Aim/Purpose The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive picture of doctoral students’ dissertation journeys using Finland as a case country. More specifically, the article examines (1) the students’ backgrounds, (2) their study motives and experiences, and (3) whether or not these elements are related. Background Despite the massification of higher education (HE), there is a shortage of detailed mixed-methods studies about PhD students’ backgrounds and their experiences of doctoral study. Existing research does not give a clear indication of the extent to which home background is reflected in PhD applications and whether or not that background is related to the subsequent experience of doctoral students. Methodology This paper is based on both quantitative and qualitative data. We utilize a person-based register (N = 18,585) and a survey (n = 1,651). Our main methods are k-means cluster analysis, t-test, and directed content analysis. Our theoretical approach is Bourdieuian. We use the concept of doctoral capital when evaluating the backgrounds, resources, and success of PhD students through the dissertation process. Contribution This study uses a mixed-methods approach and is the first to incorporate quantitative data about the entire doctoral student population in Finland. In addition, open-ended responses in the survey make the PhD students’ own experiences visible. By approaching our research subject through a mixed methods lens, we aim to create a comprehensive understanding about their dissertation journeys. From Imposter Syndrome to Heroic Tales 518 With this study, we also contribute to the debate initiated by Falconer and Djokic (2019). They found that age, race, and socioeconomic status (SES) do not influence academic self-efficacy and academic self-handicapping behaviors in doctoral students. However, in this study, a link was found between the PhD students’ backgrounds (age and parents’ SES), and their study aims and experiences. Findings Cluster analysis revealed three different groups of PhD students: Status Raisers, Educational Inheritors, and Long-term Plodders. PhD students in these groups have different resources, experiences, and chances to survive in the academic community. There are two main findings. First, the influence of the childhood family extends all the way to doctoral education, even in Finland, which is considered to have one of the most equal HE systems in the world. Some PhD students from low-educated families even experienced so-called imposter syndrome. They described experiences of inadequacy, incompetence, and inferiority in relation to doctoral studies and fellow students. Second, the influence of family background may diminish with age and life experiences. In our study, many mature doctoral students had become empowered and emancipated to such an extent that they relied more on their own abilities and skills than on their family backgrounds. Many felt that their own persistence and resilience have p
{"title":"From Imposter Syndrome to Heroic Tales: Doctoral Students’ Backgrounds, Study Aims, and Experiences","authors":"Hanna Nori, Marja Peura, A. Jauhiainen","doi":"10.28945/4637","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4637","url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive picture of doctoral students’ dissertation journeys using Finland as a case country. More specifically, the article examines (1) the students’ backgrounds, (2) their study motives and experiences, and (3) whether or not these elements are related. Background Despite the massification of higher education (HE), there is a shortage of detailed mixed-methods studies about PhD students’ backgrounds and their experiences of doctoral study. Existing research does not give a clear indication of the extent to which home background is reflected in PhD applications and whether or not that background is related to the subsequent experience of doctoral students. Methodology This paper is based on both quantitative and qualitative data. We utilize a person-based register (N = 18,585) and a survey (n = 1,651). Our main methods are k-means cluster analysis, t-test, and directed content analysis. Our theoretical approach is Bourdieuian. We use the concept of doctoral capital when evaluating the backgrounds, resources, and success of PhD students through the dissertation process. Contribution This study uses a mixed-methods approach and is the first to incorporate quantitative data about the entire doctoral student population in Finland. In addition, open-ended responses in the survey make the PhD students’ own experiences visible. By approaching our research subject through a mixed methods lens, we aim to create a comprehensive understanding about their dissertation journeys. From Imposter Syndrome to Heroic Tales 518 With this study, we also contribute to the debate initiated by Falconer and Djokic (2019). They found that age, race, and socioeconomic status (SES) do not influence academic self-efficacy and academic self-handicapping behaviors in doctoral students. However, in this study, a link was found between the PhD students’ backgrounds (age and parents’ SES), and their study aims and experiences. Findings Cluster analysis revealed three different groups of PhD students: Status Raisers, Educational Inheritors, and Long-term Plodders. PhD students in these groups have different resources, experiences, and chances to survive in the academic community. There are two main findings. First, the influence of the childhood family extends all the way to doctoral education, even in Finland, which is considered to have one of the most equal HE systems in the world. Some PhD students from low-educated families even experienced so-called imposter syndrome. They described experiences of inadequacy, incompetence, and inferiority in relation to doctoral studies and fellow students. Second, the influence of family background may diminish with age and life experiences. In our study, many mature doctoral students had become empowered and emancipated to such an extent that they relied more on their own abilities and skills than on their family backgrounds. Many felt that their own persistence and resilience have p","PeriodicalId":53524,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Doctoral Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"517-539"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86174083","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}
Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine tough-love mentoring theory (TLM) as a potential way to address the problem of low graduation rates among doctoral students. Background: In order to address this purpose, the researcher presents the following: a) a validation study for assessment tools pertaining to TLM and b) a validation study of TLM theory and its two sub-theories: mentor integrity and trustworthiness sub-theory (MIT) and the mentor high standards sub-theory (MHS). Methodology: The researcher tested the validity of the mentor integrity and trustworthiness scale from the protégés’ perspective (MIT-P), the mentor high standards scale from the protégés’ perspective (MHS-P) and the protégés’ perceptions of their own independence (PPI) scale. The sample consisted of 31 doctoral protégés recruited with multi-phase sampling at four education-related doctoral programs in the eastern part of the United States. Contribution: The study provides evidence to support TLM as a strategy to address the problem of low graduation rates among doctoral students. In addition, the study contributes validation of assessment tools that can be used to measure doctoral protégés’ perceptions of their mentors. Findings: For each scale, the data show acceptable levels of internal consistency and evidence of content validity. The data are consistent with the TLM theory and its two sub-theories. The unique contribution of the current study is that it draws from the protégés’ perspective. Recommendations for Practitioners: The researcher presents a) strategies protégés can use to find trustworthy mentors with high standards and b) strategies program administrators can use for professional development of doctoral mentors. The researcher also provides the Right Angle Research Alignment (RARA) table to help protégés organize and manage the research methods section of their dissertation. Recommendation for Researchers: It is recommended that researchers use experimental methods to test TLM theory and the sub-theories, MIT and MHS. Impact on Society: This theory may be useful in business and in the arts and in other teaching relationships such as coaching and tutoring. The researcher encourages scholars to test TLM theory in these other contexts. Future Research: Further research questions that arise from this study are as follows: How can protégés find mentors who have high standards and who are trustworthy? What can doctoral program administrators do to help mentors develop high standards and trustworthiness?
