|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
Council Of Graduate Deans Report On Postdoctoral Education At UCFall 1998 The University of California Council of Graduate Deans representing all nine campuses presents this report on postdoctoral education at the University of California. This report contains specific recommendations for consideration by campus Graduate Councils, Academic Senates, departments and administrations, by the Office of the President, and by the Coordinating Committee on Graduate Affairs. Across its nine campuses, the University of California has over 4,000 postdoctoral scholars-mostly in the sciences. In Fall 1997, numbers ranged from 152 at Santa Barbara to 1,002 at San Francisco. Often described as the "hidden university," the status of UC postdocs is similar to postdoctoral status nationally where their numbers are increasing, where they are remaining longer in "temporary" positions, where they are increasingly dissatisfied, where they are subject to inconsistent policies and practices or none at all, and where information about them is inadequate. Therefore, this report is viewed as timely and important and in concert with several national initiatives. NATIONAL BACKGROUNDThree recent reports: one from the National Research Council (NRC) Committee on Dimensions, Causes, and Implications of Recent Trends in the Careers of Life Scientists: "Trends in the Early Careers of Life Scientists"; one from the Association of American Universities (AAU) Postdoctoral Education Committee, and one from the Commission of Professionals in Science and Technology (CPST): "Postdocs and Career Prospects: A Status Report", provide a national context for discussion of the postdoctoral experience. Berkeley Dean Joseph Cerny was a member of the AAU committee whose findings are summarized briefly. The AAU report is available at http://www.aau.edu/reports/PostdocRpt.html. An executive summary of the NRC report is available at http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/trends. Information on CPST is at [omitted - this page is no longer available - October 2000]. A complete copy of this report may be obtained from campus graduate deans. The AAU Committee found some specific points of concern:
The AAU Committee made the following recommendations as a model for consideration by individual institutions:
UC BACKGROUNDThe Graduate Deans and their respective staffs and representatives from the Office of the President have met several times since January, 1997 both in sub-committee meetings of staff and meetings of the COGD as a whole to produce this report. Several comparison institutions were polled including Stanford, Columbia, Johns Hopkins, Harvard, Michigan, SUNY Buffalo, University of Wisconsin, University of Washington, and Yale as well as a comparison of UC campuses. The committee also reviewed several current national reports and articles regarding postdoctoral education including the three cited above. The committee found that several policies regarding postdoctoral scholars already existed in the University, that there were a wide variety of policies, practices, benefits, services, and awareness of postdocs among the nine campuses. Not surprisingly, the larger the campus postdoc population, the more policies, procedures, services, and benefits existed. A major challenge was the slightly different ways in which campuses defined and therefore counted postdocs, whether or not campuses Graduate Divisions functioned as a central administrative unit responsible for postdoc appointments, and how Graduate Divisions and medical schools interacted on those campuses with both. Appendix A shows the number of postdocs reported by campus to the Office of the President for Fall 1997. Since counting postdocs is somewhat problematic for many campuses, these numbers are provided to inform discussion only. GOVERNANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR POSTDOCTORAL EDUCATIONAfter review of Regents Standing Orders relevant to postdoctoral education and Academic Senate bylaws, the deans concluded that the Senate interprets postdoctoral education as an extension of graduate education by giving to Graduate Councils the authority and power to set policy and standards for postdoctoral appointments and assigning responsibility for postdoctoral activities, including initiating and administering policies, processes, and programs which enhance postdoctoral education. (Academic Senate Bylaw 330.B. Duties of Graduate Councils). Deans may delegate authority for postdoctoral appointments to other administrative officials as such delegation is not prohibited by Regents Standing Orders or Senate Bylaws. Graduate Deans or their designees retain the right to grant exceptions to policies. Recommendation: That Graduate Councils and Graduate Divisions on all campus be assigned central responsibility for postdoctoral education and that this responsibility may be delegated to other administrative officials at the discretion of the Graduate Deans. Further, that department chairs and organized research unit directors are responsible for overseeing