scholarly journals Individual and Structural Challenges in Doctoral Education: An Ethical Perspective

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.

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

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.

scholarly journals Socio-Technological Enrollment as a Driver of Successful Doctoral Education

10.28945/4196 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 161-185
Author(s):  
Georges Djohy
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Doctoral Education ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Actor Network Theory ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
Supervisor Relationships ◽  
Doctoral Socialization ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
The Individual

Aim/Purpose: This article uses the enrollment approach contained in the Actor-Network Theory (ANT) to challenge the deterministic perspectives of doctoral socialization and offers a new perspective based on co-construction between social and technological entities mobilized during the doctoral education as a driver of success. Background: Most studies have used deterministic approaches to show that the success of doctoral education is the outcome of socialization as shaped by the individual/personal, racial/ethnical, national/cultural, organizational/institutional and disciplinary contexts in which supervisors and supervisees cooperate. In doing so, they overlook the complexity of student-supervisor relationships and the gradual power-based processes of negotiation and persuasion that make the doctoral education successful. Analyzing the author’s own doctoral journey, the article highlights that the doctoral success is rather the result of a socio-technological enrollment as reflected in power-based supervisory politics. Methodology: The methodological approach consisted in an autoethnography that self-reflected on all stages of the doctoral processes and the author’s collaboration with his thesis supervisor from March 2012 until October 2016. Contribution: This paper reveals that the use of an approach of co-construction between technology and society also makes it possible to better understand the relationships between students and supervisors and the implications for socialization in a doctoral setting. Findings: The success of doctoral socialization is not necessarily a matter of individuals, disciplines, or contexts, but rather it depends on the level of articulation and implementation of the supervisory politics inspired by the imbalanced power relations among those involved. The deconstruction of the doctoral supervisory politics reveals that enrollment is an important component that mobilizes human and non-human resources from various scales. Enrollment strategies play a key role in how doctoral students start, progress and complete their doctorate. Recommendations for Practitioners: The results and analysis on socio-technological enrollment-based doctoral education can be useful in the context of support policies towards improving student supervision and facilitating doctoral studies in higher education. Recommendation for Researchers: The paper invites researchers in sociology, anthropology, psychology, education sciences, and other scientific disciplines to a theoretical reconsideration of student-supervisor relationships in the context of research and support to higher education. Impact on Society: The content of this article will help improve collaboration among supervisors and supervisees in higher education and could, thus, contribute to reducing attrition and doctoral dropout.

Moral compass framework

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pam Green ◽  
John A. Bowden
Keyword(s):  
Complex System ◽  
Moral Development ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Education System ◽  
Doctoral Education ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Development Models ◽  
Moral Compass ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Development Literature

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is as follows: locate our moral compass framework (Bowden and Green, 2014) within the moral development literature; demonstrate how the framework can be used to analyse complex system-wide problems; and propose change in doctoral education. Design/methodology/approach – This paper shows the analysis of transcripts of 50 interviews with doctoral students and supervisors. Four scenarios, each a composite derived primarily from the interview data, were analysed using the framework, complemented by reference to the moral development literature. Findings – The structure of the framework and meaning of the constructs’ collective morality, moral advocacy and moral mediation are elaborated and further explained through the analysis of the four scenarios, showing how the framework can contribute to resolution of complex system-wide problems and how they facilitate moral development within a multi-level system. Six proposals for change in the doctoral education system, at the individual, organisational and national levels, are derived from those analyses. Originality/value – The use of our moral compass framework to analyse the four scenarios demonstrates its applicability to real situations and its complementarity with the moral development literature. The paper also shows that the framework is more powerful and of broader impact than the moral development models published to date. The changes proposed for the doctoral education system, based on the moral compass framework and its application to the four scenarios, have the potential to change practice in ways that benefit everyone involved in the system – candidates, supervisors, management and government personnel.

scholarly journals International Students’ Motivations and Decisions to do a PhD in Canada: Proposing a Three-Layer Push-Pull Framework

