Pub Date : 2023-12-07DOI: 10.1108/sgpe-08-2023-0074
Hatice Nuriler, Søren S.E. Bengtsen
Purpose
Institutional framings of doctoral education mostly do not recognize the existential dimension of doctoral experience. This paper aims to offer an expanded understanding of experiences of doctoral researchers in the humanities with the concept of entangled becoming. This concept is developed through an existential lens by using Søren Kierkegaard’s philosophy – particularly his emphasis on emotions such as passion, anxiety and despair – and Denise Batchelor’s derived concept of vulnerable voices.
Design/methodology/approach
The conceptual framing is used for an empirical study based on ethnographic interviews with 10 doctoral researchers and supplementary observational notes from fieldwork at a university in Denmark. Two of the interview cases were selected to showcase variation across lived experiences and how doctoral researchers voice their entangled becoming.
Findings
Common experiences such as loneliness, insecurity(ies), vulnerability(ies) or passion for one’s research were identified across the interviews. On the other hand, this study shows that each doctoral journey in the humanities envelops a distinct web of entanglements, entailing distinct navigation, that makes each case a unique story and each doctoral voice a specific one.
Originality/value
Combining an existential philosophical perspective with a qualitative study, the paper offers an alternative perspective for doctoral education. It connects the humanities doctoral experience to the broader condition of human existence and the sophisticated uniqueness of each researcher’s becoming.
{"title":"The entangled becoming in humanities doctoral education","authors":"Hatice Nuriler, Søren S.E. Bengtsen","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-08-2023-0074","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-08-2023-0074","url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\u0000<p>Institutional framings of doctoral education mostly do not recognize the existential dimension of doctoral experience. This paper aims to offer an expanded understanding of experiences of doctoral researchers in the humanities with the concept of entangled becoming. This concept is developed through an existential lens by using Søren Kierkegaard’s philosophy – particularly his emphasis on emotions such as passion, anxiety and despair – and Denise Batchelor’s derived concept of vulnerable voices.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\u0000<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\u0000<p>The conceptual framing is used for an empirical study based on ethnographic interviews with 10 doctoral researchers and supplementary observational notes from fieldwork at a university in Denmark. Two of the interview cases were selected to showcase variation across lived experiences and how doctoral researchers voice their entangled becoming.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\u0000<h3>Findings</h3>\u0000<p>Common experiences such as loneliness, insecurity(ies), vulnerability(ies) or passion for one’s research were identified across the interviews. On the other hand, this study shows that each doctoral journey in the humanities envelops a distinct web of entanglements, entailing distinct navigation, that makes each case a unique story and each doctoral voice a specific one.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\u0000<h3>Originality/value</h3>\u0000<p>Combining an existential philosophical perspective with a qualitative study, the paper offers an alternative perspective for doctoral education. It connects the humanities doctoral experience to the broader condition of human existence and the sophisticated uniqueness of each researcher’s becoming.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138508443","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-28DOI: 10.1108/sgpe-04-2023-0033
W. Marcus Lambert, Nanda Nana, Suwaiba Afonja, Ahsan Saeed, Avelino C. Amado, Linnie M. Golightly
Purpose
Structural mentoring barriers are policies, practices and cultural norms that collectively disadvantage marginalized groups and perpetuate disparities in mentoring. This study aims to better understand structural mentoring barriers at the postdoctoral training stage, which has a direct impact on faculty diversity and national efforts to retain underrepresented groups in research careers.
Design/methodology/approach
A diverse sample of postdoctoral scholars (“postdocs”) from across the USA were asked to participate in focus groups to discuss their training experiences. The authors conducted five 90-min focus groups with 32 biomedical postdocs, including 20 (63%) women and 15 (47%) individuals from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups (URG).
Findings
A social-ecological framework was used to categorize both the upstream and downstream manifestations of structural mentoring barriers, as well as mentoring barriers, overall. Notable structural barriers included: academic politics and scientific hierarchy; inequalities resulting from mentor prestige; the (over) reliance on one mentor; the lack of formal training for academic and non-academic careers; and the lack of institutional diversity and institutional mentor training. To overcome these barriers, postdocs strongly encouraged developing a network or team of mentors and recommended institutional interventions that create more comprehensive professional development, mentorship and belonging.
