Worth doing but not worth having? The influence of personal aspirations and career expectations on the value of a doctorate

IF 1.8 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education Pub Date : 2022-10-25 DOI:10.1108/sgpe-02-2022-0012
K. Guccione, Bill Bryan
{"title":"Worth doing but not worth having? The influence of personal aspirations and career expectations on the value of a doctorate","authors":"K. Guccione, Bill Bryan","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-02-2022-0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this study is to understand the interaction between the component domains of doctoral value to identify those which have a greater influence on overall perceptions of the value of a doctorate. This study also investigates what may lead an individual to say the doctorate was not worth doing.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nUsing Bryan and Guccione’s (2018) conceptual model of “doctoral value”, this study used a qualitative survey, to examine 261 perceptions of the value of the doctorate in a range of employment contexts.\n\n\nFindings\nIndividual perceptions of value are dynamically influenced by the fulfilment of expectations, career achievements and the employer’s perception of the doctorate’s value. The authors found that the circumstances of respondents’ current employment are the most common predictor of overall perceived value and that those who reported that their doctorates were “not worth doing” attributed this to lack of a positive career outcome.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nA recurring concept was that respondents considered that their doctorate had been “worth doing” for the value it conveyed to them personally, but not “worth having” because of its low value to employers. This new understanding illustrates the complexity of decision-making and the individual career timelines that influence value. This study positions the “career value” and “personal value” domains as determinant in informing individual value judgements. The findings of this study lend weight to calls for doctoral education to focus on non-academic careers and also inspire further investigation into how non-academic employers recruit, motivate and value doctoral graduates.\n","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-02-2022-0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to understand the interaction between the component domains of doctoral value to identify those which have a greater influence on overall perceptions of the value of a doctorate. This study also investigates what may lead an individual to say the doctorate was not worth doing. Design/methodology/approach Using Bryan and Guccione’s (2018) conceptual model of “doctoral value”, this study used a qualitative survey, to examine 261 perceptions of the value of the doctorate in a range of employment contexts. Findings Individual perceptions of value are dynamically influenced by the fulfilment of expectations, career achievements and the employer’s perception of the doctorate’s value. The authors found that the circumstances of respondents’ current employment are the most common predictor of overall perceived value and that those who reported that their doctorates were “not worth doing” attributed this to lack of a positive career outcome. Originality/value A recurring concept was that respondents considered that their doctorate had been “worth doing” for the value it conveyed to them personally, but not “worth having” because of its low value to employers. This new understanding illustrates the complexity of decision-making and the individual career timelines that influence value. This study positions the “career value” and “personal value” domains as determinant in informing individual value judgements. The findings of this study lend weight to calls for doctoral education to focus on non-academic careers and also inspire further investigation into how non-academic employers recruit, motivate and value doctoral graduates.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
值得做但不值得拥有?个人抱负和职业期望对博士学位价值的影响
目的本研究的目的是了解博士价值组成领域之间的相互作用,以确定那些对博士价值的整体感知有更大影响的领域。这项研究还调查了可能导致个人认为博士学位不值得做的事情。设计/方法论/方法使用Bryan和Guccione(2018)的“博士价值”概念模型,本研究使用了一项定性调查,考察了261种在各种就业背景下对博士价值的看法。发现个人对价值的感知受到期望实现、职业成就和雇主对博士学位价值的感知的动态影响。作者发现,受访者目前的就业情况是整体感知价值的最常见预测因素,而那些认为自己的博士学位“不值得”的人则将其归因于缺乏积极的职业结果。独创性/价值一个反复出现的概念是,受访者认为他们的博士学位“值得做”,因为它传达给他们个人的价值,但不“值得拥有”,因为其对雇主的价值很低。这一新的理解说明了决策的复杂性以及影响价值的个人职业时间表。这项研究将“职业价值”和“个人价值”领域定位为个人价值判断的决定因素。这项研究的发现有助于呼吁博士教育专注于非学术职业,也有助于进一步调查非学术雇主如何招聘、激励和重视博士毕业生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education
Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
How do Danish humanities PhD school leaders constitute their roles? Interactions of biography, place and time Advancing doctoral student professional development through a strengths-based cohort program Understanding how socio-historical contexts inform approaches to improving racial climate in stem graduate education within the United States Developing writing productivity in a graduate support community “We can work on this”: exploring supervisor approaches to feedback in the context of writing for a professional doctorate
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1