Search results

The present study develops, conceptualizes and validates a scale based on the transactional stress theory to assess the perceived challenge and hindrance demands of doctoral programs that impact doctoral students’ psychological well-being.

This research employs an exploratory-mixed methodology comprising five phases with a sequential qualitative-quantitative approach. A rigorous scale development process is adopted to validate the instrument’s psychometric properties. The study respondents are Indian full-time doctoral students in the management discipline.

The findings show that the construct of perceived challenge and hindrance demands is a first-order four-factor and a second-order two-factor model. The study has validated the scale to capture the challenge and hindrance demands of doctoral research programs with the following sub-constructs: doctoral program resource inadequacies, doctoral program ambiguity, doctoral program workload and complexity.

The recommended challenge demands and hindrance demands (CHD) scale provides a benchmark for doctoral institutes and program supervisors in focussing on research students’ perception of their doctoral education demands to reduce the strain and increase their well-being during their doctoral program journey.

Hindrance demands adversely influence the motivation resources needed for doctoral education; challenge demands positively impact the research students’ internal resources.

This paper aims to expand the theory of situated learning with the application of technology and provides a technology-based situated learning model with suggestions for doctoral program design.

A literature review of the relevant topics was conducted. Themes emerged by the systematic review of the relevant studies and theoretical framework.

Studies reveal that part-time doctoral students often feel unsupported, dissatisfied and disconnected with their program. Many of these issues may be mitigated by faculty and peer mentoring, and various forms of asynchronous communication through a situated learning framework with interactive communication technologies.

Research of doctoral education should pay more attention to part-time doctoral students and investigate the quality of their programs given their individual needs, and how their progression and completion can be achieved through the innovative approaches proposed in this study.

Program designers may use a technology-based situated learning approach in program design to fulfill part-time doctoral students’ needs toward enhancing mentorship, students’ academic self-efficacy and career preparation. Further support is offered through a virtual community of practice.

This paper draws researchers’ attention to program design and part-time doctoral students’ retention and completion of a doctoral program.

This study provides an innovative synergetic model that helps administrators and program designers to design doctoral programs and motivates researchers to conduct research regarding part-time doctoral students.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate the scholar–practitioner research development scale (SPRDS), an instrument to assess research competencies of students enrolled in professional doctoral programs.

In this instrument development study, an expert panel established the content valid. A factor analysis and internal consistency analysis was used to examine the validity and reliability of the instrument.

An expert panel deemed the scale as content valid. Results of a factor analysis and internal consistency analysis demonstrated that the scale is both valid and reliable, consisting of five subscales.

The current study provides evidence that the scholar–SPRDS is a valid and reliable instrument to assess research characteristics professional doctorate students’ research competencies, which can be used to extend research on the development of doctoral students in professional doctorate programs.

The instrument can be a useful tool to assess and inform the faculty and administrators about their students, the curriculum and program resources.

Equipped with an instrument such as this, faculty and administrators are better armed to assess students’ growth thought out the program, and, in turn, design and deliver research curriculum and mentorship that assists students in developing as scholar–practitioners, which may ultimately lead to success in the program and beyond, impacting the society.

There is not a formal or standardized scale to evaluate if professional doctoral students are progressing and developing as practitioner-scholars through their professional doctoral programs. There is not a standardized or universally adopted assessment to determine if professional doctoral programs are meeting the goals and objectives they have set forth. Thus, the aim of this study was to develop and to determine the validity and reliability of a scale to measure a scholar–practitioner’s research competencies in a professional doctoral program.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate mentors' and mentees' perspectives of the mentor role within an education doctoral mentoring program at a mid-sized public institution.

Data from individual interviews with mentors and mentees were collected as part of a larger case study of a doctoral mentoring program. Mentees were doctor of education (EdD) students in their first and second years of the program. Mentors were identified as individuals who graduated from or are further along in the doctoral program. Five (N = 5) mentees and seven (N = 7) mentors participated in interviews, which were then transcribed and coded to identify emergent themes, along with transcripts of presentations given by the mentors.

Four themes emerged within the data: differentiating support roles, mentoring as a way to identify gaps in doctoral student needs, mentoring as support for doctoral student success and ways to provide suggestions for mentoring program improvement. Results indicated that mentors and mentees viewed the mentor role as being unique from the roles of faculty advisor and dissertation chair. Mentors and mentees alike responded positively to virtual mentoring.