{"title":"The Importance of Tough-Love Mentoring to Doctoral Student Success: Instruments to Measure the Doctoral Student/Proteges’ Perspective","authors":"Laura Roberts","doi":"10.28945/4630","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4630","url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine tough-love mentoring theory (TLM) as a potential way to address the problem of low graduation rates among doctoral students. \u0000\u0000Background: In order to address this purpose, the researcher presents the following: a) a validation study for assessment tools pertaining to TLM and b) a validation study of TLM theory and its two sub-theories: mentor integrity and trustworthiness sub-theory (MIT) and the mentor high standards sub-theory (MHS).\u0000\u0000Methodology: The researcher tested the validity of the mentor integrity and trustworthiness scale from the protégés’ perspective (MIT-P), the mentor high standards scale from the protégés’ perspective (MHS-P) and the protégés’ perceptions of their own independence (PPI) scale. The sample consisted of 31 doctoral protégés recruited with multi-phase sampling at four education-related doctoral programs in the eastern part of the United States. \u0000\u0000Contribution: The study provides evidence to support TLM as a strategy to address the problem of low graduation rates among doctoral students. In addition, the study contributes validation of assessment tools that can be used to measure doctoral protégés’ perceptions of their mentors.\u0000\u0000Findings: For each scale, the data show acceptable levels of internal consistency and evidence of content validity. The data are consistent with the TLM theory and its two sub-theories. The unique contribution of the current study is that it draws from the protégés’ perspective. \u0000\u0000Recommendations for Practitioners: The researcher presents a) strategies protégés can use to find trustworthy mentors with high standards and b) strategies program administrators can use for professional development of doctoral mentors. The researcher also provides the Right Angle Research Alignment (RARA) table to help protégés organize and manage the research methods section of their dissertation.\u0000\u0000Recommendation for Researchers: It is recommended that researchers use experimental methods to test TLM theory and the sub-theories, MIT and MHS.\u0000\u0000Impact on Society: This theory may be useful in business and in the arts and in other teaching relationships such as coaching and tutoring. The researcher encourages scholars to test TLM theory in these other contexts. \u0000\u0000Future Research: Further research questions that arise from this study are as follows: How can protégés find mentors who have high standards and who are trustworthy? What can doctoral program administrators do to help mentors develop high standards and trustworthiness?\u0000\u0000","PeriodicalId":53524,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Doctoral Studies","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87918025","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}
Aim/Purpose: This study examined experiences related to the impostor phenomenon among Black doctoral and postdoctoral scholars in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Background: Research on the impostor phenomenon is usually focused on undergraduates, especially for Blacks, with sparse research on Black doctoral and postdoctoral scholars. This phenomenon was originally investigated among Whites. Due to fewer studies on Blacks, culturally-relevant understanding of the impostor phenomenon is limited. Methodology: This study used surveys and interviews (convergent mixed-methods) to examine the impostor phenomenon among U.S.-based doctoral and postdoctoral scholars (together referred to as “trainees”) in STEM. Participants took a survey (that used the Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale or CIPS to individually compute impostor phenomenon scores) and a one-on-one, semi-structured interview. Survey (with CIPS scores) and interview data were converged from the same participants, who were recruited from a national conference focused on minorities in STEM (convenience sampling). Using constant comparative method and analytic induction, interview-data were categorized into themes. Contribution: Findings documented race-based impostor-experiences, possibly culturally relevant to other groups of underrepresented minorities (URMs). Findings have implications for research, policy, and practice. These include future initiatives to broaden participation in STEM careers among the underrepresented groups, support those who might experience this phenomenon and transition challenges in academia, and create greater awareness of the challenges trainees face based on their background and life experiences. Findings: Surveys indicated moderate to intense impostor phenomenon among 15 participants at the time data were collected. Interviews with the same participants found six themes linked to the impostor phenomenon: 1) Being the only-one, 2) Lack of belonging, 3) Stereotyping, micro-aggression and judgment, 4) External appearances, 5) Feeling like the “diversity enhancers,” and 6) Complications of intersecting identities. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners should consider the tensions and complications of Black identity and how it ties to training experiences in STEM as well as how race-based impostor phenomenon could shape an individual’s interaction with faculty, mentors, and peers. This knowledge could be helpful in designing professional development programs for Blacks. Recommendation for Researchers: Study findings could have research implications on the way doctoral and postdoctoral training is reimagined to be more inclusive and welcoming of diversity across multiple axes of gender, race/ethnicity, class, first-generation status, ability, sexual orientation, and country of origin, among others. Impact on Society: Black trainees could be vulnerable to leaving STEM fields due to their underrepresentation, lack of critical m
{"title":"The Impostor Phenomenon Among Black Doctoral and Postdoctoral Scholars in STEM","authors":"Devasmita Chakraverty","doi":"10.28945/4613","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4613","url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose: This study examined experiences related to the impostor phenomenon among Black doctoral and postdoctoral scholars in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).\u0000\u0000Background: Research on the impostor phenomenon is usually focused on undergraduates, especially for Blacks, with sparse research on Black doctoral and postdoctoral scholars. This phenomenon was originally investigated among Whites. Due to fewer studies on Blacks, culturally-relevant understanding of the impostor phenomenon is limited. \u0000\u0000Methodology: This study used surveys and interviews (convergent mixed-methods) to examine the impostor phenomenon among U.S.-based doctoral and postdoctoral scholars (together referred to as “trainees”) in STEM. Participants took a survey (that used the Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale or CIPS to individually compute impostor phenomenon scores) and a one-on-one, semi-structured interview. Survey (with CIPS scores) and interview data were converged from the same participants, who were recruited from a national conference focused on minorities in STEM (convenience sampling). Using constant comparative method and analytic induction, interview-data were categorized into themes.