scholarly journals Interest, Burnout, and Drop-Out Intentions Among Finnish and Danish Humanities and Social Sciences PhD. Students

10.28945/4867 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 593-609
Author(s):  
Solveig Cornér ◽  
Kirsi Pyhältö ◽  
Jouni A Peltonen ◽  
Erika Löfström
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
Dropping Out ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Personal Interest ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
Cultural Contexts ◽  
Individual Variations ◽  
Interest Profile

Aim/Purpose: This study focused on advancing understanding of individual variations in doctoral students’ interest in their doctoral studies and how they related to experiences of burnout and drop-out intentions in Denmark and Finland. Background: Ph.D. students’ experiences of interest, burnout, and dropout intentions among Finnish and Danish Ph.D. students have not been researched before. Research with a person-centred approach exploring individual variations in students undertaking doctoral studies in two comparable but distinct socio-cultural contexts is limited. Methodology: This study uses exploratory factor analysis, K-means cluster analyses in combination with Pairwise comparisons, ANOVA, and Chi-square test. A total of 365 doctoral students in social sciences and humanities disciplines in Finland and Denmark responded to a Cross-Cultural Doctoral Experience Survey. Contribution: This study contributes understanding on individual variation in doctoral students’ interest across two socio-cultural contexts by identifying four personal interest profiles. The profiles were invariant across the contexts. The study also shed further light on the interrelation between the interest in research and the risk for suffering from burnout and entertaining dropout intentions. Findings: The interest profiles identified among the Ph.D. students were the High interest profile, the Moderate interest profile, the Developmental, research and impact interest profile, and the Development and impact interest profile. All interest profiles exhibited high levels of the developmental interest, however they varied especially in the weight given to instrumental and research interests. Ph.D. students in the Moderate interest profile showed signs of burnout, and they were prone to consider dropping out. Also, individuals in the Development and impact interest profile considered more frequently dropping out of their studies. Recommendations for Practitioners: Investing in the identification and support of interest among Ph.D. students is worthwhile, as interest is not a permanent characteristic of the individual, and the combination of research, development, and impact interest indicates a lower risk for burnout and drop-out intentions. Recommendation for Researchers: It is possible that interest profiles are the same across the two national contexts investigated in this study, but their underpinnings and premises are different. It is likely that a qualitative approach would shed more light on these foci. Impact on Society: The results imply that personal interest was not determined by the socio-cultural differences between the countries, indicating that cultivating doctoral students’ personal interest, particularly a combination of research, development, and impact, provides a potential buffer for doctoral students’ burnout and drop-out, which has been raised as global concerns among policy makers, researchers, and doctoral education developers and administrators during the past decade. The study has impact on doctoral studies in international communities. Future Research: The results in this study reflect specific characteristics of social sciences and their applied nature. It remains for future research to investigate the extent to which the identified four profiles of interest in relation to burnout and drop-out intentions emerge in the natural sciences.

scholarly journals 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. ***

scholarly journals Defining Doctorateness: A Concept Analysis

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.

scholarly journals Unveiling ‘European’ and ‘International’ Researcher Identities: A Case Study with Doctoral Students in the Humanities and Social Sciences

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 303
Author(s):  
Lopes ◽  
Lourenço
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Higher Education ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Education Institution ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
International Researcher ◽  
Humanities And Social Sciences ◽  
Portuguese Higher Education

The significance of ‘identity’ in doctoral studies is widely acknowledged. Nevertheless, despite much research on what is involved in the process of identification with/as a researcher, very little attention has been devoted to understanding the effects of the internationalization of higher education in promoting feelings of belonging to a researcher community that goes beyond the national space. This qualitative case study aims to understand whether and how doctoral students in the Humanities and Social Sciences develop a ‘European’ or ‘international’ researcher identity during their doctoral studies. To address this aim, in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with twelve home and international doctoral students from a Portuguese higher education institution. Results from thematic analysis suggest that although the dichotomy ‘European’/‘international’ was not always clear in participants’ minds, those students who undertook mobility experiences or took part in international research networks or supervisory teams were more likely to regard themselves as ‘international’ or ‘European’ researchers. The implications of these findings for doctoral programs in an era of internationalization are highlighted.

