Women’s Experiences with Parenting During Doctoral Education: Impact on Career Trajectory

Aim/Purpose: This study explored the experiences of women doctoral students and their perceptions of the impact of this experience on their academic careers. Background: While more women than men graduate from doctoral programs in all non-STEM fields, women are more likely to take non-tenure positions or positions at less prestigious programs such as community colleges or teaching focused institutions. This creates a lack of diversity at research intensive programs as well as potentially highlighting gender inequities within the pipeline from doctoral education to full professorship. The source of these differences in career outcomes are not fully understood, and it is unclear whether mothers are self-selecting away from research intensive positions, they are less able to obtain the required professional training for these experiences, perhaps in part due to a lack of university based supports, or they experience discrimination based on gender biases around caregiving. Methodology: In this cross-sectional, descriptive study, women doctoral students and graduates (N=777) completed a survey about their experiences as doctoral student mothers. Contribution: Little is known about the availability of supports for doctoral student mothers across fields, or their experiences with parenting during their doctoral programs. This study provides a broader view of doctoral student mothers’ perspectives as well as their understanding of the impact of their doctoral education experience on their career trajectories. Findings: Participants reported informal supports were often available (e.g. flexibility (57.1%), peer support (42.9%)) but identified a need for subsidized childcare (67.7%) and paid leave (53.3%). Many found motherhood decreased productivity (70.1%) and 55.8% said it impacted their career, including a new definition of an “ideal” position, changed career goals, professional development opportunities, being less competitive job candidates, delays in completing their program and entering the job market and a positive impact on career. Recommendations for Practitioners: Implications for doctoral programs are the need for more formal family-friendly policies, including subsidized childcare and conference travel support, improving the quality of mentoring for these students and facilitating access to a diverse array of professional development opportunities. Recommendation for Researchers: These findings suggest that there are multiple, complex factors impacting women’s career trajectory post-graduation once they have children. Researchers should consider multiple pathways to career decisions for women with children. In addition, these findings suggest that researchers exploring this topic should consider both field of study and whether women have a child at the point of program entry. Impact on Society: An underrepresentation of women in prestigious academic positions and leadership positions has a negative impact on young women who desire an academic career. The lack of women with children in these positions creates a problematic lack of diversity in leadership and a dearth of role models for women students with children. The benefits of diversity in leadership are well known. These findings can be used by doctoral programs and academic institutions to increase gender and parental status diversity in these positions, to the benefit of students, faculty, departments, and institutions. Future Research: Future research should explore the impact of supports on measures of doctoral student success (e.g. publications, conference presentations) and the impact of these experiences on students’ careers following graduation.

Download Full-text

Preparing Doctoral Students for the Professoriate through a Formal Preparatory Course

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4174 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 14 ◽

pp. 033-067

Author(s):

Mohammed S Alkathiri ◽

Myrna R Olson

Keyword(s):

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Programs ◽

Doctoral Student ◽

Well Being ◽

Student Experiences ◽

Future Research ◽

Study Approach ◽

Graduate Preparation ◽

Multiple Data ◽

The Impact

Aim/Purpose: This study aimed to investigate doctoral student preparation for the professoriate through a formal course entitled “The Professoriate.” Background: Many studies addressed the need for improved graduate preparation, however, the study of doctoral student experiences in preparation courses, designed as part of the doctoral academic programs, has received less attention. Methodology: Eleven doctoral students (one withdrew from the study) were enrolled in a formal course that was designed to prepare them for the professoriate. The study was conducted using an ethnographic case study approach with multiple data collection methods that included observation, interviews, member checking, and examination of related documents. Contribution: Acquainted with critical realist ontology, the researchers argued that it was necessary to investigate the concerns and preparation of doctoral students in order to better clarify the complex experiences that underlie their practices of making meaning and maintaining balance and well-being in the professoriate. Findings: Three prominent themes emerged that pointed out the experience of doctoral students with regard to their preparation for the professoriate: (1) Perceived concerns with regard to working in the professoriate; (2) Students’ preparatory practices and preparatory opportunities available to them; and (3) Students’ perspectives about “The Professoriate” course and its value. Recommendations for Practitioners: The findings highlighted that educators in doctoral programs need to address and evaluate students’ concerns and preparatory activities in order to make adjustments for students that enhance their success in the program as well as in the professoriate in future. Recommendation for Researchers: The findings suggest further research into the formal preparatory opportunities available for students within doctoral programs and the barriers affecting students’ ability to participate in informal preparatory activities. Impact on Society: The findings supported the importance of providing formal preparatory courses as part of doctoral programs. Formal courses within doctoral programs allow students to devote their time for preparation which will help them to better understand the professoriate and plan for their careers. Future Research: Future research may continue the study of formal opportunities to prepare for the professoriate that are available for doctoral students from different disciplines, the experiences of doctoral students taking part in such opportunities, and the impact on doctoral student readiness for the professoriate.

