Jefferson Science Associates, LLC Managing and Operating the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility

for the U.S. Department of Energy

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������&RQWLQXHG�RQ�QH[W�SDJH

FY2014 JSA Initiatives Fund Proposal Summary Sheet

Proposal title

New proposal Renewal If renewal, prior year(s) and award amount(s)

Total funds requested Total leveraged support / Matching funds

Leveraged support / matching resources:�&RPSOHWH�LI�DSSOLFDEOH� Identify the source and amount of support. For in-kind support, provide estimate of value.Your Identification of the authorized representative who has committed institutional support for your proposal represents the acknowledgement of that�LQGLYLGXDO�No signature required. Add additional pages if necessary.

(1) Name of institution

Amount / estimate of support

Authorized representative

Email / phone number

(2) Name of institution

Amount / estimate of support

Authorized representative

Email / phone number

Principal Investigator (PI)

Institutional affiliation

Address�(PDLO�3KRQH��

Co-PI �LI�DSSOLFDEOH�

Institutional affiliation

Address�(PDLO�3KRQH��

Check one category: If PI is a Lab employee, your identification of the appropriate Associate Director below represents the acknowledgement of that AD with your submittal of proposal. No signature required.

Lab employee If Lab employee, Associate director (email / phone)

Lab user If Lab user, University affiliation

Other If Other, Institutional affiliation

Executive summary �DGG�DGGLWLRQDO�SDJHV�LI�QHFHVVDU\� �3roject Start Date (mm/yy)���������������������� Project End date (mm/yy)

�

��

Proposals may include letters of endorsement and other supporting information.

Proposal page limit (including Summary sheet and Budget proposal): 10 pages.

Jefferson Science Associates Promising Young Scientist Program

2010: $2000; 2011: $4480, 2012: $2000, 2013: $1080

$4260 $1200 + 120 person-hours

College of William & Mary

See budget justification in proposal narrative.

Wouter Deconinck

wdconinc@jlab.org, 757-221-3539

See full institution list in the proposal narrative following this summary sheet.

Wouter Deconinck

College of William & Mary

P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, VA 23187wdconinc@jlab.org, 757-221-3539

See full author list in the proposal narrative following this summary sheet.

College of William & Mary

06/14 05/15

See relevant section in the proposal narrative following this summary sheet.

Jefferson Science Associates, LLC Managing and Operating the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility

for the U.S. Department of Energy

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

FY2014 JSA Initiatives Fund Proposal Summary Sheet

Proposal title

�

Principal Investigator (PI) �

�����������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������6\QRSVLV�RI�VFLHQWLILF��HGXFDWLRQDO��WHFKQLFDO��DQG�RU�EXVLQHVV�PHULWV��DQG�DOLJQPHQW�ZLWK�DQG�VLJQLILFDQFH�WR�/DE¶V�FXUUHQW�SURJUDPV������������������������������

������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������������3URSRVHG�HYDOXDWLRQ�SODQ�WR�PHDVXUH�VXFFHVV��,I�WKLV�LV�D�UHTXHVW�IRU�UHQHZDO�RI�IXQGV��DVVHVVPHQW�RI�SULRU�\HDU�SHUIRUPDQFH���

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

Jefferson Science Associates Promising Young Scientist Program

Wouter Deconinck (College of William & Mary)

See relevant section in the proposal narrative following this summary sheet.

See relevant section in the proposal narrative following this summary sheet.

(continued)

Complete Budget Proposal on next page.

Proposals may include letters of endorsement and other supporting information.

JSA Admin Form 507

Rev. 1�/13

Item Description Amount

Subtotal Equipment

Subtotal Travel

Supplies

Subtotal Supplies

Consultants/Subcontracts

Subtotal Consultants/Subcontracts

Subtotal Other Expenses

Total Budget Proposal

Budget Justification

Jefferson Science Associates, LLC

Managing and Operating the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility

for the U.S. Department of Energy

Associate Director:

FY2014 JSA Initiatives Fund Budget Proposal

Equipment. Lab users submitting proposals that include equipment to be used at the Lab must review with the appropriate Lab

Associate Director. The provision of the name of the AD below represents the AD's acknowledgement. No signature required.

