scholarly journals Perspectives on Historically Marginalized Doctoral Students in the United States and South Africa

10.28945/4210 ◽  
2019 ◽  

[This Proceedings paper was revised and published in the 2019 issue of the International Journal of Doctoral Studies, Volume 14] Aim/Purpose: This work expands discussions on the application of cultural frameworks on research in doctoral education in the United States and South Africa. There is an emphasis on identifying and reinterpreting the doctoral process where racial and cultural aspects have been marginalized by way of legacies of exclusions in both contexts. An underlying premise of this work is to support representation of marginalized students within the context of higher education internationalization. Background: Decades of reporting provide evidence of statistical portraits on degree attainment. Yet, some large-scale reporting does not include representation of historically marginalized groups until the 1970’s in the United States, and the 2000’s for South Africa. With the growth of internationalization in higher education, examination of the impact of marginalization serves to support representation of diversity-focused discussions in the development of regional international education organizations, multilateral networks, and cross-collaborative teaching and research projects. Methodology: Qualitative research synthesis of literature focused on a dimensional framework of diversity provides a basis for this discussion paper regarding the potential of Sankofa as a cultural framework for examining the historically marginalized doctoral experience in the United States and South Africa. Contribution: A major contribution of this work offers critical questions on the use of cultural frameworks in doctoral education in the US and South Africa and broader dynamics of higher education internationalization. Findings: Sankofa reveals critical insight for reinterpretation of the doctoral process through comparison of perspectives on the historically marginalized doctoral experience in the United States and South Africa. They include consideration of the social developments leading to the current predicament of marginalization for students; awareness of the different reporting strategies of data; implementation of cultural frameworks to broaden the focus on how to understand student experiences; and, an understanding of the differences in student-faculty relationships. Recommendations for Practitioners: Recommendations for practitioners highlight the application of cultural frameworks in the development and implementation of practical strategies in the support of historically marginalized doctoral students. Recommendations for Researchers: Recommendations for researchers consider the application of cultural frameworks in the development of scholarship supporting historically marginalized doctoral students within a global context. Impact on Society: Intended outcomes for this work include increasing awareness about historically marginalized doctoral students. Recommendations are focused on improving their academic and career experiences in the United States and South Africa with global implications for this student population. Future Research: Future research should consider the application of cultural frameworks when examining the historically marginalized doctoral experience within global, national, and local contexts.

10.28945/4463 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 783-801
Author(s):  
Pamela Felder

Aim/Purpose: This work contributes to the expansion of dialogue on doctoral education research in the United States, South Africa, and within the context of higher education internationalization. There is an emphasis on identifying and reinterpreting the doctoral process where racial and cultural aspects have been marginalized by way of institutional and systemic exclusion. An underlying premise is to support representation of marginalized doctoral student experiences to raise questions about participation and contributions within the dialogue on doctoral education research and practice. Background: Decades of reporting provide evidence of statistical portraits on degree at-tainment. Yet, some large-scale reporting does not include representation of historically marginalized doctoral students until the 1970s in the United States, and the 2000s for South Africa. With the growth of internationalization in higher education, examination of the impact of marginalization serves to support representation of diversity-focused discussions in the development of regional international education organizations, multilateral networks, and cross-collaborative teaching and research projects. Methodology: The philosophical approach for this conceptual paper embraces the Sankofa tradition as a process of going back to previous trends in literature on doctoral degree completion to identify opportunities for interrogation and reinterpretation of the doctoral experience. A dimensional framework of diversity and critical race theory, CRT, guides interpretation of racial and cultural perspectives focused on exclusion, structural diversity, and the psychological/behavioral experiences related to doctoral degree completion in the United States and South Africa. A purposeful sampling strategy is used to identify of literature sources where these dimensions are identified. Contribution: A major contribution of this work is the use of a dimensional diversity framework in doctoral education in both the US and South Africa. Findings: Interpretation of previous studies reveal critical insight for understanding the racial and cultural aspects of the doctoral process through comparison of perspectives on the historically marginalized doctoral experience in the United States and South Africa. They include consideration of the social developments leading to the current predicament of marginalization for students, awareness of the different reporting strategies of data, implementation of cultural philosophies to broaden the focus on how to understand student experiences, and an understanding of the differences in student-faculty relationships. Recommendations for Practitioners: Recommendations for practitioners highlight the application of cultural approaches in the development and implementation of practical strategies for supporting historically marginalized doctoral students. Recommendations for Researchers: Recommendations for researchers consider the application of cultural ap-proaches in the development of scholarship supporting historically marginal-ized doctoral students within a global context. Impact on Society: Intended outcomes for this work include increasing awareness about historically marginalized doctoral students. Recommendations are focused on improving their academic and career experiences in the United States and South Africa with global implications regarding their contributions. Future Research: Future research should consider the application of cultural philosophical ap-proaches when examining the historically marginalized doctoral experience within global, national, and local contexts.