\u0000\u0000Contribution: Findings documented race-based impostor-experiences, possibly culturally relevant to other groups of underrepresented minorities (URMs). Findings have implications for research, policy, and practice. These include future initiatives to broaden participation in STEM careers among the underrepresented groups, support those who might experience this phenomenon and transition challenges in academia, and create greater awareness of the challenges trainees face based on their background and life experiences. \u0000\u0000Findings: Surveys indicated moderate to intense impostor phenomenon among 15 participants at the time data were collected. Interviews with the same participants found six themes linked to the impostor phenomenon: 1) Being the only-one, 2) Lack of belonging, 3) Stereotyping, micro-aggression and judgment, 4) External appearances, 5) Feeling like the “diversity enhancers,” and 6) Complications of intersecting identities.\u0000\u0000Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners should consider the tensions and complications of Black identity and how it ties to training experiences in STEM as well as how race-based impostor phenomenon could shape an individual’s interaction with faculty, mentors, and peers. This knowledge could be helpful in designing professional development programs for Blacks. \u0000\u0000Recommendation for Researchers: Study findings could have research implications on the way doctoral and postdoctoral training is reimagined to be more inclusive and welcoming of diversity across multiple axes of gender, race/ethnicity, class, first-generation status, ability, sexual orientation, and country of origin, among others.\u0000\u0000Impact on Society: Black trainees could be vulnerable to leaving STEM fields due to their underrepresentation, lack of critical m","PeriodicalId":53524,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Doctoral Studies","volume":"16 1","pages":"433-460"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84869412","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}
Aim/Purpose: One approach to helping doctoral students deal with the many challenges they face is the provision of a structured mentoring programme to complement the more traditional doctoral curriculum and supervisor relationship. This paper reports a mentoring programme containing such activities as individual consultations and peer-mentoring workshops, introduced at one of the non-public universities in Poland and discusses the development of a model of support. In developing the model, two evaluation studies were conducted seeking to discover how participants perceived the mentoring programme, what needs the mentoring programme addressed, and what benefits it provided for doctoral students. Background: With reference to a new paradigm proposed by Kram and Higgins, mentoring emerges in the context of many developmental networks, where the more junior mentors and peer-mentors together discover new roles involved in doctoral education. Methodology: Case study methodology is utilized to gather perceptions of a doctoral mentoring programme. The conceptual framework for a two-part programme is presented and the results of two evaluation studies conducted on-line using a mix-method approach are reported. In total, 42 doctoral students participated in the studies, representing social sciences and the humanities disciplines. Contribution: This paper discusses a novel doctoral mentoring programme which finds its basis in evidence-based practice. This research goes beyond previous studies by undertaking an analysis of doctoral students’ needs, then considering relationships between those needs and structuring a programme to meet them. Findings: Findings showed three main areas of need for doctoral students: the need for social interaction at university; the need for structure in the doctoral journey, and the need for psychological support. Participants distinguished two perspectives that influenced the assessment of programme activities: (a) the meaningfulness of the mentoring programme to the individual; (b) the mentor’s attitude including the general atmosphere of collegiality during meetings. Results presented are supported by a proposed intervention model. Recommendations for Practitioners: The model presented may inspire other universities to implement similar approaches for supporting their own doctoral students. Researcher enablers are also offered as strategies relating to workshop topics, meeting schedules, and programme organization. The main recommendation for practitioners is to be sensitive to the psychosocial needs of students. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers interested in doctoral students’ needs and ways of supporting them can utilize the proposed model for strategically planning such support. It is recommended that further research into the area of mentoring doctoral students makes use of the mixed-method approach. Such an approach takes cognizance of phenomenological exigencies as they pertain to individual meaning-
{"title":"Facilitating a Mentoring Programme for Doctoral Students: Insights from Evidence-Based Practice","authors":"Joanna Szen-Ziemiańska","doi":"10.28945/4594","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4594","url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose: One approach to helping doctoral students deal with the many challenges they face is the provision of a structured mentoring programme to complement the more traditional doctoral curriculum and supervisor relationship. This paper reports a mentoring programme containing such activities as individual consultations and peer-mentoring workshops, introduced at one of the non-public universities in Poland and discusses the development of a model of support. In developing the model, two evaluation studies were conducted seeking to discover how participants perceived the mentoring programme, what needs the mentoring programme addressed, and what benefits it provided for doctoral students.\u0000\u0000Background: With reference to a new paradigm proposed by Kram and Higgins, mentoring emerges in the context of many developmental networks, where the more junior mentors and peer-mentors together discover new roles involved in doctoral education. \u0000\u0000Methodology: Case study methodology is utilized to gather perceptions of a doctoral mentoring programme. The conceptual framework for a two-part programme is presented and the results of two evaluation studies conducted on-line using a mix-method approach are reported. In total, 42 doctoral students participated in the studies, representing social sciences and the humanities disciplines.\u0000\u0000Contribution: This paper discusses a novel doctoral mentoring programme which finds its basis in evidence-based practice. This research goes beyond previous studies by undertaking an analysis of doctoral students’ needs, then considering relationships between those needs and structuring a programme to meet them. \u0000\u0000Findings: Findings showed three main areas of need for doctoral students: the need for social interaction at university; the need for structure in the doctoral journey, and the need for psychological support. Participants distinguished two perspectives that influenced the assessment of programme activities: (a) the meaningfulness of the mentoring programme to the individual; (b) the mentor’s attitude including the general atmosphere of collegiality during meetings. Results presented are supported by a proposed intervention model.\u0000\u0000Recommendations for Practitioners: The model presented may inspire other universities to implement similar approaches for supporting their own doctoral students. Researcher enablers are also offered as strategies relating to workshop topics, meeting schedules, and programme organization. The main recommendation for practitioners is to be sensitive to the psychosocial needs of students.\u0000\u0000Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers interested in doctoral students’ needs and ways of supporting them can utilize the proposed model for strategically planning such support. It is recommended that further research into the area of mentoring doctoral students makes use of the mixed-method approach. Such an approach takes cognizance of phenomenological exigencies as they pertain to individual meaning-","PeriodicalId":53524,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Doctoral Studies","volume":"11 1","pages":"415-431"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76157725","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}
