No description available.

No description available.

Doctoral education in the U.S. is essential to cultivating professionals, scientists, and researchers capable of advancing and contributing to national goals. However, the engineering field warrants diversification to respond to global, social, and demographic demands. It is necessary to support students from historically marginalized backgrounds by acknowledging their unique experiences and encouraging them to activate their agency while faculty and institutional leaders work toward dismantling systemic barriers. Such practices may aid historically marginalized students in completing their degrees which will contribute to reduced attrition rates, time to degree, and degree completion. Over the past 10 years, Blacks and African Americans, Hispanic and Latinx people, and Native Americans and Indigenous people have demonstrated steady growth in doctoral education in engineering, despite several challenges and systemic barriers encountered during their doctoral journey. Even though they are growing in the field, attrition rates, time to degree, and degree completion remain an issue. Higher education researchers, workforce stakeholders, and educational organizations have been focusing on diversifying the STEM fields. Still, little attention has focused on the psychosocial elements that influence historically marginalized doctoral students' academic journeys. For example, research shows historically marginalized doctoral students encounter various challenges in doctoral education such as isolation, tokenism, and microaggression among others. To this end, it is essential to understand historically marginalized doctoral students' motivation and experiences in doctoral engineering education to identify strategies for mitigating these challenges as well as increase degree completion and decrease the time to degree. Guided by the situated expectancy-value theory and the graduate socialization framework, this dissertation consists of two manuscripts. The first manuscript is a qualitative holistic single case study that explores Latinx students' motivations to pursue a doctoral degree in engineering by investigating the following question: What values motivate Latinx students to pursue a doctoral degree in engineering? The second manuscript applies transcendental phenomenology to explore historically marginalized engineering doctoral students' socialization experiences by considering the following question: How do historically marginalized doctoral engineering students perceive their socialization experiences? The data sources for both manuscripts consist of interviews and surveys from participants in a research boot camp conducted between 2017-2021 from a larger national science foundation (NSF) funded project named the Dissertation Institute (DI). These studies are significant because they will provide implications for students who identify as members of these populations, research, practice, and policy concerning historically marginalized doctoral students' socialization experiences in engineering. Findings from the first study revealed that Latinx student motivation to pursue and persist in engineering doctoral degrees contained different subjective task values from SEVT and was influenced by educational and research experiences, role model interactions, and socio-cultural values. The second manuscript unearthed that students' socialization occurs in progressive, sequential, and connected stages. Each stage indicates students' development, even with the possible recurrence of previous stages depending on the challenges tied to systemic issues. Both manuscripts uncovered motivation and socialization vary from person to person contemplating various dimensions, and they are interconnected and influence students' journeys. In addition, the engineering context impacts both elements with respect to funding sources, research emphasis, and the persistent White male normative culture. / Doctor of Philosophy / Black and African Americans, Hispanic and Latinx, and Native Americans and Indigenous people have made significant contributions to doctoral education and the engineering field. Still, their representation in these contexts does not align with social, cultural, and political realities. Often these populations leave their doctoral programs or take longer to complete their degrees. Substantial academic research has investigated the challenges in doctoral education experienced by these populations. Still, little research focuses on their motivation to pursue or persist in these fields despite their lack of representation and socialization experiences. This dissertation focused on those elements and encompassed two studies in the engineering doctoral context that sought to answer the following questions: 1) What values motivate Latinx students to pursue a doctoral degree in engineering? 2) How do historically marginalized doctoral engineering students perceive their socialization experiences? The results from the first study showed Latinx students' motivation to pursue a doctoral degree in engineering matched their sense of self, and the attainment value represents it, as they considered completing an engineering Ph.D. will help accomplish their future academic and professional goals. Also, the importance of family and community drives their desire to earn a doctoral degree and retribute and help others in the future by being a role model. The second study evidenced that students' socialization is represented by progressive, sequential, and connected stages. The student's advancement in these stages and the ways they navigate various challenges indicated students' development. Combined, both studies demonstrated motivation and socialization vary from person to person, contemplating multiple dimensions, and are interconnected and influence students' journeys.