Originality/value
For postdoctoral scientists, structural mentoring barriers can permeate down to institutional, interpersonal and individual levels, impeding a successful transition to an independent research career. This work provides strong evidence for promoting mentorship networks and cultivating a “mentoring milieu” that fosters a supportive community and a strong culture of mentorship at all levels.
{"title":"Addressing structural mentoring barriers in postdoctoral training: a qualitative study","authors":"W. Marcus Lambert, Nanda Nana, Suwaiba Afonja, Ahsan Saeed, Avelino C. Amado, Linnie M. Golightly","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-04-2023-0033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-04-2023-0033","url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\u0000<p>Structural mentoring barriers are policies, practices and cultural norms that collectively disadvantage marginalized groups and perpetuate disparities in mentoring. This study aims to better understand structural mentoring barriers at the postdoctoral training stage, which has a direct impact on faculty diversity and national efforts to retain underrepresented groups in research careers.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\u0000<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\u0000<p>A diverse sample of postdoctoral scholars (“postdocs”) from across the USA were asked to participate in focus groups to discuss their training experiences. The authors conducted five 90-min focus groups with 32 biomedical postdocs, including 20 (63%) women and 15 (47%) individuals from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups (URG).</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\u0000<h3>Findings</h3>\u0000<p>A social-ecological framework was used to categorize both the upstream and downstream manifestations of structural mentoring barriers, as well as mentoring barriers, overall. Notable structural barriers included: academic politics and scientific hierarchy; inequalities resulting from mentor prestige; the (over) reliance on one mentor; the lack of formal training for academic and non-academic careers; and the lack of institutional diversity and institutional mentor training. To overcome these barriers, postdocs strongly encouraged developing a network or team of mentors and recommended institutional interventions that create more comprehensive professional development, mentorship and belonging.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\u0000<h3>Originality/value</h3>\u0000<p>For postdoctoral scientists, structural mentoring barriers can permeate down to institutional, interpersonal and individual levels, impeding a successful transition to an independent research career. This work provides strong evidence for promoting mentorship networks and cultivating a “mentoring milieu” that fosters a supportive community and a strong culture of mentorship at all levels.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":"104 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138508432","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-28DOI: 10.1108/sgpe-11-2022-0072
Pankhuri Aggarwal, Erica Szkody, Eleni Kapoulea, Katharine Daniel, Kirsten Bootes, Jennifer Boland, Jason Washburn, Amy Peterman
Purpose
This study aims to examine the unique lived experiences of international graduate students in light of COVID-19 and the recent sociopolitical climate in the USA (e.g. Black Lives Matter movement, protests against anti-Asian hate crimes and gun violence).
Design/methodology/approach
The authors used an exploratory qualitative design embedded within a constructivist/interpretivist paradigm. A total of 31 international health service psychology graduate students completed an online survey, 17 of whom participated in a 60-min one-on-one semi-structured interview.
Findings
Participants reported facing a range of difficulties (e.g. travel ban/inability to spend time with family, visa-related concerns, racism, decreased support) during the global pandemic and the recent sociopolitical climate in the USA. A total of 48 themes were identified and organized into six domains: COVID-19-related stress and worry, experiences of racism/discrimination, coping mechanisms, support received, recommendations for programs and higher learning institutions and advice for other international graduate students.
Originality/value
The recent sociopolitical climate in the US exacerbated some of the preexisting inequities for international graduate students due to their international student status and the global pandemic. Although few in number, students also spoke about some positive changes as a result of these major historical and political events. Implications for graduate education, clinical practice and policymaking are discussed.