Travel Support. Provide break-out of estimates for registration fees, lodging and transportation, catering, and facility charges (room

rentals, AV equipment; etc.)

Other Expenses. Examples include stipends and honoraria, prizes, awards. The JSA Initiatives Fund Program does not support

salaries and salary-related expenses, or indirect expenses. Describe other expenses below.

$0

Transportation to host institution (air fare, local transit) for 6 participants 1800

Lodging at host institution for 6 participants and for 3 seminar speakers 1350

Modest per-diem for 6 participants and for 3 seminar speakers 270

3420

Catering of refreshments for audience for 6 participants 480

Dinner with seminar speaker and guests for 3 seminar speakers 360

840

$0

$0

4260

See relevant section in the proposal narrative following this summary sheet.

Je�erson Science Associates

Promising Young Scientist Program

W. Deconinck (PI)1, E. Brash2, D. Dutta3, J. Mammei4, D. McNulty5, K. Slifer6, andP. Solvignon7

1College of William & Mary, P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, VA 23187;wdconinc@jlab.org, 757-221-3539

2Christopher Newport University, Department of Physics, Computer Science &Engineering, 1 Avenue of the Arts, Newport News, VA 23606;

brash@jlab.org, 757-594-74513Mississippi State University, P.O. Box 5167, Mississippi State, MS 39762;

ddutta@jlab.org, 662-325-31054University of Manitoba, Department of Physics, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2, Canada;

crowder@jlab.org, 204-474-61955Idaho State University, Department of Physics, Campus Box 8106, Pocatello, ID 83209;

mcnulty@jlab.org, 208-282-49016University of New Hampshire, Department of Physics, 9 Library Way, Durham, NH 03824;

karl.slifer@unh.edu, 603-722-06957University of New Hampshire, Department of Physics, 9 Library Way, Durham, NH 03824;

patricia.solvignon@unh.edu, 603-862-1962& Je�erson Lab, Suite 6, MS 12H4, 12000 Je�erson Avenue, Newport News, VA 23606;

solvigno@jlab.org, 757-269-6933

Funding Cycle: 06/01/2014 to 05/31/2015Funding Request: $4260

Executive Summary

For the past �ve years, the Promising Young Scientist program has been supporting thecareer development of postdoctoral researchers a�liated with Je�erson Lab. We aim to improvethe odds of our young researchers to obtain tenure-track faculty positions in academia andsta� scientist positions at national laboratories by providing the participants with feedback onapplication materials, by giving them valuable interviewing opportunities and by improvingtheir colloquium presentation skills. In the long term this program will help to re-invigorate thetradition of the general audience accessible colloquium which is crucial to ensure that nuclearphysics retains funding and support from the larger community.

This proposal is a continuation of the successful program started in 2009/2010. The pro-gram covers the expenses for colloquia given by postdoctoral researchers at participating hostinstitutions (with matching �nancial and in-kind contributions by the host institutions). Half ofthe past participants in this program have secured employment beyond the postdoctoral level.

4

1 Synopsis

The colloquium plays a central role in ensuring that the developments of nuclear physics are sharedwith the broader research community and the general public. It is the primary means that we haveto communicate our science with our non-nuclear colleagues in academic institutions and at nationalfunding agencies. E�ective colloquia can convey the excitement of new results, increase the odds ofrecruiting top students to the �eld, and ensure that the public has a clear understanding of whatis being accomplished with public research funding. Unfortunately, many researchers fail to craftaccessible colloquia, and alienate general audiences by presenting talks more akin to seminars forspecialists. In particular, this is not a skill that graduate students and postdoctoral researcher havehad many opportunities to develop.

