No description available.

The struggles of Latino males along the education pipeline have been well documented in recent history. Despite this increased research focus, gaps continue to exist in the literature on Latino males in education settings. Currently, the literature predominately centers on the Latino male experience in the K-12, community college, and 4-year college environments. The educational experiences of Latino males in doctoral education settings have not yet been presented. This study examines and provides insight into the Latino male doctoral student journey by detailing Latino male doctoral student experiences and perceptions at a predominately White, research-intensive, public university. In light of the deficit model research surrounding men of color, it is imperative to present the narratives of successful, high achieving Latino males along their pursuit of a doctoral degree. This study critically examines the experiences and perceptions of Latino males in pursuit of a PhD within the humanities or social sciences at a predominately White, research-intensive, public university. The mission of the study was to shed light on thematic influences, factors, and emotions that led these individuals to take interest and pursue a doctoral degree. The study's findings are presented under the lens of Latino critical race theory and gender role conflict in order to develop a thorough understanding of the internal and external influences on the Latino male doctoral student experience. My dissertation's unique contributions are its addition of the Latino male doctoral student experience to the literature on Latino males in educational contexts. Furthermore, this study's unique contributions include a new perspective on how Latino males perceive their gender roles and responsibilities as successful doctoral students. The Latino male doctoral students in this study displayed resilience during moments of vulnerability and embrace responsibility during challenging circumstances. These actions were efforts to maintain control of their doctoral education experience and to create a new image for Latino masculinity. As the findings indicate, the Latino male doctoral student experience at a large predominately White, research-intensive, public university is filled with complexity, adversity, and determination. / text

This study is situated within a context of the changing role and value of the university, particularly in terms of a renewed focus on the importance of 'practical' research. It seeks to explore candidates' experiences of the culture of three doctoral research degrees in the School of education, RMIT University. The degrees in question are the Doctor of Philosophy by thesis, the Doctor of Philosophy by project and the Doctor of Education. The research sought to problematise and contest current understandings of doctoral candidates' experiences by highlighting complexities in the process and identifying differences and similarities between each of the three degrees. The main research question is 'How do candidates perceive the respective cultures of traditional, practice-based and professional doctoral education?' A nested, multiple-case study of the three doctoral modes was used to address three sub-questions, which focused on the norms and practices of candidates ; the extent to which their needs and expectations were met; and differences in their notions of research and practice. Differences and similarities between the degrees are analysed, leading to answers to the fourth sub-question which sought to identify what can be learned in terms of supervisor pedagogy and learning support. The research design was underpinned by a Bourdieuian epistemology and a critical theoretical perspective. Bourdieu's theory of practice with its conceptual tools of habitus, field, capital, agent and practice allowed analysis of candidates' experiences and the doctoral structures within which their practice resides through one critical lens. The data revealed many issues common to all doctoral programs. These include the importance of understanding the various habitus' and relative amounts of cultural capital of candidates, and the impact of a perceived lack of learning community. Other findings related to ambivalence regarding the types of cultural and social capital appropriate for do ctoral candidates not aiming to work in an academic environment where these are in conflict with the workplace. Three meta-themes were developed: tensions between and within the field; challenges to autonomous principles; and the importance of habitus and cultural capital in doctoral study. The study added to the literature aimed at increasing understanding of candidates' trajectories toward success in the doctoral field, thereby informing supervisor and learning support pedagogy. Five recommendations were proposed, aimed at producing a vibrant doctoral learning community with a deeper understanding of candidates' issues.