2021 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-73
Author(s):  
You Zhang ◽  
Michael O'Shea ◽  
Leping Mou
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
International Students ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Student Mobility ◽  
Social Background ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
Individual Motivation ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Past Experiences

The study aims to explore which factors influence international students’ decision to pursue doctoral studies in Canada. Drawing on the push-pull model and the mechanism of educational decision making, this study uses semi-structured interviews to gather data and explores themes such as political and economic forces, institutional factors, social background and experience, and individual motivation in students’ decision making. Our study identifies multiple factors at the individual, institutional, and country levels that influence students’ decision making, including students’ past experiences, funding, faculty members, and immigration policies. Moreover, it finds that the factors vary by students’ regions of origin and disciplines of study. Our findings, focused on international doctoral students in Canada, add to the ongoing conversation about  student mobility and add nuances on international students’ decision-making process in times of shifting landscape of higher education internationalization.

Black U.S. Sexual and Gender Minority Mental Health

2020 ◽  
pp. 173-185
Author(s):  
Jonathan Mathias Lassiter ◽  
Lourdes Dolores Follins ◽  
Stacy W. Smallwood ◽  
Leo Wilton ◽  
Alishia Alexander ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
The United States ◽  
Structural Level ◽  
Transgender People ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Gender Minority ◽  
Sexual And Gender Minority ◽  
And Gender ◽  
The Individual

This chapter provides a comprehensive and nuanced review and critique of the extant scholarship related to Black sexual and gender minority (SGM) mental health in the United States. The authors highlight the determinants of mental health, the prevalence of mental health problems and inequities, and protective and resilience factors related to Black SGM mental health within five different subgroups: transgender people, intersex people, bisexual people, lesbians, and gay/same-gender-loving men. An intersectional approach is used to draw attention to how racial, gender, socioeconomic, and sexual orientation identities at the individual level influence experiences of oppression at the structural level to synergistically impact mental health. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the gaps in the literature related to Black SGM mental health and recommendations for addressing them.

The Moral Ground to View Poverty Is Injustice

2021 ◽  
pp. 90-96
Author(s):  
Mark Robert Rank ◽  
Lawrence M. Eppard ◽  
Heather E. Bullock
Keyword(s):  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
Structural Level ◽  
Moral Ground ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Individual

Chapter 12 examines poverty through the lens of injustice. Poverty has traditionally been understood as a failure at the individual level. The poor have thus been viewed as undeserving of support. Examples of using the broad brush of individual blame to paint the poor as undeserving can be found across a wide spectrum. One of the pernicious results of this myth is that it provides a comfortable justification for doing nothing to address poverty. In contrast, this chapter argues that poverty is a condition resulting largely from a failure at the structural level. The appropriate moral grounds to view poverty should be one of injustice, rather than blame.

scholarly journals Collective ritual and social support networks in rural South India

2018 ◽  
Vol 285 (1879) ◽  
pp. 20180023 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleanor A. Power
Keyword(s):  
Social Support ◽  
Social Cohesion ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Structural Level ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Religious Ritual ◽  
Religious Rituals ◽  
South Indian ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Temple

The scholarship on religion has long argued that collective worship helps foster social cohesion. Despite the pervasiveness of this contention, rigorous quantitative evaluations of it have been surprisingly limited. Here, I draw on network data representing the ties of social support among Hindu residents of a South Indian village to evaluate the association between collective religious ritual and social cohesion. I find that those who partake in collective religious rituals together have a higher probability of having a supportive relationship than those who do not. At the structural level, this corresponds to denser connections among co-participants. At the individual level, participants are more embedded in the local community of co-religionists, but are not disassociating themselves from members of other religious denominations. These patterns hold most strongly for co-participation in the recurrent, low-arousal monthly worships at the temple, and are suggestive for co-participation in the intense and dysphoric ritual acts carried out as part of an annual festival. Together, these findings provide clear empirical evidence of the lasting relationship between collective religious ritual and social cohesion.

