This past week, I witnessed extraordinary resilience on the part of some early career students.
On the one hand, some early career students presented their work in front of a group of seasoned veterans.
While taking feedback on a paper that was a bit rough from faculty and students, they didn’t flinch or break - they simply absorbed the comments and learned.
On the other hand, an early career student made a procedural error resulting in a mess with a conference submission - they addressed the issue, independently contacted the program chair, and cleans the mess up.
While taking tough feedback on the error, they didn’t make excuses - they simply acknowledged the lesson learned & looked forward.
Why mention these moments?
Because it’s important for early career scholars to know that it’s not the mistakes that matter, it’s how you rebound from the mistakes.
Frankly, I didn’t handle my own mistakes with nearly the same aplomb nor did I show such resilience as an early career scholar.
So what did these students do well?
First, the team reached out for feedback & acknowledged they needed help.
They did so a little late - but took the feedback offered and pulled together a credible presentation.
The ability to ask for help and use it to improve is an essential attribute of a good scholar.
Second, the students made no excuses.
Too often, academics look back & place fault on others - this is a function of being trained to find the ‘right answers’ - I suspect.
It’s far more functional to ‘take the heat’ & get back to work.
Third, the students were forward looking.
None of them wasted too much time dwelling on the mistake. This does not mean they were unrepentant- this does mean they didn’t let needless worry handicap their ability to work.
It’s much easier to complete research if you can ‘shake it off’ & not get caught in a cycle of recriminations.
Fourth, the students showed initiative.
The students took the time to find solutions & didn’t waste time waiting for permission to problem-solve.
When they did ask for help, they had a pretty good idea about the problem & were quick to apply solutions - once everyone converged on solutions.
Finally, the students took time to engage in double loop learning.
When the challenge was resolved, they took time to explain what they learned & make clear mistakes would not happen again.
I have seen many senior faculty respond in much less mature ways to challenges & mistakes.
While some might be pessimistic about the future of academe and the work ethic of PhD students, I’m pretty convinced the upcoming cohort of students will do what it takes to succes & make the world better.
Comments