National Institute of General Medical Sciences
Division of Minority Opportunities in Research
Minority Access to Research Careers Branch
January 2006
Message from the MORE Director
The MORE Division is considering several options to make the U*STAR Program more productive in fulfilling our mission to increase the number of underrepresented groups going into biomedical research careers. The MORE White Paper below outlines alternative strategies under consideration. Input from the MORE community is important at this early stage of our planning. I welcome your feedback on this report or related topics. Please use the feedback link below or write to me at poodryc@nigms.nih.gov.
Clifton Poodry, Ph.D.
Director, MORE Division
Send Feedback
Background
The NIGMS Division of Minority Opportunities in Research (MORE) administers research and research training programs aimed at increasing the number of underrepresented minority biomedical and behavioral scientists. The Congressionally-mandated Minority Access to Research Careers (MARC) and Minority Biomedical Research Support (MBRS) programs were established to increase the flow of competitively trained underrepresented minorities (URMs) who enroll in Ph.D. programs and who go on to research careers in biomedical or behavioral science. These institutional grants support undergraduate students who are majoring in the sciences relevant to biomedicine to improve their preparation for graduate training in biomedical research.
Overview and Summary
The purpose of this “White Paper” is to propose alternative approaches to the MARC U*STAR Program. Principles adopted for the U*STAR will undoubtedly influence the evolution of the MBRS programs as well. The metric the Division uses to determine whether it is meeting the goal of increasing the number of competitively trained URM scientists is the number of former U*STAR trainees that go into and complete a Ph.D. degree. The existing U*STAR program provides support for 56 institutions and approximately 670 students. The program holds several key assumptions and anticipated outcomes:
Key Assumptions:
- MARC supported institutions have a significant pool of high achieving undergraduates majoring in the sciences relevant to biomedicine and who are interested in research careers.
- MARC graduates will have the preparation and courses required for competitive graduate school admission.
- MARC trainees learn the value and culture of scientific research by participating in high caliber mentored research experiences and conferences.
- MARC trainees will receive the needed professional and personal advisement and mentoring to succeed in graduate school.
Anticipated Outcomes:
- 100% of graduating MARC trainees will enroll in graduate programs leading to the Ph.D. degree.
- Effective pre-MARC training will be a bridge that increases baccalaureate student retention and thus increases the pool of students prepared to be MARC trainees.
- Strengthening the science curricula at minority and minority serving institutions (MSI) will improve the academic preparedness of potential MARC trainees and other students as well.
The MARC Program provides significant resources to an institution. Typically, a modest program involving 12 trainees receives approximately $192,000 for stipends and tuition and fee support, while another $240,000 in training-related expenses is also provided. Currently, there is little attention given to whether an application and funds requested represents the best possible institutional program or just the one envisioned by the applicant Program Director.
To achieve a semblance of proportional representation within the next 25 years, the number of underrepresented minority Ph.D.s needs to double in each of the next 8 years. A harsh reality is that the MARC undergraduate research training program has not been as influential or effective as it needs to be to make a difference. The outcomes for the MARC program are less than anticipated, with less than 15% of all MARC students completing the Ph.D. in biomedical or behavioral science. Because the numbers of MARC trainees who complete the Ph.D. is low, the costs associated with the incremental gains are as much as $1 million dollars per Ph.D.-bound MARC student, and that does not include costs of the Ph.D. education.
Therefore, the MARC Branch offers several possibilities to improve the numbers of MARC students going into graduate school and completing the Ph.D. degree. Three options are presented for feedback and guidance:
- OPEN the existing U*STAR Program to more institutions, including non-MSIs, that have higher numbers of URM alumni going on to Ph.D.s.
- Refine the existing program with a much more PRESCRIPTIVE set of criteria for participation and for a size more in line with productivity.
- REVISE the existing program to have the size dependent on productivity but with more flexible resources for the institution to apply to the effort.
OPTION 1: OPEN
Description:
The overall mission of the MARC Program is to increase the number of biomedical researchers from minority groups underrepresented in the biomedical/behavioral research enterprise of this country. To achieve this goal, applications will continue to be accepted from both MSI and non-MSI applicants. Although non-MSIs can currently submit applications, a concerted outreach effort will be made by the MARC Branch to encourage applications from institutions with strong records of sending minorities on to Ph.D. degrees.
Since there are differences in the institutional environments and missions, each applicant institution is encouraged to design a research training program that reflects its mission, physical and personnel resources, and student population that provides evidence of the benefits of the program on the recruitment, retention, graduate rates, and career outcomes of its science majors. More importantly, applicant institutions are expected to set their own program goals and measurable objectives and describe the procedures and baseline data that will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed research training activities. Because of the interdisciplinary nature of current biomedical and behavioral research, the inclusion of honors students from the various science departments is strongly encouraged. Disciplines included in biomedical research are areas such as cell biology, biochemistry, physiology, pharmacology, genetics, and behavioral sciences, as well as the more quantitative areas such as mathematics, chemistry, and computer sciences that are necessary to analyze biological phenomena. The purpose of the program is to support institutional research training in any of the above areas to improve the participating
students’ preparation for graduate training in the biomedical/behavioral sciences with the objective of increasing the flow of competitively trained students into Ph.D. program. To achieve this objective, a MARC program should:
- Select a pool of highly motivated honors students who are interested in obtaining the Ph.D.
