The purpose ofthis qualitative, multi-case, and longitudinal study was to examine how doctoral students’ experiences of the doctorate influence their emerging academic identities. The development of academic identities is often alluded to in higher education research as the heart of the doctoral pursuit. There is, however, little information on how the activities of the doctorate, particularly everyday student experiences, contribute to the emergence of academic identities. The guiding framework for this study was a social-psychological role identity perspective, blended with elements of Activity Theory. Through this combined view, identity is constructed through and embedded in interpersonal relationships, with identity emerging as a property of interactions with others. Data for the study were collected over a two year period. Nine Education doctoral students participated by tracking their experiences for a particular week every month across four academic semesters (15 months) and then discussed these in interviews at the end of each year. These students were selected from a larger sample based on their explicit aim to pursue academic careers upon completion of their degrees. [...] / Cette étude de cas multiples, à la fois qualitative et longitudinale, a permis d’examiner chez des doctorants comment l’expérience au quotidien de leur programme d’études influençait l’émergence d’une identité universitaire. Dans le domaine des recherches portant sur l’enseignement supérieur, on réfère souvent au développement d’une identité universitaire comme étant au coeur même de l’expérience doctorale. Il existe toutefois peu d’informations qui précisent comment les activités inhérentes au doctorat, notamment les expériences vécues au quotidien par les doctorants, contribuent à l’émergence de cette identité universitaire. Le cadre d’analyse de cette recherche s’est élaboré autour d’une perspective socio-psychologique du rôle identitaire amalgamée avec des éléments de la théorie de l’activité humaine. Examinée de ce double point de vue, l’identité se construit au fil des relations interpersonnelles et s’y intègre. L’identité se révèle ainsi comme une propriété des relations avec les autres personnes. Les données de cette étude ont été amassées sur une période de deux ans. Chaque mois, l’expérience quotidienne de neuf doctorants en éducation était documentée pendant une semaine complète. À la fin de chaque année scolaire, ces expériences ont été discutées dans le cadre d’entrevues. Ces doctorants ont été sélectionnés à partir d’un échantillon plus large d’étudiants au doctorat en raison de leur intention explicite de s’engager dans une carrière universitaire à la fin de leur programme d’études. [...]

Higher education is currently facing a number of challenges that are leading doctoral students to seek employment outside of the traditional research-focused institution. With students looking for different jobs, professional socialization and development activities need to be re-examined to understand whether current practices are meeting the needs of doctoral students. Sociologists have explored what it means to be professional at length, but a communicative voice is needed in this conversation. This research seeks to understand how to "do" professionalism in mundane, everyday contexts. Graduate student socialization, identity, and professional development literature was used as a backdrop for exploring this phenomenon. Interviews with doctoral students in communication and directors of graduate studies in communication were conducted and documents were collected from graduate programs and the National Communication Association. This material was subsequently analyzed to explore what it means to be a professional, how to develop as a professional, and how professionalism is tracked and evaluated. The analysis suggested that what it means to be professional is composed of traditional conceptualizations of research, teaching, and service, and a number of other practices and values such as independence, collaboration, collegiality, and work-life balance. This analysis also showed that while students developed these qualities through formal means, they relied more on informal methods of developing to enhance their professionalism. Formal assessment measures helped in the evaluation process, though they did not measure many of the characteristics of a communication professional. Informal means of evaluation served as a way to track some of these characteristics. Findings showed several challenges that doctoral education currently face. First, students are increasingly pursuing careers outside the traditional Research I institutional context and increasingly pursuing more teacher-centric goals. While development opportunities should reflect student goals, a shift away from a research focus could undermine placement at Research I institutions and decrease the value of the PhD, given the increase in fixed-contract hiring at public and for-profit universities. Second, doctoral students and advisers are not adequately prepared to have difficult conversations about career goals, which may be connected to students feeling underprepared to go on the job market. Third, current assessment procedures do not measure many of the more abstract qualities and values identified as professional, which makes it difficult to assess student development. Finally, this research highlighted how the role of the body in white-collar work has been overlooked and how academic practices discipline the body in particular ways. Future research and practical applications regarding each of these challenges were explored, and limitations were also discussed.

The privatised interactions between doctoral student and supervisor as they jointly work on the text are the subject of my thesis. To investigate this important yet neglected aspect of supervision, I use data obtained from interviews with seven doctoral supervisory pairs in the social sciences, arts, and humanities in an Australian university. My methodology comprises a series of close-ups to explore feedback relations within supervision and the ways in which meanings are played out for both supervisors and students. The interpretive approach draws upon Foucaultian theory, critical discourse analysis, and (post)critical theory traditions. Accordingly, the power asymmetries between supervisor and student are seen as productive – in the sense of creatively fertile - and not merely synonymous with prohibition or disempowerment. Within five interpretive chapters, I engage with the productive and problematic aspects of supervisory relations, making visible how supervisory feedback assists in the formation of students’ scholarly identities. My analysis examines how the pressures to ensure the production of timely and disciplined thesis texts are impacting on feedback relations. It also examines various ambiguities and tensions such as those embedded in the supervisor’s position as ‘pastor’ and ‘critic’, between asymmetrical and relational power, between the promotion of authorship/autonomy on the one hand, and the preservation of the canon on the other. My discussion highlights the ways supervisors, notwithstanding their authority, attempt to mediate the power disparity through mechanisms such as standing back, withholding and filtering feedback, or using the invitational strategies of ‘under offering’ which downplay the disciplinary nature of their work. I also reflect on what makes acceptance or resistance more or less likely and what promotes/hinders the transition to and reliance on students’ own expertise. Overall, the interpretations I offer suggest that the exercise of power is never straightforward, is opaque and ambiguous and susceptible to misunderstanding and unpredictability. My research thus reveals a picture of social relations that is less orderly and transparent than assumed in the institutional literature and associated guidelines. In particular, the research qualifies the current institutional faith that PhD research/writing is a transparent process, within which supervisors can be trained in the ‘skills’ for providing effective feedback so students can work at an efficient pace and produce predictable results.

