Search

Steeped in both critical race feminism (Wing, 1997) and social cognitive career theory (Lent et al., 2002), the present study intentionally centered the voices of 11 Women of Color graduate students and early career professionals to understand how graduate advisors mitigated or exacerbated the structural barriers Women of Color navigate during their science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) doctoral programs. Using thematic analysis grounded in the social constructivist paradigm, researchers identified four emergent themes: (a) unsupportive advising behaviors as a contextual barrier, (b) debilitating impact on mental health, (c) shared gender identity but mismatch racial/ethnic identity, and (d) advocacy-centered instrumental support and psychosocial support as key contextual supports. Results indicated that graduate advisors' behaviors served as both contextual barriers that exacerbated the structural barriers Women of Color navigated in STEM, as well as contextual supports that enhanced the doctoral experience and mitigated the adverse toll of marginalizing encounters in STEM. Three recommendations that stem from this work include: (a) adopt an intersectional approach to advising that values students as whole beings, (b) commit to antioppressive advocacy as part of the advising role, and (c) recognize the toll that unsupportive advising behaviors have on Women of Color's mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on the development of a community of practice (CoP) for qualitative doctoral researchers at the University of Bath (UK). Although the sources of support that qualitative doctoral researchers can access have grown substantially across the United Kingdom, United States, Australia, and South Africa (e.g., supervisor meetings, discrete courses, and standalone workshops), they generally remain "disjointed," forcing qualitative doctoral researchers to individually navigate these "siloed" sources. In this article, we describe our solution to the problem—creating a doctoral CoP capable of "connecting the dots"—by drawing on 3 years of experience leading the CoP. We focus and reflect on our facilitation approach, session design, and challenges faced with the goal of sharing "best practice." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Definition: Completion and final examination comprise the final stages of a doctoral program and represent the culmination of the doctoral candidates' years of research. In this entry, completion is defined as the writing and submission of a doctoral thesis, and final examination is defined as the viva voce. Over the years, the format and scope of doctoral degrees has expanded and a variety of formats are now offered. In addition to the traditional research-only doctoral degree, professional, practice-based, and new route programs also contain a taught element alongside research. However, the creation of a substantive thesis or practice-based alternative addressing a novel research question is common to all. In contrast, processes and formats of viva voces vary across the globe. These range from private, closed-door defenses to assessed or ritualistic public defense presentations. For both completion and final examination, there are many practical and psychological hurdles that need to be navigated in order for the candidate to attain their doctoral degree. This entry will highlight these aspects as well as provide evidence-based guidance for supervisors in supporting their doctoral candidates through these daunting final stages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Silk Road Tourism Research is the property of Ataturk University Coordinatorship of Scientific Journals and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The right of citation in doctoral theses is an essential aspect of academic research and knowledge development in various fields. This fundamental concept allows PhD students to support their arguments, validate their hypotheses and strengthen their academic contribution by referring to the works and ideas of other authors. In this article, we aim to explore the role and importance of citation rights in the context of PhD theses. The right of citation serves as a basis for building an academic dialogue between the author and the scientific community. By referring to previous work, PhD students demonstrate that they know their field of study and that they incorporate its contributions into their own research. This strengthens the credibility and relevance of the PhD thesis within the academic community. The right of citation ensures compliance with academic ethics and prevention of plagiarism. By highlighting the sources used and giving proper credit to the original authors, PhD students demonstrate academic integrity and respect for the work of others. This practice promotes transparency and collaboration in research, fundamental to scientific progress and maintaining high academic standards. In addition, the citation right contributes to the development of a solid knowledge base in the field. By connecting with previous work, PhD theses situate their contribution in the existing context and can identify gaps or opportunities for future research. Thus, this citation and referencing process is an engine of academic progress, encouraging innovation and the continuous development of knowledge. Thus, the right of citation is a fundamental pillar of doctoral theses, having multiple roles and importance in the context of academic research. By following this principle, PhD students contribute to building and consolidating knowledge in their areas of expertise, promoting academic ethics and advancing the frontiers of human knowledge.