The Promising Young Scientist1 program assists junior nuclear physicists in crafting accessiblecolloquium talks. This has the immediate bene�t of increasing the candidate's chances of securingpermanent employment due to the central role the colloquium plays in most hiring processes. Italso has the long term bene�t of improving the nuclear physics community's ability to communicateour exciting physics to the general public.

In addition to providing opportunities and feedback to postdoctoral researchers in crafting ap-pealing colloquium talks, we give extensive feedback on their application materials: a cover letter,curriculum vitae, list of publications, research and teaching statements, and a colloquium abstract.Postdoctoral researchers rarely gain experience in writing compelling research proposals and researchstatements, and frequently need to focus their documents away from past research and towards fu-ture projects. Teaching statements, which are becoming more important in a cut-throat job market,often need signi�cant rewriting to include recent evolution in teaching pedagogies away from purelylecture-based instruction. The colloquium abstract, often written based on a seminar abstract, isoften still �lled with Je�erson Lab jargon.

As part of the past two proposals we have repeatedly attempted to organize an academic jobseminar series at Je�erson Lab. The aim of this series is to improve the job interview skills of ourpostdoctoral researchers, while preparing them for a career with an increased focus on teaching, onmentoring of undergraduate students, and on securing research funding. We have had relativelylittle success with this component of the program due to the reduced presence of postdoctoralresearchers during the 12GeV upgrade/shutdown. During the funding cycle of this proposal weanticipate an increase in postdoctoral researchers at Je�erson Lab, and we plan to organize a seriesof three seminars in the early fall of 2014.

1.1 Job Interviews and Colloquia at Host Institutions

During the application process for this program applicants submit a dossier of documents commonlyrequested for academic faculty or sta� scientist positions: a cover letter, a curriculum vitae, a listof publications, research and teaching statements, and a colloquium abstract. All applicants receiveindividual feedback from the members of the selection committee on the materials they submit.Although the call for applications is phrased as a competition to motivate high-quality submissions,it is our intention to accept all applicants within the constraints of the budget. With an average of�ve applications received per year, this has always been possible until now. If we receive 7 or more

1Earlier proposals referred to the program as �Promising Young Physicist.� To demonstrate our openness to any

postdoctoral researcher in the natural sciences a�liated with Je�erson Lab we have been using the name �Promising

Young Scientist� for the past several years.

5

applicants, then we will need to select the applicants for whom the Promising Young Scientist willprovide the most immediate bene�ts, while strongly encouraging other applicants to apply in thenext year. While the process of giving feedback on a colloquium talk is time-consuming, we wouldrather not have more than one participant per host institution per year.

Selected participants are invited to one of the host institutions where they meet for one-on-one interviews with faculty and the department chair. Visits culminate in the presentation of acolloquium to a general audience including undergraduate students, graduate students, and facultymembers outside of nuclear physics. The speaker is expected to craft a talk which will be accessibleto this broad audience, and is provided guidance and feedback by her/his host in the weeks leading upto the visit. Depending on the candidate's career goal and preferred institution type, the candidatemay deliver in addition either a seminar for specialists, or a teaching demonstration on a topicof their choice. At Mississippi State University, for example, job interviews typically include theteaching of an introductory physics class.

Audience members are provided with an anonymous questionnaire through which they provideconstructive criticism of the colloquium. At the conclusion of the visit, the candidate is providedwith an aggregated summary of the audience response along with comments solicited from the one-on-one interviews. This feedback provides guidance on which aspects of their presentations andinterviews went well, and which elements should be improved. Ultimately, this process providesparticipants with an advantage when competing for permanent positions, and helps ensure thatthey will e�ectively communicate their nuclear physics research to general audiences.

Several past participants have by now secured tenure-track positions, one past participant isassistant project scientist in radiological sciences, and one past participant is visiting assistantprofessor (see table 1). In appendix A.1 an article from Je�erson Lab's OnTarget newsletter isreproduced. It includes interviews with past participants in the program.