Download Full-text

An Effective Doctoral Student Mentor Wears Many Hats and Asks Many Questions

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4195 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 14 ◽

pp. 133-159 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Laura R. Roberts ◽

Christa M Tinari ◽

Raymond Bandlow

Keyword(s):

Doctoral Students ◽

Research Methods ◽

Time Management ◽

Quantitative Methods ◽

Doctoral Programs ◽

Doctoral Student ◽

Research Question ◽

The United States ◽

Future Research ◽

Structured Interviews

Aim/Purpose: Doctoral student completion rates are notoriously low; although statistics differ depending on which study one consults, a typical completion rate is about 50%. However, studies show mentors can use strategies to improve students’ graduation rates. Our purpose was to learn from effective mentors about the processes they believe are most important in guiding doctoral students to the successful completion of a dissertation and, specifically, the strategies they implement to help students with writing and research methods. The study was confirmatory and exploratory; we posed several hypotheses and we were attentive to emergent themes in the data. Background: This paper addresses the problem by providing practical strategies mentors can use to help students succeed. Methodology: We conducted semi-structured interviews of 21 effective mentors of doctoral students representing highly ranked educational programs at universities across the United States. We conducted conventional and summative content analysis of the qualitative data. Contribution: This research showed that effective mentors provide students with technical support (e.g., scholarly writing and research methods), managerial support (e.g., goal-setting and time management), and emotional support in the form of encouragement. This research goes beyond prior studies by providing specific strategies mentors can apply to improve their practice, particularly regarding support with research methods. Findings: The data showed that encouragement, help with time management, and timely communication were key strategies mentors used to support students. Mentors also provided resources and directed students to use skills learned in previous coursework. Many mentors spoke about the importance of writing a strong research question and allowing the question to guide the choice of methods rather than the other way around. Mentors also said they pushed students to conform to APA style and they used Socratic methods to help students develop the logical organization of the manuscript. Many mentors referred students to methodologists and statisticians for help in those areas. Recommendations for Practitioners: Individual mentors should conduct a self-assessment to learn if they need to improve on any of the technical, managerial, and interpersonal mentoring skills we identified. Moreover, doctoral programs in educational leadership and related areas are advised to conduct careful assessments of their faculty. If they find their faculty are lacking in these mentoring skills, we recommend that they engage in professional development to increase their capacity to provide effective mentoring. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend that future researchers continue to explore strategies of effective mentors. In particular, researchers should interview mentors who specialize in quantitative methods to learn if they can offer clever and innovative approaches to guide doctoral students. Impact on Society: We conclude this paper with practical strategies to help mentors become more effective. We also make some policy recommendations that we believe can improve the mentoring process for doctoral programs in education. We believe better scholarship at the doctoral level will provide new knowledge that will benefit society at large. Future Research: This research was a springboard for some new research questions as follows. We recommend future researchers to study how often effective mentors meet with students, how quickly they provide feedback on written drafts, and their strategies for delivering tough feedback in a caring way (i.e., feedback that the student’s work did not meet expectations).