Completion and final examination comprise the final stages of a doctoral program and represent the culmination of the doctoral candidates’ years of research. In this entry, completion is defined as the writing and submission of a doctoral thesis, and final examination is defined as the viva voce. Over the years, the format and scope of doctoral degrees has expanded and a variety of formats are now offered. In addition to the traditional research-only doctoral degree, professional, practice-based, and new route programs also contain a taught element alongside research. However, the creation of a substantive thesis or practice-based alternative addressing a novel research question is common to all. In contrast, processes and formats of viva voces vary across the globe. These range from private, closed-door defenses to assessed or ritualistic public defense presentations. For both completion and final examination, there are many practical and psychological hurdles that need to be navigated in order for the candidate to attain their doctoral degree. This entry will highlight these aspects as well as provide evidence-based guidance for supervisors in supporting their doctoral candidates through these daunting final stages.

Abstract Higher education is awash with data that, when refined, facilitates data-informed decisions. Such decision-making is much more prevalent in support of undergraduate education given the much larger number of undergraduates pursuing higher education in contrast to the much smaller proportion of graduate students. A simple extension of current undergraduate-focused tools to the population of graduate students risks ignoring large differences in the students, processes, and policies that are unique to graduate education. Graduate education is more decentralized, less grade-focused and more milestone-focused (e.g., passing preliminary exams, defending a thesis), graduate admissions is driven by department-level processes and criteria, expected products vary across programs (e.g., performances, journal articles, books), and curricular specialization is the norm. Consequently, local contextual variables predominate. This article describes the development of a milestones dashboard to support programs in their pursuit of graduate education excellence by creating data transparency at the student level, visualizing student progress through milestones, allowing benchmarking against other programs at the university, and empowering college and university administrators to identify trends and to ask questions when unusual data arise.

In this study, it is aimed to reveal the bibliometric profile of graduate (master's and doctorate) studies written on "Medical and Aromatic Plants" in Türkiye in terms of various criteria. For this purpose, the thesis search engine of the Council of Higher Education (CoHE) was searched with the keywords "medical and aromatic plants, aromatic plants and medical plants” in Turkish. As a result of the scanning, 149 graduate theses were identified and 7 of these theses are not open to access. Of the 142 theses, 118 are master's thesis, 23 are doctoral thesis, and 1 is a specialization in medicine. 42% of the graduate theses were conducted under the advisor of professors. The theses were written in many different universities and departments. It has been determined that biology is the subject most covered in graduate theses. Four graduate theses were written in English. 36% of the graduate theses used between 51-100 references. Foreign references were used more in the majority of theses. 77% of the theses were written in the range of 51-150 pages. Quantitative method was used as a method in the majority of theses. In terms of keywords, there is not keywords were used in 8 theses. The most frequently used keywords are medicinal plant(s), medicinal and aromatic plant(s) and aromatic plant(s), respectively. This study guides scientists who want to work on medicinal and aromatic plants.

Doctoral degrees include Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) and other professional doctorates such as Engineering Doctorate (EngD), Doctor of Education (EdD), or Doctor of Clinical Psychology (DClinPsy). Unlike undergraduate- or postgraduate-taught students, doctoral study focuses on a single, autonomous piece of research. Research indicates a high occurrence of mental health problems in doctoral students. This paper describes the piloting and qualitative evaluation of a range of interventions designed to enhance the mental health support for doctoral students at one UK university. These interventions sought to target an array of known factors that affect the mental health of doctoral students, including individual capacity for coping with stress and social support availability.