Shaoan Zhang, Chengcheng Li, M. Carroll, P. Schrader
Aim/Purpose Most programs are designed with full-time doctoral students’ characteristics and needs in mind; few programs consider the unique needs of part-time doctoral students, including time restrictions, experiences during the program, identity development, and different professional aspirations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential differences between part-time and full-time doctoral students in their scholarly development, and how technology may serve as a communication and organization tool for individual and program support. Background Built on the application of communities of practice, information and communication technology, and situated learning theory, this study sought to evaluate the potential differences among full-time and part-time doctoral students associated with their scholarly development in a traditional doctoral program at a large research-intensive university. Methodology This study used independent samples t-test to evaluate the potential differences between part-time and full-time doctoral students in their scholarly development. Data were collected from 98 doctoral students via a survey. This A Comparison of Part-Time and Full-Time Doctoral Students 394 study also employed two hypothetical cases that described the issues and solutions related to the program pursuant to scholarly development, which further illustrated the quantitative results and provided more meaningful discussions and suggestions. Contribution This study provided insights into part-time doctoral students’ scholarly development and provided suggestions for designing doctoral programs and differentiated mentoring for both full-time and part-time doctoral students. Further, additional multifaceted mentoring approaches including peer mentoring and e-mentoring were evaluated. Findings Significant differences were found in four aspects of doctoral students’ scholarly development: the opportunities to do research related to grants with faculty, support for scholarly work in addition to advisor’s support, involvement in the teaching/supervision activities, and goals for scholarly development. Recommendations for Practitioners Program designers, faculty, and especially mentors should appreciate the differences between part-time and full-time doctoral students. Potential program redesigns should include judicious applications of technology as essential components to address limited accessibility and opportunities for parttime students. An Individual Development Plan (IDP) should be used to mentor doctoral students to enhance the effectiveness of mentoring regarding academic goals, actions, and related roles and responsibilities. Recommendations for Researchers Future research can further evaluate and develop the instrument to better measure more domains of doctoral students’ scholarly development. Additionally, qualitative methods may be used to further provide the emic description of the process of part-time students’ engagement with the pr
{"title":"Doctoral Program Design Based on Technology-Based Situated Learning and Mentoring: A Comparison of Part-Time and Full-Time Doctoral Students","authors":"Shaoan Zhang, Chengcheng Li, M. Carroll, P. Schrader","doi":"10.28945/4598","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4598","url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose Most programs are designed with full-time doctoral students’ characteristics and needs in mind; few programs consider the unique needs of part-time doctoral students, including time restrictions, experiences during the program, identity development, and different professional aspirations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential differences between part-time and full-time doctoral students in their scholarly development, and how technology may serve as a communication and organization tool for individual and program support. Background Built on the application of communities of practice, information and communication technology, and situated learning theory, this study sought to evaluate the potential differences among full-time and part-time doctoral students associated with their scholarly development in a traditional doctoral program at a large research-intensive university. Methodology This study used independent samples t-test to evaluate the potential differences between part-time and full-time doctoral students in their scholarly development. Data were collected from 98 doctoral students via a survey. This A Comparison of Part-Time and Full-Time Doctoral Students 394 study also employed two hypothetical cases that described the issues and solutions related to the program pursuant to scholarly development, which further illustrated the quantitative results and provided more meaningful discussions and suggestions. Contribution This study provided insights into part-time doctoral students’ scholarly development and provided suggestions for designing doctoral programs and differentiated mentoring for both full-time and part-time doctoral students. Further, additional multifaceted mentoring approaches including peer mentoring and e-mentoring were evaluated. Findings Significant differences were found in four aspects of doctoral students’ scholarly development: the opportunities to do research related to grants with faculty, support for scholarly work in addition to advisor’s support, involvement in the teaching/supervision activities, and goals for scholarly development. Recommendations for Practitioners Program designers, faculty, and especially mentors should appreciate the differences between part-time and full-time doctoral students. Potential program redesigns should include judicious applications of technology as essential components to address limited accessibility and opportunities for parttime students. An Individual Development Plan (IDP) should be used to mentor doctoral students to enhance the effectiveness of mentoring regarding academic goals, actions, and related roles and responsibilities. Recommendations for Researchers Future research can further evaluate and develop the instrument to better measure more domains of doctoral students’ scholarly development. Additionally, qualitative methods may be used to further provide the emic description of the process of part-time students’ engagement with the pr","PeriodicalId":53524,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Doctoral Studies","volume":"52 1","pages":"393-414"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90324436","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}
S. Mendez, K. Johanson, V. Conley, Kinnis Gosha, Naja Mack, C. Haynes, R. Gerhardt
Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore the efficacy of simulated interactive virtual conversations (chatbots) for mentoring underrepresented minority doctoral engineering students who are considering pursuing a career in the professoriate or in industry. Background: Chatbots were developed under the National Science Foundation INCLUDES Design and Developments Launch Pilot award (17-4458) and provide career advice with responses from a pre-programmed database populated by renowned emeriti engineering faculty. Chatbots have been engineered to fulfill a myriad of roles, such as undergraduate student advisement, but no research has been found that addresses their use with supplemental future faculty mentoring for doctoral students. Methodology: Chatbot efficacy is examined through a phenomenological design with focus groups with underrepresented minority doctoral engineering students. No theoretical or conceptual frameworks exist relative to chatbots designed for future faculty mentoring; therefore, an adaptation and implementation of the conceptual model posited on movie recommendations was utilized to ground this study. The four-stage process of phenomenological data analysis was followed: epoché, horizontalization, imaginative variation, and synthesis. Contribution: No studies have investigated the utility of chatbots in providing supplemental mentoring to future faculty. This phenomenological study contributes to this area of investigation and provides greater consideration into the unmet mentoring needs of these students, as well as the potential of utilizing chatbots for supplementary mentoring, particularly for those who lack access to high quality mentoring. Findings: Following the data analysis process, the essence of the findings was, while underrepresented minority doctoral engineering students have ample unmet mentoring needs and overall are satisfied with the user interface and trustworthiness of chatbots, their intent to use them is mixed due to a lack of personalization in this type of supplemental mentoring relationship. Recommendations for Practitioners: One of the major challenges faced by underrepresented doctoral engineering students is securing quality mentoring relationships that socialize them into the engineering culture and community of practice. While creating opportunities for students and incentivizing faculty to engage in the work of mentoring is needed, we must also consider the ways in which to leverage technology to offer supplemental future faculty mentoring virtually. Recommendation for Researchers: Additional research on the efficacy of chatbots in providing career-focused mentoring to future faculty is needed, as well as how to enhance the functionality of chatbots to create personal connections and networking opportunities, which are hallmarks of traditional mentoring relationships. Impact on Society: An understanding of the conceptual pathway that can lead to greater satisfaction with chatb
{"title":"Chatbots: A Tool to Supplement the Future Faculty Mentoring of Doctoral Engineering Students","authors":"S. Mendez, K. Johanson, V. Conley, Kinnis Gosha, Naja Mack, C. Haynes, R. Gerhardt","doi":"10.28945/4579","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4579","url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore the efficacy of simulated interactive virtual conversations (chatbots) for mentoring underrepresented minority doctoral engineering students who are considering pursuing a career in the professoriate or in industry. \u0000\u0000Background: Chatbots were developed under the National Science Foundation INCLUDES Design and Developments Launch Pilot award (17-4458) and provide career advice with responses from a pre-programmed database populated by renowned emeriti engineering faculty. Chatbots have been engineered to fulfill a myriad of roles, such as undergraduate student advisement, but no research has been found that addresses their use with supplemental future faculty mentoring for doctoral students.\u0000\u0000Methodology: Chatbot efficacy is examined through a phenomenological design with focus groups with underrepresented minority doctoral engineering students. No theoretical or conceptual frameworks exist relative to chatbots designed for future faculty mentoring; therefore, an adaptation and implementation of the conceptual model posited on movie recommendations was utilized to ground this study. The four-stage process of phenomenological data analysis was followed: epoché, horizontalization, imaginative variation, and synthesis.\u0000\u0000Contribution: No studies have investigated the utility of chatbots in providing supplemental mentoring to future faculty. This phenomenological study contributes to this area of investigation and provides greater consideration into the unmet mentoring needs of these students, as well as the potential of utilizing chatbots for supplementary mentoring, particularly for those who lack access to high quality mentoring.\u0000\u0000Findings: Following the data analysis process, the essence of the findings was, while underrepresented minority doctoral engineering students have ample unmet mentoring needs and overall are satisfied with the user interface and trustworthiness of chatbots, their intent to use them is mixed due to a lack of personalization in this type of supplemental mentoring relationship.\u0000\u0000Recommendations for Practitioners: One of the major challenges faced by underrepresented doctoral engineering students is securing quality mentoring relationships that socialize them into the engineering culture and community of practice. While creating opportunities for students and incentivizing faculty to engage in the work of mentoring is needed, we must also consider the ways in which to leverage technology to offer supplemental future faculty mentoring virtually. \u0000\u0000Recommendation for Researchers: Additional research on the efficacy of chatbots in providing career-focused mentoring to future faculty is needed, as well as how to enhance the functionality of chatbots to create personal connections and networking opportunities, which are hallmarks of traditional mentoring relationships.\u0000\u0000Impact on Society: An understanding of the conceptual pathway that can lead to greater satisfaction with chatb","PeriodicalId":53524,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Doctoral Studies","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86785720","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}
Aim/Purpose: Many researchers have investigated factors related to why doctoral candidates do or do not persist in a doctoral program, yet, literature was not found where researchers investigated the relationship between self-directed learning and currently enrolled EdD candidates. The authors sought to understand EdD candidates’ self-direction in learning at the onset of their EdD program. The findings informed program and course instructional strategies of the EdD Program and helped to determine what could be done to help candidates be more successful in the program. Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate the self-directed learning of doctoral candidates in one EdD program in a private university in a southeastern state. Adults are by nature self-directed individuals and it would be reasonable to assume that adult doctoral candidates might exhibit some level of self-directed learning. Methodology: The PRO SDLS (Stockdale, 2003) was employed to measure self-directed learning among a population of 110 EdD candidates currently enrolled in a private university in a southeastern state. The following variables were also included in the analysis: year of enrollment, program concentration, hour of enrollment, age, and gender. A series of one-way ANOVAs were used to compare the differences of each independent variable on each measure of the dependent variable. Contribution: The findings informed program and course instructional strategies of the EdD Program and helped to determine what could be done to help candidates be more successful in the program. The findings not only benefitted this individual EdD Program, but also additionally will add to the body of knowledge on encouraging self-directed learning among EdD candidates. Findings: The researchers found that all candidates, regardless of variables investigated, had similar levels of self-directed learning, above average for adults, which is typical of doctoral students. While no specific variable was statistically significantly different, a few variables neared the significance level of 0.05, in exhibiting even higher levels of self-directed learning. It was found that females demonstrated slightly higher control, a sub-factor of self-directed learning, and candidates in the higher education program demonstrated higher motivation, another sub-factor of self-directed learning. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners would benefit by incorporating the following steps to increase self-directed learning among doctoral candidates in education: facilitating the dissertation process earlier, gradual release into dissertation hours, writing competency based curriculum for earlier writing skills, and fostering collaborative grouping within the program for social connection. Recommendation for Researchers: Self-directed learning is only one possible reason for whether or not students may or may not complete a doctoral degree in education. Other variables may influence, p