Dissertation (Ph.D.)--University of Toledo, 2009. / Typescript. "Submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy in Counselor Education." Bibliography: leaves 175-196.

Thesis (D.Ed.)--University of Delaware, 2009. / Principal faculty advisor: Douglas A. Archbald, School of Education. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--UCLA, 2007. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 287-298).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Virginia Commonwealth University, 2007. / Prepared for: School of Education. Bibliography: leaves 225-234. Also available online.

This thesis investigates the changing cinematic representations of a particular figure in horror culture: the Zombie. Current critical perspectives on the figure of the Zombie have yet to establish literary and cultural antecedents to the cinematic portrayal of the Zombie, preferring to position it as a mere product of American horror films of the 1930s. This study critiques this standpoint, arguing that global uses of the Zombie in differing media indicate a symbolic figure attuned to changing cultural contexts. The thesis therefore combines cultural and historical analysis with close textual readings of visual and written sources, paying close attention to the changing contexts of global film production and distribution. In order to present the cinematic Zombie as a product of historical, geographical and cultural shifts in horror film production, the thesis begins by critiquing existing accounts of Zombie film, drawing attention to the notion of generic canons of film as determined by both popular and academic film critics and draws attention to the fractured nature of genre as a method of positioning and critiquing film texts. In this, an interdisciplinary approach, drawing on the methods of cultural-historical and psycho-analytical critiques of horror film, is appraised and then applied to the texts under discussion. The first chapter positions a working thematic and visual deconstruction of the Zombie as an embodiment of the abject, positioning it as a result of changing cultural discussions in fiction on the nature of death and burial. This establishes a thematic framework to apply throughout the following chapters, noting alterations to representations. The second chapter offers a historicised account of appearances of the fictional Zombie before American cinematic productions of the 1930s, critiquing claims that this is the only original production context for the Zombie. The third chapter charts the changing production contexts of American Zombie film until the mid 1960s, to introduce the critiques of authorial importance placed upon the works of George A. Romero, which are discussed in Chapter 4. This critique in turn questions established notions of generic canon and international influence, which are discussed in Chapters 5 and 6. These chapters question the idea of American filmic product dominance in national contexts, charting the discussions of the Zombie body found in differing national cinemas. It is shown that dialogues of representation can be both nationally specific and meant for global audiences, brought about by the changing production and exhibition markets of the 1970s onwards. This in turn challenges the idea that the American model is the dominant representation in the contemporary Zombie film, discussed in Chapter 7. The thesis therefore charts three separate areas for discussion, that of historical, cultural and production contexts that can be held accountable for changing cinematic representations. Particular attention is placed on the thematic and visual use of the Zombie within differing media and firmly position cinematic representations as indicative of wider changes in popular media and their intended audiences. The thesis therefore offers a detailed historical and cultural taxonomy of Zombie film, furthering previous studies, but also presents a more detailed exploration of cultural contexts than previous critics have attempted.

The literature identifies multiple factors pertinent to learner characteristics and learning experiences that may promote doctoral education outcomes, and yet little quantitative research has examined relationships between those factors deemed important in the effectiveness of doctoral education. This study sought to examine predictive relationships among doctoral students’ learner characteristics, their involvement in mentorship and intellectual community, and doctoral education outcomes. Using Astin’s theory of involvement and the literature on signature pedagogies in doctoral education as conceptual guides, a survey instrument was constructed for the purpose of measuring variables identified as relevant to the effective formation of scholars. Central to the conceptualization of this study was academic involvement as represented by mentorship and intellectual community. The instrument was validated in a two-stage pilot testing process and administered to doctoral candidates at three public Texas higher education institutions. Of the 217 participants, the majority were female, White (Non-Hispanic), US citizens, and were pursuing education doctorates. Data were analyzed using multivariate statistical analyses. Reliability and validity estimates indicated psychometric integrity of the 20 observed variables measured to represent the constructs of mentorship and intellectual community. Results indicated that doctoral students’ learner characteristics were not notably predictive of doctoral students’ degree of involvement in mentorship and intellectual community (p < .05, R2 = .23). Doctoral students’ degree of academic involvement was strongly predictive of outcomes (p < .001, R2 = .58), particularly student satisfaction with the doctoral education experience and self-efficacy in conducting various forms of scholarly work. Of this effect, more tangible outcomes such as scholarly productivity and degree progress were not meaningfully related to academic involvement. Regardless of the frequency of academic involvement, students perceived faculty mentorship and intellectual community as very important. The predictive value and perceived importance of faculty mentorship and intellectual community highlight the critical role faculty and peer support plays in the doctoral learning experience, and imply that such teaching and learning practices should be promoted in doctoral education. Considering that satisfaction and self-efficacy tend to be related to other educational outcomes, those concerned with the overall quality of doctoral education should focus increased attention on building collegial, effective, productive relationships among and within program communities.

No description available.