From Imposter Syndrome to Heroic Tales: Doctoral Students’ Backgrounds, Study Aims, and Experiences

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4637 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 15 ◽

pp. 517-539

Author(s):

Hanna Nori ◽

Marja H Peura ◽

Arto Jauhiainen

Keyword(s):

Cluster Analysis ◽

Mixed Methods ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Family Background ◽

Academic Community ◽

Educational Opportunities ◽

Future Research ◽

Educational Equality ◽

Doctoral Studies

Aim/Purpose: The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive picture of doctoral students’ dissertation journeys using Finland as a case country. More specifically, the article examines (1) the students’ backgrounds, (2) their study motives and experiences, and (3) whether or not these elements are related. Background: Despite the massification of higher education (HE), there is a shortage of detailed mixed-methods studies about PhD students’ backgrounds and their experiences of doctoral study. Existing research does not give a clear indication of the extent to which home background is reflected in PhD applications and whether or not that background is related to the subsequent experience of doctoral students. Methodology: This paper is based on both quantitative and qualitative data. We utilize a person-based register (N = 18,585) and a survey (n = 1,651). Our main methods are k-means cluster analysis, t-test, and directed content analysis. Our theoretical approach is Bourdieuian. We use the concept of doctoral capital when evaluating the backgrounds, resources, and success of PhD students through the dissertation process. Contribution: This study uses a mixed-methods approach and is the first to incorporate quantitative data about the entire doctoral student population in Finland. In addition, open-ended responses in the survey make the PhD students’ own experiences visible. By approaching our research subject through a mixed methods lens, we aim to create a comprehensive understanding about their dissertation journeys. With this study, we also contribute to the debate initiated by Falconer and Djokic (2019). They found that age, race, and socioeconomic status (SES) do not influence academic self-efficacy and academic self-handicapping behaviors in doctoral students. However, in this study, a link was found between the PhD students’ backgrounds (age and parents’ SES), and their study aims and experiences. Findings: Cluster analysis revealed three different groups of PhD students: Status Raisers, Educational Inheritors, and Long-term Plodders. PhD students in these groups have different resources, experiences, and chances to survive in the academic community. There are two main findings. First, the influence of the childhood family extends all the way to doctoral education, even in Finland, which is considered to have one of the most equal HE systems in the world. Some PhD students from low-educated families even experienced so-called imposter syndrome. They described experiences of inadequacy, incompetence, and inferiority in relation to doctoral studies and fellow students. Second, the influence of family background may diminish with age and life experiences. In our study, many mature doctoral students had become empowered and emancipated to such an extent that they relied more on their own abilities and skills than on their family backgrounds. Many felt that their own persistence and resilience have played an important role in their doctoral studies. There were also a few ‘heroic tales’ about hard work and survival in spite of all the hurdles and distresses. Recommendations for Practitioners: PhD students are a very heterogeneous group. Their motives and goals for applying for doctoral studies vary, and their backgrounds and life situations affect their studies. There are three critical points educational practitioners should pay special attention to (1) supervision and support (mentoring), (2) length of funding, and (3) granted research periods. Recommendation for Researchers: Because Finland and the other Nordic countries have a long tradition of equal educational opportunities, we need comparative studies on the same topic from countries with higher educational disparities. Impact on Society: Inequalities in educational opportunities and experiences originate at the very beginning of the educational path, and they usually cumulate over the years. For this reason, the achievement of educational equality should be promoted not only through education policy but also through family, regional, and social policy decisions. Future Research: The Bourdieuian concepts of cultural, social, and economic capitals are also relevant in doctoral education. PhD students’ family backgrounds are reflected in their motives, experiences, and interpretations in the academic community. Future research should explore how to best support and reinforce the self-confidence of doctoral students from lower SES backgrounds.

Individual and Structural Challenges in Doctoral Education: An Ethical Perspective

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4738 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 ◽

pp. 211-236

Author(s):

Liana Roos ◽

Erika Löfström ◽

Marvi Remmik

Keyword(s):