Higher education is awash with data that, when refined, facilitates data-informed decisions. Such decision-making is much more prevalent in support of undergraduate education given the much larger number of undergraduates pursuing higher education in contrast to the much smaller proportion of graduate students. A simple extension of current undergraduate-focused tools to the population of graduate students risks ignoring large differences in the students, processes, and policies that are unique to graduate education. Graduate education is more decentralized, less grade-focused and more milestone-focused (e.g., passing preliminary exams, defending a thesis), graduate admissions is driven by department-level processes and criteria, expected products vary across programs (e.g., performances, journal articles, books), and curricular specialization is the norm. Consequently, local contextual variables predominate. This article describes the development of a milestones dashboard to support programs in their pursuit of graduate education excellence by creating data transparency at the student level, visualizing student progress through milestones, allowing benchmarking against other programs at the university, and empowering college and university administrators to identify trends and to ask questions when unusual data arise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

By reviewing the scientific literature specialized in sleep disorders (TS) carried out in Mexico, especially at the TS Clinic (Faculty of Medicine-UNAM) at the General Hospital of Mexico (CTS-HGM) from 1948 to 2020, it was possible to document the history of ST research in Mexico and the role played by the CTS-HGM. Sleep Medicine (MS) is one of the newest specialties in Mexico and case research in this field began around 1948, while formal research in 1974. The founding of CTS-HGM in 1997 led to significant development in TS research in Mexico. In addition, the CTS-HGM became a center of care for patients with these problems, as well as important research center since its publications cover all the diagnostic categories of the CITS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Doctoral degrees include Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) and other professional doctorates such as Engineering Doctorate (EngD), Doctor of Education (EdD), or Doctor of Clinical Psychology (DClinPsy). Unlike undergraduate- or postgraduate-taught students, doctoral study focuses on a single, autonomous piece of research. Research indicates a high occurrence of mental health problems in doctoral students. This paper describes the piloting and qualitative evaluation of a range of interventions designed to enhance the mental health support for doctoral students at one UK university. These interventions sought to target an array of known factors that affect the mental health of doctoral students, including individual capacity for coping with stress and social support availability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research educators, scholars, and employers often debate the nature and purpose of doctoral training. Should doctoral degrees exist only to make new knowledge and replenish the academic workforce or are they part of broader societal-enhancement and employment agendas? Or both? This study aimed to identify and analyse tensions in Australian employability discourse in the doctoral degree. We systematically reviewed 41 articles published in journals and conferences on Australian doctoral employability training from 2000 to 2022 and put them in context with the broader debate about doctoral employability in the so-called 'grey literature' of government reports and policy papers. Our findings indicated that stakeholders are all grappling with the difficulty of meeting diverse learning needs and there are contested understandings of the value of the doctoral degree beyond academia. At the same time, we found a relatively poor evidence base for many claims that outcomes of doctoral education are poor for both students and employers. This paper will be of interest to research educators seeking to implement new training programs and policy makers trying to craft new initiatives to connect doctoral education with industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Doctoral degrees include Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) and other professional doctorates such as Engineering Doctorate (EngD), Doctor of Education (EdD) or Doctor of Clinical Psychology (DClinPsy). Unlike undergraduate or postgraduate taught students, doctoral students focus upon a single, autonomous piece of research. Research indicates a high occurrence of mental health problems, mental distress, and symptoms of anxiety or depression in doctoral students. Additionally, there is concern that they may be less likely to disclose existing mental health problems or access support services than undergraduate or postgraduate taught students. This entry explores the known factors that contribute to the mental health of doctoral students studying in the United Kingdom.

Doctoral education in social work is critical in nurturing the stewards of the discipline. Universities across Canada, and elsewhere, are increasing admissions for bachelor and master of social work programs. Consequently, doctoral social work programs are expanding to educate and train new social work faculty. Extant literature on doctoral social work education is predominantly American. There are fourteen Canadian doctoral social work programs, yet no study has observed the state of these programs. Using two data sources, this article provides a snapshot of PhD social work student experiences in 2019–2020. The analysis of all doctoral social work students (n = 157) from the 2019 Canadian Graduate and Professional Student Survey (CGPSS) found that: a) the overall quality of social work PhD programs in Canada was rated by students as moderate; and b) financial obstacles may be an undue barrier to academic success. Furthermore, the analysis of an online survey of Canadian social work PhD students (n = 69) regarding their experience applying for doctoral fellowships and scholarships found that workshops significantly facilitated scholarship success, and that other institutional preparation activities were identified as valuable. These findings illuminate the current state of doctoral social work education in Canada with implications for research and education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Definition: Doctoral degrees include Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) and other professional doctorates such as Engineering Doctorate (EngD), Doctor of Education (EdD) or Doctor of Clinical Psychology (DClinPsy). Unlike undergraduate or postgraduate taught students, doctoral students focus upon a single, autonomous piece of research. Research indicates a high occurrence of mental health problems, mental distress, and symptoms of anxiety or depression in doctoral students. Additionally, there is concern that they may be less likely to disclose existing mental health problems or access support services than undergraduate or postgraduate taught students. This entry explores the known factors that contribute to the mental health of doctoral students studying in the United Kingdom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Definition: This entry explores the different ways in which students are accepted onto doctoral degrees such as PhDs and professional doctorates. The processes involved are referred to in this entry, and in much of the policy-related and research-informed literature, as "recruitment and selection". These processes are worthy of attention given that they are high stakes for students themselves, those who guide and advise them, known as academic "supervisors", and for academic communities more broadly. The entry acknowledges that recruitment and selection processes differ between institutions and across geographical contexts. The entry draws upon research studies and policy documents which relate to recruitment and selection practices from local, national and international contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This entry explores the different ways in which students are accepted onto doctoral degrees such as PhDs and professional doctorates. The processes involved are referred to in this entry, and in much of the policy-related and research-informed literature, as “recruitment and selection”. These processes are worthy of attention given that they are high stakes for students themselves, those who guide and advise them, known as academic “supervisors”, and for academic communities more broadly. The entry acknowledges that recruitment and selection processes differ between institutions and across geographical contexts. The entry draws upon research studies and policy documents which relate to recruitment and selection practices from local, national and international contexts.