Participation by mentors and mentees was limited to first- and second-year doctoral students; thus, dissertation-stage students' perceptions of mentoring could not be determined. Implications include the value of mentoring in filling the gaps of support for doctoral students and the capability of mentoring programs to be adapted to unexpected circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

This study targets scholar-practitioner students in an EdD program, who are often overlooked by mentoring literature, and distinguishes research between faculty mentoring and mentoring performed by other students/recent graduates. Additionally, the pandemic gave the authors an opportunity to explore adapting mentoring to virtual formats.

This study aims to perform a scoping review of the recent studies on critical resources required for the doctoral program by mapping the resources at various levels of Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems and their underlying theories. The study proposes a holistic model of supportive resources in the doctoral education.

The current scoping review is supported by Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage methodological guidance The authors reported sixty-eight articles that were published between 2010 and 2023 and complied with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

The study identified two categories of resources that promote doctoral student well-being: personal resources such as research self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation of the doctoral student. Second, the contextual resources provided by supervisors, department, family, peers, institution and Government policy impact the well-being of doctoral students. The study relied on the self-determination and conservation of resources theory to determine doctoral students' stress-free, high-quality research journey.

The study findings can help higher education institutions, supervisors, peers and academicians plan and implement the finest resources to improve the well-being of doctoral students. The institutions can develop a wide range of strategies, tailored supportive programs, and interventions that can help in improving students' mental and emotional health, based on the developed multifaceted resource framework. Doctoral students can also use the review's findings to help them deal with program obstacles by encouraging themselves internally and participating in mentoring programs.

This review article proposes a comprehensive conceptual framework by considering Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems on multilevel resources that help to understand the inter-relationship between resources required in the doctoral student's program.

Globally, traditional and online doctoral programs face difficulties with student persistence and progression. An online doctoral school implemented a first-year program sequence taught by a cadre of 20 specialized faculty members who engage in best practices to assist students in persisting and progressing toward program completion.

This qualitative program assessment using content analysis examined the program effectiveness of one online doctoral program's first-year program sequence. Two research questions guided this program assessment, they were: RQ1. Based on online doctoral students' perspectives, what motivators contribute to online doctoral student persistence and progression in an online doctoral program? RQ2. How do online faculty contribute to online doctoral student persistence and progression? Data collection included myriad of program metrics: content area meetings (CAMs); closing the loop assessment data; faculty and student end of course survey data; and faculty and student semistructured interviews.

The resultant themes indicated that students are motivated by support from family, friends and religious beliefs; and students persist based on support from fellow doctoral students and faculty members. Additional themes revealed that faculty members motivate students through building faculty–student relationships, individual coaching, providing university resources and through clarification of program requirements; and faculty members perceive that face-to-face doctoral residencies greatly contribute to student persistence and progression through interpersonal interaction and through improved clarity.

Implications of this program assessment have far-reaching impact on how doctoral granting institutions can structure small cadres of faculty to develop interpersonal relationships with doctoral students with focus on support and development.

This study aims to focus on survey reports of doctoral students’ experiences in the USA, providing a look at factors influencing “in the moment” decisions students make about persistence. Specifically, the authors investigate the reasons doctoral students consider leaving their programs, and how these reasons may differ for international and domestic students. The authors also examine international–domestic patterns by sex and by program of study.

As part of a campus-wide doctoral program assessment, doctoral students and recent graduates at a large, public, Research I institution in the Midwest region of the USA are asked to complete a program satisfaction survey. Content analysis of open-ended survey responses is the basis of the analysis. Next, a code by committee approach is used whereby two members of the research team coded all open-ended responses and discussed discrepancies to reach consensus on all codes assigned, and to reduce individual biases. Each open-ended response is assigned at least one of 16 codes, with more than one code used as necessary.

The results suggest that, although both academic and social factors are important influences of doctoral departure in general, academic concerns – specifically, alignment with goals, career preparation and program structure – may be particularly important for international students, whereas social aspects – faculty relationships and program climate – may be more important for domestic US students.

Researchers should consider conducting larger, multi-institutional studies in the USA, which would reflect a diversity of perspectives and experiences within the American context. Parallel studies of doctoral programs in other countries may be useful in identifying whether similar factors are found for international and domestic students attending those programs. Follow-up interviews could be used to further delve into and understand the emergent patterns from the surveys. The findings of such future studies have the power to inform programs and policies designed to increase the retention of both domestic and international doctoral students.

Given that faculty/advising is one of the most important factors cited by both domestic and international students, our findings suggest that US faculty members may need to give more attention to nurturing supportive relationships with their advisees. Furthermore, American university administrators might consider changing tenure requirements and reward systems for professors to place more emphasis on cultivating positive relationships with advisees, publishing, presenting and writing grants with advisees, and providing high-quality mentoring for doctoral students. Doctoral-granting institutions should consider implementing regular program reviews that include surveys from doctoral students to help programs identify and meet their students’ needs.

