At Major University, science faculty are expected to develop—and secure outside funding for— research projects in their area of specialization. A junior faculty member has received a prestigious new investigator grant that enables her to support a graduate studentSupporting a graduate student means more than providing financial resources. New students must be instructed both in the technical aspects of research and in appropriate experimental design and data interpretation. This research methodology instruction may be provided by the mentor or through formal coursework.
In her role as a mentor, the faculty member should consider explaining to new graduate students the process by which research is funded. This will help them understand the grant proposal submission process. It will also emphasize the importance of rigorous experimental design and data analysis. In addition, she should work to develop a relationship with her graduate students beyond that of research supervisor. This may include starting research meetings with a short "check in" on how the student is doing in general, an occasional lunchtime meeting, or other format that allows for conversation beyond the immediate activities in the laboratory.
as well as a part-time technician. The graduate student whom she is supporting to work on this project is both excited about the research, and highly skilled in the laboratory, so the work is going quickly. On the basis of the student’s first six months of work on this grant, as well as earlier studies she conducted on her own, the faculty member is preparing to submit a major grant proposal. As part of the proposal, the faculty member needs to provide extensive preliminary data to support her hypothesis and approach. She has therefore asked the graduate student for his raw data, along with the general conclusions that he has drawn from his work so far.Mentors should periodically review both general research findings and raw data from their students. Students need support not only for proper methodology of data collection but also for interpretation. Mentors can provide this grounding and support through evaluating and critiquing students’ research.
On Monday morning the faculty member informs the graduate student of her concerns. She tells him that he needs to repeat several of the key experimentsMentoring is more than providing supervision; it is an interactive relationship. For a mentoring relationship to be successful for both mentor and student, it needs to involve certain elements including honesty, mutual respect, trust, and compassion, which are expressed through ongoing sharing and listening.
Faculty members have many competing demands on their time, and being a mentor to students as well as the principal investigator on a research project can sometimes lead to conflicts. Mentors should provide a nurturing instructional environment in which students can gain experience in becoming researchers themselves. Recipients of research grants have an obligation to the granting agency based on the proposal submitted. In addition, they have an obligation both to themselves professionally and to those whom they support (graduate students, technicians) to maintain funding for the research. An important part of the mentoring process is to share this information with students in the early stages of the mentoring relationship. Once students are familiar with how research is funded, they are more likely to actively support and help with the grant submission process.
, using appropriate protocols, and that the work must be completed this week so that results can be included in the grant proposal. The graduate student then tells her that he had planned to take part of the week off to attend a family reunion, but the faculty member is adamant that he remain to carry out the required studies. The graduate student storms out of the labThe graduate student needs to begin assuming more responsibility for his professional training. For example, he should consider having the faculty member review his experimental protocols before he performs the laboratory work, and he should consult with her before discarding any of his data. If his department does not offer a course in research design, he should seek one elsewhere on campus (or beyond). The graduate student also needs to apprise his mentor, well in advance, of times he plans to be away from the laboratory. As a developing professional, he needs to ensure that his personal activities do not compromise the professional activities of others.
; the
faculty member returns to her office to consider her options.
There are several approaches the faculty member can take to deal with her grant proposal:
- If the graduate student agrees to repeat the critical experiments, she can include them in the proposal, replacing his earlier efforts (although it remains possible that the data from these repeated studies will still not support her hypotheses).
- She can complete the grant proposal without the student’s data, although not including preliminary data may lessen her chances of receiving funding.
- She can include the original data from the graduate student’s studies, noting that the work is preliminary and needs to be repeated with a more refined experimental design.
- She can delay submission of the proposal until the next deadline, and work with the graduate student in the interim to develop a strong data set for the proposal.
- She can propose that the two of them redo the critical experiments together. The graduate student can help set up the experiments and then the faculty member and her technician can complete them. This will allow the graduate student to attend his family reunion, and the faculty member will have the data she needs for the grant proposal.
The last approach has the best chance of satisfying both the faculty member and the graduate student. It also exemplifies good mentoring. By proposing a collaboration to redo the experiments, the faculty member will emphasize their importance and her own commitment to the work. By assuming some of the responsibility for conducting the experiments, so that the student will be able to take some time off later in the week, she will show the graduate student that she values his personal as well as professional life.
In each of the remaining approaches the faculty member will need to make concessions—in her relationship with the graduate student, in the rigor of her grant proposal, or in the time before new grant funding might become available. The best way to address this dilemma, of course, is to avoid it. Open communication with her graduate student, clarifying the complex nature of research in an academic setting at the outset of their working relationship, and regular review of both the experimental design and the student’s raw data will help avoiding situations like the one in this case study.