{"title":"International students’ experiences in graduate programs during COVID-19 and recent sociopolitical climate in the USA","authors":"Pankhuri Aggarwal, Erica Szkody, Eleni Kapoulea, Katharine Daniel, Kirsten Bootes, Jennifer Boland, Jason Washburn, Amy Peterman","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-11-2022-0072","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-11-2022-0072","url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\u0000<p>This study aims to examine the unique lived experiences of international graduate students in light of COVID-19 and the recent sociopolitical climate in the USA (e.g. Black Lives Matter movement, protests against anti-Asian hate crimes and gun violence).</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\u0000<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\u0000<p>The authors used an exploratory qualitative design embedded within a constructivist/interpretivist paradigm. A total of 31 international health service psychology graduate students completed an online survey, 17 of whom participated in a 60-min one-on-one semi-structured interview.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\u0000<h3>Findings</h3>\u0000<p>Participants reported facing a range of difficulties (e.g. travel ban/inability to spend time with family, visa-related concerns, racism, decreased support) during the global pandemic and the recent sociopolitical climate in the USA. A total of 48 themes were identified and organized into six domains: COVID-19-related stress and worry, experiences of racism/discrimination, coping mechanisms, support received, recommendations for programs and higher learning institutions and advice for other international graduate students.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\u0000<h3>Originality/value</h3>\u0000<p>The recent sociopolitical climate in the US exacerbated some of the preexisting inequities for international graduate students due to their international student status and the global pandemic. Although few in number, students also spoke about some positive changes as a result of these major historical and political events. Implications for graduate education, clinical practice and policymaking are discussed.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138542088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-10DOI: 10.1108/sgpe-09-2023-090
Karri Holley
{"title":"Editorial: Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education during a decade of change","authors":"Karri Holley","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-09-2023-090","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-09-2023-090","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139281283","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-09DOI: 10.1108/sgpe-02-2023-0017
Julianne A. Wenner, Megan Frary, Paul J. Simmonds
Purpose Historically, graduate education’s goal was to prepare academics; now most science, technology, engineering and/or mathematics (STEM) graduate students (GSs) go on to nonacademic careers. STEM GSs must be equipped for success regardless of career aspirations, which can be done by strengthening GSs’ professional identities. This study aims to explore an interdisciplinary partnership designed to strengthen STEM GS professional identity. Design/methodology/approach The STEM Partnership Project (SPP), asked STEM GSs to serve as disciplinary experts and teach STEM content to elementary teacher candidates (TCs) so the TCs could design and teach an elementary science lesson. GSs also enrolled in a one-credit course to support SPP participation and activities. Over five semesters, the authors collected data from 28 STEM GSs across different disciplines and degree programs in the form of course assignments, surveys and interviews. Findings The SPP supported the development of a professional identity by having GSs serve as and feel like experts; increasing GSs’ sense of belonging in their field; increasing GSs’ self-confidence that they could (learn to) teach a wide variety of audiences; and raising GSs’ awareness of their ability to serve others via their field. Originality/value The SPP’s outcomes were consistent across STEM disciplines, did not require GSs to take on large amounts of coursework, nor did it cost much beyond materials for the various lessons. Furthermore, the key components that strengthened GSs’ professional identities could be adapted for different contexts and institutions.
