Reducing the stigma surrounding opioid use disorder: evaluating an opioid overdose prevention training program applied to a diverse population

Background The opioid epidemic is a rapidly growing public health concern in the USA, as the number of overdose deaths continues to increase each year. One strategy for combating the rising number of overdoses is through opioid overdose prevention programs (OOPPs). Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of an innovative OOPP, with changes in knowledge and attitudes serving as the primary outcome measures. Methods The OOPP was developed by a group of medical students under guidance from faculty advisors. Training sessions focused on understanding stigmatizing factors of opioid use disorder (OUD), as well as protocols for opioid overdose reversal through naloxone administration. Pre- and post-surveys were partially adapted from the opioid overdose attitudes and knowledge scales and administered to all participants. Paired t-tests were conducted to assess differences between pre- and post-surveys. Results A total of 440 individuals participated in the training; 381 completed all or the majority of the survey. Participants came from a diverse set of backgrounds, ages, and experiences. All three knowledge questions showed significant improvements. For attitude questions, significant improvements were found in all three questions evaluating confidence, two of three questions assessing attitudes towards overdose reversal, and four of five questions evaluating stigma and attitudes towards individuals with OUD. Conclusions Our innovative OOPP was effective not only in increasing knowledge but also in improving attitudes towards overdose reversal and reducing stigma towards individuals with OUD. Given the strong improvements in attitudes towards those with OUD, efforts should be made to incorporate the unique focus on biopsychosocial and sociohistorical components into future OOPPs.

Climate Surveys of Biomedical PhD Students and Training Faculty Members in the Time of Covid

In July 2020, four months into the disruption of normal life caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, we assessed the institutional climate within the School of Medicine. Voluntary surveys were completed by 135 graduate students in 11 PhD-granting programs and by 83 members of the graduate training faculty. Several themes emerged. PhD students work hard, but the number of hours spent on research-related activities has declined during the pandemic. The students are worried about the pandemic's impact on their research productivity, consequent delays in their graduation, and diminished future job prospects. Many late stage PhD students feel they do not have adequate time or resources to plan for their future careers. Symptoms of anxiety and/or depression are prevalent in 51% of the students, based on answers to standardized questions. Most students report they have strong mentoring relationships with their faculty advisors and like their programs, but they identify to a lesser extent with the medical school as a whole. Faculty think highly of their graduate students and are also worried about the pandemic's impact upon productivity and the welfare of students. Students are interested in access to an Ombuds office, which is currently being organized by the medical school. Moving forward, the school needs to address issues of bias, faculty diversity, support for mentor training, professional development, and the imposter syndrome. We must also work to create a climate in which many more graduate students feel that they are valued members of the academic medicine community.

The Changing Landscape of Doctoral Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: PhD Students, Faculty Advisors, and Preferences for Varied Career Options

The landscape of graduate science education is changing as efforts to diversify the professoriate have increased because academic faculty jobs at universities have grown scarce and more competitive. With this context as a backdrop, the present research examines the perceptions and career goals of advisors and advisees through surveys of PhD students (Study 1, N = 195) and faculty mentors (Study 2, N = 272) in science, technology, engineering, and math disciplines. Study 1 examined actual preferences and career goals of PhD students among three options: research careers, teaching careers, and non-academic careers in industry, and compared the actual preferences of students with what they perceived as being the normative preferences of faculty. Overall, students had mixed preferences but perceived that their advisors had a strong normative preference for research careers for them. Moreover, students who ranked research positions as most desirable felt the most belonging in their academic departments. Further analyses revealed no differences in career preferences as a function of underrepresented minority (URM) student status or first-generation (FG) status, but URM and FG students felt less belonging in their academic departments. Study 2 examined faculty preferences for different careers for their advisees, both in general and for current students in particular. While faculty advisors preferred students to go into research in general, when focusing on specific students, they saw their preferences as being closely aligned with the career preference of each PhD student. Faculty advisors did not perceive any difference in belonging between their students as a function of their URM status. Discrepancies between student and faculty perceptions may occur, in part, because faculty and students do not engage in sufficient discussions about the wider range of career options beyond academic research. Supporting this possibility, PhD students and faculty advisors reported feeling more comfortable discussing research careers with each other than either non-academic industry positions or teaching positions. Discussion centers on the implications of these findings for interpersonal and institutional efforts to foster diversity in the professoriate and to create open communication about career development.