scholarly journals Wawasan Kebersihan Lingkungan & Keberagamaan; Praktik Kebersihan Lingkungan pada Civitas Akademika UIN Imam Bonjol Padang

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 80-92
Author(s):  
Rulan Permata Sari
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Religious Knowledge ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Public ◽  
Environmental Hygiene ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Depth Interviews

The basic identity of academic community of UIN Imam Bonjol Padang is Muslim, with sufficient religious knowledge. This study aims to see the correlation of knowledge with behavior in maintaining environmental cleanliness. The research data collection was carried out by survey and in-depth interviews with the academic community of UIN Imam Bonjol. This study found that, first the understanding of the academic community of UIN Imam Bonjol Padang about cleanliness was quite good at the individual level originating from the hadith about cleanliness, both in text and in substance. Second, in maintaining cleanliness, UIN academics are influenced by the lack of available hygiene facilities and infrastructure and the absence of regulation. Third, there is an asymmetrical relationship between the knowledge of the UIN academic community about environmental hygiene and practice because the understanding of environmental hygiene is still in the domestic area and is private in nature, not yet entering the public space.

scholarly journals Money for the marginalized: Promoting access to income benefits in Manitoba

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Schachter
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Realist Evaluation ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Evaluation Methodology ◽  
Structural Level ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Dual Objectives

Low-income Manitobans are eligible for a variety of federal and provincial income support benefits that may help them meet their basic needs. However, many face barriers to completing the bureaucratic processes required to access these benefits. In response, nonprofit and public sector agencies have developed free benefit intermediary programs that support low-income community members to claim their benefits. Despite the growth of this field, there is a dearth of scholarly literature on programs that promote access to income benefits. This thesis contributes to filling this gap through a mixed-methods study of benefit intermediary programs operating in Winnipeg, MB. Using a realist evaluation methodology, this study examines contextual conditions that inhibit benefit take-up and the field of social programs that promote access to benefits. The evaluation considers the social-structural context, program goals and activities, and key program mechanisms that may account for the outcomes that ensue. Findings from semi-structured key informant interviews and a literature review demonstrate that benefit intermediary programs have dual objectives that correspond to two of Nancy Fraser’s strategies for achieving social justice. At the individual level, they employ a strategy of affirmative redistribution to assist low-income community members to claim benefits that increase their quality of life. At a structural level, they pursue nonreformist reforms to reduce systemic barriers that inhibit benefit take-up and build cross-sectoral capacity to promote access. However, these programs face constraints that limit the scope of their direct service delivery and the extent to which they can effect structural change. Nevertheless, benefit intermediaries play a vital role in promoting access to income benefits in Manitoba. This research may be useful for practitioners, policymakers, and social scientists who are interested in the problem of benefit non-take-up, or who are engaged in efforts to increase the take-up of money for the marginalized.

scholarly journals I won’t be #BulliedIntoBadScience

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corina Logan
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Public ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Research Administrators ◽  
Central Resource ◽  
Peer Community ◽  
The Individual

Watch the VIDEO.The #BulliedIntoBadScience (BIBS) campaign consists of early career researchers leading individuals and institutions in adopting open practices to improve research rigor (from all fields, not only the sciences). I will share how BIBS started and discuss what we as researchers are doing to stop exploiting ourselves and the public when sharing our research with each other and the public. We are developing best practices for facilitating higher quality research and tackling biases in this rapidly changing world of scholarly publishing. I will share case studies at the individual level (e.g., how a PI can run an open and transparent lab), at the level of the academic community (e.g., changing editorial practices via efforts such as Editors4BetterResearch and Peer Community in Ecology), and at the level of institutions (e.g., serving as Data Champions and advising governments). We at BIBS aim to be a central resource for people to share and organize best practices, thus it is useful for researchers, librarians and research administrators.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document