Download Full-text

Defining Doctorateness: A Concept Analysis

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/3939 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 13 ◽

pp. 031-148

Author(s):

Shahram Yazdani ◽

Foroozan Shokooh

Keyword(s):

Conceptual Model ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Doctoral Programs ◽

Concept Analysis ◽

Future Research ◽

Step Method ◽

Doctoral Studies ◽

Academic Degree ◽

New Concepts

Aim/Purpose: This study analyses the concept of doctorateness and its defining characteristics and gives a definition for it by examining the various ways it is used in doctoral education literature. Background: The term ‘doctorateness’ is an immature unclarified concept referred to as a common quality for all doctoral awards. With the emergence of different types of doctoral studies worldwide, a clear definition for this concept is a requirement. Defining doctorateness can result in major implications for research and the practice of doctoral education, as determining attributes of doctorateness will pose serious expectations regarding standard setting for the process and outcome of doctoral programs and requirements of doctoral students. Methodology: In this study, Walker and Avant’s eight step method of concept analysis is used. The method is a systematic approach frequently used to analyze relatively new concepts. Contribution: The current study moves beyond the earlier studies by isolating defining attributes of the concept and giving a clear conceptual definition for doctorateness. Findings: Five defining attribute of doctorateness refined from literature include independent scholar, developmental and transformative apprenticeship process, original conceptual contribution/scholarship, highest academic degree, and stewardship of the discipline. Based on the defining attributes a definition is formulated for the concept of doctorateness. In addition to giving a definition a conceptual model consisting of five conceptual areas of purpose, process, product, prerequisite, and impact according to the usage of concept in the literature is also presented. Recommendations for Practitioners: By using the conceptual model and defining attributes presented in this study practitioners and professionals in doctoral education can study the effective design for doctoral programs and utilize the definition as a basis for evidencing doctoral awards. Future Research: Defining attributes can also contribute to psychometric researches related to tool development and constructing tools with explicit criteria for doctorate judgment.

Download Full-text

Doctoral Students’ Identity Development as Scholars in the Education Sciences: Literature Review and Implications

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4687 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 ◽

pp. 089-125

Author(s):

Yoon Ha Choi ◽

Jana Bouwma-Gearhart ◽

Grant Ermis

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Identity Development ◽

Literature Review ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Doctoral Programs ◽

Future Generations ◽

Future Research ◽

Student Identity ◽

Diverse Group

Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to offer a systematic review of empirical literature examining doctoral students’ identity development as scholars in the education sciences. We frame our analysis through a constructivist sociocultural perspective to organize our findings and discuss implications for multiple actors and components that constitute the system of doctoral education, with doctoral students as the central actors of the system. Background: Despite increasing interest in the professional identity development of postsecondary students via their experiences in educational programs, relatively little is known about how doctoral students develop their identity as professionals who engage in scholarship. We focus specifically on the experiences of education sciences doctoral students, given their unique experiences (e.g., typically older in age, more professional experiences prior to starting doctoral program) and the potential of education sciences doctoral programs contributing to the diversification of academia and future generations of students and scholars. Methodology: Our systematic literature search process entailed reviewing the titles, abstracts, and methods sections of the first 1,000 records yielded via a Google Scholar search. This process, combined with backwards and forwards citation snowballing, yielded a total of 62 articles, which were read in their entirety. These 62 articles were further reduced to 36 final articles, which were coded according to an inductively created codebook. Based on themes derived from our coding process, we organized our findings according to a framework that illuminates individual identity development in relation to a larger activity system. Contribution: This systematic review presents the current body of scholarship regarding the identity development of education sciences doctoral students via a constructivist sociocultural framework. We contribute to the study of doctoral education and education research more broadly by focusing on an area that has received relatively little attention. A focus on the identity development of doctoral students pursuing the education sciences is warranted given the field’s promise for preparing a diverse group of future educators and education scholars. Furthermore, this analysis broadens the conversation regarding scholarship on this topic as we present doctoral student identity development as occurring at the intersection of student, faculty, program, disciplinary, institutional, and larger sociocultural contexts, rather than as individualized and local endeavors. Findings: Looking across our reviewed articles, identity as scholar emerged as recognition by self and others of possessing and exhibiting adequate levels of competence, confidence, autonomy, and agency with respect to scholarly activities, products, and communities. Students often experience tensions on their journey towards becoming and being scholars, in contending with multiple identities (e.g., student, professional) and due to the perceived mismatch between students’ idealized notion of scholar and what is attainable for them. Tensions may serve as catalysts for development of identity as scholar for students, especially when student agency is supported via formal and less ubiquitous subsidiary experiences of students’ doctoral programs. Recommendations for Practitioners: We recommend that actors within the broader system of doctoral student identity development (e.g., doctoral students, faculty, organizational/institutional leaders) explicitly acknowledge students’ identity development and intentionally incorporate opportunities for reflection and growth as part of the doctoral curriculum, rather than assume that identity development occurs “naturally.” In this paper, we provide specific recommendations for different stakeholders. Recommendation for Researchers: Our literature review focused on studies that examined the identity development of doctoral students in the education sciences. We recommend further discipline-specific research and synthesis of such research to uncover similarities and differences across various disciplines and contexts. Impact on Society: Doctoral students have the potential to become and lead future generations of educators and scholars. Taking a sociocultural and system-level approach regarding the successful identity development of doctoral students is necessary to better support and cultivate a diverse group of future scholars who are well-equipped to lead innovations and solve problems both within and outside academia. Future Research: Possible areas of future research include focusing on the experiences of students who leave their programs prior to completion (and thus not developing their identity as scholars), investigating specific knowledge, skills, and attitudes associated with activities that studies have claimed contribute to identity development, and examining phenomena or traits that are seen as more biologically determined and less modifiable (e.g., attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, and mental health differences) in relation to doctoral students’ identity development. Finally, we recommend that future research should look into the underlying norms and nuances of ontological, epistemological, and methodological roots of programs and disciplines as part of the “story” of developing identity as scholar. Norms, and related philosophical underpinnings of typical doctoral education (and the tasks these translate into) were not explored in the reviewed literature.