- Provide a rigorous curriculum in biological and quantitative sciences that will prepare the students for graduate school, by including courses required for graduate school admission.
- Provide summer research experiences outside of the applicant institution.
- Send students directly into Ph.D. programs.
- For those institutions that do not have the capacity for on-campus research training during the academic year, provide MARC trainees from the various departments with courses dealing with research techniques, integrated research skills development, analytical thinking, etc.
- Send MARC trainees to a national scientific meeting, in addition to their attendance at either the ABRCMS or SACNAS meetings.
- Evaluate the institutional program using both formative and summative evaluation procedures.
OPTION 2: PRESCRIPTIVE
Description
A PRESCRIPTIVE MARC Program would have the same programmatic philosophy as the current MARC Program, except that the program announcement will describe in exact terms the mandatory features that must be done to meet the program announcement objectives. Thus, a PRESCRIPTIVE MARC Program would have much less flexibility than the current program, but perhaps achieve greater outcomes. To be successful using this option, institutions must:
- Select students with GPAs of 3.3 or greater who are motivated and interested in obtaining the Ph.D. The actual appointment might require approval by MORE professional staff.
- Select students from multiple departments, such as those from life sciences, psychology, mathematics, chemistry, physics, engineering, and computer sciences in order to have a strong interdisciplinary program.
- Provide a strong interdisciplinary MARC curriculum that will provide trainees with excellent quantitative skills, a strong academic background, and analytical thinking.
- Provide supplemental instruction in skills building such as reading for comprehension, writing, and analyzing and presenting scientific data.
- Provide supplemental group activities that promote active learning, analytic thinking, and problem solving based on research findings.
- Require partnerships for off-campus research with academic institutions that have T32 training grants.
- Provide tutoring to achieve high academic performance.
- Provide academic courses based on a program seminar series.
- Provide proactive and intrusive advising by an advocate, professional advisor, and assistance with academic and non-academic problems when they arise.
- Provide opportunities for and expect community service in which students use their scientific knowledge, their communication skills, convey the excitement of science, and reinforce their commitment to the goals of the MORE student development programs.
- Send 100% of graduating trainees to Ph.D. programs.
- Have increased institutional accountability of how the MARC funds are used, including how funds released by the provision of institutional fellowships or other institutional support to MARC trainees are used.
Option 3: REVISE
Description
For new and competitive applications, in the REVISED option, the number of trainee positions recommended will depend on the outcome/past performance of the applicant institution in sending its students to a research doctorate in biomedical/behavioral sciences. Funded programs will be expected to send 100% of U*STAR participants directly into science Ph.D. programs. Those that meet this objective may receive additional trainee slots or funds to conduct additional activities as the institution sees fit. Programs that, after an initial time frame, continue to fall short of meeting the Ph.D. goal may lose trainee positions or lose the program altogether.
In the REVISED program option, as well as in the proposed OPEN and PRESCRIPTIVE options, student selection by the institution will be very important, such that a program must carefully select students with the motivation, desire, and academic aptitude for Ph.D. training to reach the 100% Ph.D.-bound objective. A key feature of the REVISED option is that the flexibility would continue, allowing the institution to plan MARC activities to meet its own needs. For those that meet the goal of sending 100% of their graduates each year directly into Ph.D programs, it is possible that:
- Additional student slots could be awarded
- Additional training related expenses could be provided
For those institutions that do not meet their objectives, training positions and/or training-related expenses could be decreased.
A substantial change in the proposed program is that institutions would be given training-related expenses on a formula basis with greater flexibility for their utilization. Furthermore, it is likely that the proportion of funds allocated as training related expenses could increase significantly. Institutions would be encouraged to provide counseling and tutoring services to increase the high performance of all students. They would be encouraged to develop an outstanding curriculum. Since institutions will differ in the support services that they already provide, they would have flexibility to deploy their trainee-related expenses in ways most critical to their own circumstance.
Pros and cons we have identified:\
Option 1: OPEN
Pros
- New institutions encouraged to apply. Greater competition for funds should spur new ideas and produce better outcomes.
- Little change will be needed for program announcement or review criteria.
- Potential increase in the number of high quality MARC trainees supported.
- Students selected may have more interdisciplinary and quantitative training.
Cons:
- May significantly disadvantage smaller schools and schools with less selective admission criteria.
- Schools without an active research faculty are at a distinct disadvantage.
Option 2: PRESCRIPTIVE
Pros:
- Relatively easy to implement.
- Uniform criteria.
- Builds upon lessons learned and successful programs.
- Anticipate better outcomes.
Cons:
- One size does not fit all. Institutions have different missions, different needs, and different resources available.
- Mandating a feature does not ensure quality of that feature.
- Less incentive for institutional buy-in.
Option 3: REVISE
Pros
- Resources will be aligned with specific outcomes, namely, numbers of student going on to Ph.D.
- Fine details of how to design and implement the most suitable interventions will be left to the institution.
- Flexibility in resource allocation may assist institutions in benefiting a larger number of students beyond those in the MARC Program.
- Programs should achieve a higher percentage of students going on to the Ph.D.
Cons
- May require institutional planning and institutional buy-in rather than the efforts of
individual Program Directors.
- May decrease incentives for the Program Director to put in the effort.
- May result in reduction of resources to large programs with modest outcomes.
