Shut Up & Write!® builds writing self-efficacy and self-regulation in early-career researchers

Abstract Introduction: High writing self-efficacy and self-regulation are tied to publication and grant submission. Writers with these attributes are more productive. We investigated whether participating in a Shut Up & Write!®-style intervention (SUAW) would produce statistically significant gains in writing self-efficacy and self-regulation when comparing pre-post-participation surveys. Methods: Forty-seven medical students, TL1/KL2, and early-career faculty from across the USA expressed interest in participating, with 37 completing the pre-survey. We conducted (on Zoom) a 12-week SUAW series and measured the effect using a pre-post survey adapted from the Writer Self-Perception Scale. Paired t-tests (α = 0.05) were conducted on three subscales to test for significant differences between pre- and post-test means. The subscales reflected writing attitudes, writing strategies, and avoiding writing distractions. Subscales showed acceptable internal consistency with Cronbach’s alphas of 0.80, 0.71, and 0.72, respectively. Results: Twenty-seven participants attended at least one session. Of these, 81% presented as female, and 60% were from NIH-defined Underrepresented Backgrounds and/or were from Minority-Serving Institutions. Twenty-four completed both the pre- and post-surveys. Sixty percent previously participated in an activity similar to SUAW. We found significant improvements in writing attitudes (p = 0.020) and writing strategies (p = 0.041) for those who previously participated. For those who had not previously participated, we found improved writing strategies (p = 0.002). Eighty percent were very satisfied/satisfied with SUAW. Discussion: Researchers have tied writing self-efficacy and self-regulation to timely publication and grant submission. We found significant gains in self-efficacy and self-regulation, suggesting that participation in a SUAW-style intervention may increase writing productivity

Delivering What We PROMISED: Outcomes of a Coaching and Leadership Fellowship for Mentors of Underrepresented Mentees

Research demonstrates that mentorship can significantly improve career success, career satisfaction, and persistence for underrepresented (UR) minority faculty. However, many UR faculty members do not receive the mentorship they need, nor do mentors always possess the range of skills required to guide UR mentees through the unique challenges they face. We developed a 1-year fellowship training program, PROMISED, designed to help mentors promote career self-authorship and leadership among their UR mentees. PROMISED fellows participated in a two-day in-person training to develop career coaching skills, followed by a series of one-month leadership training/mentoring modules. We assessed mentors’ skills at the start and completion of the program. We found that PROMISED fellows reported an increase in perceived skill level in nearly every training topic, with “addressing diversity” demonstrating the most significant change. These results provide evidence that career coaching and leadership training offer an effective supplement to traditional mentor training and that mentors can incorporate these skills effectively into their mentoring practice. Taken together, we believe our data suggest that a program designed to train mentors in coaching and leadership can enhance career satisfaction, persistence, and retention of their UR mentees

Developing a Training Program to Diversify the Biomedical Research Workforce

The National Institutes of Health has made considerable investments to diversify the biomedical research workforce. Towards this goal, the authors partnered with representatives from several minority-serving institutions (MSIs) to develop training for the next generation of researchers. To ensure the most effective training program, the authors conducted a needs assessment with junior and senior investigators from the partnering MSIs. In 2016, the authors conducted focus groups and interviews with 23 junior investigators as well as in-depth interviews with 6 senior investigators from the partnering institutions with the goal of identifying specific areas of training and support that would help junior investigators at MSIs develop and sustain research careers. The data were transcribed and coded, and thematic analysis was conducted. The authors determined four areas in which training and support were needed: training in the "informal curriculum" (skills not covered in traditional clinical research courses), protected time for research training, opportunities to create career-advancing work products, and networking opportunities. The themes that were identified informed the development of the LEADS (Leading Emerging and Diverse Scientists to Success) program. The program consists of 10 instructor-led online modules each lasting approximately one month in duration with weekly synchronous sessions. Scholars are expected to be able to devote at least 20% of their time to the program