Likewise, while other research on international students’ doctoral experiences has been conducted, such as the relationship with their faculty advisor (Kim, 2007; Rice et al., 2009), single studies that focus on factors affecting the attrition of domestic versus that of international students’ remain limited. The purpose of this study is to address the following research questions: What factors contribute to doctoral students’ considerations of departure in the USA? How might these factors differ between domestic and international students? We seek to expand understandings of doctoral attrition by using larger-scale qualitative data to address limitations of existing studies that focus on the experiences of only a few students.

The growing demand for doctoral education and the role of the doctoral degree to advance nations socially, economically, and culturally forces countries and individual institutions to respond to concerns stemming from the doctoral process. Numerous initiatives to support doctoral students have been adopted with varying features across countries. The purpose of this paper is to examine doctoral student support programs in two countries: the USA and Turkey. These countries offer higher education systems at different stages of maturity and stability.

The data for this study came from a comparative case study analysis of doctoral student experiences in support programs at two research universities, one in the USA and one in Turkey. Ten American doctoral students and eight Turkish doctoral students were interviewed, for a total of 18 interviews. The study utilized the conceptual framework specified by the PhD Completion Project initiated by the US Council of Graduate Schools.

The two national systems featured in this study are at different points of their development. These developmental starting points influence the rationale and construction of a student support program, particularly one focused on advanced degrees, research activity, and knowledge production. The Turkish higher education system faces the challenge of building its infrastructure to be responsive to national needs in future decades, including producing qualified faculty as teachers and researchers. The American model of doctoral student support concentrates on increasing diversity within the academy. By focusing on first-generation students, students of color, and women in STEM disciplines, efforts are directed toward not just improving the quantity of graduates, but also the diversity of those graduates.

While doctoral student support programs are increasingly common in multiple national contexts, analyses of these programs are rare, and comparative analyses even more so. The emergence of new academic disciplines, the trend toward interdisciplinary research, and the prevalence of neo-liberal policies has made the doctoral experience increasingly complex. The data presented here reveal that while doctoral education is influenced by country-specific contexts, doctoral students from multiple countries share many of the same experiences.

While institutional efforts have shown modest results, AACSB statistics suggest that current practices are insufficient to increase more substantively the representation of minorities among doctorally qualified business school faculty. The purpose of this paper is to explore antecedents to the faculty representation issue – that is, the motives, concerns, and resources of US minority individuals with respect to business doctoral program entry – as a basis for improving minority faculty representation outcomes.

A small sample of doctoral program directors were interviewed to ascertain their perspective on recruitment, design and delivery of PhD programs in business and from which a survey instrument was developed. A sample of 292 US minority respondents surveyed indicated their top reasons for and concerns about pursuing a doctorate, program selection and rejection criteria, sources of information and financing, and, for those in the decision-making stage, reasons for waiting to apply to a program. The paper compares responses of those who graduated from or are currently enrolled in a doctoral program in business with those who decided not to enroll. The paper also explores factors most salient to individuals currently contemplating enrolling but who have not yet decided to do so.

Results suggest that mentorship of promising undergraduate and master's students by business faculty and current doctoral students is critical to US minority enrollments in doctoral programs; however, a school's physical location, required time and energy, and financial considerations also play a role in the decision-making process. The role of international students in diversity efforts by doctoral programs is also salient.

Previous studies in multiple disciplines note the under-representation of US minority faculty in academe. In business education, suggestions for overcoming this gap have focussed on recruitment, mentoring, and/or networks and support groups but little is known about antecedents to entry (motives, concerns, and resources of US minority individuals) with respect to business doctoral programs.

The purpose of this study is to examine how doctoral students navigate preparing for an academic career, particularly through instructional professional development, in the context of the entire doctoral program. For doctoral students pursuing an academic position, the dissertation process provides one avenue for developing their skills and identities as independent researchers. Yet, research shows a need to provide support for student’ instructional professional development and to understand how they are shaped into educators and researchers.

A multiple case study methodology was designed to capture the perceptions and experiences of 21 alumni of an academic career preparation program at a large, public university. In this exploratory, qualitative study, semi-structured interviews and final reports from program coursework were analyzed using a modified analytic induction methodology.

This study employs elements of self-determination theory and transition theory to interpret doctoral students’ transitions into and through the instructional professional development program under study. The participants sought competence in their teaching by participating in this voluntary and supplemental program. These students exercised autonomy in the pursuit of this professional development and in overcoming challenges to relatedness in the form of non-supportive program structures, including curriculum and faculty.

This study contributes to the graduate education literature on the experiences of doctoral students as they prepare for and transition into their future academic careers.