1.2 Academic Job Seminar Series at Je�erson Lab

In the approved Promising Young Scientist proposal submitted in August 2011, we introduced anacademic job seminar series at Je�erson Lab. Inside and outside speakers are invited to discuss jobskills relevant to the academic employment chances of our postdoctoral researchers. Through theseseminars participants have an opportunity to polish their resume and curriculum vitae, acquire jobinterview and public speaking skills, improve their scienti�c writing, �nd out about research fundingcycles and grant proposal guidelines, and learn about teaching techniques and trends. Participantswho are selected to give a colloquium at one of the host institutions in section 1.1 will be invitedto discuss their experiences in the job seminar series, in particular after the candidate successfullysecures employment.

After the August 2011 proposal was approved in December 2011, the last months of the 6-GeV eraprecluded a large enough audience before the summer. The subsequent 12GeV upgrade/shutdownsu�ered from the same problem. As we gear up for intensive installation and start of operations,we anticipate an improved situation. The �rst of these job seminars will therefore take place atJe�erson Lab the �rst week of September 2014. Possible speakers include Ed Brash (CNU), GailDodge (ODU and NSF), Juliette Mammei (UofM), and Wouter Deconinck (W&M).

6

2 Participating Institutions

Since the �rst run of this program in 2010, the number of participating host institutions has steadilyincreased. This allows us to accept more applicants into the program, and to host them at the type ofinstitution in line with their interest. The original host institutions, Christopher Newport University(E. Brash) and the University of New Hampshire (M. Holtrop, K. Slifer), were joined in early 2011by the College of William & Mary (W. Deconinck), later by Mississippi State University (D. Dutta)and Idaho State University (D. McNulty), and in 2012 by the University of Manitoba (J. Mammei,a former participant in the program). Je�erson Lab itself also participates (P. Solvignon).

Due to the frequent stationing of postdoctoral researchers at Je�erson Lab, a local presenceis a bene�t during the preparation of the colloquia (for practice talks, and in-person review andfeedback on application materials). The proximity of several of the participating institutions aidssigni�cantly with this.

3 Program Evaluation and Past Performance

At the start of this program in the spring of 2010, we established application criteria, the structureof visits, a method for feedback to be provided to the applicant, and a method for the applicantto provide feedback on the program. Through a website (http://www.jlab.org/user_resources/usergroup/JSA_grant.html) we promote the program and attract applicants. We invite applica-tions to the program in the spring with several postings to the JLab CUGA mailing lists. Theselection process during the summer allows enough time to schedule the colloquia during the fallsemester, and allows for applicants to receive feedback in time for the job application season in thefall.

In the fall semester of 2013 and spring of 2014 we have hosted three of the four participantsselected during the summer of 2013:

• Elena Long (University of New Hampshire), invited to University of Manitoba (host: JulietteMammei), �Building the Bridge Between Partons and Nuclei�

• Mehdi Meziane (Duke University), invited to Idaho State University (host: Dustin McNulty),�The size of the proton�

• Peter Monaghan (Hampton University), invited to University of New Hampshire (host: KarlSlifer), �Searching for Heavy Photons with TREK�

• Christopher Monahan (William & Mary), invited to Mississippi State University (host: Di-pangkar Dutta), �Hunting for new physics with lattice quantum chromodynamics�

• Kei Moriya (Indiana University), invited to William & Mary (host: Wouter Deconinck),�Hadronic Spectroscopy and What We Can Learn About QCD from GlueX�

• David Wilson (Je�erson Lab), invited to Christopher Newport University (host: Ed Brash),�QCD strong coupling regime�

For a complete list of past participants, see table 1.

2As referred to in Appendix A.1, John Leckey was originally scheduled to present a colloquium at Christopher

Newport University, but this was rescheduled to the University of Manitoba to avoid interference with an actual

faculty search at Christopher Newport University.

7

Table 1: Overview of participants in the Promising Young Scientist program. The participant'sinstitution at the time of selection (�Home�), and the host institution (�Host�) are listed, along withthe participant's current a�liation.