{"title":"Supporting STEM graduate students in strengthening their professional identity through an authentic interdisciplinary partnership","authors":"Julianne A. Wenner, Megan Frary, Paul J. Simmonds","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-02-2023-0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-02-2023-0017","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose Historically, graduate education’s goal was to prepare academics; now most science, technology, engineering and/or mathematics (STEM) graduate students (GSs) go on to nonacademic careers. STEM GSs must be equipped for success regardless of career aspirations, which can be done by strengthening GSs’ professional identities. This study aims to explore an interdisciplinary partnership designed to strengthen STEM GS professional identity. Design/methodology/approach The STEM Partnership Project (SPP), asked STEM GSs to serve as disciplinary experts and teach STEM content to elementary teacher candidates (TCs) so the TCs could design and teach an elementary science lesson. GSs also enrolled in a one-credit course to support SPP participation and activities. Over five semesters, the authors collected data from 28 STEM GSs across different disciplines and degree programs in the form of course assignments, surveys and interviews. Findings The SPP supported the development of a professional identity by having GSs serve as and feel like experts; increasing GSs’ sense of belonging in their field; increasing GSs’ self-confidence that they could (learn to) teach a wide variety of audiences; and raising GSs’ awareness of their ability to serve others via their field. Originality/value The SPP’s outcomes were consistent across STEM disciplines, did not require GSs to take on large amounts of coursework, nor did it cost much beyond materials for the various lessons. Furthermore, the key components that strengthened GSs’ professional identities could be adapted for different contexts and institutions.","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":"275 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135043559","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-29DOI: 10.1108/sgpe-03-2023-0026
Jarett D. Haley, Amber N. Williams, Rosemary J. Perez, Claire K. Robbins
Purpose The purpose of this study is to explore how US graduate students described their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) education and engagement experiences outside their academic departments. Design/methodology/approach This study used a critical constructivist qualitative approach and methods (i.e. interviews) to explore how 44 graduate students across various disciplines and fields at two public research institutions in the USA described their DEI education and engagement experiences outside their departments. Findings Students identified expanded DEI and professional knowledge as key learning outcomes, while also highlighting the benefits and negative effects of the identity-centered (dis)connection, community and personal fulfillment that came from these experiences. Research limitations/implications Given that DEI education and engagement opportunities addressed some students’ needs and were unsatisfactory for others, more scholarship on the nature of these experiences is needed to better understand factors that contribute to students’ desirable and undesirable outcomes. There are also practical implications for faculty who advise graduate students and administrators who are responsible for funding the campus spaces in which these experiences occurred (e.g. graduate colleges, identity-based student organizations). Originality/value Few studies have explored graduate students’ participation in DEI education and engagement opportunities outside of their academic departments. Consequently, the efficacy of these initiatives, and the extent to which students benefit from them, warrant investigation. This study, thus, adds to researchers’ and practitioners’ understanding of this topic by highlighting the benefits and limitations of these experiences for graduate students.
{"title":"Learning and (dis)connection: graduate students’ experiences seeking diversity, equity and inclusion education and engagement opportunities","authors":"Jarett D. Haley, Amber N. Williams, Rosemary J. Perez, Claire K. Robbins","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-03-2023-0026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-03-2023-0026","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose The purpose of this study is to explore how US graduate students described their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) education and engagement experiences outside their academic departments. Design/methodology/approach This study used a critical constructivist qualitative approach and methods (i.e. interviews) to explore how 44 graduate students across various disciplines and fields at two public research institutions in the USA described their DEI education and engagement experiences outside their departments. Findings Students identified expanded DEI and professional knowledge as key learning outcomes, while also highlighting the benefits and negative effects of the identity-centered (dis)connection, community and personal fulfillment that came from these experiences. Research limitations/implications Given that DEI education and engagement opportunities addressed some students’ needs and were unsatisfactory for others, more scholarship on the nature of these experiences is needed to better understand factors that contribute to students’ desirable and undesirable outcomes. There are also practical implications for faculty who advise graduate students and administrators who are responsible for funding the campus spaces in which these experiences occurred (e.g. graduate colleges, identity-based student organizations). Originality/value Few studies have explored graduate students’ participation in DEI education and engagement opportunities outside of their academic departments. Consequently, the efficacy of these initiatives, and the extent to which students benefit from them, warrant investigation. This study, thus, adds to researchers’ and practitioners’ understanding of this topic by highlighting the benefits and limitations of these experiences for graduate students.","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135200656","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-20DOI: 10.1108/sgpe-01-2023-0010
Michael L. Tidwell, Ellis S. Logan
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand demographic group (race, first-generation college graduate, gender, age) differences among perceived family and faculty social and family financial support within the US graduate school admissions pipeline in the social sciences. Design/methodology/approach Using data from a cross-sectional convenience sample survey ( N = 99), this paper looks at ordinal social support variables (faculty member support, family social support and family financial support) by demographic groups. This paper uses a Mann–Whitney U test to compare first-generation status, race and gender and a Kruskal–Wallis H test to compare age groups. Findings This paper finds that applicants over 27 years old had significantly less faculty support in the graduate admissions pipeline compared to other age groups; differences in faculty support across race were marginally significant ( p = 0.057). Regarding family social support, this paper finds first-generation applicants, male applicants and applicants over 27 years old report lower levels of support. Finally, this paper finds first-generation applicants and applicants over 27 years old report lower levels of familial financial support. Originality/value Previous literature on graduate admissions – published in this journal (Pieper and Krsmanovic, 2022) and others – does not consider experiences up to and before applicants hit the “submit” button on graduate applicants, which the authors term the graduate admissions pipeline. Instead, most previous literatures focus on faculty committees and validity of required application materials. Thus, this study begins to answer Posselt and Grodsky’s (2017) call to develop an understanding of applicant experiences and support within the graduate admissions pipeline.