Introduction: With the emergency medicine speciality in its nascency in Africa, EM doctoral programmes will need to be developed to facilitate the establishment of an evidence base that is responsive to the African populace. This study aimed to understand the thoughts, experiences, and opinions of current and past candidates of a South African EM PhD programme. Methods: Descriptive, qualitative, semi-structured interviews were used to gather data on PhD EM candidates and graduates. Findings: Four candidates, and four graduates were interviewed. Four categories emerged from the data 1) interviewees had various motivations for starting a PhD in EM, 2) candidate expectations and learning needs were not always aligned with reality, and the challenges and opportunities for success in the PhD programme are related both 3) intrinsically (candidate) and 4) extrinsically (system). Discussion: Many of the barriers noted by the participants can be related to the nascency of the EM in Africa. Participants felt underprepared for their doctorate in terms of their baseline research literacy and skill. Candidates did not receive the level of student-supervisor engagement they desired. Candidates who are also clinicians faced both academic challenges and a resource-limited healthcare system. Pre-doctoral training may upskill prospective candidates in research literacy before they officially register. Distance-learning can be sub-optimal in terms of social interaction and collaboration. A well-curriculated, competency-based programme with clear outcomes, structured teaching-learning opportunities, intentional academic support throughout the programme, can mitigate the above. Protected academic time, promotion criteria which acknowledges academic contributions, financial incentives and more joint positions between universities and clinical services are potential solutions for clinician researcher challenges. An African PhD EM programme should produce graduates who are independent researchers, skilled in academic supervision and who are impactful to African needs when contributing to the African EM knowledge economy.

Using the lens of Community Cultural Wealth (CCW; Yosso, 2005), the present study examined the supports and challenges encountered by Latinx and Black students as they obtained doctoral degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) disciplines. Twelve self-identified participants at predominately White institutions (PWI) completed semi-structured interviews. Two sets of findings emerged. First, students viewed support from faculty, mentors, advisors, and program directors, as well as off-campus individuals as the main factors contributing to their academic success. Commonly identified challenges included not connecting with their advisor, feeling unsupported and isolated within their programs, and experiencing microaggressions. Regarding the impact of intersectionality, both benefits and challenges emerged. Half indicated that their multiple social identities aided their studies, yet some reported their social identities made it difficult relating to others. The second major findings focused on applying the CCW model and suggested Latinx and Black students utilized all CCW dimensions (i.e., aspirational, navigational, social, linguistic, familial, resistant capital) to varying degrees in navigating their doctoral experiences. The findings are unique in highlighting the considerable strengths and cultural capital students bring to the academy, revealing important insights about their need for connection and community in harassment-free environments. Specific recommendations are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated PhD candidate feedback on research and employability skills training, delivered via workintegrated learning (WIL) within an alternative doctoral training model. Voluntary feedback was received using a mixed-methods survey consisting of 10 quantitative statements reflecting on learning, and qualitative feedback comprising best aspects and needs improvement comments. The results indicate candidates highly valued the WIL-based assessments, teacher interactions, workload, research-relevant problem-solving frameworks, workrelated knowledge and skills, and confidence-building. The qualitative analysis also revealed some PhD candidates desired more peer interactions early in candidature. The study reinforces four emerging design principles for WIL in doctoral programs and provides a contemporary evidence-base for improving alternative doctoral training programs. Areas for further research include: understanding training motivation and needs including content complexity, internships, and culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) candidate needs; benchmarking engagement with doctoral WIL; increasing doctoral peer interactions; WIL for new technologies; and communicating the value of doctoral WIL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the emergency medicine speciality in its nascency in Africa, EM