Download Full-text

Alignment of Doctoral Student and Supervisor Expectations in Malaysia

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4682 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 ◽

pp. 001-029

Author(s):

Irina Baydarova ◽

Heidi E Collins ◽

Ismail Ait Saadi

Keyword(s):

Doctoral Students ◽

Hierarchical Model ◽

Doctoral Student ◽

Future Research ◽

Structured Interviews ◽

Attrition Rates ◽

Research Supervision ◽

Supervisor Relationships ◽

Supervision Relationships ◽

The Impact

Aim/Purpose: This paper compares doctoral student and supervisor expectations of their respective roles and responsibilities in doctoral research supervision relationships in Malaysia. It identifies the areas, and the extent to which expectations align or differ. Background: Incongruence of expectations between doctoral students and their supervisor has been cited as a major contributor to slow completion times and high attrition rates for doctoral students. While researchers urge the need for explicit discussion of expectations, in practice doctoral students and supervisors rarely make their expectations explicit to each other, and few researchers have examined the areas of alignment or misalignment of expectations in depth. Methodology: Semi-structured interviews were held with fifteen doctoral students and twelve supervisors from two research-intensive universities in Malaysia. An inductive thematic analysis of data was conducted. Contribution: This paper provides the first in-depth direct comparison of student-supervisor expectations in Malaysia. A hierarchical model of student-supervisor expectations is presented. Findings: Expectations vary in the degree of congruence, and the degree to which they are clarified by students and supervisors across four different areas: academic practice, academic outcomes, skills and personal attributes, personal relationships. A hierarchical model is proposed to describe the extent to which both students and supervisors are able to clarify their mutual expectations arising throughout the doctoral student-supervisor relationship. Recommendations for Practitioners: Institutions should support discussions with both doctoral students and supervisors of expectations of their student-supervisor interactions, and encourage them to be more proactive in exploring their mutual expectations. Recommendation for Researchers: Data is recommended to be collected from students who have recently completed their studies, given the observation that some student participants were uncomfortable speaking about their supervisors while still in the student-supervisor relationship. Impact on Society: Opening opportunities for discussions of expectations by students and supervisors, supported and encouraged by the institutions within which they work, can help set the scene for positive and productive relationships. Future Research: Findings indicate there is need to examine in depth the impact of gender, and the competing pressures to publish and graduate on time, as they relate to the student-supervisor relationships and experience.

