Meeting Abstract
Working Session
Successful scientists have learned to develop a career trajectory and professional identity around the intellectual merit of their research; the same is not ordinarily true for the broader impacts activities associated with externally funded research. Activities suggested as fulfillments for broader impacts (BI) in a federal grant proposal might focus on undergraduate research or teaching, graduate education, or outreach to K-12 classrooms; the latter may consist of school visits, or might outsource the task to existing university programs who provide relevant services. We offer an alternative concept of addressing BI, something we refer to as Broader Impacts Identity (BII). The concept was developed by co-author Julie Risien, and refers to the deliberate development of a signature program around BI, based on scientists’ own personal strengths and preferences, and the nature of the research portfolio that a scientist develops over time. The concept of a BII suggests that the evolution of BI activities associated with a scientist’s research portfolio does not have to be ad-hoc, but can follow a deliberate plan. We will present detailed arguments for the need of a BII, provide evidence from a study on the impact of a comprehensive science engagement training program on mostly emerging scientists, and present the outline of a self-assessment tool that helps individuals reflect on their own BII. The tool will be reflective rather than descriptive in nature. It guides scientists through a structured process of aligning personal strengths and interests with the affordances and limitations of their particular research, the research domain within which they conduct their research, and the broader societal significance of the research domain itself.
