Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:07:45.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Enhancing vital non-technical workplace competencies for early career seed scientists

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2018

Héctor E. Pérez
Héctor E. Pérez*
Affiliation:
University of Florida, Department of Environmental Horticulture, 2047 IFAS Research Drive, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Héctor E. Pérez, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Graduate training programs often produce technically ‘savvy’ scientists with inadequate non-technical skill sets essential for workplace success. The challenges associated with lack of non-technical competency may be exacerbated in highly specialized fields such as seed science. This brief communication describes recent efforts conducted at the 12th Triennial Conference of the International Society for Seed Science to address non-technical skill development for pre-career professionals. Furthermore, I propose a few adaptable ideas to begin confronting the divide between graduate education and professional development.

Keywords

graduate educationnon-technical skillsprofessional developmentworkplace competency
Type
Short Communication
Information
Seed Science Research , Volume 28 , Special Issue 3: Seeds as Systems , September 2018 , pp. 182 - 185
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blickley, JL, et al. (2012) Graduate student's guide to necessary skills for nonacademic conservation careers. Conservation Biology 27, 24–34.Google Scholar
Cake, MA, et al. (2016) Which professional (non-technical) competencies are most important to the success of graduate veterinarians? A Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) systematic review: BEME Guide No. 38. Medical Teacher 38, 550–563.Google Scholar
Catlow, R (2017) Peer reviewers need more nurturing. Nature 552, 293.Google Scholar
Chhinzer, N and Russo, AM (2018) An exploration of employer perceptions of graduate student employability. Education + Training 60, 104–120.Google Scholar
Golde, CM and Dore, TM (2001) At Cross Purposes: what the experiences of doctoral students reveal about doctoral education. The Pew Charitable Trusts, Philadelphia, PA. Available at: www.phd-survey.org (accessed 17 December 2017).Google Scholar
Hou, J, et al. (2014) Transformation of the education of health professionals in China: progress and challenges. The Lancet 384, 819–827.Google Scholar
Leming, JS (1977) Doctoral programs as preparation for what? The professional training perspective, p. 14 in Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April 1977, New York, USA.Google Scholar
Muir, MJ and Schwartz, MW (2009) Academic research training for a non-academic workplace: a case study of graduate student alumni who work in conservation. Conservation Biology 23, 1357–1368.Google Scholar
Pérez, HE (2005) What students can do to improve graduate education in conservation biology? Conservation Biology 19, 2033–2035.Google Scholar
Repinski, SL, et al. (2011) Plant breeding graduate education: opinions about critical knowledge, experience and skill requirements from public and private stakeholders worldwide. Crop Science 51, 2325–2336.Google Scholar
Rowan, L and Townend, G (2016) Early career teacher's beliefs about their preparedness to teach: implications for the professional development of teachers working with gifted and twice-exceptional students. Cogent Education 3, 1242458. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1242458.Google Scholar
TeKrony, DM (2006) Seeds: the delivery system for crop Science. Crop Science 46, 2263–2269.Google Scholar
Wiek, A, Withycombe, L and Redman, CL (2011) Key competencies in sustainability: a reference framework for academic program development. Sustainability Science 6, 203–218.Google Scholar