This study examines the impact of academic and personal life on graduate student persistence and transformation. Of particular interest are the relationships, emotions, and life management skills required throughout the graduate experience and how socialization, emotional intelligence, and advising aid students through their academic program. With an average of seven to eight years required to complete a doctoral program, life happens. Students enter and leave relationships, children are born, family members have emergencies, health issues arise, and emotional growth takes place. Therefore, students transform not only academically, but in many ways. These are intertwined as evidenced by the data-derived system representation. The importance of understanding the interconnected links in graduate experience spans academic, social, economic, and societal spheres. Each year hundreds of thousands of students enter graduate school. However, for doctoral students, there is an enormous gap between acceptance and completion. After seven years, approximately 50 percent complete their program and after ten years the rate climbs to only 57 percent (Council of Graduate Schools, 2010). This study offers a systemic representation and a four-stage model of graduate student development, incorporating student-identified factors: Faculty Impact, Life Management, Relationships, Playing the Game, Growth/Transformation, Emotions, and Reward/Purpose. Stage I: Orientation and Socialization Stage II: Adjustment and Transition Stage III: Navigation and Transformation Stage IV: Completion and Advancement The results, presented as a systems-based model, along with analysis, may be used to support faculty, advisors, and administrators in creating better advising, orientation, evaluation, and support systems. Departmental policies may be improved to identify at-risk students, provide mentorship opportunities, or obtain continual feedback to understand the underlying factors that may stop students from progressing. This research might also help identify students during the application/admission process. The methodological framework used to create the system produced in this study is Interactive Qualitative Analysis (Northcutt & McCoy, 2004), a methodology that provides the quantitative rigor of algorithmically generated data analysis, combined with the qualitative descriptiveness of interviews, in order to provide insights into the drivers of graduate school persistence. This methodology uses a systematic, protocol-driven research procedure to construct a unified, descriptive diagram to illustrate the phenomenon. / text

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Thesis (M.A.)--Miami University, Dept. of Psychology, 2009. / Title from first page of PDF document. Includes bibliographical references (p. 70-79).

No description available.

<p>  </p> <p>Higher education has embedded systemic disadvantages for women within Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines. As a result, parenting women who pursue doctoral degrees in STEM fields face an uphill battle; yet the literature has given short shrift to the experiences of women who have children while training to become scientific professionals. This absence exists despite the fact that parenting is frequently an underlying theme in the literature on women’s decreased participation in STEM disciplines. Further, studies that do address parenting women’s experiences in higher education at large focus on individual characteristics and are limited by an emphasis on gender at the expense of other social inequalities. These inequalities have remained persistent and poorly understood. To re-imagine STEM higher education as an institution, it is necessary to understand the everyday social relations embedded within organizations that are a part of the institution. This institutional ethnography addresses these gaps. This study aimed to explore the social relations of the STEM higher education that shaped women’s experiences in STEM doctoral programs. Using Intersectionality and Inequality Regimes frameworks, this study examined women’s interactions with the institution, thereby providing a highly contextualized perspective on the STEM higher education institution. Data collection followed an emergent design with interviews with parenting women in STEM doctoral programs. Through these interviews, narrative events were identified that helped to isolate institutional processes that shaped their experiences. From there, data collection involved interviews with institutional informants and analysis of institutional texts (e.g., graduate handbooks, university policies). Data analysis followed narrative analytic methods using the Listening Guide, Labovian narrative analysis, and institutional ethnographic ruling relations mapping. Therein, three key studies from the data are shared. First, a narrative analysis with interpretation by Inequality Regimes showed how regimes of inequality shaped the experiences of two women who were pregnant and parenting while pursuing STEM doctorates. Second, an institutional ethnographic inquiry into the institutional relations that made up the lactation rooms and women’s interactions with them and revealed a decentralized organization that made accessing the spaces challenging for doctoral student women. And third, an institutional ethnographic analysis of women’s experiences with parental leave illustrated the lack of responsibility to ensure that students know about parental leave and could use the policy. Findings examine the institution’s organization around an ideal worker that many participants struggled to perform; this resulted in a diffuse and disorganized approach to policy and procedures for parenting women. Findings indicate that the neoliberal discourses in the institution shaped these experiences. The institution's masculine, white, classed nature results in it being insular to parenting women. While women persist within this environment, they face adversity emergent from the relations that make up the institution. I offer recommendations to improve gaps in consideration for parenting students, and a call to transform the overall institution to support parenting women at this critical juncture in their training. </p>