Presentation #102.04 in the session Community & Profession.
In 2021, NASA Astrophysics tasked a panel to carry out the first evaluation of the NASA Hubble Fellowship Program (NHFP), which has been successfully run for over thirty years. The final report, published in late 2021 resulted in 32 recommendations aimed at improving the NHFP. After the publication of the review an implementation taskforce was created to implement some of the recommendations and create an assessment and timeline. In the summer 2022, a community feedback questionnaire was conducted to gather community input on the prioritization of the report recommendations. Over 100 participants took the anonymous questionnaire. Here we present the methodology, analysis and results of the questionnaire and the follow up questionnaire, which we will circulate in the summer of 2023.
The original questionnaire was a combination of Likert scale and open-ended questions. Therefore, the analysis included both qualitative and quantitative analysis. The goals of this analysis were twofold. The first was to understand what recommendations the astrophysics community prioritized. The second was to understand if various groups of the community prioritized recommendations differently. We also analyzed differences in responses based on career stage and type of institution. Comparative analysis showed there are differences in how these groups prioritize recommendations. The qualitative data was analyzed to further investigate the reason behind people’s rankings. This stage of analysis was done through inductive coding, in which I identified main themes and patterns within the data. This data provided ideas for further research into how to implement the NHFP review board’s recommendations.
These ideas shape the questionnaire we plan to distribute the summer of 2023. The primary goals of this second questionnaire are to:
Get clarity on some of the recommendations from the first questionnaire.
Better understand what the community thinks the goals of the NHFP should be.
Hear from more early career (undergrads-early post-PhD grads), who were underrepresented in the first questionnaire.
With this second questionnaire we hope to shape the NHFP into a better fellowship for everyone.