Helen Jäckel: Jülich, Melbourne, Münster: A path into Science Management

Psychologist Dr Helen Jäckel completed her PhD at the Forschungszentrum Jülich, spent a year conducting research in Melbourne, Australia, during that time, and now works in postgraduate support at the University of Münster. In this interview, she talks about her journey from research to academic administration and her current role there.

Ms Jäckel, you completed your PhD at the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at Forschungszentrum Jülich – and during that time you went to Melbourne for a one-year research placement. Was this planned from the outset?

The position was set up as a binational PhD within the “Jülich-University of Melbourne Postgraduate Academy (JUMPA)” programme – a collaboration between the University of Melbourne and Forschungszentrum Jülich. The research stay in Melbourne was therefore planned from the outset. After spending about a year in the Research Centre’s very well-equipped EEG laboratory investigating how the detection of errors is reflected in brain activity and how this error processing changes over the lifespan, I went to Melbourne in 2019. The main driving force behind this was to gain a better understanding of a specific method for analysing electroencephalography data – EEG for short – for which my supervisor there had developed his own programme. Beyond that, it was of course also about engaging with his team and getting to know the research scene in Melbourne. Although the programme was still in its early stages, I was one of the pioneers of these exchanges and had to fight my way through a few hurdles. At the same time, however, I received a great deal of support, as my supervisor at the research centre and my doctoral supervisor at the University of Cologne were very committed to JUMPA.

At the same time as me, a PhD student based in Melbourne started his placement here in Jülich for a year – effectively as my counterpart. We were actually supposed to work in each other’s institutes at the same time. However, things got a bit mixed up, so we ended up at the same location at times. Contrary to the original plan, this meant we were able to work together in person rather than just online, which proved to be a great benefit.

What did you take away from your time in Australia?

I’d already been to Australia during my undergraduate studies, so the prospect of another stint abroad as part of my PhD really appealed to me. Melbourne is a great city where I felt very much at home. I found it particularly exciting to experience a different research culture. In Melbourne, the PhD programme had a more student-oriented feel to it: there were five or six of us PhD students crammed into a rather small office – quite different from Jülich. But this led to a great exchange within the team, from which I learnt a lot. Beyond that, there were plenty of opportunities for networking, such as at informal PhD meetings or department talks. These events often had a pleasant, relaxed atmosphere – and in Melbourne, good food is simply part of the deal.

Were there any difficult situations in Australia?

There certainly were, because six months in, the COVID-19 pandemic hit, along with the lockdown. This obviously had a huge impact on my time abroad – although I have to say that, on the whole, I got through this period quite well, not least thanks to some close local friendships. As I’d already spent a lot of time travelling in the months leading up to it, I was personally able to take the restrictions a bit more in my stride. When the lockdown came – which was much stricter in Melbourne than in Germany – I bought a camping table and continued my research at my makeshift workspace at home. Fortunately, I’d already got to know my fellow PhD students in person beforehand, so it was easier to stay in touch digitally. I was already in regular online contact with my supervisor at the research centre, so I was able to continue my PhD without any major interruptions. Nevertheless, I naturally noticed how much I missed face-to-face meetings – and in the end, I found myself looking forward to going home again.

What happened next for you once you were back in Germany?

As Germany was still in lockdown at the time, I also did a lot of work from home. This period was particularly shaped by my involvement in the PhD student representative body ‘DocTeam’. Among other things, we campaigned for good working conditions and the mental health of PhD students. Although DocTeam has no voting rights, it is represented on important committees such as the Scientific and Technical Council. After a colleague from the institute took me along to a meeting, I was swept up by the dedication and enthusiasm of the others and eventually served as DocTeam’s spokesperson for a year. I have very fond memories of that time: it definitely provided important impetus for my future career path.

Where did your career take you after you completed your PhD?

After a long journey, I applied for various positions in research management in the Cologne area and eventually chose the Graduate Centre at Cologne University of Applied Sciences. Working at a university of applied sciences has opened up entirely new perspectives for me, as my educational background had previously been exclusively at universities. Many structures – including the Graduate Centre – were still being established. At the same time, there was a lot of activity, for example through the NRW Doctoral College, which supports doctoral studies at universities of applied sciences. As the team was very small and the areas of responsibility were broad, I was able to gain a wide range of experience during this exciting phase and develop my own areas of focus.

How did it come about that you’re now working in Münster?

The reasons for moving to Münster were personal: I’m from the area and wanted to return there with my partner. When looking for a job, I initially ended up at the University’s Eye Clinic: a research management role that focused on research support services. Although I found it exciting to get a bit closer to research again, I realised that my particular interest still lies in providing postgraduate support. So it was a happy coincidence that a former colleague from Cologne told me about my current role, which I started after taking a break for family reasons.

The move has gone well: you have been working at the University of Münster’s Graduate Centre since November 2025.

When I saw the job advert, I knew straight away: it’s a perfect fit for my profile – I simply have to give it a go! What’s more, there are two little huts in front of the castle in Münster, and every time I walked past them on the promenade, I thought how lovely it would be to work there one day. And that’s exactly where I’m sitting now! As a few of the conditions didn’t seem ideal to me, I didn’t get my hopes up too much at first. But it was a really friendly and professional interview; I was able to start with a slightly reduced number of hours and have since increased them further.

What exactly are you working on?

I work at the Münster Centre for Emerging Researchers (CERes) on a project-based role: a major project from England called the ‘Next Generation Research SuperVision Project’, in which we are involved as a practice partner. The aim is to further promote high-quality PhD supervision. In England, for example, compulsory induction courses for new supervisors are already widespread, whereas in Germany it is often simply expected that professors can do this – even though they have never learnt how. The project has developed various scientifically grounded resources for professors on the topic of PhD supervision. We are selecting a few of these and piloting them – our feedback will then be incorporated into the further development of the resources within the project. At the same time, we would like to engage in dialogue at the University of Münster on the topic of ‘good supervision’ – and, together with the infrastructure divisions and supervisors themselves, identify what needs exist. For example, there appears to be considerable interest in sharing experiences from supervisory practice and learning from one another.