TABLE 1.

Example of pedagogical and supervisory practices observed in our work with new trainees (e.g. community college students) in R1 laboratories, the potential impact of these practices, and suggested inclusive practices.

Example of Observed Practice	Potential Impact	Inclusive Practice
Supervisory: The research mentor does not realize that the trainee is not familiar with the implied expectations of the laboratory or the research experiences, including those relating to the laboratory culture. For example, it is not clear to the trainee when and how they should report issues and mistakes, or ask questions.	The trainee fails to meet the mentor’s unstated expectations. For example, the trainee fails to report mistakes in a timely manner or the trainee asks too many questions. As a result, the mentor first assumes without sufficient evidence that the trainee is not capable of meeting their expectations.	The research mentor should not assume that the trainee is familiar with unstated laboratory expectations. Instead, the research mentor should make all expectations clear to the trainee at the beginning of their work together. They should first consider trainee errors as an indication that the trainee is unclear with expectations, and (re)state them to the trainee (see Table 2).
Educational: The research mentor does not realize that the trainee is not familiar with foundational science concepts related to the laboratory’s research. For example, the mentor bases their assumption of what the trainee must know on their educational background (courses completed, degrees obtained) or the trainee’s perception of familiarity with a topic.	The trainee fails to meet the mentor’s unstated performance expectations because the trainee doesn’t have the foundational knowledge required to understand higher-level concepts. The mentor further incorrectly assumes that the trainee is not capable of learning complex scientific concepts, and is therefore not able to meet the expectations of their laboratory or institution.	Regardless of previous experience or references, the mentor should confirm the trainee’s familiarity with concepts and abilities. The mentor should first make learning and performance expectations clear to the trainee and conduct a direct baseline assessment of trainees’ knowledge and skills.
Educational: The research mentor sets out to expose the trainee to multiple techniques in their first weeks in the laboratory and to explain numerous new scientific concepts. They provide the trainee with articles to read and invite them to laboratory meetings and scientific seminars. However, they neglect to set boundaries with learning outcomes or articulate which concepts/skills the trainee should prioritize understanding/developing first.	The lack of clearly articulated learning outcomes and priorities incorrectly shapes a trainee’s unrealistic and unfocused learning goals. This may impact the trainee’s ability to progress, and contribute to repeated mistakes and/or feelings of being overwhelmed. The mentor may view the trainee’s substandard performance or behavior as evidence that the trainee does not have the educational foundation, ability or drive to meet expectations.	The trainee’s failure to meet expectations should first prompt the research mentor to review if they have clearly set and prioritized learning outcomes. If not, the mentor should narrow in on a few key concepts and techniques to teach and assess during the course of the traineeship and clarify them to the trainee.