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Academic Community ◽

Assessment Process ◽

Ethical Principles ◽

Structural Level ◽

Ethical Perspective ◽

Doctoral Studies ◽

Individual Level ◽

The Individual

Aim/Purpose: The study set out to understand the challenges doctoral students experience at different systemic levels of doctoral education through the perspective of ethical principles. Background: Doctoral students experience various challenges on their journey to the degree, and as high dropout rates indicate, these challenges become critical for many students. Several individual and structural level aspects, such as student characteristics, supervisory relationship, the academic community as well national policies and international trends, influence doctoral studies, and students’ experiences have been researched quite extensively. Although some of the challenges doctoral students experience may be ethical in nature, few studies have investigated these challenges specifically from an ethics perspective. Methodology: The study drew on qualitative descriptions of significant negative incidents from 90 doctoral students from an online survey. The data were first analyzed using a reflexive thematic analysis, and then the themes were located within different systemic levels of doctoral studies: individual (e.g., doctoral student, the individual relationship with supervisor) and structural (e.g., the institution, faculty, academic community). Finally, the ethical principles at stake were identified, applying the framework of five common ethical principles: respect for autonomy, benefiting others (beneficence), doing no harm (non-maleficence), being just (justice), and being faithful (fidelity). Contribution: Understanding doctoral students’ experiences from an ethical perspective and locating these among the systemic levels of doctoral studies contributes to a better understanding of the doctoral experience’s complexities. Ethical considerations should be integrated when creating and implementing procedures, rules, and policies for doctoral education. Making the ethical aspects visible will also allow universities to develop supervisor and faculty training by concretely targeting doctoral studies aspects highlighted as ethically challenging. Findings: In doctoral students’ experiences, structural level ethical challenges out-weighed breaches of common ethical principles at the individual level of doctoral studies. In the critical experiences, the principle of beneficence was at risk in the form of a lack of support by the academic community, a lack of financial support, and bureaucracy. Here, the system and the community were unsuccessful in contributing positively to doctoral students’ welfare and fostering their growth. At the individual level, supervision abandonment experiences, inadequate supervision, and students’ struggle to keep study-related commitments breached fidelity, which was another frequently compromised principle. Although located at the individual level of studies, these themes are rooted in the structural level. Additionally, the progress review reporting and assessment process was a recurrent topic in experiences in which the principles of non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice were at stake. Recommendations for Practitioners: Going beyond the dyadic student-supervisor relationship and applying the ethics of responsibility, where university, faculty, supervisors, and students share a mutual responsibility, could alleviate ethically problematic experiences. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend that further research focus on experiences around the ethics in the progress reporting and assessment process through in-depth interviews with doctoral students and assessment committee members. Impact on Society: Dropout rates are high and time to degree completion is long. An ethical perspective may shed light on why doctoral studies fail in efficiency. Ethical aspects should be considered when defining the quality of doctoral education. Future Research: A follow-up study with supervisors and members of the academic community could contribute to developing a conceptual framework combining systemic levels and ethics in doctoral education.

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.

Doctoral Journey During Covid-19: Reflections From a Collaborative Autoethnography

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4871 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 ◽

pp. 633-656

Author(s):

Aireen Grace Andal ◽

Shuang Wu

Keyword(s):

Higher Education ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Recent Literature ◽

Ethical Dilemmas ◽

Academic Community ◽

Future Research ◽

Doctoral Studies ◽

Anxiety Levels ◽

The Impact

Aim/Purpose: This paper identifies and examines cross-cutting experiences from the perspective of two doctoral students, whose research was affected by the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Background: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be challenging for higher education scholars in terms of proceeding with their research and how the pandemic sets the scene for changes in higher education’s future. Due to increased anxiety levels because of uncertainties, the paper provides a reflection of doctoral experiences from two students – one in Russia at the data collection stage, and one in China (enrolled in New Zealand) at the proposal stage. Methodology: Through collaborative autoethnography and joint-reflection, we analyze our experiences as doctoral students focusing on methodological adjustments, ethical dilemmas, adaptation strategies and supervisor-supervisee relationships. Conducting a collaborative autoethnography provides a richer analysis of the interplay between perspectives, compared to a traditional autoethnography. Collaborative autoethnography also provides conditions for a collective exploration of subjectivities of doctoral students through an iterative process. After providing separate individual accounts, we discussed our experiences, analyzed them, and engaged in a joint-reflection from our consensual interpretations. Contribution: Our work aims to contribute to existing discussions on how COVID-19 impacted on doctoral students’ coping strategies during the pandemic. The paper encourages doctoral students to further discuss how they navigate their doctoral experiences through autoethnography and joint-reflections. Findings: Three main themes transpired in our analysis. First, we encountered roadblocks such as interruptions, frustrations and resistance to adapt our doctoral studies in the pandemic context, which align with the recent literature regarding education during the coronavirus pandemic. Second, we faced a diversity of burdens and privileges in the pandemic, which provided us with both pleasant (opportunity to create change) and unpleasant (unknown threats) situations, thereby enabling us to construct and reconstruct our stories through reflection. Third, we experienced a shared unfamiliarity of doing doctoral studies during the pandemic, to which the role of the academic community including our supervisors and doctoral colleagues contributed to how we managed our circumstances. Recommendations for Practitioners: We speak to our fellow doctoral students to dare navigate their doctoral experiences through collaborative reflections. In practice, by reflecting on our experience, we recommend that new doctoral students remain flexible and mindful of their doctoral journeys and recognize their agency to deal with the unexpected. We thus encourage the view of doctoral studies as a process rather than outcome-oriented, as we gain experience from processes. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend using both collaborative autoethnography and joint-reflection as an instructive tool for qualitative research. Such engagements offer important discussions towards further communications and exchange of ideas among doctoral students from various backgrounds. Impact on Society: More broadly, this work is an invitation to reflect and provoke further thoughts to articulate reflections on the impact and various ways of thinking that the pandemic might bring to the fore. Future Research: Doctoral students are welcome to contribute to a collectivity of narratives that thicken the data and analyses of their pandemic experiences in higher education to reinforce the role of doctoral researchers as agents of history in the trying times of a pandemic.