10.28945/4735 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 237-252
Author(s):  
Genia M. Bettencourt ◽  
Rachel E. Friedensen ◽  
Megan L Bartlett

Aim/Purpose: Multiple barriers exist within doctoral education in the United States that can undermine the success of students, particularly for students with marginalized identities. While mentorship can provide an important form of support, it must be done in an intentional way that is mindful of issues of equity and power. Background: By applying a power-conscious framework to current practices of doctoral mentorship in the U.S., we propose key considerations to help support doctoral students and shift power imbalances. Methodology: As a scholarly paper, this work draws upon a comprehensive review of existing research on doctoral mentorship in the U.S. Contribution: As a relatively recent development, the power-conscious framework provides an important tool to address issues of inequity that has not yet been applied to doctoral mentorship to our knowledge. Such a framework provides clear implications for mentorship relationships, institutional policies, and future research. Findings: The power-conscious framework has direct applicability to and possibility for reshaping doctoral mentorship in the U.S. as well as elsewhere. Each of the six foci of the framework can be integrated with research on doctoral students to help formal and informal mentors enhance their practice. Recommendations for Practitioners: Throughout our analysis, we pose questions for mentors to consider in order to reflect upon their practice and engage in further exploration. Recommendation for Researchers: Research on doctoral mentorship should explicitly engage with broader dynamics of power, particularly as related to understanding the experiences of marginalized student populations. Impact on Society: The demanding nature of and precarity within U.S. doctoral education leads to high rates of departure and burnout amongst students. By re-envisioning mentorship, we hope to begin a broader re-imagining of doctoral education to be more equitable and supportive of students. Future Research: To examine these claims, future research should explore doctoral student mentorship relationships and how power dynamics are contained therein both within the U.S. and in international contexts.


10.28945/3713 ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 001-019
Author(s):  
Sydney Freeman Jr. ◽  
Gracie Forthun

Aim/Purpose: Executive doctoral programs in higher education are under-researched. Scholars, administers, and students should be aware of all common delivery methods for higher education graduate programs. Background This paper provides a review and analysis of executive doctoral higher education programs in the United States. Methodology: Executive higher education doctoral programs analyzed utilizing a qualitative demographic market-based analysis approach. Contribution: This review of executive higher education doctoral programs provides one of the first investigations of this segment of the higher education degree market. Findings: There are twelve programs in the United States offering executive higher education degrees, though there are less aggressively marketed programs described as executive-style higher education doctoral programs that could serve students with similar needs. Recommendations for Practitioners: Successful executive higher education doctoral programs require faculty that have both theoretical knowledge and practical experience in higher education. As appropriate, these programs should include tenure-line, clinical-track, and adjunct faculty who have cabinet level experience in higher education. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should begin to investigate more closely the small but growing population of executive doctoral degree programs in higher education. Impact on Society: Institutions willing to offer executive degrees in higher education will provide training specifically for those faculty who are one step from an executive position within the higher education sector. Society will be impacted by having someone that is trained in the area who also has real world experience. Future Research: Case studies of students enrolled in executive higher education programs and research documenting university-employer goals for these programs would enhance our understanding of this branch of the higher education degree market.


Author(s):  
Ute S. Lahaie ◽  
Jacqueline M. Mumford

Many universities in the United States are working to incorporate innovative 21st century skills, new active learning pedagogical approaches, and technology. Creating new physical and virtual spaces requires agile faculty professional for technology-centric experiences. Designing and offering meaningful professional development to faculty members in new virtual and physical learning technology-centric environments is a challenge. This case study explores the journey of one higher education institution in the Midwest as they implemented new technology-centric strategies, initiatives, and support. Data from faculty participants indicate the program's success and establish an agenda for future research.