Year Participant Home Host Subsequent Position and A�liation

2010 Huey-Wen Lin JLab UNH Research Asst. Prof. at U. of WashingtonGuy Ron LBNL UNH Sr. Lecturer at Hebrew U., JerusalemRobert Bennett ODU UNH Adj. Asst. Prof. at Old Dominion UniversityKijun Park JLab W&M Postdoc at Je�erson Lab

2011 Juliette Mammei UMass W&M Asst. Prof. at U. of ManitobaJean-Francois Rajotte MIT MSU Postdoc at McGill UniversityDru Renner JLab CNU Postdoc at Los Alamos National LabBo Zhao W&M ISU Asst. Project Scientist at U.C. Irvine

2012 Pedro Jimenez-Delgado JLab ISUNarbe Kalantarians Hampton UNHJohn Leckey2 Indiana UofMSeamus Riordan UMass MSUVince Sulkosky MIT W&M Visit. Asst. Prof. at Longwood University

2013 Elena Long UNH UofMMehdi Meziane Duke ISUPeter Monaghan Hampton UNHChristopher Monahan W&M MSUKey Moriya Indiana W&MDavid Wilson JLab CNU

As mentioned in section 1.1, the interviewers and colloquium audience provide feedback to theparticipants. In appendices A.2 and A.3 we provide a sample of this feedback. As we strive to im-prove this program, we solicit comments from the participants on their experiences. In appendix A.4we provide a sample of this feedback.

Based on feedback received from participants in the program, we have shifted the applicationdeadline from the Users Group Meeting to later in the summer (closer to the actual job applicationdeadlines). In the upcoming year we will be working to develop and collect online resources forapplicants: we anticipate using the User Group wiki to collect useful guidelines for applicationmaterials, along with sample application dossiers.

4 Budget Justi�cation

The expenses for each visit include $300 for transportation (airfare and local transit); $150 forlodging (average of 1 and 2 night stay); a modest per-diem of $30 for the participants to covertravel expenses; and $80 for catering of refreshments for the colloquium audience. The host in-stitution contributes �nancial matching funds of: $80 for lunch for the candidate and 3 guests,and $120 for dinner for the candidate and 3 guests. The host institution provides in-kind supportof approximately 7 person-hours per applicant of time spent with institution representatives dur-ing the mock interview process (faculty members, chair of the department, representative of thedean or administration); approximately 10 person-hours per applicant for constructive feedbackand comments on the applicants application materials and colloquium presentation; approximately

8

3 person-hours of local administrative logistical assistance (setting up travel and lodging, organizingthe purchase of colloquium refreshments, establishing the candidate's visit schedule, and advertisingthe colloquium).

The total cost per visit of each candidate is estimated at $760, of which the host institutionabsorbs $200 of mostly food-related expenses. We request support for 6 postdoctoral visits over aone-year period to be split among the participating institutions. The number of recipients re�ectsthe number of postdoctoral visits per year that have been supported in the past. This adds up to$3360 for the period from June 1, 2014, until May 31, 2015.

Several of the participants to the program are stationed permanently at Je�erson Lab. In theprevious years, only one of the three participating institutions was located far enough to requiresigni�cant use of the budgeted expenses. In the next year we expect this to occur less because ofthe additional institutions in other states. In particular the addition of the University of Manitobaas a host institution, with higher travel expenses, will o�set the reduced need for travel expenses tolocal institutions.

For external job seminar series at Je�erson Lab we anticipate taking advantage of the existingtravel schedules of the speakers. We propose to cover lodging at $150 (average of 1 and 2 nightstay); a modest per-diem of $30; and $120 for dinner for the seminar speaker and 3 guests. The totalcost per visit of each seminar speaker is estimated at $300. We request support for 3 job-seminarspeaker visits. This adds up to $900 for the funding period from June 1, 2014, until May 31, 2015.

This Initiatives Fund project currently (December 2013) has a small balance of approximately$3,000. These funds will be spent during the spring of 2014 on the travel to host institutions forthree participants of the FY2013 program.