doctoral programmes will need to be developed to facilitate the establishment of an evidence base that is responsive to the African populace. This study aimed to understand the thoughts, experiences, and opinions of current and past candidates of a South African EM PhD programme. Descriptive, qualitative, semi-structured interviews were used to gather data on PhD EM candidates and graduates. Four candidates, and four graduates were interviewed. Four categories emerged from the data 1) interviewees had various motivations for starting a PhD in EM, 2) candidate expectations and learning needs were not always aligned with reality, and the challenges and opportunities for success in the PhD programme are related both 3) intrinsically (candidate) and 4) extrinsically (system). Many of the barriers noted by the participants can be related to the nascency of the EM in Africa. Participants felt underprepared for their doctorate in terms of their baseline research literacy and skill. Candidates did not receive the level of student-supervisor engagement they desired. Candidates who are also clinicians faced both academic challenges and a resource-limited healthcare system. Pre-doctoral training may upskill prospective candidates in research literacy before they officially register. Distance-learning can be sub-optimal in terms of social interaction and collaboration. A well-curriculated, competency-based programme with clear outcomes, structured teaching-learning opportunities, intentional academic support throughout the programme, can mitigate the above. Protected academic time, promotion criteria which acknowledges academic contributions, financial incentives and more joint positions between universities and clinical services are potential solutions for clinician researcher challenges. An African PhD EM programme should produce graduates who are independent researchers, skilled in academic supervision and who are impactful to African needs when contributing to the African EM knowledge economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A “doctoral student” is the term for a student undertaking the highest level of university degree (a doctorate). “Supervisor” is the term for the academic, or academics, who act as their guide. Unlike taught classroom-based degree courses, doctoral degrees in the UK are normally only, or mainly, focused upon a single intensive research study into a specific topic. Such degree courses facilitate the development of students into highly specialist autonomous researchers capable of independent thought. Typically, a blend of support is provided to each doctoral student which consists of an elective development program of research methods learning opportunities alongside dedicated supervisor support from one or more academic members of staff called “supervisors”. It is the expectation that each supervisor will act as a guide and mentor for the doctoral student, thereby enabling them to successfully complete their program of research. This entry relates primarily to the UK model of supervising a doctoral student. Doctoral programs in other countries may differ.

Mentoring has been an effective strategy that contributed to personal, academic, and career success on all levels. It has played an integral role in doctoral students' journeys to successfully complete their degrees. Due to limited research regarding the emic experiences and perspectives of Deaf doctoral students and graduates with mentorship during their doctoral studies, data was collected and analyzed from focus groups. A grounded theory methodology with the method of constant comparative analysis identified eight common themes, which were synthesized to four categories; access, relationships, collaboration, and locus of control. The overarching theme using the in vivo codes was determined to be a 'safe space' which was the keystone to doctoral students' overall success to complete the program. To support future Deaf doctoral students with mentoring, insights and recommendations for future research are shared. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Definition: A "doctoral student" is the term for a student undertaking the highest level of university degree (a doctorate). "Supervisor" is the term for the academic, or academics, who act as their guide. Unlike taught classroom-based degree courses, doctoral degrees in the UK are normally only, or mainly, focused upon a single intensive research study into a specific topic. Such degree courses facilitate the development of students into highly specialist autonomous researchers capable of independent thought. Typically, a blend of support is provided to each doctoral student which consists of an elective development program of research methods learning opportunities alongside dedicated supervisor support from one or more academic members of staff called "supervisors". It is the expectation that each supervisor will act as a guide and mentor for the doctoral student, thereby enabling them to successfully