Creating and Sustaining Collaborative Multi-Institutional Industry Site Visit Programs: A Toolkit - Extended Data S1-S10

Background: As more early career scientists enter into diverse career pathways, visiting local companies or organizations can support their exploration of these paths. As an efficient way to facilitate this, we developed a collaborative regional site visit program: the Enhancing Local Industry Transitions through Exploration (ELITE) Consortium. Consortium members arrange half-day visits to local industry sites, thus providing companies and trainees the opportunity to meet and identify potential professional and career opportunities. Three different training institutions worked cooperatively in the development and maintenance of the program. The ELITE Consortium was developed with eight phased steps; guidelines and operating procedures were created for each of these steps and are provided along with sample materials for institutions interested in building similar programs. Methods: Prior to fully developing the program, trainee interests were evaluated via questionnaire. During program implementation and thereafter, program directors tracked attendance and collected career outcome data from publicly available sources to identify first job positions after training. Regression analyses and chi-squared analyses were used to examine site visit matches and career outcome data. Results: Analyses suggest a positive impact of site visits on postdoctoral and graduate trainees’ career outcomes at companies or institutions that match a similar sector (e.g., for-profit) and type (e.g., biotech, pharmaceutical, contract research organization). Despite a small sample size, evidence suggests an especially positive impact on trainees who organize site visits to companies compared with those who simply participate. Conclusions: The ELITE Consortium was successful in helping trainees explore and identify a multitude of career paths. Trainees attained employment either directly or in related companies and institutions visited by ELITE participants. The joint, three-institution, flexible nature of the ELITE Consortium positively impacts the program’s sustainability and reach. The toolkit provided here will help other institutions to replicate and adapt the program with minimal effort

Institutional Graduate Career Outcomes Database 2022

The Graduate Career Consortium’s (GCC) Career Outcomes Program updated its database of publicly available graduate career outcomes of each of its member institutions. The compiled graduate institutional career outcomes are listed in this database, containing hyperlinks to reports or interactive dashboards displaying the outcomes. Master’s-level, graduate-level, and postdoctoral-level career outcomes were included. Inclusion criteria consisted of institutional reports or dashboards containing quantitative career outcomes (in contrast to institutions that solely included anecdotes and alumni profile stories). Institutions listing program summary statistics alone were not included. In all, we found that 66% of GCC member institutions reported their alumni career outcomes publicly. Data was collected and checked by Committee members in 2022 using a current GCC member institution list at that time; this database was last updated in June, 2022. Publicly available data was collected using standard search engines (e.g., Google, institutional website search bars). Collected data was then presented to and screened by GCC membership for accuracy and completeness. The final draft was reviewed by the Committee and approved for distribution; the Committee aims to update this annually. Authors listed alphabetically by last name

Making Strides in Doctoral-Level Career Outcomes Reporting: Surveying the Landscape of Classification and Visualization Methodologies and Creating a Crosswalk Tool

Manuscript Abstract: The recent movement underscoring the importance of career taxonomies has helped usher in a new era of transparency in PhD career outcomes. The convergence of discipline-specific organizational movements, interdisciplinary collaborations, and federal initiatives have all helped to increase PhD career outcomes tracking and reporting. Transparent and publicly available PhD career outcomes are being used by institutions to attract top applicants, as prospective graduate students are factoring these in when deciding on the program and institution in which to enroll for their PhD studies. Given the increasing trend to track PhD career outcomes, the number of institutional efforts and supporting offices for these studies have increased, as has the variety of methods being used to classify and report/visualize outcomes. This report, therefore, aims to identify and summarize currently available PhD career taxonomy tools, resources, and visualization options to help catalyze and empower institutions to develop and publish their own PhD career outcomes. This work serves as an empirical review of the career outcome tracking systems available and highlights organizations, consortia, and funding agencies that are impacting policy change toward greater transparency in PhD career outcomes reporting. Project Description: We collated STEM and humanities career outcome taxonomies from 30 groups (universities, consortia, research institutions & professional societies) and mapped fields that were similar between these taxonomies. In mapping these fields, a number of challenges occurred. For example, some taxonomies were too comprehensive to fully map (e.g., there were nearly 1500 categories to choose from), and these omissions are noted within the headings. Some categories had a tally higher than the total number of taxonomies examined because they were present in multiple ways within a single taxonomy (e.g., tenure-track faculty may have appeared as a variety of different professor job titles). Additionally, some categories were repeated for the purposes of alignment; an asterisk (*) was used to depict when this "one-to-many" mapping occurred. Another key challenge is that no two taxonomies have categories that are 100% equivalent. This was especially apparent when examining employment categorization between different countries. Nevertheless, efforts were made to ascertain the fundamental meaning of each data field in order to best highlight approximate equivalencies between taxonomies. Furthermore, in order to prevent the loss of granularity when aligning taxonomies that are more complex, multiple rows are depicted back-to-back with the same color to highlight categories that are related. Some text is shown in a color other than black to indicate either multiple categories that align together, or to indicate that a category is out of place with respect to the parent taxonomy stratification. Not all of these occurrences are indicated for ease of illustration; one may refer to the original taxonomies to ascertain their structure