Download Full-text

The PhD Experience: A Review of the Factors Influencing Doctoral Students’ Completion, Achievement, and Well-Being

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4113 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 13 ◽

pp. 361-388 ◽

Cited By ~ 25

Author(s):

Anna Sverdlik ◽

Nathan C. Hall ◽

Lynn McAlpine ◽

Kyle Hubbard

Keyword(s):

Academic Success ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Recent Literature ◽

Doctoral Student ◽

Well Being ◽

Future Research ◽

Unique Contribution ◽

Family Responsibilities ◽

Doctoral Experience

Aim/Purpose: Research on students in higher education contexts to date has focused primarily on the experiences undergraduates, largely overlooking topics relevant to doctoral students’ mental, physiological, motivational, and social experiences. Existing research on doctoral students has consistently found mental and physical health concerns and high attrition rates among these students, but a comprehensive understanding of these students’ experiences is still lacking. Background: The present review paper aims to offer deep insight into the issues affecting doctoral students by reviewing and critically analyzing recent literature on the doctoral experience. An extensive review of recent literature uncovered factors that can be readily categorized as external and internal to the doctoral student; external factors include supervision, personal/social lives, the department and socialization, and financial support opportunities, while internal factors motivation, writing skills, self-regulatory strategies, and academic identity. Methodology: 163 empirical articles on the topic of doctoral education are reviewed and analyzed in the present paper. Contribution: The present paper represents a comprehensive review of the factors found to influence the experiences (e.g., success, satisfaction, well-being) of doctoral students in their programs. It represents a unique contribution to the field of doctoral education as it attempt to bring together all the factors found to date to shape the lived experiences of doctoral students, as well as evidence-based ways to facilitate students’ success and well-being through these factors. More specifically, the present paper aims to inform students, faculty, and practitioners (e.g., student support staff) of the optimal practices and structures uncovered to date, as most beneficial to doctoral students in terms of both academic success and well-being. Impact on Society: Decreases to doctoral students’ well-being as they progress in their programs, financial struggles, and the notable difficulty in maintaining a social life/family responsibilities have been widely discussed in popular culture. The present paper aims to highlight these, and other, issues affecting the doctoral experience in an attempt to contribute to the conversation with comprehensive empirical evidence. By facilitating discussions on the issues that play a role in the attribution and dissatisfaction of existing doctoral students, and perhaps deter potential doctoral students from ever entering doctoral education system, we hope to contribute to a student-cantered focus in which departments are concerned with the academic success of doctoral students, but also equally concerned with maximizing students’ well-being in the process of attaining a doctoral degree. This, we hope, will enhance the societal perception of doctoral education as a challenging, yet worthwhile and rewarding process. Future Research: Future research in which the confluence of the factors discussed in this review, particularly with respect to the cross-cutting impact of socialization variables, is recommended to provide a sufficiently in-depth examination of the salient predictors of doctoral student development and persistence. Future research efforts that steer away from single-factor foci to explore interactive or redundant relationships between factors are thus recommended, as are analyses of the potential effects that changes to one aspect of the doctoral experience (e.g., motivational interventions) can have on other factors. Finally, studies employing various alternative methodologies and analytical methods (e.g., observational, questionnaire, experimental, experience sampling) are similarly expected to yield valuable knowledge as to the nature and extent of the afore-mentioned and novel contributing factors, as well as the utility of student intervention programs aimed at improving both the personal and professional lives of doctoral students internationally

Download Full-text

Assessing Doctoral Student Development of Self-Authorship: The Epistemological, Intrapersonal, and Interpersonal Growths

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4413 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 14 ◽

pp. 597-611

Author(s):

Mohammed S Alkathiri

Keyword(s):