本文的目的是了解美国社会科学研究生院招生管道中，人口统计学群体(种族、第一代大学毕业生、性别、年龄)在感知家庭和教师社会和家庭经济支持方面的差异。设计/方法/方法使用横断面方便抽样调查(N = 99)的数据，本文按人口统计群体研究了有序的社会支持变量(教员支持、家庭社会支持和家庭经济支持)。本文采用Mann-Whitney U检验比较第一代社会地位、种族和性别，采用Kruskal-Wallis H检验比较年龄组。研究发现，与其他年龄组相比，27岁以上的申请人在研究生录取管道中获得的教师支持明显较少;不同种族的教师支持差异有显著性差异(p = 0.057)。在家庭社会支持方面，本文发现第一代申请人、男性申请人和27岁以上申请人的支持水平较低。最后，本文发现第一代申请人和27岁以上的申请人报告的家庭经济支持水平较低。先前发表在本刊(Pieper and Krsmanovic, 2022)和其他人上的关于研究生入学的文献没有考虑申请人点击研究生申请“提交”按钮之前的经历，作者将其称为研究生入学管道。相反，大多数先前的文献关注的是学院委员会和所需申请材料的有效性。因此，本研究开始回应Posselt和Grodsky(2017)的呼吁，即在研究生招生管道中发展对申请人经历和支持的理解。
{"title":"Differences in support within the social science graduate admissions pipeline","authors":"Michael L. Tidwell, Ellis S. Logan","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-01-2023-0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-01-2023-0010","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand demographic group (race, first-generation college graduate, gender, age) differences among perceived family and faculty social and family financial support within the US graduate school admissions pipeline in the social sciences. Design/methodology/approach Using data from a cross-sectional convenience sample survey ( N = 99), this paper looks at ordinal social support variables (faculty member support, family social support and family financial support) by demographic groups. This paper uses a Mann–Whitney U test to compare first-generation status, race and gender and a Kruskal–Wallis H test to compare age groups. Findings This paper finds that applicants over 27 years old had significantly less faculty support in the graduate admissions pipeline compared to other age groups; differences in faculty support across race were marginally significant ( p = 0.057). Regarding family social support, this paper finds first-generation applicants, male applicants and applicants over 27 years old report lower levels of support. Finally, this paper finds first-generation applicants and applicants over 27 years old report lower levels of familial financial support. Originality/value Previous literature on graduate admissions – published in this journal (Pieper and Krsmanovic, 2022) and others – does not consider experiences up to and before applicants hit the “submit” button on graduate applicants, which the authors term the graduate admissions pipeline. Instead, most previous literatures focus on faculty committees and validity of required application materials. Thus, this study begins to answer Posselt and Grodsky’s (2017) call to develop an understanding of applicant experiences and support within the graduate admissions pipeline.","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136312763","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-08DOI: 10.1108/sgpe-12-2022-0078
Sónia Cardoso, Cristina Sin
Purpose Internationalisation is one of the significant manifestations of the ongoing transformation of doctoral education. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the perspectives of Portuguese universities and doctoral students regarding the importance of internationalisation and the strategies to achieve it in doctoral education. Design/methodology/approach A sample of 118 doctoral programme websites from 27 universities (15 public, 12 private) served as the data source of university perspectives of internationalisation. Doctoral students’ perspectives on the same topic were collected through 31 interviews, 27 conducted in seven focus groups and four individually, with first-year doctoral students from three Portuguese public universities. Content analysis was performed on the two sets of data. Findings According to university and doctoral students’ perspectives, internationalisation assumes an important role in Portuguese doctoral education and is being integrated through specific strategies. Strategies for attracting and recruiting international students appear to take a back seat compared to strategies which offer students international experience through immersion in international environments in their home institutions. While expressing the potential impediments, undesirable side effects and conditions that internationalisation must meet, students seem to take a critical stance towards it and towards the institutional strategies designed to promote it. Originality/value This paper addresses a topic which does not appear to receive much attention in doctoral education research and, to this extent, advances knowledge on the internationalisation of doctoral education.