{"title":"Self-Direction in Learning of EdD Candidates at a Small, Private Institution","authors":"J. Kirk, Andrew S Courtner","doi":"10.28945/4378","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4378","url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose: Many researchers have investigated factors related to why doctoral candidates do or do not persist in a doctoral program, yet, literature was not found where researchers investigated the relationship between self-directed learning and currently enrolled EdD candidates. The authors sought to understand EdD candidates’ self-direction in learning at the onset of their EdD program. The findings informed program and course instructional strategies of the EdD Program and helped to determine what could be done to help candidates be more successful in the program.\u0000\u0000Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate the self-directed learning of doctoral candidates in one EdD program in a private university in a southeastern state. Adults are by nature self-directed individuals and it would be reasonable to assume that adult doctoral candidates might exhibit some level of self-directed learning. \u0000\u0000Methodology: The PRO SDLS (Stockdale, 2003) was employed to measure self-directed learning among a population of 110 EdD candidates currently enrolled in a private university in a southeastern state. The following variables were also included in the analysis: year of enrollment, program concentration, hour of enrollment, age, and gender. A series of one-way ANOVAs were used to compare the differences of each independent variable on each measure of the dependent variable. \u0000\u0000Contribution: The findings informed program and course instructional strategies of the EdD Program and helped to determine what could be done to help candidates be more successful in the program. The findings not only benefitted this individual EdD Program, but also additionally will add to the body of knowledge on encouraging self-directed learning among EdD candidates. \u0000\u0000Findings: The researchers found that all candidates, regardless of variables investigated, had similar levels of self-directed learning, above average for adults, which is typical of doctoral students. While no specific variable was statistically significantly different, a few variables neared the significance level of 0.05, in exhibiting even higher levels of self-directed learning. It was found that females demonstrated slightly higher control, a sub-factor of self-directed learning, and candidates in the higher education program demonstrated higher motivation, another sub-factor of self-directed learning. \u0000\u0000Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners would benefit by incorporating the following steps to increase self-directed learning among doctoral candidates in education: facilitating the dissertation process earlier, gradual release into dissertation hours, writing competency based curriculum for earlier writing skills, and fostering collaborative grouping within the program for social connection. \u0000\u0000Recommendation for Researchers: Self-directed learning is only one possible reason for whether or not students may or may not complete a doctoral degree in education. Other variables may influence, p","PeriodicalId":53524,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Doctoral Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"353-371"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89476451","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}
Aim/Purpose This mixed-methods research study examined impostor phenomenon during postdoctoral training in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) through the following research question: “What are the manifestations of the impostor phenomenon experienced during postdoctoral training in STEM?” Background The impostor phenomenon occurs when competent, high-achieving students and professionals believe that they are fraud and will be exposed eventually. It involves fear of failure, lack of authenticity, feeling fake or fraud-like, denial of one’s competence, and is linked to lower self-esteem, mental health consequences, and lack of belonging. Methodology This study was conducted with US-based postdoctoral trainees (or postdocs) using mixed-methods approach. The study examined aspects of impostor phenomenon among 43 postdocs by converging survey data using Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale (CIPS) and qualitative data from semi-structured interviews from the same participants. Both convenience and snowball sampling were used. Majority of the participants were White, female, and from science disciplines. Interview findings were organized into themes using constant comparative method and analytic induction. Contribution Findings pointed to the need for better designing professional development programs for postdocs that would: 1) address fears and insecurities due to impostor-feelings, 2) normalize conversations around perceived failure, judgment, and one’s lack of belonging, and 3) provide support with networking, mentoring, academic communication, and mental health challenges. Findings Survey results indicated moderate to intense impostor-feelings; interviews found six triggers of the impostor phenomenon during postdoctoral Postdocs and the Impostor Phenomenon in STEM 330 training: 1. not pursuing new things, 2. not making social connections, 3. impaired academic communication, 4. not applying, 5. procrastination and mental health, and 6. feeling undeserving and unqualified. Current findings were compared with prior findings of impostor-triggers among PhD students who also experienced the first three of these challenges during doctoral training: challenges to applying newly learnt knowledge in other domains, reaching out for help, and developing skills in academic communication verbally and through academic writing. Recommendations for Practitioners The office of postdoctoral affairs could design professional development programs and individual development plans for those experiencing the impostor phenomenon, focusing on strengthening skills (e.g., academic writing) in particular. There was an environmental and systemic dimension to the imposter phenomenon, perhaps more prevalent among women in STEM. The academy could devise ways to better support scholars who experience this phenomenon. Recommendations for Researchers Research characterizing the qualitative characteristics of the impostor phenomenon across the STEM pipeline (undergrad
