1. Introduction

1. The Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate at the University of Minnesota: Where is it now? B. D. CLARK1, S. J. KERRIGAN1, J. G. PUHL1,2, J. I. LUOMA1, K. E. HIMES3, V. S. SEYBOLD2; 1Grad. Program in Neuroscience,2Dept. of Entomology 3Office of the Provost, Univ. of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 225.27 Cell & Molec The Idealized Pathway + DGS Standing GPN Committee’s • 4. Original CID Initiative: Form a GPN Student Board • The Original Purpose of the Student Board Was to: • 1. Organize student initiatives-meet monthly (year-round) around a specific agenda, with meetings open to all students • 2. Link between students and faculty, especially Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) Board members serve a 1-year term, with two members serving 2-year terms for continuity from year-to-year. These representatives become the Co-Coordinators during their 2nd year serving on the Board. • Current Status of the GPN Student Board: STRUCTURE: One representative from years 1-4 and one for years 5+ serve a 1-year term. One Board member (years 3+) serves a second term to act as the Board’s coordinator. A second co-coordinator was deemed un-necessary by Board members. SCOPE: Board meets monthly to discuss issues brought up by students and faculty of the GPN, disseminates relevant information to the GPN student body via email announcements and discussions at all-student meetings, and sponsors practice colloquium talks for 3rd year students (prior to their first presentation at the GPN weekly colloquium). The Board conducts bi-annual GPN all-student meetings to: • Disseminate information from DGS, Graduate School, graduate student association, GPN committees, etc. • Discuss issues pertaining to all students. • Hold elections for student representative positions on GPN committees. • Meet with student representatives to GPN faculty committees instead of presenting at the bi-annual GPN all-student meeting (as was done in the past). • 5. Original CID Initiative: Improve the Written Preliminary Examination • Original Goals for Revising • the Written Prelim: • 1. Promote integration of concepts • from the four core courses (Systems, • Cellular & Molecular, Developmental, • and Behavioral Neuroscience) • Original Action Steps: 1. Make 50% of questions integrative (content from at least two core courses) 2. Grade integrative questions by faculty members from multiple courses 3. Format 50% of questions as 'use of information' type questions (targeted experimental design, interpret data, etc.) 4. Gather input from students to aid development of integrative questions • Current Status of Core Course Material Integration: • For the two years following the end of the CID, integrated questions made up 50% of the exam. Recently, integrative questions have made up less than 50% of the questions. • Numerous questions require experimental design based answers. • Integrative questions graded by faculty from multiple courses. • Students who have passed the written prelim have contributed content/design to the integrative questions on recent exams. The written prelim has been adjusted and students who pass the exam integrate the material presented in the four core courses. However, the historical structure of the exam requires new questions each year and as a result the percentage of integrative questions has declined since the end of the CID. 1. Introduction The Graduate Program in Neuroscience (GPN) at the University of Minnesota is one of nine neuroscience partner programs that participated in the Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate (CID). The CID was a five-year long, nation-wide project that focused on improving doctoral education in U.S. universities through the analysis of the participating programs' training activities. The CID ended in 2005 and the GPN has been assessing the progress made through the initiative. We provide a brief overview of the goals accomplished and an evaluation of whether the changes made are currently in effect, as well as potential reasons for why some of the goals have not been met or maintained. In this presentation we report the impact that the CID had on our graduate program. Student Body Developmental Systems Behavioral Student Rep Student Board Steering Committee • 2. Original CID Initiative: Revise Oral Preliminary Exam • Goals of Revising the Oral Preliminary Exam: • 1. Facilitate degree progress by moving the oral prelim timeline earlier in the degree • 2. Prepare students more effectively for the exam 3. Facilitate peer support 4. Promote grant-writing skills 5. Facilitate degree progress by increasing passing rate • Original Action Steps: 1. Help students understand the oral exam process and be well prepared 2. Facilitate peer support by implementing uniform exam deadlines 3. Promote student/faculty dialog • Result: the oral prelim has been improved • Second year students spend a required class session discussing the purpose, format, and timing of the oral prelim. • All second year students turn in the written portion of the exam at the beginning of September and complete their oral thesis proposal by the end of the semester. • The written portion of the exam takes the form of a Ruth R. Kirshtien NRSA grant application based upon the student’s thesis proposal. • The new oral exam has decreased time to completion for the average student and better prepares them to compete for graduate level grants such as the NRSA. Action The Current Pathway Student Body Student Board DGS • 6. Conclusion • Several ideas born of the GPN’s participation in the CID are permanently integrated into our curriculum. These ideas were designed to increase the efficacy with which this department trains future scientists. • Changes written into program policy, such as the revised oral examination, will have lasting effects on our educational quality. • Changes not written into policy, such as the inclusion of 50% integrative questions on the written prelim, will not achieve lasting benefit without increased attention in the future. The Student Board also became less effective following the end of the CID. • During the CID a limited number of programmatic changes were successfully implemented. They required a great deal of time and energy, thus the CID at the GPN should be viewed as a success although some projects were not brought to completion. • The improvements conceived during the CID may be partially responsible for the recent five-year renewal of our Neuroscience Training Grant. • This year’s evaluation of the GPN’s participation in the CID by the Student Board has renewed discussion of the ideas generated during the CID. We will rejuvenate the achievements of the CID by increasing dialogue between the Student Board and the incoming Director of Graduate Studies. We have designed a calendar that will maintain the improvements that were not drafted into policy. Each July we ‘welcome the first years’ in conjunction with the Student Mentorship Committee. The Curriculum Committee continues to generate integrative questions for the written preliminary exam. The Student Board sponsored an ‘integrative questions’ workshop that collected feedback and produced fresh ideas for the student representative to bring to this committee. Our goal is to develop a lasting culture within the GPN that will foster new graduate student-sponsored initiatives in the spirit of the initial CID advancements. Student Handbook • 3. Original CID Initiative: Improve Policies for GPN Faculty Membership • Goals for GPN Faculty Membership: • 1. Ensure that all GPN faculty are available and appropriate as Ph.D. advisors 2. Promote awareness of diverse faculty research 3. Develop guidelines for GPN membership • Original Action Steps: 1.Shorten weekly faculty colloquium presentations from 1 hour to 30 minutes to facilitate faculty exposure 2. New faculty applicants required to present during weekly GPN colloquium 3. GPN faculty periodically reviewed for continuing GPN membership • Current Status on Faculty Membership Improvements: • Policy on faculty membership revised and more thoroughly documented: • Policy revised, making it easier for new GPN faculty to mentor students. • Renewal with GPN contingent on faculty members serving the program (teaching, colloquium presentation, attendance of functions, etc.) • Weekly colloquium presentations are 30 minutes, number of faculty presenting has doubled • GPN faculty polled yearly to determine if they are accepting students. List is available to students. Website