Background/Question/Methods Environmental problems are generally complex and blind to disciplinary boundaries. Solutions often require collaborative research that integrates knowledge across historically disparate fields. Yet the traditional model for training new scientists typically emphasizes personal independence and disciplinary focus. Increasing awareness of the limitations of the traditional model has spurred a re-examination of graduate training in the environmental sciences. Many institutions are implementing novel training approaches with varying degrees of success. In this analysis, our group of current and former doctoral students summarizes our experiences in one such program: the Biogeochemistry and Environmental Biocomplexity (BEB) Program at Cornell University, funded by an NSF Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship grant. We identify key aspects of the program that contributed to our integrative research training and discuss challenges that may often arise in such programs. We present results from two surveys of Cornell graduate students: (1) comparing the training opportunities available to BEB participants versus students in traditional programs, and (2), assessing how students perceive involvement in the BEB program has affected their education. Finally, we offer recommendations to students interested in facilitating cross-disciplinary interactions at their institutions. Our objective is to elucidate the benefits and challenges faced by integrative research training programs. Results/Conclusions According to survey results, students indicated that involvement in the BEB program has enhanced their scientific understanding and communication skills and has been a worthwhile addition to their graduate education. In addition, current BEB students feel that the program is increasing the opportunities and likelihood of collaborating with scientists outside of their field. Specifically, BEB participants are nearly twice as likely as non-BEB students to seek advice from faculty outside of their department, and they also rely more heavily on input from peers outside of their departments. The BEB program has also enriched the education of participants by providing access to training activities and material resources that are not offered within individual departments. We conclude that such programs can empower students to take ownership of their education, broaden their experience in the research and social components of science, and promote communication and collaboration among disciplines. Moreover, an integrative pedagogy need not require extending the duration of graduate study or sacrificing the depth of knowledge expected of graduates. Though challenges remain, our experiences suggest that integrative training approaches can prepare future researchers and educators to tackle complex environmental problems by encouraging interdisciplinary thinking and collaborations.