bioRxiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2022.12.06.519378

The Australian academic STEMM workplace post-COVID: a picture of disarray

Christian, K.·Larkins, J.-a.·Doran, M. R.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In 2019 we surveyed Australian early career researchers (ECRs) working in STEMM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine). ECRs almost unanimously declared a "love of research", however, many reported frequent bullying and questionable research practices (QRPs), and that they intended to leave because of poor career stability. We replicated the survey in 2022 to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and sought more information on bullying and QRPs. Here, we compare data from 2019 (658 respondents) and 2022 (530 respondents), and detail poor professional and research conditions experienced by ECRs. Job satisfaction declined (62% versus 57%), workload concerns increased (48.6% versus 60.6%), more indicated "now is a poor time to commence a research career" (65% versus 76%) from 2019 to 2022, and roughly half reported experiencing bullying. Perhaps conditions could be tolerable if the ecosystem were yielding well-trained scientists and high-quality science. Unfortunately, there are signs of poor supervision and high rates of QRPs. ECRs detailed problems likely worthy of investigation, but few (22.4%) felt that their institute would act on a complaint. We conclude by suggesting strategies for ECR mentorship, training, and workforce considerations intended to maintain research excellence in Australia and improve ECR career stability.

Explore related subjects

scientific communication and educationPreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Christian, K., Larkins, J.-a., Doran, M. R.. 2022-12-07. The Australian academic STEMM workplace post-COVID: a picture of disarray. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.06.519378

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2023

"When I talk about it, my eyes light up!" Impacts of a national laboratory internship on community college student success

Participation in technical/research internships may improve undergraduate graduation rates and persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), yet little is known about the benefits of these activities a) for community college students, b) when hosted by national laboratories, and c) beyond the first few years after the internship. We applied Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) to investigate alumni perspectives about how CCI at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) impacted their academic/career activities. We learned that alumni had low confidence and expectations of success in STEM as community college students. Participation in CCI increased their professional networks, expectations of success, and STEM skills, identity, and self-efficacy/confidence. Hispanic/Latinx alumni recalled the positive impact of mentors who prioritized personal connections, and women valued "warm" social environments. We propose several additions to the SCCT model, to better reflect the supports and barriers to STEM persistence for community college students.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2023

Insights from a survey of mentorship experiences by graduate and postdoctoral researchers

Mentorship is vital for early career researchers in training positions, allowing them to navigate the challenges of work and life in research environments. However, the quality of mentorship received by trainees can vary by investigator and by institution. One challenge faced by those hoping to improve trainee mentorship is that the extent to which mentorship is offered to and experienced by research trainees is not well characterized. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a survey to examine the quality of mentorship received by trainees in research environments, to identify characteristics of positive and negative mentorship, and to highlight best practices to improve trainee mentorship. We received 2,114 responses from researchers at graduate and postdoctoral career stages worldwide. Quantitative analysis showed that at least [~]25-45% of respondents were dissatisfied with some aspects of their mentorship. Qualitative responses revealed that common issues in mentorship include unclear expectations in research and mentoring interactions, lack of guidance, and inadequate support of trainee independence and career goals. Our findings also identified key mentorship elements desired by trainee mentees. Based on trainee suggestions, we describe strategies for individual mentors, departments, and institutions to improve the training experience for graduate and postdoctoral researchers.

scientific communication and education↗