2015 ◽  
pp. 7-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeleine F. Green

The United States is not a world leader in higher education internationalization. A recent survey shows that many other countries are much more active than the US in student exchanges and the other elements of internationalization.


10.28945/4475 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 029-056
Author(s):  
Laura Roberts

Aim/Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to reveal the assessment tools and a theory preferred to mentor doctoral students with integrity and trustworthiness. The connection between mentors’ feelings of trustworthiness and protégé success were explored. Background: This study examines the concept presented in 1983, 1985, and 1996 by Kram of mentor relations (MR) theory, which illustrates that graduation rates can improve with effective mentoring. In the United States, doctoral programs have low graduation rates. Scholars and researchers agree that doctoral programs must develop ways and means to improve their graduation rates. This researcher examined an extension of Kram’s mentor relations theory by employing the Mentor Integrity and Trustworthiness (MIT) theory, which depicts that mentors with a strong sense of integrity and trustworthiness provide a safe haven for protégés to succeed. As supported by Daloz, a trustworthy mentor provides a safe haven for protégés to take the intellectual risks required to produce an original contribution to the canon of scholarly knowledge in the form of a doctoral dissertation. Methodology: A quantitative research methodology of data collection ensued including the researcher generated MIT scale and the mentors’ perceptions of protégés’ independence (MPPI) scale, a survey to establish acceptable levels of internal consistencies for items on the two scales, a supported evidence of the content validity of the two scales, the researcher’s analysis of the validity of the MIT theory, and a multi-stage sampling method to recruit a research sample of 50 mentors from four universities in the eastern part of the United States from several education-related doctoral programs. The doctoral programs were diverse in terms of selectivity, type of degree, and mentors’ years of experience. Contribution: This research study contributes to existing literature knowledge by generating the relationship between mentors’ feelings of trustworthiness and protégés’ success as measured by graduation rate and the number of awards won by protégés. The validation of the mentor integrity and trustworthiness (MIT) scale and the mentor perceptions of protégé independence (MPPI) scale, and the supported evidence of content validity and reliability for both scales will deepen and extend the discussion of doctoral mentoring in higher education. Findings: Results indicated that mentors’ feelings of trustworthiness were correlated with the number of dissertation awards won by protégés and with graduation rates. Graduation rates and dissertation awards rates were not measured directly, but were reported by the mentors. In addition, the researcher found that mentors perceived their protégés to be independent scholars, in general, however, minimally in the area of writing the research methods section of their dissertation. Recommendations for Practitioners: The researcher discussed the practical implications for mentors’ professional development in trustworthiness and integrity. The researcher also provided the Right Angle Research Alignment table to help protégés organize and manage the research methods section of their dissertation. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should continue to explore MIT theory with experimental methods to attempt to improve the internal validity of the theory. Impact on Society: The researcher encourages scholars to test the MIT theory in mentoring relationships that go beyond doctoral studies such as mentoring in business and in the arts. The researcher also encourages scholars to test whether the MIT theory is relevant in other kinds of teaching relationships such as coaching and tutoring. Future Research: Further research questions that arise from this study are as follows: What can mentors do to improve their integrity? What can mentors do to improve their feelings of trustworthiness? How can the MIT and MPPI instruments be refined and improved?


2020 ◽  
pp. 205699712097165
Author(s):  
Andrew Hansen

The task of moral formation has long been an important purpose of higher education in the United States. However, pluralism and lack of moral consensus within secular universities present significant challenges to accomplishing this task. One possible solution is Christian study centers, which offer thick moral cultures that can form students at secular universities within the Christian tradition. Anselm House’s Fellows Program at the University of Minnesota illustrates such a context and suggests avenues for future research.


2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgios Angelopoulos ◽  
John A Parnell ◽  
Gregory J Scott

Managers working in South Africa, Peru and the United States were classified as stakeholder- and/or shareholder-oriented along the Perceived Role of Ethics and Social Responsibility (PRESOR) scale. The relationship between stakeholder/shareholder orientation and perceptions of organisational performance was further explored. In South Africa and overall, respondents with both high stakeholder and low shareholder orientations reported the greatest performance satisfaction. In Peru, managers with a high stakeholder orientation reported the greatest satisfaction with organisational performance. A significant link between stakeholder or shareholder orientation and performance satisfaction was not found in the United States, however. Directions for future research are outlined.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document