{"title":"The Impostor Phenomenon Among Postdoctoral Trainees in STEM: A US-Based Mixed-Methods Study","authors":"Devasmita Chakraverty","doi":"10.28945/4589","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4589","url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose This mixed-methods research study examined impostor phenomenon during postdoctoral training in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) through the following research question: “What are the manifestations of the impostor phenomenon experienced during postdoctoral training in STEM?” Background The impostor phenomenon occurs when competent, high-achieving students and professionals believe that they are fraud and will be exposed eventually. It involves fear of failure, lack of authenticity, feeling fake or fraud-like, denial of one’s competence, and is linked to lower self-esteem, mental health consequences, and lack of belonging. Methodology This study was conducted with US-based postdoctoral trainees (or postdocs) using mixed-methods approach. The study examined aspects of impostor phenomenon among 43 postdocs by converging survey data using Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale (CIPS) and qualitative data from semi-structured interviews from the same participants. Both convenience and snowball sampling were used. Majority of the participants were White, female, and from science disciplines. Interview findings were organized into themes using constant comparative method and analytic induction. Contribution Findings pointed to the need for better designing professional development programs for postdocs that would: 1) address fears and insecurities due to impostor-feelings, 2) normalize conversations around perceived failure, judgment, and one’s lack of belonging, and 3) provide support with networking, mentoring, academic communication, and mental health challenges. Findings Survey results indicated moderate to intense impostor-feelings; interviews found six triggers of the impostor phenomenon during postdoctoral Postdocs and the Impostor Phenomenon in STEM 330 training: 1. not pursuing new things, 2. not making social connections, 3. impaired academic communication, 4. not applying, 5. procrastination and mental health, and 6. feeling undeserving and unqualified. Current findings were compared with prior findings of impostor-triggers among PhD students who also experienced the first three of these challenges during doctoral training: challenges to applying newly learnt knowledge in other domains, reaching out for help, and developing skills in academic communication verbally and through academic writing. Recommendations for Practitioners The office of postdoctoral affairs could design professional development programs and individual development plans for those experiencing the impostor phenomenon, focusing on strengthening skills (e.g., academic writing) in particular. There was an environmental and systemic dimension to the imposter phenomenon, perhaps more prevalent among women in STEM. The academy could devise ways to better support scholars who experience this phenomenon. Recommendations for Researchers Research characterizing the qualitative characteristics of the impostor phenomenon across the STEM pipeline (undergrad","PeriodicalId":53524,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Doctoral Studies","volume":"43 1","pages":"329-352"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90395557","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}
Meredith L Conrey, G. Roberts, Melissa R Fadler, Matias M Garza, Clifford V Johnson, Misty Rasmussen
Aim/Purpose: Limited research exists on the perceived value that a doctoral degree has on higher education administrators’ goals; therefore, this collective case study had two purposes. The first was to assess qualitatively the perceptions of four doctorate-holding higher education administrators to explore the potential value associated with their degrees, and the second was to determine whether they perceived that their degree attainments influenced the achievement of their professional goals, if at all. Background: Understanding goal attainment and the value associated with obtaining a doctoral degree is important to recognize the needs of doctoral students and to inform how to support degree-seeking professionals in achieving their professional goals. Building upon the conceptual model of doctoral value, as defined by Bryan and Guccione (2018), the researchers also utilized Becker’s (1964) human capital theory as the framework for understanding the perceptions of select administrative professionals who have completed their doctoral degrees in higher education. Methodology: Because this was a collective case study, four doctorate-holding higher education administrators were selected, through convenience sampling, to engage in a formal semi-structured face-to-face interview. Interview responses were evaluated using ethnographic analysis (i.e., domain analysis, taxonomic analysis, and componential analysis). Contribution: Findings from this research can be used to better understand the perceptions of graduates who earned a doctoral degree in education, particularly with an increase in the number of doctoral degrees in that field. The results from this study align with findings from previous studies. Findings: The ethnographic analysis of the data indicated that the administrators perceived their doctoral degree as a way to advance professionally (e.g., career opportunities and research publication) and as a way to improve personally (e.g., increased confidence and becoming a role model). Two domains emerged: attainment of goals and perceptions of doctoral degree value. The taxonomic analysis revealed that the attainment of goals included personal and professional goals. Lastly, the componential analysis led to the discovery of nine attributes associated with obtaining a doctoral degree. Recommendations for Practitioners: Administrators in higher education degree programs should understand the needs of their students while they are participating in doctoral studies. By knowing what doctoral students expect to gain after obtaining a doctoral degree, doctoral-program administrators might consider tailoring courses and support programs to meet doctoral student needs. Recommendation for Researchers: Additional longitudinal studies should be undertaken to understand better how doctoral graduates view the value of their degree many years later. Do their perceptions change over time, or are they solidified? Impact on Society: With an increasing
{"title":"Perceptions After Completing the Degree: A Qualitative Case Study of Select Higher Education Doctoral Graduates","authors":"Meredith L Conrey, G. Roberts, Melissa R Fadler, Matias M Garza, Clifford V Johnson, Misty Rasmussen","doi":"10.28945/4572","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4572","url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose: Limited research exists on the perceived value that a doctoral degree has on higher education administrators’ goals; therefore, this collective case study had two purposes. The first was to assess qualitatively the perceptions of four doctorate-holding higher education administrators to explore the potential value associated with their degrees, and the second was to determine whether they perceived that their degree attainments influenced the achievement of their professional goals, if at all.\u0000\u0000Background: Understanding goal attainment and the value associated with obtaining a doctoral degree is important to recognize the needs of doctoral students and to inform how to support degree-seeking professionals in achieving their professional goals. Building upon the conceptual model of doctoral value, as defined by Bryan and Guccione (2018), the researchers also utilized Becker’s (1964) human capital theory as the framework for understanding the perceptions of select administrative professionals who have completed their doctoral degrees in higher education.