complete their program of research. This entry relates primarily to the UK model of supervising a doctoral student. Doctoral programs in other countries may differ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim/Purpose To provide a research proposal writing framework to help doctoral students argue and motivate their efforts at furthering the existing knowledge available to understand some phenomenon or theory. Background I discuss how the cognitive process theory of writing and the science writing heuristic can lead to a set of rhetorical moves and question prompts that students can use to develop the content of their research proposals. Methodology I searched the literature on research proposal writing and, more broadly, academic writing to locate teaching and learning concepts associated with my recent question prompt approach used to guide my doctoral students. I used search words such as "writing" and "question prompts." My review led me to the cognitive process theory of writing and heuristic scaffolding. I searched further using keywords such as "rhetorical move" and "heuristic prompts." I performed several iterations of literature searches and reviews. Contribution Instead of guiding a linearly developed research proposal that begins with an Introduction and proceeds to a Literature Review and then a Research Design and Methods section, the framework reveals a research proposal's underlying logical flow and content by describing five rhetorical moves: establishing a topic question from an interesting phenomenon, establishing research opportunities, selecting a research question, providing a tentative solution, and establishing a plan to investigate the solution. Thus, the framework contributes to scholarship about how educators can facilitate independent reflection and broader problem-solving at the doctoral research proposal development stage. Particularly for the social sciences, it reveals the promise of the cognitive process theory of writing, dual problem space model of reflection, and heuristic scaffolding as valuable theoretical perspectives for the supervision of the planning phase of doctoral research. Recommendations for Practitioners Teachers and advisors may use the framework's rhetorical moves and question prompts as cognitive scaffolds to help students navigate an ill-structured problem typical of doctoral research projects in the social sciences. The question type of scaffolding gives the research student more responsibility; rather than the thesis supervisor or advisor articulating a model or nominating the technique, they require the student to self-regulate and develop it independently. This helps deal with the oft-experienced circumstance in which the supervisor does not have time to interact directly and regularly with the student. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Spanish regulatory framework governing university doctoral studies, establishes that, for all purposes, PhD students are researchers in training and, as such, all the activities carried out by these students during their training as doctors, must be recorded. These activities must be detailed in a formal "doctoral activity document" (DAD) that serves to evaluate the student. If these students are considered, to all intents and purposes, researchers (in training), their activities (all or some of them) should be part of the scientific production of the institution and, therefore, be included in their CRIS systems. Through the results of a survey conducted in 18 relevant Spanish universities, this presentation aims to analyse how the research activities carried out during the doctoral training period impact, or may impact, on CRIS systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. This review's objectives are to find out (in relation to health and/or social care): (1) What is known about the outcomes and impact of completing (or not completing) a professional doctorate in health and/or social care on the individual professional? (2) What is known about the outcome and impact of completing (or not completing) a professional doctorate in health and/or social care on the employing organisation? (3) What is known about the outcome and impact of completing (or not completing) a professional doctorate in health and/or social care on the profession? (4) What is known about the outcome and impact of completing (or not completing) a professional doctorate in health and/or social care on service users and the wider society? (5) How do we use the findings from this review to inform educators, higher education institutions, professionals, investors in employing organisations and policymakers? (6) What further research will be needed to answer any knowledge gaps or recommendations? (7) Where possible, we will identify and report on any demographic data and discuss their relevance to the impact and outcomes from professional doctorates., (© 2024 The Author(s). Campbell Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Campbell Collaboration.)