In summary, we request a total of $3360 + $900 = $4260 for the funding period from June 1,2014, until May 31, 2015. Each of the six participating host institutions will contribute a matchingcontribution of $200 in addition to 20 person-hours of in-kind support.

9

A Supporting Materials

A.1 JLab OnTarget Newsletter, Deborah Magaldi (August 1, 2012)

Program Helps Young Scientists Prep for Academic Job Market

Source: http://wwwold.jlab.org/news/OnTarget/2012/2012-07/index.htmlThe academic job market is very competitive and applying for a faculty position requires a

range of skills that many young scientists haven't explicitly been trained in, such as grant writing,management, and public communication and interview skills. Now, a program supported by theJSA Initiatives Fund is helping these young researchers work on the skills crucial for a successfuljob search.

The JSA Promising Young Scientist program helps postdoctoral researchers develop and �ne-tune a range of skills necessary for succeeding in the tight academic job market, according to WouterDeconinck, assistant professor of Physics at the College of William &Mary and principal investigatorof the program.

�The program helps our junior nuclear physicists work on their public speaking, communicationand job interview skills as well as with preparing application materials such as their resume, CV(or Curriculum Vitae), a teaching statement and a research statement, and crafting and deliveringa colloquium,� Deconinck notes.

�Crafting and presenting an accessible colloquium-level talk,� he points out, �is likely the mostimportant aspect of the academic job interview process. This program provides the participantswith guidance and feedback so they can successfully develop, organize and deliver an outstandingcolloquium.�

The postdoctoral fellows selected for the Promising Young Scientist program get feedback andguidance from the program's committee on their application packages and their colloquium presen-tations. Each individual goes through a �mock� interview at one of the participating institutions,which includes giving his or her colloquium.

�Our primary goal is to improve the young scientists' odds of getting permanent faculty andsta� positions,� Deconinck emphasizes, �and in the process, we hope to re-invigorate the traditionof the colloquium geared to a general audience, which will help improve the understanding of andappreciation for nuclear physics research.�

He maintains, �This public accessibility is crucial to ensure that nuclear physics retains fundingand support from the larger community.

�We just �nished this year's selection, and we have selected �ve promising young scientists whowill each be invited to a university,� Deconinck said on behalf of the selection committee. Thoseselected will give a colloquium in the coming fall or early spring of 2013.

• John Leckey, a postdoc at Indiana University, working on the Gluonic Excitations Experi-ment, or GlueX, in Hall D, has been invited to present a colloquium at Christopher NewportUniversity.

• Seamus Riordan, a postdoc at the University of Massachusetts, working on parity violationand nuclear structure experiments in Hall A, has been invited to present a colloquium atMississippi State University.

• Pedro Jimenez-Delgado, a postdoc at Je�erson Lab, working on parton distribution functionsin the Theory and Computational Physics group, has been invited to present a colloquium at

10

Idaho State University.

• Narbe Kalantarians, a postdoc at Hampton University, working on the Super High MomentumSpectrometer drift chambers for Hall C and the DarkLight experiment in the Free-ElectronLaser facility, has been invited to present a colloquium at the University of New Hampshire.

• Vince Sulkosky, a postdoc at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, working on short-rangecorrelation experiments in Hall A, has been invited to present a colloquium at the College ofWilliam & Mary.

�I think we provide a great service to our postdocs, and they are grateful for the opportunity topractice skills that you otherwise only use when you are in a real job-search situation,� Deconincksaid. �Previous participants have said that this experience helped them tremendously in their �rstjob interviews!�

Jean-Francois Rajotte, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, participated during the 2011-12academic year. Afterward, he said, �I feel lucky to have been selected for the JSA Promising YoungScientist program. I don't see how else I could have learned about the faculty application processin such a concrete way. I am thankful to the physics department of Mississippi State University,especially professors Dipangkar Dutta and Gautam Rupak who welcomed and guided me for threedays on their campus. Several professors spent time with me discussing their research and their lifeas faculty members. In addition to the colloquium, I also gave a lecture at the undergraduate level,another useful experience that does not come often to a postdoc.�

�This program not only o�ers valuable entries for my CV, it is also informative about the life ofa professor and reveals a `behind the scenes' look at a faculty position interview,� Rajotte added.�I recommend everyone who is considering an academic career to apply for the program.�

Another participant from last cycle, Juliette Mammei, also had very positive comments aboutthe program.

