#4 Student Voices and Leadership

10/5/2022 1:45 am

By Kayla Seymore, Evan Dooley and Dr. Caitlin Banks.

In academia, we are doing 2 things:

Pushing science forward through research
Training the next generation to push science forward

In this sense, you are serving the next generation of scientists. One way you can confirm that this service is actually helping those it is intended for is to involve your constituents at every level. This has advantages for your students, your group, and you! Here are 4 good reasons why:

1. Students are the researchers of the future.

If we train no one, then no one will carry on our field. Students provide the opportunity for you to shape the future of our field. If we never show them what is involved in being a researcher, they will be ill-prepared to become researchers…and likely leave academia. Including students prepares them to lead successful research careers of their own.

2. Students bring perspective.

Students increase the demographic diversity of your team. They are from a different time and place than us, and bring life experiences from another generation. This diversity breeds innovation. In particular, underrepresented groups find relationships between concepts and ideas that others often miss (Hofstra et al., 2020). At organizational levels, students not only diversify your group, they also bring the CURRENT student perspective. This perspective is always changing. You may remember aspects of your own student experiences, but they’re living them right now!

3. Students distribute the workload.

Students can do data collection and analysis. Students can also help with grant drafts, IRB literature review, and other research logistics. Including students in this way helps show them the larger picture of where the group is headed, while building the skills needed to successfully contribute and eventually run a team.

4. Students are a renewable energy source.

Research is new and exciting to students. They don’t know about as many downsides yet. They are stoked to be involved and often astonished that they could be making a contribution to ~Science~. Let their excitement be contagious! This is especially true for undergraduate researchers. Undergrads come in and out quickly, so if you can find a way for your group to harness their energy, you will end up with a near constant power source.

So, hopefully by now you’re convinced that students should be included at every level of research. “But what does this look like? How could I be more inclusive of students?” Great questions! Here are a couple action items you can incorporate to be more inclusive of students.

Inclusive Leadership

Historically, leadership of students runs on a Hierarchical Leadership Model; also known as the Top-down Approach. At the top, senior leadership sets goals and objectives. Next, supervisors receive specific tasks to achieve these goals and objectives, then delegate those tasks to students at the bottom. While this type of leadership approach provides a clear chain of command and facilitates quick decision-making, the disadvantages are that each level of responsibility only communicates with the level directly above or below theirs. This can result in a lack of leadership feedback from, and impact to, the students. Additionally, without open and direct communication, the motivation for team goals/objectives gets lost and students often disengage from their tasks.

A more inclusive student leadership model is the Feedback Loop; which, as the name suggests, is based on continuous feedback. In the Planning stage, students provide input & have decision-making authority. In the Implementation stage, there is an organization-wide collaboration on planned tasks. In the Assessment stage, completed tasks are reviewed with students and feedback is discussed. And lastly, in the Modification stage, goals and tasks can be adjusted based on feedback. This type of leadership creates a “buy-in” for the team’s objectives and encourages a more collaborative process to accomplish goals. Being included at every stage of a process and receiving feedback on tasks increases student motivation and morale. Additionally, incorporating student feedback allows for flexibility in the way goals are accomplished; which ultimately promotes a growth culture in the workplace. So, what does this look like?

At the Scientific Organization Level (Plan/Implement/Assess/Modify)

Student Representative
Gives active voice for student needs and ideas to reach the Executive Board
Student Committee
Gives platform for students to develop programs for their peers in biomechanics across the country
Student Chapters
Gives ownership of biomechanics professional development to students at their own institutions

At the Institution/Department Level (Assess/Modify)

Student government
Each department should be represented
Student rep can bring issues to the Provost and discuss solutions among peers
Curriculum
Regularly assess with students
Is classroom content as relevant/applicable as possible?
Program policy
Regularly assess with students
Is policy helpful/useful/widely upheld?

At the Research Lab/Team Level (Plan/Implement)

Research
Explain how students’ work fits into current/upcoming grant(s)
Create room for exchange of new research ideas
Training
Regularly discuss training plan and objectives
Allow students to train others
Lab policy
Collaborate on workplace policy
Encourage students to embody lab virtues

Effective Communication

If you haven’t picked it up yet, communication is critical to student inclusion at all levels. Without effective communication deadlines start to be missed, there’s waning interest in the research topic, and failed mentoring relationships (Straus et al., 2013).

So, how do you do communicate effectively? Here are a couple tips:

Find your best mode(s) and frequency of communication
In-person, email, Slack, Microsoft Teams, Zoom, etc.
Mode may vary depending on the person and type of interaction
Be willing to experiment and modify communication style
Communication is an interactive and iterative process
Be a scientist! If something did not work, learn from it, and try a new approach
Remember: one communication failure does not lead to a failed relationship
Mentors
Mentees change and grow over time
Some communication/teaching styles may not be effective at every stage of learning
Be willing to adapt your mentoring and grow with your mentee
Mentees
It’s okay to have different views/opinions and discuss them with your mentor
Try to see your mentor as a colleague you respect, not an authority you fear
Mentors are helping you become an expert in your field of study!

In conclusion, students should be included at every level of scientific research. Practicing an inclusive leadership model and effective communication can help integrate students and keep pushing science forward through the next generation of scientists!

Information in this blog post was originally presented at the 2022 North American Congress on Biomechanics ‘Diversifying Your Workplace’ workshop. Resources related to this and other workshop topics can be found here: bit.ly/NACOBDEI

References

1. Hofstra B, Kulkarni VV, Munoz-Najar Galvez S, He B, Jurafsky D, McFarland DA. The Diversity-Innovation Paradox in Science. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020;117(17):9284-9291. doi:10.1073/pnas.1915378117

2. Straus SE, Johnson MO, Marquez C, Feldman MD. Characteristics of successful and failed mentoring relationships: a qualitative study across two academic health centers. Acad Med. 2013;88(1):82-89. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31827647a0

Author: Kayla Seymore

Kayla Seymore is a PhD student in the Biomechanics and Movement Science Program at the University of Delaware (UD). As part of the UD Tendon Research Group, her work focuses on the impact of lower limb musculoskeletal adaptations on Achilles tendon health and development in adolescents. She currently leads the Black Biomechanists Association, a non-profit organization she co-founded with the mission to uplift and enrich Black biomechanists in their academic and professional careers. Outside of research, Kayla enjoys taking walks with her French bulldog, listening to comedy podcasts, and curating music playlists for every kind of mood.

Author: Evan Dooley

Evan (he/they) is a PhD candidate in the University of Virginia Motion Analysis and Motor Performance Lab. He studies how we move, why we move, and how we can help people move better. Specifically, Evan works at the interface of humans and the devices that we use everyday; with his current focus being modeling how assistive forces from devices affect walking efficiency. Ultimately, these models will inform the development of a powered posterior walker for people with cerebral palsy that can increase the walking efficiency of the user, while maintaining the stability benefits of the device.

Author: Dr. Caitlin Banks

Caitlin Banks, PhD, is a postdoctoral researcher at the Kennedy Krieger Institute and Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, MD, USA and the Executive Chair of Empowering Allies at IWB. Her research focuses on walking, lower extremity function, and health disparities in people with stroke. She did her graduate work at the University of Florida and the University of California, Davis. Outside the lab, she loves synchronized skating, figure skating, and playing with her puppy, Leo.