{"title":"The internationalisation of doctoral education and the strategies to achieve it: the perspectives of Portuguese universities and doctoral students","authors":"Sónia Cardoso, Cristina Sin","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-12-2022-0078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-12-2022-0078","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Purpose\u0000Internationalisation is one of the significant manifestations of the ongoing transformation of doctoral education. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the perspectives of Portuguese universities and doctoral students regarding the importance of internationalisation and the strategies to achieve it in doctoral education.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design/methodology/approach\u0000A sample of 118 doctoral programme websites from 27 universities (15 public, 12 private) served as the data source of university perspectives of internationalisation. Doctoral students’ perspectives on the same topic were collected through 31 interviews, 27 conducted in seven focus groups and four individually, with first-year doctoral students from three Portuguese public universities. Content analysis was performed on the two sets of data.\u0000\u0000\u0000Findings\u0000According to university and doctoral students’ perspectives, internationalisation assumes an important role in Portuguese doctoral education and is being integrated through specific strategies. Strategies for attracting and recruiting international students appear to take a back seat compared to strategies which offer students international experience through immersion in international environments in their home institutions. While expressing the potential impediments, undesirable side effects and conditions that internationalisation must meet, students seem to take a critical stance towards it and towards the institutional strategies designed to promote it.\u0000\u0000\u0000Originality/value\u0000This paper addresses a topic which does not appear to receive much attention in doctoral education research and, to this extent, advances knowledge on the internationalisation of doctoral education.\u0000","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46546134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-05DOI: 10.1108/sgpe-12-2022-0084
Elizabeth A. Jach, Anthony P. Rinaldi
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to highlight suicide risk factors experienced by graduate students and postdoctoral scholars, and then outline suicide prevention strategies for these populations. Design/methodology/approach Through analysis of literature and application of theory, the authors use the diathesis-stress model and Joiner’s (2005) interpersonal theory of suicidality to outline suicide prevention strategies specific to graduate students and postdoctoral scholars. Findings The authors’ review of the literature and application of theory suggest that both individuals and groups can engage in suicide prevention strategies, specifically pertaining to reducing stressors unique to graduate students and postdoctoral scholars, as well as addressing feelings of thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness that can lead to the development of suicidality within these populations. Practical implications Engaging in suicide prevention strategies can save lives and address the mental health conditions exhibited among graduate student and postdoctoral scholars. Originality/value The authors offer a synthesis of good practices addressing suicide risk factors and prevention with attention to the stress-diathesis model and Joiner’s (2005) interpersonal theory of suicidality toward reducing suicidality among graduate students and postdoctoral scholars.