Research on doctoral student attrition has shown that one of the main reasons for which students do not persist in the Ph.D. is because of a poor relationship with their doctoral advisor. The importance of the advising relationship is especially true in science, math, and engineering degrees because of the science model of advising as the student is the advisor's employee, close collaborator, and apprentice. While much attention has been given to understanding the dynamics of the advising relationship, little attention has been given to on how these relationships commence or the context in which they begin. This study ultimately contributes to understanding the context of the inception of advisor- advisee relationships and how it ultimately relates to both faculty and doctoral student satisfaction. The following overarching research questions guide this dissertation: What are the processes for doctoral students to find advisors in engineering, science, and math? How is this process experienced by faculty and students? To address these questions, I conducted three studies. Through these studies, this dissertation: 1) Identified and described the types of advisor-advisee selection processes that exist in engineering, science, and math and examined trends and patterns across disciplines; 2) compared how two Chemical Engineering programs practice the advisor selection process and examined how faculty and graduate program directors negotiate agency in the process and 3) explored how students experience satisfaction of their basic needs in the advisor selection process of one Chemical Engineering program and examined which student attributes influence this satisfaction of needs. The results showed that there are multiple ways through which a student can find an advisor in science, math, and engineering doctoral program, but these vary widely by both discipline and field of study. The results also showed both students and faculty value the ability to select whom they will work with. However, both groups may also need support in making this decision regarding with whom they will work. Overall, the results of this dissertation highlight the importance of developing practices that balance an individual's need for support and autonomy to improve their satisfaction. / Doctor of Philosophy / Studies have shown that roughly half of the doctoral students do not complete the doctorate degree. One of the main reasons for this departure is students having a poor relationship with the doctoral advisor. This relationship is particularly important for science, math, and engineering doctorates as in these fields of study the advisor and student work closely together. Much research has looked at how the relationship can be improved; however, little work has addressed how these relationships begin and the environment in which they start. This dissertation encompasses three studies that address the following research questions: What are the processes for doctoral students to find advisors in engineering, science, and math? How do faculty and students experience this process? Through these studies, this dissertation: 1) Described the ways through which doctoral programs help students find advisors in engineering, science, and math and how these ways varied by disciplines and fields of study; 2) compared how two Chemical Engineering programs help students find advisors; 3) explored how students experienced finding an advisor of one Chemical Engineering program. The results showed that there are multiple ways through which a student can find an advisor, but these vary widely by both discipline and field of study. The results also showed both students and faculty value the ability to choose whom they will work with. However, they may also need support in making this decision. Overall, the results of this dissertation highlight the importance of developing practices that balance an individual’s need for support and free will to improve their satisfaction.

This study was designed to explore the impact of interdisciplinary research on the likelihood of a doctoral student obtaining a faculty job upon degree completion. Additionally, this study examined the important individual and institutional components of socialization that contribute to differences in career outcomes. A socialization framework likely substantiates the extent to which doctoral training environments are consequential to careers. Results were obtained from a sample of 28,928 doctoral students who participated in the 2021 Survey of Earned Doctorates. Hierarchical Generalized Linear Modeling was used because it measures the effects of both student characteristics and institutional factors. The findings from this analysis suggest student demographics are an important predictor, but the significance of those characteristics' changes when doctoral field of study is considered. Additionally, there are institutional characteristics that impact the likelihood of obtaining a faculty job related to the proportion of various student backgrounds, faculty backgrounds, and broad field of study, and the prestige of the institution. The independent variable of interest, interdisciplinary dissertation, was not statistically significant at the student level, but the proportion of doctoral students completing an interdisciplinary dissertation at the institution level was statistically significant and negatively associated with obtaining a faculty position adjusting for other institutional factors. These findings show the importance of applying hierarchical models to research questions related to career outcomes for doctoral students. Without a hierarchical model, this important differential finding across levels would have been hidden. / Doctor of Philosophy / There is currently a surplus in doctoral degree production compared to a shrinking number of faculty jobs in academia. Interdisciplinary research experiences in doctoral education are becoming more popular and it is important to determine how participation in these programs influences a student's career prospects upon receiving their degree. This study was designed to explore the impact of completing an interdisciplinary dissertation on the likelihood of obtaining a faculty job upon degree completion. A model was used which considers characteristics of individual students as well as characteristics of the institutions they attend. Findings of the study show that for a student, completing an interdisciplinary dissertation does not have a statistically significant influence on their likelihood of obtaining a faculty job. However, the proportion of students completing an interdisciplinary dissertation at a particular institution has a statistically significant negative association on the likelihood of obtaining a faculty job. Additionally, student demographics were only significant until the broad field of study was considered in the model. Beyond student characteristics, there are institutional characteristics that impact the likelihood of obtaining a faculty job and these are related to the representation of various student backgrounds, faculty backgrounds, institution prestige, and the proportion of doctoral students in each broad field. These findings show the importance of considering both student and institutional characteristics.

No

No

The extent of the application of the strategic planning process on dental education institutions was the problem in this descriptive study. The specific purpose was to describe the status of strategic planning based on the perceptions of the respondents. The organization, the characteristics and the impact of the strategic planning process would be investigated and described by this research. The total population of the doctoral and post-doctoral dental education institutions were included in the study. A specifically developed research instrument was used to elicit the perceptions of the respondents, both experts and chief executive officers (deans). All the experts (100 percent) completed and validated the research instrument and 65 percent of the dental education institutions completed the research instrument. The research instrument evaluated three areas of strategic planning: organization, characteristics, and the impact of strategic planning on their institutions. It was concluded that all dental education institutions participate in the strategic planning process and that the organization in the strategic planning process and that the organization and characteristics are generally similar to those in higher education institutions. The application of the strategic planning process has been proven beneficial in higher education institutions and there are perceived benefits in dental education. The study also concluded that there were conflicting perceptions that showed differences between dental and higher education institutions. These differences demonstrated that the dental education^institutions were not using the strategic planning process at the same functioning level as higher education institutions.