Mentoring, Managing, and Helping

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Steven Williams ◽  
Tiffany Jeanette Brown Burnett ◽  
Talia Kay Carroll ◽  
Cameron J. Harris
Keyword(s):  
Critical Race Theory ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Help Seeking ◽  
Mentoring Relationships ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
Race And Gender ◽  
Student Advisor ◽  
Seeking Behavior ◽  
And Gender

This study utilizes a critical race theory framework to explore the ways race and gender influence Black doctoral students’ socialization experiences. Themes about the varied roles and identities of important socialization agents emerged from the data. Managing expectations, engaging in help-seeking behavior, and developing fulfilling mentoring relationships, also proved instrumental to these students’ retention and persistence in doctoral study. Furthermore, their experiences offer insights about the complexity of navigating the various relationships, including, but not limited to the traditional mentor-protégé, student–advisor relationship in doctoral studies as Black students. Through their narratives, participants describe vivid experiences of fear, distrust, and betrayal that halted their development as scholars. They also share stories of support, care, and triumph as the potential of supportive relationships are realized. Implications for praxis, theory, and future research are discussed.

scholarly journals “Should I stay or should I go?” Indicators of Dropping Out Thoughts of Doctoral Students in Computer Science.

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 246
Author(s):  
Dorothee Alfermann ◽  
Christopher Holl ◽  
Swantje Reimann
Keyword(s):  
Computer Science ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Machine Learning Algorithms ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
Dropping Out ◽  
Central Importance ◽  
Work Tasks ◽  
Lower Likelihood ◽  
Professional Self ◽  
Doctoral Candidates

Evidence in the literature indicates that doctoral candidates may experience increased levels of stress and worry about successfully completing their doctorate degrees. As a result, a significant number of doctoral candidates drop out. In our study with 424 doctoral students in computer science (113 women, 311 men), we ask about the frequency of dropout thoughts as an indicator of possible premature termination. By means of machine learning algorithms, we extract variables associated with higher or lower likelihood of dropout thoughts. In particular, satisfaction with advisor’s support, experiencing a crisis, professional self-efficacy, choice of advisor, and perceived meaningfulness of additional work tasks proved to be of central importance. Based on these results, we suggest taking steps to improve professional and social support for doctoral students. Recommendations include implementing more intensive supervision in the early stages of the doctorate, improve the match between doctoral candidates’ expectations and the requirements of the respective institute, monitor progress during the doctorate (e.g., with the help of an advisor agreement), and increase the qualifications of advisors to include leadership and communication skills.

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

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.

scholarly journals Supporting Academic Writing and Publication Practice: PhD Students in Engineering and their Supervisors

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 221
Author(s):  
Alena Kasparkova ◽  
Kamila Etchegoyen Rosolová
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Thinking Skills ◽  
Writing Development ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
University Management ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
National Training

Supporting Academic Writing and Publication Practice: PhD Students in Engineering and their Supervisors This poster documents the bottom-up efforts leading to the establishment of an academic writing support program for doctoral students at an engineering university in the Czech Republic (CR). To defend their dissertation, by law Czech doctoral students have to have published their research. Moreover, many faculties require their doctoral students to publish in prestigious English-medium journals, which is a challenge even for the students’ supervisors. Although publication requirements prior to dissertation defence are becoming common in many countries (Kamler and Thompson, 2014; Kelly, 2017), Czech students often face a challenge of writing in the absence of any prior writing support, where insufficient knowledge of English only adds an extra hurdle to the already difficult task of argumentation absent in Czech schooling. CR has a comparatively high number of doctoral students, but also alarmingly high drop-out rates with more than 50% students not finishing their studies (Beneš et al., 2017). In part, this is due to the students’ difficulties to publish (National Training Fund, 2019). This challenge could be addressed with systematic writing development, but Czech educators and dissertation supervisors are not commonly aware of composition being teachable as we learned from our preliminary study on writing support in doctoral programs in several Czech universities (Rosolová & Kasparkova, in press). While supervisors and university leaders tended to see writing development as a responsibility of the students, the doctoral students were calling for systematic support.  We strive to bring attention to the complexity of writing development and introduce a discourse on academic writing that conceives of academic writing as a bundle of analytical and critical thinking skills coupled with knowledge of rhetorical structures and different academic genres. We show how these skills can be taught through a course drawing on the results from a needs analysis survey among engineering doctoral students, the target population for this course (for more information on the survey, see Kasparkova & Rosolová, 2020). In the survey, students expressed a strong interest in a blended-learning format of the course, which we base on a model of a unique academic writing course developed for researchers at the Czech Academy of Sciences, but not common in Czech universities. Our course is work in progress and combines writing development with library modules that frame the whole writing process as a publication journey ranging from library searches, to a selection of a target journal and communication with reviewers. Because we are well aware that a course alone will not trigger a discourse on writing development in Czech higher education, we also plan on involving a broader academic community through workshops for supervisors and a handbook on teaching academic writing and publishing skills for future course instructors. Colleagues at EATAW 2019 conference commented on the poster sharing their difficulties from the engineering context and for instance suggested a computer game to engage engineers. This resonated with our plan to invite our engineers into the course through a geo-caching game – for more, see Kasparkova & Rosolová (2020). References Beneš, J., Kohoutek, J., & Šmídová, M. (2017). Doktorské studium v ČR [Doctoral studies in the CR].  Centre for Higher Education Studies. https://www.csvs.cz/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Doktorandi_final_2018.pdf Rosolová, K. E., & Kasparkova, A. (in press). How do I cook an Impact Factor article if you do not show me what the ingredients are? Educare. https://ojs.mau.se/index.php/educare Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2014). Helping Doctoral Students Write (2nd edition). Routledge. Kasparkova, A., & Rosolová, K. (2020). A geo-caching game ‘Meet your Editor’ as a teaser for writing courses. 2020 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm), Kennesaw, GA, USA, 2020, pp. 87-91. https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm48883.2020.00019 Kelly, F. J. (2017). The idea of the PhD: The doctorate in the twenty-first-century imagination. Routledge. National Training Fund. (2019). Complex study of doctoral studies at Charles University and recommendations to improve the conditions and results. Report for the Charles University Management. Prague.