�I have only been a postdoc for two years, but people told me to `Apply early and often' so Idecided to apply for several tenure-track faculty positions at universities that I felt would be a goodmatch for me,� she said. �I also applied for the JSA Promising Young Scientist program, and wasvery happy to be accepted.�

�Before I even gave my colloquium,� she continued, �I had already received valuable feedback onmy research plan and teaching statement, which were part of the application for the program. I wasinvited to give a colloquium at William and Mary. Afterward, some of the audience members gaveme constructive criticism; they were very encouraging and helpful. In addition to getting feedbackabout the colloquium, the department also conducted a `mock' interview, with visits to variousfaculty members as well as an interview portion with faculty who had volunteered to serve as a`search committee'. The whole experience gave me con�dence by letting me know what to expectduring my subsequent interviews.�

�I went for my �rst real interview a week after I gave the colloquium at William and Mary,�Mammei said. �A month after the JSA Promising Young Scientist mock interview and practicecolloquium, I went for an interview at the University of Manitoba, and am proud to say that I willbe starting there as an assistant professor this fall.�

11

A.2 Examples of Open-Ended Feedback from Interviewers

Interviewer 1: As a non-expert in nuclear physics, I wanted to learn about the �big-picture�in this �eld during my meeting with [candidate]. My impression is that [candidate] was neitherclear nor convincing about the current status/understanding of the composition of nucleons fromthe experimental viewpoint. [Applicant] often referred to models and theory but less to what hasbeen learnt/proven from experiment.

Interviewer 2: I think [candidate] is quite ready for real job interview. I was impressed with howfreely [candidate] was able to discuss long-range plans for nuclear physics and a possible rolein it, [candidate] also seem to plan possible funding opportunities. I'd recommend [candidate]to be better prepared to discuss teaching philosophy, plans for student/postdoc involvement andmentoring.

A.3 Examples of Feedback from Colloquium Audience Members

The following questions are used to gain feedback from the colloquium audience members. Allquestions use a Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), and include room forwritten comments. The candidate is provided with the average/median and spread on the resultsand the typed comments.

1. The presentation was at an appropriate level for a colloquium.2. There was an appropriate amount of material covered in the talk.3. The subject matter was interesting.4. The speaker's delivery was clear an understandable.5. The speaker demonstrated mastery of the subject matter.6. The speaker answered audience questions e�ectively.7. Overall I enjoyed this colloquium.

Audience member 1: I have an overall positive impression of his talk, although there are areasin which he could improve, for example, spending more time on explaining graphs, symbols andquantities on the axes especially in a colloquium for non-experts.

Audience member 2: The introduction was nice, although a bit more background on parity andparity-violation would help. Immediately after the intro the speaker jumped to very technicaltalk, with lots of jargon and technical terms, almost impossible for non-experts to follow.

A.4 Examples of Feedback from Program Participants

The following questions are used to gain feedback from the participants in the program. The �rstsix questions use a Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree); the last question isopen-ended.

1. This experience gave me a better understanding of the goals of a colloquium.2. This experience will help me to craft better colloquia in the future.3. I found the scheduled meetings with faculty/administration useful.4. I found the audience feedback data to be useful.5. I found the interview feedback data to be useful.6. I believe this experience will improve my chance at permanent employment.7. Please discuss any valuable `lessons learned' from this experience.

12

8. Please provide comments on how to improve the program.

Candidate 1: As a lesson, now I understand what will be asked and how I should be preparedduring the man-to-man interview. [. . . ] It is useful to have this feedback, especially negativefeedback, because there I can make an improvement.

Candidate 2: I really appreciated the opportunity to have a dry run at an interview without theinterview pressure. This is a fantastic program.

13