Thesis (Ph.D.), Faculty of Humanities, School of Education, University of the Witwatersrand, 2009 / People who hold doctoral degrees are considered valuable national resources able to produce knowledge to address pressing problems, and important sources of labour for the higher education sector. However, in 2006, only 1100 people graduated with doctoral degrees in South Africa. This limits the potential for research and improvements in higher education. In addition, 618 of those graduates were white, making it difficult to address equity concerns. Within the higher education sector there are debates about how to increase enrolments in doctoral education and the best way to run PhD programmes for effective learning, high quality research results and for efficiency. But there is little South African-based empirical research into what makes people undertake PhDs, how the programmes work and what learning and knowledge result. This study explores how different stakeholders – national and institutional policymakers, academic staff and doctoral people – understand the PhD; how these understandings influence the practice of doctoral education; and how different practices affect the PhD experience and the learning and knowledge produced. The primary research question I address is: “How do existing models and pedagogies of doctoral programmes shape the learning of doctoral people and the outcomes of doctoral programmes in South Africa?” The origins of the Doctor of Philosophy degree are often traced back to the nineteenth century reforms of German universities when the idea emerged that all scholars should be actively involved in research. But this is a simplistic view. By examining the evolution of the PhD in greater depth, it becomes clear that it has undergone continuous change and has always served both the high-minded pursuit of knowledge and the more prosaic pursuit of skills for employment. The literature reflects ongoing tension between the scholarly view of the PhD as knowledge generation by an emerging scholar, and the labour market view of the PhD as developing high-level research skills. In the South African context both of these views can be observed, but I also identified a view of the PhD as ongoing personal development through an engagement with knowledge. The three views of the PhD are underpinned by different discourses which inform the practice of doctoral education. In South Africa, the traditional model of individual supervision dominates, and it varies by discipline, department and supervisor. But patterns of practice can be discerned and I identify four of these and discuss how supervisors construct their individual supervision practice. Doctoral education is also a function of the people who do PhDs. Much of the research undertaken in the overdeveloped world focuses on younger people who are starting out on academic careers. However, in South Africa, many people doing PhDs are older and midway through careers which are often not academic. This leads me to propose a model of intersecting contexts, as an alternative to McAlpine and Norton‟s nested context model of doctoral education, which more accurately reflects the local situation. I discuss the PhD experience and make use of the intersecting contexts model to develop the notion of congruence between the PhD, the contexts and the PhD person with more positive experiences being related to higher degrees of congruence. Finally, I consider how the outcomes of doctoral education, the learning and knowledge which result, relate to the expectations of the different stakeholders. The research took the form of a qualitative study with a multiple case-study design employing theoretical replication. I examined doctoral education in four academic units at three South African universities with the units selected to represent different disciplines. All four units were in previously advantaged universities from the English-speaking tradition and all were successfully producing PhD graduates. These rich pictures of how doctoral education takes place contribute empirical evidence to current debates about the PhD in South Africa. At a conceptual level I identify the competing discourses about what a PhD is. I provide a more nuanced understanding of the practice of doctoral education within the overarching model of individual supervision. The intersecting contexts model provides a way to understand the expectations and circumstances of doctoral people and the notion of congruence illuminates their varied experiences. Finally, the study confirms that the outcomes of doctoral education, in terms of learning and knowledge generated, meet at least some of the expectations of policy-makers, supervisors and people who do PhDs.

This research considers the experiences and difficulties that professional doctoral students face and the supervision relationship. Winnicott’s psychoanalytical ideas are used to understand and make sense of the less visible dynamics that shape the professional doctoral students’ narratives. Semi-structured interviews are used to sensitively explore in-depth the nature of difficult experiences. The method of analysis was both compatible with the psychoanalytical theoretical perspective and with the qualitative interview method. The analysis provided an opportunity to listen to and make sense of the professional doctoral students’ narratives in four different ways. The thesis begins with a review of the wider doctoral education research context. Changes, taking place in that context, are considered, looking particularly at the impact of the knowledge economy on doctoral educational research in general and, more specifically, on professional doctoral educational research. Literature within doctoral education highlights supervision models and psychoanalytical supervision models designed for doctoral supervision practice and doctoral student support. Key findings relate to the professional doctoral students’ expectations and the perceptions that shape their difficult experiences. Firstly, professional doctoral students have little knowledge of doctoral supervision before beginning their first doctoral supervision relationship. The professional doctoral students’ expectations and perceptions influence their supervision relationships. When the professional doctoral students negotiate their expectations, they experience a productive working supervision relationship. However, when professional doctoral students exclude difficult experiences from their supervision relationships they do not get an opportunity to make sense of their experiences. Informal pastoral support, such as cohorts, peer groups and families, provide additional space for the professional doctoral students to talk about their difficult experiences. However, this thesis shows that informal support does not provide an academic framework for the professional doctoral student to understand their difficult experience within a doctoral research context. In contrast, this research suggests that the supervision relationship between the professional doctoral student and the supervisor can offer a supervision space informed by Winnicott’s psychoanalytical ideas. In this space supervisors and supervisees can explore difficult professional doctoral student experiences in a creative, playful and academic environment. The thesis concludes by considering the implications for doctoral supervisors and for professional doctoral students. In doing so, I offer recommendations that include points to consider for Higher Education policy, professional doctoral education and supervision training.