Examining Educational Leadership Doctoral Students’ Self-Efficacy as Related to Their Role as a Scholarly Practitioner Researcher

Aim/Purpose: This study examined an educational leadership doctoral preparation program to better understand how students’ self-efficacy evolves from the lens of a scholarly practitioner researcher as they progress through specified checkpoints to degree completion. The aim was to identify what factors contributed to building scholarly practitioner researcher skills and what factors hindered the development of doctoral students as they progressed through their educational leadership preparation program. Background: Doctoral programs have the highest attrition of graduate programs, with almost half of the successful students taking six to seven years to complete. Thus, educational leadership doctoral preparation programs must find ways to enhance students’ perceived capability in an effort to facilitate their progress through the program in a timely manner. The researchers believe having high research self-efficacy coupled with evidence-based practices to strengthen scholarly practitioner research skills may be a contributor to effective program progression if viewed from the lens of a scholarly practitioner researcher. Methodology: A mixed-methods study utilizing an ex-post-facto research design based on descriptive statistics coupled with an analysis of qualitative data examined students’ perceived self-efficacy of educational leadership doctoral students in relation to their rate of progression. Contribution: This study provides other doctoral programs a lens into the importance of maintaining students’ high self-efficacy, specifically in the area of scholarly practitioner research to ensure efficient progression through the program to completion in a timely manner. Findings: Educational leadership doctoral students in the specified cohorts reported high self-efficacy at the pre-, mid-, and post-assessment checkpoints in the program during their coursework tier, and findings revealed this high self-efficacy was sustained throughout this progression to the dissertation tier. Four overarching narrative themes influencing students self-efficacy in scholarly practitioner research were identified as Social Support, Academic Challenges, Discipline, Effort, and Motivation, and Personal Challenges. Recommendations for Practitioners: Educational leadership and related doctoral programs should consider using a scholarly practitioner researcher approach. This focus may lead to faster rates of degree completion and better prepared students to solve problems of practice in their practitioner settings. Recommendation for Researchers: While the results are promising in support of evidence-based practices to prepare scholarly practitioner researchers, in turn sustaining or supporting high levels of self-efficacy may prove impactful, thus warranting further research. Impact on Society: Ensuring high levels of self-efficacy may help students to complete their doctoral degree in a timelier manner due to the perception they are capable of program completion and may also, better prepare students to serve as scholarly practitioner researchers in their educational settings. Future Research: Future research should continue longitudinally to examine self-efficacy from the lens of a scholarly practitioner researcher to better understand how this shapes doctoral students’ efforts and capabilities in their doctoral work from admit to program completion. Additionally, future research can quantitively assess a model identifying the relationship between self-efficacy and the four identified themes for the development of doctoral students’ research skills as scholarly practitioners.

Communication Sciences and Disorders PhD Graduates' Perceptions of Their PhD Program

Purpose The shortage of doctor of philosophy (PhD)–level applicants to fill academic and research positions in communication sciences and disorders (CSD) programs calls for a detailed examination of current CSD PhD educational practices and the generation of creative solutions. The intended purposes of the article are to encourage CSD faculty to examine their own PhD program practices and consider the perspectives of recent CSD PhD graduates in determining the need for possible modifications. Method The article describes the results of a survey of 240 CSD PhD graduates and their perceptions of the challenges and facilitators to completing a PhD degree; the quality of their preparation in research, teaching, and job readiness; and ways to improve PhD education. Results Two primary themes emerged from the data highlighting the need for “matchmaking.” The first time point of needed matchmaking is prior to entry among students, mentors, and expectations as well as between aspects of the program that can lead to students' success and graduation. The second important matchmaking need is between the actual PhD preparation and the realities of the graduates' career expectations, and those placed on graduates by their employers. Conclusions Within both themes, graduate's perspectives and suggestions to help guide future doctoral preparation are highlighted. The graduates' recommendations could be used by CSD PhD program faculty to enhance the quality of their program and the likelihood of student success and completion. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.11991480

