Moving beyond the classroom:

Integrating skills and ethical practices in a real-world scenario

DANIELLE M EVERS, STUART WASHINGTON, KAREN GALE
Interdisciplinary Program in Neuroscience, Georgetown University, Washington, DC

BACKGROUND PROCESS
Graduate curricula focus on
introducing students to all aspects Ethical Issues Addressed
of the field they are preparing to Grant Writing Instruction
Grant Review Training Discussions of case studies
enter but do not always provide Proper handling of privileged documents
avenues to practice learned skills. Shared ‘secrets’ from faculty
Policies protecting the use of information
Shared experiences from Introduction to review criteria
provided in the research proposal
In hopes of developing ‘stewards of students (NRSA) and scoring mechanisms
Dealing with misconduct (including plagiarism)
the discipline’ we must provide Mentorship by faculty member Exposure to reviewers comments from
Proper attribution of credit
students opportunities to apply Feedback from additional faculty faculty grant applications
NIH conflict of interest and
learned skills in practical settings Advice on how to work
confidentiality policies
with consideration of outcomes and with reviewers comments
Confidentiality of the review process
ethics.
Through our programs participation
in the Carnegie Initiative on the
Doctorate we expanded our Review Process Mock Study Section Scoring and Feedback
Completion of mini-grant
curriculum and now provide
experiential learning practices Primary, secondary and tertiary Review in two concurrent Each applicant receives
Each student completes and mock study sections
through ‘Survival Skills and Ethics submits a mini-grant reviewers assigned a score, a rank percentile
Critiques posted to website NIH representatives present (SRO, PO) and comments from reviewers
for Emerging Scientists’, such as Following NIH grant structure Evaluation, discussion and scoring
accessible by all reviewers
mock grant review sessions. following NIH model

FEEDBACK CONCLUSIONS
“From the case studies it became apparent that “The mock study section This experience allows students to practice their grant
many special circumstances regarding handling was quite an eye- writing skills, appreciate and apply ethical standards
privileged documents can arise. The fact that opener… We’ve all been that have been discussed in class in an applied
study sections are often arranged so that given the advice that our professional context . Training graduate students for
experts in the field are reviewing grants in an grants will need to be all aspects of their future career should be approached
area they are familiar clear , easy to read, and in the same way as training in the lab environment, with
with means they are compelling , but nothing real on-the-job experience. This mock study section
privy to project plans could really drive that serves this purpose for the skill of grant writing. It is
that may relate to their point home better than one addition to the curriculum inspired through our
own work. How do you actually putting our- participation with the Carnegie Initiative on the
compartmentalize this selves in the shoes of the people who will be deciding the fate of our Doctorate towards creating true ‘stewards of the
information?” grants. I think we understand better now just HOW clear, how easy discipline’.
printed by

to read and how compelling they will need to be.” Supported by: NIH Grants: T32NS041231, F31DC007576 , 5F31NS061467
www.postersession.com