The National Conference on Health Disparities Student Research Forum

The annual National Conference on Health Disparities (NCHD) was launched in 2000. It unites health professionals, researchers, community leaders, and government officials, and is a catalyzing force in developing policies, research interventions, and programs that address prevention, social determinants, health disparities, and health equity. The NCHD Student Research Forum (SRF) was established in 2011 at the Medical University of South Carolina to build high-quality biomedical research presentation capacity in primarily underrepresented undergraduate and graduate/professional students. This paper describes the unique research training and professional development aspects of the NCHD SRF. These include guidance in abstract development, a webinar on presentation techniques and methods, a vibrant student-centric conference, and professional development workshops on finding a mentor and locating scholarship/fellowship funding, networking, and strategies for handling ethical issues in research with mentors. Between 2011 and 2018, 400 undergraduate and graduate/professional students participated in the NCHD SRF. Most students were women (80.5%). Approximately half were African American or black (52.3%), 18.0% were white, and 21.3% were of Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. The NCHD SRF is unique in several ways. First, it provides detailed instructions on developing a scientific abstract, including content area examples. Second, it establishes a mandatory pre-conference training webinar demonstrating how to prepare a scientific poster. Third, it works with the research mentors, faculty advisors, department chairs, and deans to help identify potential sources of travel funding for students with accepted abstracts. These features make the NCHD SRF different from many other conferences focused on students’ scientific presentations.

An integrated model for interdisciplinary graduate education: Computation and mathematics for biological networks

The current challenges at the forefront of data-enabled science and engineering require interdisciplinary solutions. Yet most traditional doctoral programs are not structured to support successful interdisciplinary research. Here we describe the design of and students’ experiences in the COMBINE (Computation and Mathematics for Biological Networks) interdisciplinary graduate program at the University of Maryland. COMBINE focuses on the development and application of network science methods to biological systems for students from three primary domains: life sciences, computational/engineering sciences, and mathematical/physical sciences. The program integrates three established models (T-shaped, pi-shaped and shield-shaped) for interdisciplinary training. The program components largely fall into three categories: (1) core coursework that provides content expertise, communication, and technical skills, (2) discipline-bridging elective courses in the two COMBINE domains that complement the student’s home domain, (3) broadening activities such as workshops, symposiums, and formal peer-mentoring groups. Beyond these components, the program builds community through both formal and informal networking and social events. In addition to the interactions with other program participants, students engage with faculty in several ways beyond the conventional adviser framework, such as the requirement to select a second out-of-field advisor, listening to guest speakers, and networking with faculty through workshops. We collected data through post-program surveys, interviews and focus groups with students, alumni and faculty advisors. Overall, COMBINE students and alumni reported feeling that the program components supported their growth in the three program objectives of Network Science & Interdisciplinarity, Communication, and Career Preparation, but also recommended ways to improve the program. The value of the program can be seen not only through the student reports, but also through the students’ research products in network science which include multiple publications and presentations. We believe that COMBINE offers an effective model for integrated interdisciplinary training that can be readily applied in other fields.

Tutor and tutoring in modern education and Ukraine

In the article the problems of tutoring, as component individualization of studies, are considered. Authors estimate the attempts of some Ukrainian scientists to equate the functions of tutor and of counsel known yet from soviet times of academic group critically. Moreover, the current Ukrainian legislation does not give determination of concept "counsel" and does not envisage this activity. Implementation of tutor functions needs certain knowledge and abilities, forming of that is not envisaged by maintenance of traditional preparation of teacher and personality internalss that today does not have support in the legislative field of Ukraine. Therefore that is why logically to lean against western scientific and practical revisions from this object. Actuality and necessity of tutoring, – here authors support opinion of some other scientists, - are conditioned by the primary purpose of British education – by the development of ability to think, that is realized in mainly due to independent work of student at accompaniment of tutor. Authors pay attention to that in Oxford and Cambridge of tutors occupy important position as regular units, providing a feed-back between a student and concrete teacher and all faculty advisors. Tutor here is a tutor that is fastened after every student, and conducts him to the end of studies. He elects the programs for a ward student, recommends him the certain algorithm of study, and controls all process. Due to the role of counsels of studies in Oxford becomes individual in a great deal. The German model of education, that envisaged no freedom and choice and only hard discipline and limitation, was used in Ukraine, This model was brought yet in the days of tsar's Russia by М. Lomonosov. But present time requires from education new approaches, methods and facilities. One from such systems and there is tutoring. Thus, there is an urgent requirement in bringing of profession of tutor to the National classifier of Ukraine SK 003: a 2010 «Classifier of professions».