{"title":"Applying theory and research toward reducing suicidality among graduate students and postdoctoral scholars","authors":"Elizabeth A. Jach, Anthony P. Rinaldi","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-12-2022-0084","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-12-2022-0084","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Purpose\u0000The purpose of this paper is to highlight suicide risk factors experienced by graduate students and postdoctoral scholars, and then outline suicide prevention strategies for these populations.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design/methodology/approach\u0000Through analysis of literature and application of theory, the authors use the diathesis-stress model and Joiner’s (2005) interpersonal theory of suicidality to outline suicide prevention strategies specific to graduate students and postdoctoral scholars.\u0000\u0000\u0000Findings\u0000The authors’ review of the literature and application of theory suggest that both individuals and groups can engage in suicide prevention strategies, specifically pertaining to reducing stressors unique to graduate students and postdoctoral scholars, as well as addressing feelings of thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness that can lead to the development of suicidality within these populations.\u0000\u0000\u0000Practical implications\u0000Engaging in suicide prevention strategies can save lives and address the mental health conditions exhibited among graduate student and postdoctoral scholars.\u0000\u0000\u0000Originality/value\u0000The authors offer a synthesis of good practices addressing suicide risk factors and prevention with attention to the stress-diathesis model and Joiner’s (2005) interpersonal theory of suicidality toward reducing suicidality among graduate students and postdoctoral scholars.\u0000","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45030045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-31DOI: 10.1108/sgpe-01-2023-0004
Erika Löfström, L. Tikkanen, H. Anttila, K. Pyhältö
Purpose Empirical evidence on how supervisors have perceived the changes and the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on their supervision is scarce. This paper aims to examine how the changing landscape of doctoral education has affected supervision from the supervisors’ perspective. Design/methodology/approach This survey addressed change, challenges and impact in supervisory responsibilities due to COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was completed by 561 doctoral supervisors from a large multi-field research-intensive university in Finland. Findings Results show that supervisors estimated that their supervision had been negatively affected by the pandemic, but to a lesser extent than their doctoral candidates’ progress and well-being. In the changed landscape of supervision, the supervisors grappled with challenges related to recognising doctoral candidates’ need of help. Supervisors’ experiences of the challenges and the impact of changed circumstances varied depending on the field and the position of the supervisor, whether they supervised part- or full-time candidates, and the organisation of supervision. Practical implications The slowed-down progression and diminishing well-being of doctoral candidates reported by supervisors is likely to influence supervision in a delayed way. Supervisors may be anticipating some issues with stalled studying and stress, but the question is the extent to which they are prepared to handle these as they emerge in supervision encounters. The fact that the experiences varied across field, position, organisation of supervision and the type of candidates (full or part time) suggests that support provided for supervisors to overcome challenges needs to be tailored and engineered. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature on doctoral supervision by exploring the impact of transitioning to online supervision and the rapid changes in doctoral supervision as a consequence of the recent global pandemic.
{"title":"Supervisors’ experiences of doctoral supervision in times of change","authors":"Erika Löfström, L. Tikkanen, H. Anttila, K. Pyhältö","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-01-2023-0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-01-2023-0004","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose Empirical evidence on how supervisors have perceived the changes and the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on their supervision is scarce. This paper aims to examine how the changing landscape of doctoral education has affected supervision from the supervisors’ perspective. Design/methodology/approach This survey addressed change, challenges and impact in supervisory responsibilities due to COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was completed by 561 doctoral supervisors from a large multi-field research-intensive university in Finland. Findings Results show that supervisors estimated that their supervision had been negatively affected by the pandemic, but to a lesser extent than their doctoral candidates’ progress and well-being. In the changed landscape of supervision, the supervisors grappled with challenges related to recognising doctoral candidates’ need of help. Supervisors’ experiences of the challenges and the impact of changed circumstances varied depending on the field and the position of the supervisor, whether they supervised part- or full-time candidates, and the organisation of supervision. Practical implications The slowed-down progression and diminishing well-being of doctoral candidates reported by supervisors is likely to influence supervision in a delayed way. Supervisors may be anticipating some issues with stalled studying and stress, but the question is the extent to which they are prepared to handle these as they emerge in supervision encounters. The fact that the experiences varied across field, position, organisation of supervision and the type of candidates (full or part time) suggests that support provided for supervisors to overcome challenges needs to be tailored and engineered. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature on doctoral supervision by exploring the impact of transitioning to online supervision and the rapid changes in doctoral supervision as a consequence of the recent global pandemic.","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41553332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号