This document was sent to Teri Odom, Jason Gillmore, Christine Gaudinsk, and Lisa Balbes on Oct 6.
*******************************
Dear Teri, Jason, Christine, and Lisa,
Thanks again for participating in the conference call on Tuesday. As promised, John has sent the design document and initial draft of the PowerPoint slides for the academic module. Having your feedback by October 18 will give us time to compile it by the time John returns from vacation.
As you review the documents, please remember that they are for a four-hour introductory module that will be either part of or precede more in-depth offerings such as the Postdoc to Faculty workshop. The audience may include others besides graduate students and postdoctoral scholars, especially given the challenging employment environ.
Please send your comments in whatever format is most convenient. If you annotate the document, please use comments.
Feedback on any aspect of the module is welcome. In particular, we hope that you can consider whether:
plans for the module are on track
any topics are missing that should be in an introductory module
any topics should be covered in subsequent career offerings
the relative coverage of topics is appropriate
the level of interactivity is appropriate
there are other resources that can serve as references
there is information that could help inform the development of sections of the module
Lisa will also affirm that the plan for this module aligns with that of the core module.
It turns out that there were not any windows of time when a majority of us could be on a conference call. As an alternative, I’ve taken a careful look at your comments, discussed the suggestions with my colleagues, and compiled the following feedback to send to John. Additional comments have been incorporated into the design document.
Having the different perspectives about careers in academe was really helpful and highlighted the diverse mix of career paths that one can follow in higher education. Our challenge will be to convey that – at an appropriate level – to the participants who are still considering their options and then direct those who decide to explore academic careers to more in-depth resources.
Stay tuned for the participants guide!
Jodi
Objectives - Will be focused on:
Helping participants determine if academe is a sector in which they want to pursue a career, and which types of institutions are of most interest
out next steps for gaining additional knowledge about careers in academe, developing the necessary skills, and applying for positions.
Primary questions
Relevant content (see aspects to increase and decrease)
Note: Topics will be covered at an introductory level – enough to help participants make informed decisions and plans.
Order of content
Try to align with that for the other tracks
Make adjustments that reflect the special aspects of academe
Incorporation of language/description of processes that span the range of institutions
Shift from “Four primary career pathways” to “Career pathways in primary sectors” vs (general categories vs job categories)
Shift from “each pathway” to “example/sample pathways in each sector”
Shift from “A Career in Academe” to “Careers in Academe”
Shift from “a faculty career” to “academic careers”
Shift from “a typical pathway” to “example/sample pathways”
Shift from “steps in the typical academic career” to “trajectories”
Shift from “typical responsibilities” to “range of responsibilities”
Shift from “advantages/disadvantages” to “things to consider”
Shift from “main steps” to “components” of hiring process
Aspects to increase – topics focused on getting the job
Importance of mentoring to find a position and be successful
of faculty advisor
Open doors, write letters of recommendation, make introductions
Role of advisee
Pursue opportunities to become more visible in academic community
Discuss letters of recommendation and possibilities of introductions
I'm having trouble tracking what I've seen before and what's not current. Would it be possible for you to review, evaluate, and consolidate all the suggestions that make sense to you into one form to forward to me. I seem to be getting the same comments from reviewers via your system multiple times.
Thanks. Let me know if there's a better way to accomplish this.
Sorry for the confusion! What you suggest is what I did with the academic SME feedback - the main points which are in the comments/track changes of the 2nd version (most current one) on the ACS network - the same version that I sent via e-mail on the morning of Friday, Oct 28.
Unfortunately, I first had time to communicate with the academic SMEs yesterday - sending them the message above (the same draft I sent to the rest of the team via e-mail).
It seemed like the ACS network would be the best way to have all of the documents in one place, but perhaps it is a more valuable strategy for those of us on ACS staff - and a place that you can turn to only if you want to look at the more detailed comments from SMEs.