\u0000\u0000Methodology: Because this was a collective case study, four doctorate-holding higher education administrators were selected, through convenience sampling, to engage in a formal semi-structured face-to-face interview. Interview responses were evaluated using ethnographic analysis (i.e., domain analysis, taxonomic analysis, and componential analysis).\u0000\u0000Contribution: Findings from this research can be used to better understand the perceptions of graduates who earned a doctoral degree in education, particularly with an increase in the number of doctoral degrees in that field. The results from this study align with findings from previous studies. \u0000\u0000Findings: The ethnographic analysis of the data indicated that the administrators perceived their doctoral degree as a way to advance professionally (e.g., career opportunities and research publication) and as a way to improve personally (e.g., increased confidence and becoming a role model). Two domains emerged: attainment of goals and perceptions of doctoral degree value. The taxonomic analysis revealed that the attainment of goals included personal and professional goals. Lastly, the componential analysis led to the discovery of nine attributes associated with obtaining a doctoral degree.\u0000\u0000Recommendations for Practitioners: Administrators in higher education degree programs should understand the needs of their students while they are participating in doctoral studies. By knowing what doctoral students expect to gain after obtaining a doctoral degree, doctoral-program administrators might consider tailoring courses and support programs to meet doctoral student needs.\u0000\u0000Recommendation for Researchers: Additional longitudinal studies should be undertaken to understand better how doctoral graduates view the value of their degree many years later. Do their perceptions change over time, or are they solidified?\u0000\u0000Impact on Society: With an increasing ","PeriodicalId":53524,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Doctoral Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"305-327"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86477970","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}
Aim/Purpose This paper found some factors which influence research supervisees’ selection of their research supervisors. Background Research on supervisor-supervisee relationship is mostly conducted when research students have already initiated their studies. Research on how a supervisor is selected before the research begins is researched less. How do supervisees select their supervisors? Which factors do they consider important? These questions were not clearly answered in the literature so far. Methodology A scale was developed to measure factors which influence the selection of research supervisors. Using an online survey, data was collected from 315 research students in Malaysia between August and October 2018. Psychometric properties of the scale were assessed using exploratory factor analysis followed by confirmatory factor analysis. Construct reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the scale were assessed using composite reliability, maximal reliability, average variance extracted, and maximum shared variance. Contribution How research supervisees select their supervisors is an understudied area. Most of the research on supervisor selection is done after the research journey has begun. This research focuses on the thought processes before supervisor selection. Psychometric Analysis of a Proposed Model 286 Findings Demographics, expertise, and physical appearance emerge as important constructs that influence the thought process of a research supervisee. Each of these constructs is composed of several dimensions, each with its own weight and importance. Recommendations for Practitioners Research supervision is an integral part of contemporary teaching profession. To develop this important dimension of an academic’s career, this research holds high significance. The emerging factors will help researcher supervisors enhance their profiles and become more visible. This has practical implications for higher education institutions as well. Recommendation for Researchers Further studies in this area can explore these factors across different cultures, distinction between undergraduate and postgraduate students, public and private higher education institutions, and scholarship or self-funded students. Impact on Society Attracting better and relevant research students will result in a better match between researcher’s capability and supervisor’s expertise leading to high impact research. Future Research This research was done on only 315 respondents. More respondents from diverse population might influence the outcome.
{"title":"Psychometric Analysis of a Proposed Model to Determine Factors Influencing Selection of a Research Supervisor","authors":"A. Shafiq, S. Sharif, Anbareen Jan","doi":"10.28945/4567","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.28945/4567","url":null,"abstract":"Aim/Purpose This paper found some factors which influence research supervisees’ selection of their research supervisors. Background Research on supervisor-supervisee relationship is mostly conducted when research students have already initiated their studies. Research on how a supervisor is selected before the research begins is researched less. How do supervisees select their supervisors? Which factors do they consider important? These questions were not clearly answered in the literature so far. Methodology A scale was developed to measure factors which influence the selection of research supervisors. Using an online survey, data was collected from 315 research students in Malaysia between August and October 2018. Psychometric properties of the scale were assessed using exploratory factor analysis followed by confirmatory factor analysis. Construct reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the scale were assessed using composite reliability, maximal reliability, average variance extracted, and maximum shared variance. Contribution How research supervisees select their supervisors is an understudied area. Most of the research on supervisor selection is done after the research journey has begun. This research focuses on the thought processes before supervisor selection. Psychometric Analysis of a Proposed Model 286 Findings Demographics, expertise, and physical appearance emerge as important constructs that influence the thought process of a research supervisee. Each of these constructs is composed of several dimensions, each with its own weight and importance. Recommendations for Practitioners Research supervision is an integral part of contemporary teaching profession. To develop this important dimension of an academic’s career, this research holds high significance. The emerging factors will help researcher supervisors enhance their profiles and become more visible. This has practical implications for higher education institutions as well. Recommendation for Researchers Further studies in this area can explore these factors across different cultures, distinction between undergraduate and postgraduate students, public and private higher education institutions, and scholarship or self-funded students. Impact on Society Attracting better and relevant research students will result in a better match between researcher’s capability and supervisor’s expertise leading to high impact research. Future Research This research was done on only 315 respondents. More respondents from diverse population might influence the outcome.","PeriodicalId":53524,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Doctoral Studies","volume":"70 1","pages":"285-304"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83904805","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}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：