Quantitative Preparation in Doctoral Education Programs: A Mixed-Methods Study of Doctoral Student Perspectives on their Quantitative Training

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/3789 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

pp. 137-156 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Sarah L Ferguson ◽

Katrina A Hovey ◽

Robin K Henson

Keyword(s):

Mixed Methods ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Student Perceptions ◽

Curriculum Design ◽

Student Voice ◽

Quantitative Methods ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Student Perspectives ◽

Future Research ◽

Doctoral Level

Aim/Purpose: The purpose of the current study is to explore student perceptions of their own doctoral-level education and quantitative proficiency. Background: The challenges of preparing doctoral students in education have been discussed in the literature, but largely from the perspective of university faculty and program administrators. The current study directly explores the student voice on this issue. Methodology: Utilizing a sequential explanatory mixed-methods research design, the present study seeks to better understand doctoral-level education students’ perceptions of their quantitative methods training at a large public university in the southwestern United States. Findings: Results from both phases present the need for more application and consistency in doctoral-level quantitative courses. Additionally, there was a consistent theme of internal motivation in the responses, suggesting students perceive their quantitative training to be valuable beyond their personal interest in the topic. Recommendations for Practitioners: Quantitative methods instructors should emphasize practice in their quantitative courses and consider providing additional support for students through the inclusion of lab sections, tutoring, and/or differentiation. Pre-testing statistical ability at the start of a course is also suggested to better meet student needs. Impact on Society: The ultimate goal of quantitative methods in doctoral education is to produce high-quality educational researchers who are prepared to apply their knowledge to problems and research in education. Results of the present study can inform faculty and administrator decisions in doctoral education to best support this goal. Future Research: Using the student perspectives presented in the present study, future researchers should continue to explore effective instructional strategies and curriculum design within education doctoral programs. The inclusion of student voice can strengthen and guide future work in this area.

A Situated Framework for Socialising a Scholarship Mindset with Doctoral Students

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4406 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 14 ◽

pp. 567-580 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Vassiliki Zygouris-Coe ◽

Sherron Killingsworth Roberts

Keyword(s):

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Empirical Studies ◽

Quality Education ◽

Future Research ◽

Doctoral Studies ◽

Environmental Learning ◽

Academic Literature ◽

Course Work ◽

Academic Qualifications

Aim/Purpose: The doctoral experience is a complex, challenging, and life-changing process. Cultivating a scholarship mindset is a requirement for success in early and later academic careers. This paper presents a situated framework for socializing doctoral students' scholarship mindset. Background: Faculty of doctoral education programmes prepare students for higher education and other scholarly positions. Methodology: In this situated framework, two doctoral faculty utilized their academic qualifications, programmatic experiences, and related academic literature to develop a framework that has been successful in a particular School of Teacher Education context. Contribution: The situatedThe situated framework, which includes steps to Develop, Nurture and Challenge, Apprentice, and Celebrate scholars, can serve as a guide to encourage review and evaluation of doctoral education programmes and the ways in which they develop doctoral students' scholarship mindset and preparation. framework can serve as a guide to encourage review and evaluation of doctoral education programs and the ways in which they develop doctoral students' scholarship mindset and preparation. Findings: Key findings included increased doctoral student participation in events and experiences that contributed to developing a scholarship mindset and strengthening their scholarly publication and research trajectory. Recommendations for Practitioners: Doctoral students need to engage in ongoing, strategic experiences that will positively impact their scholarship trajectory. Retention of doctoral students is not just a matter of successful completion of course work. Recommendation for Researchers: Research in the environmental learning contexts of doctoral education programmes and in the ways in which doctoral academic mentors engage students in scholarship may prove useful to programme developers. Impact on Society: Scholarship during doctoral studies and beyond will contribute to the development of quality education, knowledge, and research at all levels. Future Research: Future research should focus on empirical studies that explore the effectiveness of this situated framework through the perspectives of additional faculty and doctoral students at the particular university context.