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 Experiences of Chinese International Doctoral Students in Canada Who Withdrew: A Narrative Inquiry

10.28945/4240 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 259-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Gao
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
International Students ◽  
Graduate Students ◽  
Narrative Inquiry ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Cultural Awareness ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Doctoral Studies ◽  
International Doctoral Students

Aim/Purpose: For the purpose of better understanding the reasons of their withdrawal and experiences, this study seeks to elicit the voices of Chinese international students who have withdrawn from doctoral studies in Canada. Background: This study used Tinto’s institutional departure model as a framework. His model illustrates that the experience of individuals in that institution modifies their initial intentions and commitments. The scholarly literature on degree completion of graduate students and existing studies on experiences of international students in the North American context also guided the inquiry of this study. Methodology: This is a qualitative study with narrative inquiry as a means for investigation and exploration. Four participants were recruited by purposive sampling, and in-depth interview was used as the approach to collect data. Data were collected in Mandarin and were transcribed into texts. Two rounds of analysis were applied and then the findings were translated into English. Contribution: This study added information to the literature on international doctoral students’ experiences and explained how socio-cultural factors could impact doctoral students’ decision-making. Findings: The themes included: experiences with doctoral supervisors; partnership and the perception of gender roles; family of origin and the importance of education; and educational differences between China and Canada. Recommendations for Practitioners: At a practice level, universities could consider delivering series of workshops to help international graduate students start their journey. Departmental administrative bodies could consider building community for doctoral students and tracking their study paths to better assist students. Given the increased number of international students on campuses, it is time for university staff and faculties to become more aware of what a more diverse student population means. Professional development workshops would help to develop professors’ cultural awareness. Recommendation for Researchers: My research is an example of addressing translation issues in cross-language and cross-cultural settings. Qualitative research is considered valid when the distance between the meanings as experienced by the participants and the meanings as interpreted in the findings is as close as possible. Therefore, I would recommend in the condition that if the researcher and the participant(s) share the same language, the best practice would be to transcribe and analyze data in the original language to shorten the distance from the meanings that are made by participants and the meanings that are interpreted by the researcher(s). Language meanings do lose during the translation process; as researchers, we should try our best to present our participants as truly as possible. Impact on Society: The number of international students who choose to conduct doctoral studies is increasing every year. They are making contributions to the host countries in various ways such as contribution to the enrichment of higher education, the development of research, the promotion of global understanding etc. However, their study status and overall well-being may not be getting enough attention from both the scholarly research and in real practice. Thus, the experiences shared by my research participants who used to be doctoral students and left their studies halfway could add value and knowledge to the understanding of this group of students and to better assist the internationalization of higher education institutions. Future Research: Future studies could probe more on other ethnicities and cultures. Also, numerous studies have been conducted to examine the relationship between doctoral students and their supervisors; however, the incompatibility between doctoral students and their supervisors and coping strategies in that situation is still an area that needs more investigation.

scholarly journals A Situated Framework for Socialising a Scholarship Mindset with Doctoral Students

10.28945/4406 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 567-580 ◽  
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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document