Doctoral Students ◽

Student Development ◽

Doctoral Programs ◽

Doctoral Student ◽

Doctoral Program ◽

Three Dimensions ◽

Future Research ◽

Defined Contribution ◽

Learning Program ◽

Self Authorship

Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess to what extent current doctoral students developed self-authored perspectives, as well as to assess whether or not there was an association between the number of years in the doctoral program and the development of three dimensions of self-authorship (i.e., Epistemological, Intrapersonal, and Interpersonal). Background: Self-authorship is a way of knowing that assists adults in the management of their lives in a way that helps them succeed in society. It is important to study the development of self-authorship in doctoral students because such development is necessary for individuals to overcome the challenges they experience in doctoral programs. The importance of this study rests on the fact that self-authorship development may prompt doctoral students’ ability to succeed in the completion of their doctoral degrees, as well as to meet the challenges of their future in academia. Methodology: Forty-five doctoral students in a Teaching and Learning program were surveyed on three constructs: Epistemological, Intrapersonal, and Interpersonal. The Doctoral Students’ Self-Authorship Questionnaire was developed by the author based on Baxter Magolda’s theory of self-authorship development. Three level-two constructs of self-authorship were conceptually and operationally defined. Contribution: There is no instrument available (i.e., a questionnaire) to assess the self-authorship perspectives of doctoral students. Although it is expected that people will develop self-authored perspectives as they get older, it is unknown to what extent current doctoral students develop self-authorship. No previous studies have assessed doctoral student self-authorship. Findings: The findings showed that participants had advanced levels in all three dimensions and continued to develop towards self-authorship. However, results showed a nonsignificant association between years in the doctoral program and self-authorship development. In other words, although doctoral students spend many years in certain programs, this spent time does not contribute significantly to their development of self-authorship. Recommendations for Practitioners: The current study suggested that doctoral programs should investigate their students’ development toward self-authorship and provide them with more opportunities to better improve their self-authorship. Recommendation for Researchers: The findings suggest further research into the developmental opportunities available for students within doctoral programs that assist students’ ability to develop self-authored perspectives. Impact on Society: The findings supported the importance of assessing doctoral students’ self-authorship as part of doctoral programs. Without the assessment of doctoral student development of self-authorship in their programs, less effort might be taken to address student needs in developing self-authorship. Future Research: Future research may continue the study of self-authorship for doctoral students from different disciplines or schools, especially where attrition rates are high.

Download Full-text

Online Doctoral Student Research and Writing Self-Efficacy in a Publishing Internship

Higher Learning Research Communications ◽

10.18870/hlrc.v10i1.1170 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Lee M Stadtlander ◽

Amy Sickel ◽

Daniel Salter

Keyword(s):

Social Support ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Self Efficacy ◽

Doctoral Student ◽

Future Research ◽

Student Research ◽

Publishing Process ◽

Doctoral Research ◽

Impact Of Technology ◽

The Impact

The present project purposed to develop a publishing internship program and evaluate its effect on doctoral student participants. A key assumption was that direct experience with the publishing process as a doctoral student would help build some of the necessary skills and self-efficacy to be successful as authors/scholars in the future. Because there has not been previous research in this area, the present study addresses this gap. Two different assessments, a writing knowledge and self-efficacy inventory and a research self-efficacy inventory, were used in a pre–posttest design to evaluate the impact of participation in the 6-month internship program on 22 online doctoral students. A texting app was used to build a community of practice to provide social support. Writing self-efficacy and research self-efficacy improved significantly over the 6-month internship. Students judged the internship favorably and found the texting group to offer social support and information. Programs such as the current journal internship may offer the opportunity for students to gain valuable professional experience and learn the logistics of journal publishing, thus potentially allowing for better dissemination of doctoral research. This article contributes a mechanism for increasing students’ understanding of the publication process, as well as improving research and writing self-efficacy. Future research may wish to explore the impact of technology and texting groups on student research self-efficacy and feelings of social support.

