

    The Grad School Success Summit replays (virtual) FREE

    Are you in graduate school? Do you know someone heading to grad school in the new year? This virtual summit has great sessions on school-life balance, wellness, and more. Get ready with a boost of motivation brought to you by Allanté Whitmore of the Blk + In Grad School podcast. You’ll get free access to the replays (including my session on How to Manage Your Online Presence in Grad School).

    Books

    25 Ways to Say ‘No’ in A Professional Way

    25 Ways to Say No in a Professional Way

    Having a difficult time saying ‘no’ in the workplace? Here’s how to communicate in a professional and confident way.

    This digital download is from Dr. Monica Cox.

    Stronger Than You Think: The 10 Blind Spots That Undermine Your Relationship and How to See Past Them

    Stronger Than You Think book cover

    Whether you’re in grad school, teaching, or in the lab, relationships can be hard. Appreciate the love you have, or find the one you want and deserve. Dr. Gary Lewandowski Jr. is an expert on relationships. This is a book I read last year I think is great for academics. I learned a lot, and hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

    Laziness Does Not Exist

    Dr. Devon Price used to believe that productivity was the best way to measure self-worth. Now they dive into the history and origins of the ‘laziness lie.’ It goes back to the Puritans! Most of us feel like we’re not doing enough even though people today do more work than other humans in history. My friends recommended this to me and now I’m sharing it with you!

    Attribution: A Novel

    WATCH: YOUTUBE LIVE WITH THE AUTHOR

    Cate Adamson is working on her doctorate in New York under an impossible, sexist advisor. She struggles until she discovers a hidden painting. Is it a masterpiece? Join Cate’s journey to Spain as she uncovers an art mystery.

    A novel from Linda Moore.

    Watch our book talk, live on YouTube on The Social Academic.

    Communities

    The PhD Balance Community

    PhD Balance is a community creating space for graduate students to openly discuss mental health. Join the community for access to webinars, challenges, and conversation.

    The Personal Finance for PhDs Community

    Emily Roberts, PhD sets you up for success with your personal finances. From paying down debt to taxes, this community helps PhDs make the most of your money.

    Game

    Dead Theorists: A Card Game

    A satirical card game for philosophers and aspiring academics for 2-4 players.

    Other Gift Ideas for Academics

    Professional memberships to associations and organizations

    Support the academic in your life with an annual membership to a professional organization or association in their field. For graduate students especially, this is a valuable line on their CV that opens their world to new conferences and networking opportunities.

    Money towards professional development activities

    Help a professor, researcher, or graduate student gain professional development with money for

    • Conferences
    • Award submission
    • Research travel
    • Working with a coach
    • Joining a training or course

    A spa day

    Give the gift of relaxation with a day at the spa. A hot stone massage can help relieve those post-semester grading muscle aches.

    A weekend away

    Sometimes the best gift is a night away. Take a trip and leave the work behind for the ultimate weekend getaway.

    The form above subscribes you to new posts published on The Social Academic blog.
    Want emails from Jennifer about building your online presence? Subscribe to her email list.
    Looking for the podcast? Subscribe on Spotify.
    Prefer to watch videos? Subscribe on YouTube.

    Thanks for checking out this gift guide

    Bookmark this page. Please share this list with a friend or colleague!

    Gifts and Holiday

    Source link