Reconceptualising post-PhD research pathways - A model to create new postdoctoral positions and improve the quality of postdoctoral training in Australia

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Blitz

Reconceptualising post-PhD research pathways proposes a linked, two-pronged strategy for Australian universities to strengthen research performance and postdoctoral training. The approach first redesigns post-PhD research pathways to enable mechanisms for creating new postdoctoral positions. Second, it develops a coherent programme of policies, processes, and practices in postdoctoral education and training. The expected outcome is improved success in attracting and retaining top postdoctoral researchers globally while enhancing research productivity and reducing brain drain.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages7

Reading Time18 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Developments in researcher training in the US and UK

Policy, processes, and practices in postdoctoral education

Implications for Australia: attracting, retaining, and mitigating brain drain

A U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W Reconceptualising postPhD research pathways A model to create new postdoctoral positions and improve the quality of postdoctoral training in Australia J Berman, S Juniper, T Pitman & C Thomson University of Western Australia Focusing on the developmental needs of early career postdoctoral fellows – the lifeblood of an internationally competitive researchintensive university–this paper suggests an inextricably linked, two pronged approach to improving research performance at Australian universities. The first is to reconceptualise post-PhD research pathways and in doing so conceive a mechanism for creating new postdoctoral positions; the second is to develop a coherent programme of policies, processes and practices in postdoctoral education and training. In this way, Australian universities will increase their success in attracting and retaining the brightest and best postdoctoral students from all over the world and thereby improve research performance. Introduction: developments in researcher training in the US and UK In 1998 the Graduate and Postdoctoral Education Committee of the Association of American Universities (AAU), recognising that postdoctoral students (‘postdocs’) have a crucial role in helping research intensive universities realise their full potential in research activity and accomplishments, made a series of recommendations for improving postdoctoral training (AAU, 2005). A key player in the drive for implementing the recommendations has been the National Postdoctoral Association (NPA, formed in 2003) which has 140 institutional members and represents over 40,000 postdocs. TheAAU and theNPA have been working to re-establish the postdoc as a trainee, in transition between postdoctoral training and permanent employment. The definition of postdoc, as recommended by the AAU, is‘a recent doctoral graduate, in a temporary position, engaged in full-time research under the supervision of a faculty member, in preparation for an academic career’(AAU, 2005). They assert that during the three to five-year training period, frequently referred to as a‘transition to independence’, postdocs should receive the advanced instruction needed to embark on a successful career. As a consequence of the AAU’s recommendations and NPA’s activities, more attention has been given to postdoctoral training by the National Academies, the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other government and nonprofit organisations. Indeed, in mid 2007 the US Congress approved a new provision on postdoctoral mentoring as part of a larger bill reauthorising the NSF. Developments in postdoctoral training in the US were echoed in the UK through the 1996 Research Careers Concordat between universities and funding agencies which agreed standards, expectations and responsibilities for the career management of researchers in universities on fixed term contracts. This initia- vol. 50, no. 2, 2008 Reconceptualising post-PhD research pathways, J Berman, S Juniper, T Pitman & C Thomson 71 A U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W tive was followed by the Roberts Report (2002) SET for Success, which focused on increasing the quantity and quality of science, engineering and technology experts as part of the Government’s Productivity and Innovation Strategy. The findings of the report led to the Government’s provision of‘Roberts money’, which included funding for generic skills training both for postgraduates and postdocs, the creation of up to 200 Research Council UK (RCUK) Academic Fellowships to provide better career paths into academic positions, and the establishment of the UK Higher Education Research Development Group (UKHERD), a national network of professionals charged with developing research staff in UK Higher Education under the auspices of RCUK. The RCUK is currently developing anew national researcher development progr

FAQs

What two-pronged approach does the paper recommend for Australian universities?

It recommends reconceptualising post-PhD research pathways to create new postdoctoral positions, alongside developing a coherent programme of policies, processes, and practices for postdoctoral education and training.

How does the paper describe the US approach to postdoctoral training?

It characterises the US model as predominantly bottom up, driven by the National Postdoctoral Association through university postdoctoral offices that work with the NPA to address postdoctoral issues.

Why does the paper argue Australia should respond to international developments?

It warns that failure to respond would accelerate brain drain and reduce Australia’s ability to attract and retain the brightest and best postdoctoral researchers worldwide.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Blitz