Download Full-text

Doctoral supervision and COVID-19: Autoethnographies from four faculty across three continents

Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice ◽

10.53761/1.18.5.6 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (5) ◽

pp. 90-107

Author(s):

Dannelle D. Stevens ◽

◽

Rajendra Chetty ◽

Tamara Bertrand Jones ◽

Addisalem Yallew ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Health Care ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Doctoral Programs ◽

Social Economic ◽

Doctoral Student ◽

Faculty Members ◽

The Many ◽

Doctoral Supervision ◽

Political Health

Doctoral students represent the fresh and creative intellectuals needed to address the many social, economic, political, health care, and education disparities that have been highlighted by the 2020 pandemic. Our work as doctoral student supervisors could not be more central nor vital than it was at the beginning of, during, and following the pandemic. Written during the pandemic of 2020, the purpose of this paper was to describe how four faculty from three continents navigated their relationships with doctoral students in the research and dissertation phase of their doctoral programs. Using a common set of prompts, four faculty members each wrote an autoethnography of our experience as doctoral student supervisors. Even though our basic advising philosophies and contexts were quite different, we learned about the possibility and power of resilience, empathy, and mentoring online. Our findings imply that new online practices could be closely examined and retained after the pandemic to expand the reach, depth and impact of doctoral education.

Download Full-text

Academic Culture in Doctoral Education: Are Companies Making a Difference in the Experiences and Practices of Doctoral Students in Portugal?

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4665 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 15 ◽

pp. 685-704

Author(s):

Patrícia Silva Santos ◽

Maria Teresa Patrício

Keyword(s):

Identity Formation ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Doctoral Programs ◽

Academic Culture ◽

Doctoral Degree ◽

Well Being ◽

Academic Trajectories ◽

The Future ◽

Hybrid Trajectories

Aim/Purpose: This article examines the experience and practice of doctoral students by focusing on different dimensions of the PhD socialization process. It addresses the question of whether university collaborations with businesses influence the experience and practice of PhD students. Background: The study explores the academic culture in the PhD process through the analysis of the experiences and practices of doctoral students in two groups – those without business collaborations (academic trajectories) and those with business collaborations (hybrid trajectories). Academic trajectories are seen as traditional academic disciplinary based doctoral education, while hybrid trajectories cross boundaries collaborating with companies in the production of new knowledge. Methodology: The article uses a qualitative methodology based on extensive interviews and analysis of the curriculum vitae of fourteen Portuguese PhD students in three scientific domains (engineering and technology sciences, exact sciences, and social sciences). The doctoral program profiles were defined according to a survey applied to the directors of all doctoral programs in Portugal. Contribution: The study contributes to the reflection on the effects of collaboration with companies, in particular on the trajectories and experiences of doctoral students. It contributes to the understanding of the challenges associated with business collaborations. Findings: Some differences were found between academic and hybrid trajectories of doctoral students. Traditional products such as scientific articles are the main objective of the PhD student, but scientific productivity is influenced by trajectory and ultimately by career prospects. The business culture influences the trajectories of doctoral students with regard to outputs such as publishing that may act as a barrier to academic culture. PhD students with academic trajectories seem to value international experiences and mobility. Minor differences were found in the choice of topic and type of research activity, revealing that these dimensions are indicative of the scientific domain. Both hybrid and academic students indicate that perceptions of basic and applied research are changing with borders increasingly blurred. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is important for universities, department chairs, and PhD coordinators to be concerned with the organisation, structure, and success of doctoral programs. Therefore, it is useful to consider the experiences and trajectories of PhD students involved with the business sector and to monitor the relevance and results of such exchange. Key points of contact include identifying academic and business interests, cultures, and practices. A student-centred focus in university-business collaboration also can improve students’ well-being in this process. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should consider the processes of interaction and negotiation between academic and business sectors and actors. It is important to understand and analyse the trajectories and experiences of PhD students in doctoral programs and in university-company collaborations, since they are the central actors. Impact on Society: This analysis is relevant to societies where policy incentives encourage doctoral programs to collaborate with companies. The PhD is an important period of socialization and identity formation for researchers, and in this sense the experiences of students in the context of collaboration with companies should be analyzed, including its implications for the professional identity of researchers and, consequently, for the future of science inside and outside universities. Future Research: More empirical studies need to explore these processes and relationships, including different national contexts and different scientific fields. Other aspects of the academic and business trajectory should be studied, such as the decision to pursue a PhD or the focus on perceptions about the future career. Another point that deserves to be studied is whether a broader set of experiences increases the recognition and appreciation of the doctoral degree by employers inside and outside the academy.

Download Full-text