Domestic racial and ethnic minorities have been persistently underrepresented in U.S. geography doctoral programs. Efforts to improve diversity have taken many forms over the years, but most have been short-lived with limited success. In this article, we introduce the Advancing Geography Through Diversity Program (AGTDP), a four-pronged cohort-based model that systematically and sustainably increases the presence of African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Native Americans in geography doctoral programs. The program is currently in its fourth year in the Department of Geography, Environment, and Spatial Sciences at Michigan State University. Context for the development of the framework is provided, followed by a detailed discussion of each pillar of the program: recruitment, support, engagement, and retention. We evaluate the current state of the program along with lessons learned for successful implementation. To date, the program has effectively increased the representation across all three underrepresented groups within the department's doctoral program. We believe the AGTDP can serve as a model for more widespread deployment to other geography departments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background A substantial monetary investment supports STEM doctoral students in the United States (U.S.) through a variety of funding mechanisms (e.g., fellowships, research, and teaching assistantships). However, we have limited knowledge of how students’ funding influences their development of career-relevant skills during graduate school. Using survey data from STEM doctoral students (n = 719) across 35 highly ranked U.S. institutions, we use exploratory factor analysis and nested multivariate regression modeling to understand how students’ primary funding influences development of: (a) research skills; (b) teamwork and project management skills; (c) peer training and mentoring skills, and (d) communication skills. Results We find significant differences in students’ self-reported development for all four career-related skills based on their primary funding type. Students with research assistantships reported higher research and teamwork and project management skills than those with teaching assistantships. Yet, students with teaching assistantships reported significantly higher development of peer training and mentoring than students funded via all other types. Students funded via external fellowships reported lower skill development than students funded primarily by research assistantships across all four career-relevant skills. Conclusions Doctoral students' development of career-relevant skills are not uniform across primary funding types. Particularly, the perceived benefits of external fellowship funding (i.e., prestige, autonomy, increased pay) may come at the cost of fewer opportunities to develop skills important for career success. STEM graduate education scholars, practitioners, and policymakers should consider and ameliorate the varied impacts that funding mechanisms can have on graduate students’ development of career-relevant skills.

Inadequate or ineffectively communicated feedback from faculty advisors may limit the development of cordial, collaborative relationships with doctoral capstone writers and may impede their successful outcomes. The purpose of this general qualitative study was to explore online faculty's use of technology when advising doctoral capstone writers. Yang and Carless's (2013) feedback triangle model, including cognitive, social-affective and structural dimensions, provided the framework for the study. Demographic survey data and Zoom interview data were collected from 10 doctoral faculty at a fully online university to explore how and why faculty use technology and what technology-related activities faculty conduct when advising doctoral capstone writers. Emergent codes were organised using a priori codes from the feedback triangle model, and themes were developed within these dimensions. Cognitive themes were ensuring accountability and providing instruction, which addressed how participants were using technology. Social-affective themes addressing why faculty use technology were enhancing communication, increasing motivation and promoting self-regulation. Structural themes indicating technology-related activities were modes, preferences, procedures and barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past 50 years the diversity of higher education faculty in the mathematical, physical, computer, and engineering sciences (MPCES) has advanced very little at 4-year universities in the United States. This is despite laws and policies such as affirmative action, interventions by universities, and enormous financial investment by federal agencies to diversify science, technology, mathematics, and engineering (STEM) career pathways into academia. Data comparing the fraction of underrepresented minority (URM) postdoctoral scholars to the fraction of faculty at these institutions offer a straightforward empirical explanation for this state of affairs. URM postdoc appointments lag significantly behind progress in terms of both undergraduate and Ph.D.-level STEM student populations. Indeed, URM postdoc appointments lag well-behind faculty diversity itself in the MPCES fields, most of which draw their faculty heavily from the postdoctoral ranks, particularly at research-intensive (R1) universities. Thus, a sea-change in how postdocs are recruited, how their careers are developed, and how they are identified as potential faculty is required in order to diversify the nation's faculty, and particularly the R1 MPCES professoriate. Our research shows that both Ph.D. students and postdocs benefit from intentional structure at various levels of their respective "apprentice" experiences, a factor that we believe has been neglected. Several key structural approaches are highly effective in these regards: (1) A collaborative approach in which leading research universities collectively identify outstanding URM candidates; (2) Faculty engagement in recruiting and supporting these postdocs; (3) Inter-institutional exchange programs to heighten the visibility and broaden the professional experiences of these postdocs; (4) Community-building activities that create a sense of belonging and encourage continuing in academia for each cohort; and (5) Continuing research based on outcomes and new experimental approaches. The California Alliance, consisting of UC Berkeley, UCLA, Caltech, and Stanford, has been engaged in such a program for almost a decade now, with most of the California Alliance URM postdocs now in tenure track positions or on the path toward careers as faculty at research intensive (R1) institutions. If this approach was brought to scale by involving the top 25 or so URM Ph.D.