in in uncertain tim imes Agnes Bosanquet Alana Mailey Jason - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Redefining early career academia in in uncertain tim imes

Agnes Bosanquet Alana Mailey Jason Lodge Kelly E Matthews

Context

• ‘Early career’ academia typically defined as

five years post-PhD

• Terms include neophyte (Hemmings & Kay

2010), apprentice (Laudel and Glaser 2008), gen X faculty (Matross Helms 2010), young, new or junior academics (Price, Coffey & Nethery 2014).

• Normative pathway: PhD, post-doc or Level

A, Level B appointment or promotion

• Does not reflect the lived experiences of

self-defining ECAs

Method

• Online qualitative and quantitative survey: 522 early career

academics (ECAs) across three Australian universities

• Open ended questions on career plans, ideal academic role,

most and least important factors for career progression

• Institutional data: professional development offered to ECAs

at same three universities

• Narrative inquiry = makes meaning of lived experiences

through story-telling (Connelly and Clandinan, 1990)

Institutional definitions of early career

Institution 1 Institution 2 Institution 3 Someone who is within his/her first eight years of academic employment (research and/or teaching), allowing for uninterrupted, stable academic development. An early career researcher (researchers who are within five years post completion (formal award) of their PhD

• r MPhil degree

An ECR is within five years of the start

• f their research careers. This usually

means that they have been awarded a PhD or equivalent research doctorate within five years; however, an extension to this limit would be approved owing to career interruptions (eg maternity leave, illness). DECRA Researchers may be eligible to apply if they have been awarded a PhD within five years or, together with periods of significant career interruption, have been awarded a PhD within nine years of the closing time of submission of Proposals. NHMRC Applicants must: have held their PhD for no more than two years (from the date of the letter advising that their PhD thesis was passed – not upon receipt of degree) unless career disruptions exist.

A tale of three universities: Survey findings

Institution 1 Institution 2 Institution 3 In order to be successful in Academia, I need to focus on my: Research 93.70% 95% 95.30% Teaching 42% 48.30% 68.20% My first priority is: Research 68.10% 64.40% 42.40% Teaching 16% 26.70% 51.80% I am active in the scholarship of: Research 82.80% 82.80% 74.10% Teaching 30.70% 46.10% 65.90% I have participated in professional development in: Research 53.80% 42.20% 58.80% Teaching 48.70% 59.40% 77.60% My institution supports my: Research 70.80% 65.20% 67.80% Teaching 39.60% 44.00% 65.50% I am given sufficient resources to adequately conduct my: Research 57.50% 52.20% 41.40% Teaching 37.90% 42.40% 55.20%

A tale of three universities: Institutional support

Institution 1 Institution 2 Institution 3 Short workshop - research Short workshop - teaching Short workshop - leadership Short workshop - career planning Professional development program Grants - internal, research Grants - internal, teaching Grants - external, research Grants - external, teaching Job opportunities/ targeted positions Seminars/ conferences Mentoring program Networking, facilitated Community of practice Induction and orientation Awards - research Awards - teaching

Redefining early career: narratives

Narratives aim to capture the “messiness” of academic practice (Jones, 2011) ECA 1 – was professional staff, recently started PhD ECA 2 – career change from industry, three year Lecturer contract ECA 3 – has PhD, young family, Level B on probation ECA 4 –casual teaching at different universities since PhD completion ECA 5 – fixed-term research contract, considering leaving academia

Implications

• Defining and supporting ECAs is complex
• Need for subjective definitions
• Uncertainty and insecurity: casualisation
• Workloads and work/life balance: ‘sacrifice’,

caring responsibilities (25%), administration

• Research pressures: publish or perish
• Love for academic work
• Need for professional development and

institutional support for self-defining ECAs

References

• Hemmings, B. and R. Kay. 2010. Research self-efficacy, publication output, and early career
• development. International Journal of Educational Management 24,(7): 562-74.
• Jones, A. 2011. Seeing the messiness of academic practice: Exploring the work of academics

through narrative. International Journal for Academic Development 16,(2): 109-18.

• Laudel, G. and J. Glaser. 2008. From apprentice to colleague: The metamorphosis of early career
• researchers. Higher Education 55,(3): 387-406.
• Matthews, K.E., J.M. Lodge and A. Bosanquet. 2014. Early career academic perceptions, attitudes

and professional development activities: Questioning the teaching and research gap to further academic development. International Journal for Academic Development 19,(2): 112-24.

• Matross Helms, R. 2010. New challenges, new priorities: The experience of generation x faculty. A

study for the collaborative on academic careers in higher education (Coache).

• Price, E., B. Coffey and A. Nethery. 2014. An early career academic network: What worked and

what didn’t. Journal of Further and Higher Education: 1-19.

• Images: http://blasst.edu.au/cartoons.html