postdoctoral education within their academic units and that faculty mentors are responsible for guiding and monitoring the work of postdoctoral scholars, for developing a research and training plan with the scholar, for providing periodic oral and written evaluations of progress, for career advising, and for job placement assistance. UC VIEW OF THE POSTDOCTORAL EXPERIENCEAppendix B is a proposed philosophical statement of the University of California view of the postdoctoral experience. Recommendation: The UC View of the Postdoctoral Experience be circulated to campus Graduate Councils, Academic Senates, departments, and administration, Office of the President, and CCGA for comment and adoption system wide. And that once adopted, this statement be published and disseminated as appropriate. UC DEFINITION OF A POSTDOCTORAL SCHOLARAcademic Senate Bylaw 106(B)(3)(a) states that the Graduate Councils have the responsibility for setting "standards for the appointment of postdoctoral scholars or their academic equivalent." A footnote to this Bylaw states: The term "academic equivalent" refers to such appointments as Postgraduate Research category who are in training status but not to interns or residents. Enrollment as a postdoctoral scholar is limited to a period not to exceed five years. Appendix C is a proposed UC definition of a postdoctoral scholar from the Council of Graduate Deans (COGD). This proposed definition is consistent with and builds upon the current Senate definition and incorporates recommendations from the AAU report. Recommendation: The UC COGD proposed definition of a postdoctoral scholar be circulated to and reviewed by campus Graduate Councils, Academic Senates, administrations, and Office of the President. Upon approval by CCGA, the revised definition be used to determine an individual's eligibility for postdoctoral status. Since the proposed definition is consistent with current Senate legislation, it does not require approval of the Academic Assembly of the UC Academic Senate. CCGA, however, has the option of forwarding the definition to the Academic Assembly for approval to include the definition in the Senate Bylaws. POSTDOCS AS A SEPARATE NEW GROUPThe Deans, recognizing the growing number of postdocs, the increasing duration of appointment time, the increasing dissatisfaction with some aspects of their status, and their continuing important contribution to the mission of the university, make the following recommendation: Recommendation: Postdoctoral scholars should be constituted as a distinct group of individuals in the University of California - a group clearly separate from students, other academic employees, staff employees, and resident and house staff (including clinical fellows) and that this group should have its own policies, programs, services and benefits. APPOINTMENT TITLESCurrently, several title codes are used by the campuses to signify postdoctoral scholars. These include Title Codes 3370, 3240, 9995 (Davis only), and 3296. On some campuses postdoctoral scholars are viewed separately from postgraduate researchers but on other campuses these two titles are interchangeable. These title codes do not always capture postdoctoral scholars funded through fellowships and traineeships which preclude employment status and who, on some campuses, are paid via fellowship stipend or postdoctoral scholars who are funded directly. The University must have an accurate way to identify and count its postdoctoral population. Recommendation: At least two appointment titles are needed to conform with extramural funding agency requirements. One for postdocs, who because they are funded through their mentor's research grants, must be employees and therefore require academic titles. A second title is needed for postdocs funded directly or through fellowships and traineeships from extramural sponsors, most of whom state that scholars are not considered employees. A third title might be needed to track supplemental funding for individual postdocs. Appendix D provides detailed recommendations about criteria and conditions for appointment. Of particular importance are recommendations regarding percent time and length of time for a postdoctoral appointment, minimum compensation levels for postdocs, and leaves of absence. Those recommendation are summarized below: Recommendation regarding salary and stipend levels: A minimum compensation level should be set to be at least equivalent to an NIH training grant (September 1998 = $21,000; October 1998 = $26,250 (proposed for consideration). The maximum compensation level would be equal to 150% of the current maximum PGR level ($64,152). Recommendation regarding length of service: Appointments are temporary, could be made for a period of up to three years, with reappointments permissible up to a total of five years including time spent in postdoctoral status at other institutions. Recommendation regarding percent time: Postdoctoral Scholar appointments would be made at 100% time to recognize that preparation for an academic or research career requires 100% effort. Exceptions could be made in unusual