-producing R1 institutions in the MPCES fields, about 40% of the national URM postdoctoral population in these fields could be affected. Although this impact would fall short of bringing URM MPCES faculty ranks up to full representation of the United States population as a whole, it would vastly improve the outlook for URM students and their aspirations to take on leadership roles as scientists and engineers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Underrepresentation among U.S. citizen racial and ethnic minorities in geography has a long history, one perpetuated through—and readily measurable by—its doctoral degree–granting record. This article examines the history of efforts to redress underrepresentation since the 1960s, explores modern underrepresentation, measures the degree of its persistence in the discipline and within individual departments, and identifies drivers that exacerbate the racial and ethnic representation disparity among U.S. citizens in geography doctoral programs. To quantify the degree to which the discipline is underperforming demographically, we contrasted the rate of domestic underrepresented minority doctoral degree conferrals with those of White doctoral recipients in geography, the social sciences, and the entire academy over a twenty-three-year period from 1997 through 2019. During that span, geography consistently trailed the social sciences and the academy: This underrepresentation gap has widened in the past decade. Four drivers were identified: (1) lack of dedicated funding for underrepresented minority doctoral students, (2) minimal prior exposure to academic and professional geography, (3) passive recruitment strategies, and (4) pervasive Whiteness of departments. We conclude with a call to action for geographers to meet the moral imperative of racial and ethnic representational equity by becoming agents of measurable change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past 50 years the diversity of higher education faculty in the mathematical, physical, computer, and engineering sciences (MPCES) has advanced very little at 4-year universities in the United States. This is despite laws and policies such as affirmative action, interventions by universities, and enormous financial investment by federal agencies to diversify science, technology, mathematics, and engineering (STEM) career pathways into academia. Data comparing the fraction of underrepresented minority (URM) postdoctoral scholars to the fraction of faculty at these institutions offer a straightforward empirical explanation for this state of affairs. URM postdoc appointments lag significantly behind progress in terms of both undergraduate and Ph.D.-level STEM student populations. Indeed, URM postdoc appointments lag well-behind faculty diversity itself in the MPCES fields, most of which draw their faculty heavily from the postdoctoral ranks, particularly at research-intensive (R1) universities. Thus, a sea-change in how postdocs are recruited, how their careers are developed, and how they are identified as potential faculty is required in order to diversify the nation’s faculty, and particularly the R1 MPCES professoriate. Our research shows that both Ph.D. students and postdocs benefit from intentional structure at various levels of their respective “apprentice” experiences, a factor that we believe has been neglected. Several key structural approaches are highly effective in these regards: (1) A collaborative approach in which leading research universities collectively identify outstanding URM candidates; (2) Faculty engagement in recruiting and supporting these postdocs; (3) Inter-institutional exchange programs to heighten the visibility and broaden the professional experiences of these postdocs; (4) Community-building activities that create a sense of belonging and encourage continuing in academia for each cohort; and (5) Continuing research based on outcomes and new experimental approaches. The California Alliance, consisting of UC Berkeley, UCLA, Caltech, and Stanford, has been engaged in such a program for almost a decade now, with most of the California Alliance URM postdocs now in tenure track positions or on the path toward careers as faculty at research intensive (R1) institutions. If this approach was brought to scale by involving the top 25 or so URM Ph.D.-producing R1 institutions in the MPCES fields, about 40% of the national URM postdoctoral population in these fields could be affected. Although this impact would fall short of bringing URM MPCES faculty ranks up to full representation of the United States population as a whole, it would vastly improve the outlook for URM students and their aspirations to take on leadership roles as scientists and engineers.

Drawing on 12 semi-structured interviews with Black, Latina, and white graduate women who either continued or discontinued their STEM doctoral degrees, the present study examined the psychological impact of navigating marginalizing experiences in white male-dominated STEM environments. Using thematic analysis grounded in a social constructivist paradigm, researchers identified three emergent themes: 1) institutional challenges as contextual barriers, 2) impact on wellbeing and STEM persistence, and 3) contextual supports and coping. These findings indicate that challenging STEM encounters within the higher education environment contributed to increased stress, depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation among graduate women in STEM from diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds. The compound effect of these STEM stressors and their subsequent psychological toll contributed to decreased STEM persistence among participants. Study implications highlight the need for faculty and university administrators to challenge and address institutional norms that operate as contextual barriers, destigmatize discussions surrounding mental health, and adopt a "whole person" approach to supporting graduate women in STEM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Türkbitig Journal of Cultural Studies is the property of Turkbitig Journal of Cultural Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)