A Theoretical Perspective on How Doctoral Supervisors Develop Supervision Skills

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4446 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 14 ◽

pp. 721-739

Author(s):

Katherine Fulgence Swai

Keyword(s):

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Future Research ◽

Research Approach ◽

Supporting Evidence ◽

Ongoing Research ◽

Knowledge And Skills ◽

Contemporary World ◽

Supervision Process ◽

Doctoral Supervision

Aim/Purpose: The paper establishes how doctoral supervisors develop the supervision skills needed to handle the doctoral supervision process in the contemporary world. Background: While the existing literature confirms that PhD holders can supervise doctoral students, there is a need to provide supporting evidence that the skills they possess qualify them to do this. Methodology: Using the qualitative research approach, the study established the knowledge and skills that are needed to supervise doctoral students in the contemporary world. Through thematic analysis of 82 scholarly publications, the study established, in order of preference, five mechanisms through which doctoral supervisors develop supervision skills, i.e. the supervision process, doctoral education, institutional guidelines, institutional training courses and individualized learning. Contribution: The study contributes to the ongoing research on the supervision of doctoral studies in the 21st century. Findings: Findings show that a well-structured doctoral education, including the related processes, imparts the knowledge and skills needed for doctoral supervision. Likewise, a combination of the mechanisms and an individual’s commitment, in terms of time and engagement, develop the skills that are relevant for doctoral supervision. Recommendations for Practitioners: Higher Education Institutions need to make supervisors aware of the potential of these mechanisms for developing the skills necessary for doctoral supervision and encourage them to use them Recommendation for Researchers: Further research on the development of doctoral supervision skills should broadly consider the role of different programmes in developing doctoral supervision skills in different contexts. Impact on Society: The study has implications for doctoral supervisors and universities as regards the need to ensure that both mechanisms are instituted to enable doctoral supervisors to develop doctoral supervision skills. Future Research: Since the study was done theoretically, it might be important to conduct further research using mixed-methods research with a phenomenological design to establish the skills possessed by doctoral supervisors and the mechanism they used to develop the supervision skills in any context.

Re-envisioning Doctoral Mentorship in the United States: A Power-Conscious Review of the Literature

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4735 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 ◽

pp. 237-252

Author(s):

Genia M. Bettencourt ◽

Rachel E. Friedensen ◽

Megan L Bartlett

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

The United States ◽

Future Research ◽

Power Dynamics ◽

Research Findings ◽

Direct Applicability ◽

Important Form ◽

The U.S

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.

Starting Doctoral Dissertation Journey with a Solid Research Problem Statement – A Four Stage Framework

10.28945/4770 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Azad Ali ◽

Shardul Pandya

Keyword(s):

Doctoral Students ◽

Methodological Approach ◽

Doctoral Program ◽

Research Problem ◽

The Other ◽

Future Research ◽

Student Adjustment ◽

Problem Statement ◽

Graduate Studies ◽

Doctoral Studies

Aim/Purpose: Provide methodology suggesting steps to doctoral mentors to work with students in constructing their research problem statement in their dissertation. Background: Doctoral students face difficulties writing their dissertation and they begin by writing the research problem statement. Methodology: This paper uses a framework widely used to describe student adjustment to graduate studies in general and to doctoral program in particular. Contribution: This study provides a framework to mentors/advisors that is helpful in guiding the students to writing their research problem statement. Findings: Writing a research problem statement is difficult by itself. Following a methodological approach suggested in this study could help with writing it. Recommendations for Practitioners: A methodological approach in writing the dissertation is helpful to mitigate the difficulties of writing the dissertation. Our study tackles difficulties with writing the research problem statement. Recommendations for Researchers: More research needs to be done on methodological approach to writing the other sections in the dissertation. Impact on Society: Our findings in this research will help doctoral mentors/advisors as they guide students in completing the writing of their research problem statement Future Research: Intention for future research is to follow similar methodological approach in guiding students in writing the other sections of the dissertation. *** NOTE: This Proceedings paper was revised and published in the International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 16, 469-485 Click DOWNLOAD PDF to download the published paper. ***