Developing Effective Advocates during Doctoral Preparation: An Examination of Federal-Level Special Education Policy Internships

It is critically important for leadership personnel in special education to develop knowledge and skills in policy and advocacy. The Pew Charitable Trust initiated a survey to uncover resources and experiences impacting doctoral-level preparation at institutes of higher education. Results indicated that fewer than 30 percent of doctoral students were provided the opportunity for an internship experience. Thus, a large university located in the southeast United States created an internshipexperience reflective of current policies and trends within the field of special education. This article discusses interns’ responsibilities with reference to policy and politics, opportunities for mentorship, the development of personal contacts and networking, and the impact of each experience on the intern’s future role in special education teacher education and advocacy.

Doctoral Preparation Influence on New Faculty's Perception of Role Transition

Context: Teaching, scholarship, and service are required of all faculty in order to earn tenure. Faculty members hired directly from doctoral programs may not be adequately prepared to face the responsibilities of a full-time position in the professoriate. Objective: To explore what mechanisms as part of doctoral education influenced the perceptions of junior faculty development while transitioning postgraduation. Design: Qualitative phenomenological study. Setting: Fourteen higher education institutions. Patients or Other Participants: Sixteen junior faculty (7 male, 9 female, age = 32 ± 3.5 years) representing 7 National Athletic Trainers' Association districts participated. At the time of the interview, participants were within their first 3 years of a full-time faculty position. All participants earned doctorates from residential programs and had an assistantship position. Main Outcome Measure(s): All participants completed a semistructured telephone interview. The interview guide was focused on the experiences of junior faculty within their first 3 years in a tenure-track position. Questions were grounded within the literature and purpose of the study. We analyzed the interviews through a psychosocial developmental lens using a general inductive approach. Results: Two themes of doctoral preparation emerged that influenced the perceptions of junior faculty transitioning into a faculty role: breadth and depth of the doctoral assistantship and doctoral coursework related to academia. Doctoral assistantships with breadth and depth helped participants develop competence, while doctoral coursework related to academia provided content expertise. Conclusions: Doctoral education is the platform for transition into academia. Our findings suggest that doctoral program assistantships that provided both breadth and depth of experience facilitated transition. Coursework related to academia influenced perceptions of transition into the faculty role by exposing participants to pedagogy and higher education infrastructure.

Culture Shock: Transitioning from Clinical Practice to Educator

Transitioning from doctoral preparation to the academy is a stressor for most new faculty, particularly among academicians in the medical and health professions where role strain may include clinical responsibilities as part of faculty load. The proliferation of clinical doctorates and terminal clinical allied health degrees has increased the need for both traditionally trained educators, but also faculty with clinical doctorates or terminal clinical degrees (CDF) to augment the curriculum. CDF may not have the background in academia typically acculturated in a traditional doctoral degree. A lack of socialization during clinical doctoral preparation may lead CDF to develop unrealistic expectations regarding faculty collegiality, research and responsibility. Socialization is necessary to orient new faculty, but may be compounded with CDF who lack orientation to the academy regarding classroom management, scholarship, institutional hierarchy and general faculty expectations. A more extensive orientation to teaching, service, and scholarship as well as transitional issues like time management and expectations should be added to mentorship and orientation for CDF hired for health care professions educational programs. Challenges for CDF are most often related to problems decoding expectations of the organization, learning to budget time and creating relationships with colleagues. CDF need remediation to overcome the culture shock associated with the transition from practice to the academy. Traditional mentorship and socialization models entail mature faculty who gift their time and expertise in a one-on-one or small group sessions. CDF orientation may need to follow a more formalized plan rather than traditional mentorship philosophies and for an extended period of time (1-2 years) to ensure a successful transition. This manuscript provides a reorganization of common concepts in the mentorship literature to help administrators of health care profession education to develop CDF and junior faculty.