circumstances by the Graduate Dean or Dean's designee for individuals who are unable to pursue full-time study for reasons of health, family responsibilities, or employment external to the University. Recommendation regarding leaves of absence: Sick leave would accrue at one working day (8 hours) per month for full time service unless the funding agency has other requirements. Vacation leave would accrue at one day (8 hours) per month for full time service for the first three years and then to 10 hours per month in years 4 and 5 unless the funding agency has other requirements. Parental leave policies would be established by campuses in compliance with federal and state law. BENEFITSThe AAU report recommends that all postdoc appointees should have access to a comprehensive health care plan for themselves and their dependents. Some other desired benefits or services include workers' compensation coverage, access to career planning and job placement assistance, and access to a grievance procedure. These same concerns were echoed in a 1996 survey of postdocs at UCSF, where postdoctoral scholars have formed a registered campus organization. HEALTH INSURANCEA survey of UC campuses indicates established plans for postdocs at Irvine (as of 1998), San Diego, and San Francisco; access to GSHIP or an undergraduate dependent plan at Davis and Santa Barbara respectively; and no plans in place at UCB, UCLA, Riverside, or Santa Cruz. UCB and UCLA seek to establish plans in the near future. Plan coverage varies as do voluntary vs. mandatory enrollment. UCSF and UCSD have the most comprehensive coverage. UCSF offers a choice of HMO or PPO and includes medical, dental, vision, Life, ADD&D, and LTD and is linked to the campus plan for house staff and residents. UCSD offers an HMO and dental and vision plans. Recommendation: That health insurance for postdoctoral scholars be mandatory. That University of California provide access to, at minimum, medical insurance for all postdoctoral scholars officially appointed and in future years consider adding vision and dental plans. That the Office of the President study the viability of a system-wide policy for postdoctoral scholars. ACCESS TO A GRIEVANCE PROCEDUREAccess to a grievance procedure is a common theme in postdocs surveys and a recommendation of the AAU report which cites growing dissatisfaction among this group of individuals. The University has grievance procedures for faculty, for non-senate academic employees, for students, and for staff but none specifically for postdocs. Recommendation: That using existing campus grievance procedures as a model, campuses establish a separate and distinct grievance procedure for postdoctoral scholars that is written, protects due process, contains clear time lines, requires a clear statement of alleged grievance and requested remedy, requires adequate opportunity and venue for response and resolution, provides for the assignment of authority/responsibility to either a designated individual or a designated hearing committee, is followed consistently, and is well known to those it covers or otherwise impacts. OTHER BENEFITS AND SERVICESThere are several other important areas for future action for postdoctoral scholars. These areas include career counseling and job placement assistance, access to housing and recreational activities, workers' compensation as related to postdocs, taxation compliance information as related to postdocs, centralize appointment processes, improve data collection, and tracking postdocs as they move on in their careers. Recommendation: That the Office of the President and campuses continue to work to improve the postdoctoral experience at the University and revisit this topic on an annual basis to assess progress and plan for future action. FUNDING FOR INITIATIVES TO ENHANCE POSTDOCTORAL EDUCATIONFunding is needed in order to provide for benefits and services recommended in this report. Recommendation: Campuses are encouraged to do a cost analysis and create a fund source to support these endeavors. At campus option, explore the possibility of charging "an annual appointment fee" for postdoctoral scholars in most cases this would paid by the principal investigator/faculty mentor or to explore an allocation from central campus administration. CONCLUSIONThe University of California recognizes the important role postdoctoral scholars play in its mission of education and research and strives to be a national leader in providing the best possible educational and training experience for them. The adoption of the recommendations contained in this report is viewed as an important step in improving postdoctoral education within the University. COUNCIL OF GRADUATE DEANSRonald Henderson, Chair Richard Attiyeh Clifford Attkisson Joseph Cerny Cristina Gonzalez Charles Li Jean-Pierre "Peter" Mileur Claudia Mitchell-Kernan Frederic Wan COGD Postdoctoral Scholar Staff Committee: Sam Castaneda Jean Fort Jeff Gibeling Carol Landa, Chair Matt Miller Lynn Roych Carol Sokolov Judi Sui Mark Westlye Ami Zusman November, 1998 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