The Role of Faculty Advising, Mentoring, and Gatekeeping as Social Support for Undergraduate Communication Sciences and Disorders Students

Purpose Social support may be provided by undergraduate students' family and friends and by other members of the campus community, including faculty. The purpose of this review article was to review the existing literature about the roles of faculty members as advisors, mentors, and gatekeepers who provide social support for undergraduate students. Social support is a buffer for stress, and current undergraduate students are more stressed than their predecessors. Method The study is a narrative review of the literature about faculty as advisors, mentors, and gatekeepers. The concept of social support and its relationship to students' stress is explored, followed by a discussion of faculty advisors' roles, knowledge, and skills and a synthesis of literature about prescriptive, developmental, praxis, and appreciative advising. A discussion of faculty as mentors who focus on students' experiences before, during, and after college and as gatekeepers who look for signs of students in distress concludes the review. Conclusions Faculty may provide social support to students inside and outside the classroom as advisors, mentors, and gatekeepers. Assuming these roles means faculty must consider students as whole people who have needs and experiences beyond academics. Students' stress was clear in the literature before COVID-19, and their concerns and needs are exacerbated during the pandemic. Additional research is needed to identify effective advising and mentoring programs for communication sciences and disorders undergraduate students. Increased institutional support for and recognition of the time, resources, and training faculty need to serve in this expanded role is also critical as faculty members attempt to manage their own stress.

Classroom Walls and City Hall: Mobilizing Local Partnerships to Advance the Sustainable Development Agenda

This roundtable discussion raises and responds to the question: What can be learned from academic and local government partnerships to advance the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)? We draw on several years of cooperation between the Office of the Mayor of Los Angeles (CA, USA) and academic institutions on how to best advance and integrate the United Nations’ SDGs into policy. Stakeholders from this project give voice to varying perspectives across roles—as city officials, academic partners, graduate and undergraduate students—in the Los Angeles case of SDG implementation. The article outlines a “Task Force” model, under the joint facilitation of faculty advisors and guidance of city partners, that promotes students’ experiential learning, and meaningfully bridges theory and practice in bringing global frameworks to local practice. We highlight what we gain by disaggregating the local and taking space and place seriously in sustainability policy, while underscoring the importance of long-term trust and relationship building in the success of local sustainability efforts.

Don’t count them out: PhD skills development and careers in industry

Purpose The purpose of this study is to identify what skills gained during PhD study are linked with preparation and differences between industry and academic positions. Design/methodology/approach Using student-level data from nearly 2,400 early career PhD alumni from 50 US PhD granting institutions, this study uses a generalized ordered logit model with partial proportional odds to test the main and conditional effects of 14 areas of skill development on perceptions of career preparation. Findings This study contributes empirical evidence to show that research skills and communicating with non-technical audiences are positively linked with job preparation. Practical implications The combination of sophisticated research and noncognitive skills promotes the idea of a well-rounded PhD – a highly skilled and versatile researcher that can interact in both academic and industry settings – as a goal of doctoral education. The knowledge gained from this study will assist scholars and graduate educators, including faculty advisors, program directors, graduate deans, graduate education professionals and career development professionals to reconceptualize professional preparation for work in industry. Social implications For-profit businesses, particularly start-up companies, are vital for economic development and many require PhD-level employees across research and management roles. Developing PhDs with the appropriate skills for industry will better align higher education and economic interests. Originality/value The wide scope of doctoral institutions allows for a quantitative approach not appropriate for single-institution case studies of doctoral career pathways research.