The Philosophical Approach of Sankofa: Perspectives on Historically Marginalized Doctoral Students in the United States and South Africa

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4463 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 14 ◽

pp. 783-801

Author(s):

Pamela Felder

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

South Africa ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Doctoral Degree ◽

The United States ◽

Student Experiences ◽

Future Research ◽

Philosophical Approach ◽

Doctoral Experience

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.

Pastoral Care in Doctoral Education: A Collaborative Autoethnography of Belonging and Academic Identity

International Journal of Doctoral Studies ◽

10.28945/4900 ◽

2022 ◽

Vol 17 ◽

pp. 001-023

Author(s):

Danielle Hradsky ◽

Ali Soyoof ◽

Shaoru Zeng ◽

Elham M Foomani ◽

Ngo Cong-Lem ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Pastoral Care ◽

Doctoral Students ◽

Academic Writing ◽

Doctoral Education ◽

Future Research ◽

Self Awareness ◽

Writing Groups ◽

Education Programs ◽

Self Reflection ◽

Doctoral Writing

Aim/Purpose: It is increasingly recognized that doctoral education programs should better support doctoral students. In particular, it has been noted that students experience significant isolation during their PhD, which negatively affects their educational experiences and their personal wellbeing. Doctoral writing groups are collaborative learning communities that have in recent years received increasing attention to address this issue. This collaborative autoethnography explores the affective benefits (i.e., benefits associated with emotions and feelings) of these doctoral writing groups, particularly focused on the pastorally supportive nature of these learning communities. Background: Writing groups have been shown to promote academic writing skills and build reflective practice, personal epistemology, and academic identity. We have found that a much more significant benefit of our writing groups has been the pastoral care we have experienced, particularly in relation to the turbulent emotions often associated with academic writing. This should, perhaps, not be surprising since it is clear that academic writing is a form of identity work. There is, therefore, a clear need to better support doctoral students, particularly with regard to the more affective components of academic writing. This prompted us to write this collaborative autoethnography to showcase what we consider to be the primary role of doctoral writing groups: pastoral care. Methodology: We employ a collaborative autoethnographic methodology to integrate our personal reflections into the existing literature in the field. Contribution: We argue that doctoral writing groups are vehicles of pastoral care as they promote wellbeing, foster resilience, provide academic care, and build social capital. Findings: We demonstrate that doctoral writing groups foster students’ sense of belonging through self-reflection and the sharing of experiences in a safe space, which builds perceived self-efficacy and self-awareness. Furthermore, through the self-reflection and discussion that is inherent in doctoral writing groups, students also develop a better understanding of themselves and their place within the academy. Recommendations for Practitioners: Our research highlights that writing groups may be designed to teach academic communication skills, but they provide an affective benefit that cannot yet be quantified and which should not be underestimated. Incorporating writing groups into doctoral education programs can, therefore, have a positive influence on the educational experiences of PhD students and improve their overall wellbeing. This paper concludes by providing practical suggestions to help practitioners implement writing groups into doctoral education programs, particularly focused on how these groups can be made more pastorally supportive. Recommendation for Researchers: This paper also extends the theoretical understanding of pastoral care by providing a framework for pastoral care within the doctoral writing group environment. We show how pastoral care can be conceptualized as the promotion of self-awareness, self-efficacy, reflection, and empowerment of doctoral students through nurturing communities where all members are valued, encouraged, guided, and supported. Our experiences, which we have integrated throughout this paper, also highlight the importance of relationship-building within the educational community, particularly when these relationships are characterized by mutual respect and shared responsibility. Impact on Society: The poor well-being of doctoral students has now been well-established across the world, but strategies to improve the academic environment for these students are still lacking. This paper provides evidence that implementing writing groups as a strategy to embed pastoral care in a doctoral education environment helps doctoral students flourish. Ultimately, this can lead to an improved academic research culture into the future. Future Research: Future research should explore other methods of better integrating pastoral care interventions into doctoral education programs in order to reduce isolation and promote student wellbeing.