Search results

What contributes to US professional doctoral student success in the online space is the subject of this chapter. The online doctoral student occupies two underserved categories of higher education students: doctoral students and online students, both of which have historically low graduation rates (Bawa, 2016; Stone, 2017). A number of US online doctoral programs have significantly higher graduation rates than normal, demonstrating that it is possible to create highly successful online doctoral programs. In this chapter, we apply the R. E. Clark and Estes (2008) conceptual framework of human performance to understanding the factors contributing to doctoral student success in online programs. We look at three stakeholder groups, faculty, staff, and students, and review the factors and solutions that could allow each group to contribute to doctoral student success. This review of the literature is informed by examples drawn from two online professional doctoral programs for which the authors either designed and taught courses, and chaired dissertations, or were enrolled in as a student.

This chapter proposes authentic leadership as a generic competence and an integral part of doctoral education regardless of field of study. The authors explore its potential to enhance the development of doctoral candidates and academics and search for answers to the questions: Can and should authentic leadership be developed as a generic competence in doctoral education? How can it be designed and implemented in a doctoral training module? What would its learning outcomes be? The authors address these questions in the context of doctoral education. They assert that authentic leadership training should be mandatory for all doctoral candidates, and that supervisors should be actively engaged in the development of this underappreciated transferrable skill.

The purpose of this chapter, which is a response to calls to examine students’ perspectives of the doctoral experience, is to investigate the notion that doctoral education facilitates developing nodes in leading networks of knowledge for leader and leadership development – a theme that has not been examined.

Using data generated from in-depth interviews embedded with excerpts of personal life stories and the questionnaire, this qualitative study analyses the views of some African students about their experiences of doctoral study in the United Kingdom.

The study discovered that doctoral education is perceived as: acquisition of knowledge and capabilities for professional leadership trajectories; creator of learning communities, networks and relationship resources; developing nodes in leading knowledge networks; progression from the self to the relational and to the collective; and action learning, all for leader and leadership development.

Drawing on the findings, the chapter argues for the novel notion of doctoral education as developing nodes within leading networks of knowledge for leader and leadership development.

Although, the research is a qualitative study that focused on a small group of students in one university, and as a result, its findings cannot be generalised, its implication for doctoral agendas worldwide and Africa and its Agenda 2063, in particular, need consideration.

Although established for the purpose of educating Black Americans, recently, many HBCUs have been witness to a steady increase of White students (Shorette II & Arroyo, 2015). And, with projections that non-Black student enrollment will continue to increase at HBCUs (Palmer, Shorette II, & Gasman, 2015), strategies for supporting the changing demographics are needed. This chapter presents selected findings from a larger quantitative investigation examining the impact of faculty–student engagement on the experiences and perceived persistence, or belief that one will complete a doctoral program, of White doctoral students at HBCUs. Results indicated external engagement, i.e., social components for student success external to a student’s academic program and research practices, was a best predictor for optimal experiences and increased belief in self for program completion. Directions for future research and practice are offered.

Studies of inequality in higher education on both undergraduate and graduate levels have rarely examined experiences of Asians and Pacific Islanders (APIs). In this study, we focus on the experiences and outcomes of API students in doctoral education. More specifically, we examine socialization experiences and research productivity of three groups of students: domestic API, international API, and domestic white students. The results, based on a national cohort of PhD students in biology, reveal notable differences in experiences and outcomes of domestic and international API students. Although variation in socialization experiences explains differences in research productivity in the first year, that is not the case in the second year of doctoral study. In the second year, international API students have publication productivity comparable to their white peers, despite less favorable socialization experiences. Domestic API students, however, have lower research productivity than their white peers, even though they have comparable socialization experiences. Given the presumption of APIs’ success, especially in the STEM fields, findings for domestic API students are surprising and not aligned with the model minority stereotype. Contributions to research on API students, doctoral education, and socialization theory are discussed.

To provide potential accounting doctoral students with relevant information on various doctoral program characteristics.

Current doctoral students in accounting, representing 60 different programs in the United States, completed a survey concerning various doctoral program characteristics at their respective doctoral institutions. We examine the survey responses along with program rankings and job placement data.

Doctoral programs in accounting differ on many dimensions such as the structure of the courses and deliverables required, the student cohort profile, student research support, and teaching expectations. In addition, top tier programs differ on a variety of these characteristics from lower tiered programs.

A single student at each doctoral program completed the survey. Doctoral students’ experiences may differ between each other and programs may change. However, we asked students to respond to the survey questions as a “typical student” and as a whole, doctoral programs appear to have remained similar over the past half of century.

The intended audience for this chapter is potential accounting doctoral students. Providing them with an awareness of the different program characteristics should prove to be useful in finding a program with the appropriate fit.

Research readings groups represent a recent innovation in accounting doctoral education that appears to be spreading at research-oriented universities. In this chapter, the authors describe how accounting research readings groups can serve as a mechanism to engage doctoral students in the consumption and discussion of research throughout all phases of the doctoral program. An accounting research readings group supplements the breadth of knowledge gained in doctoral seminars by adding depth of knowledge in a focal research area. The authors offer insights from the educational psychology literature to justify research readings groups as a form of team-based learning and then offer suggestions on the formation and operation of these groups. The authors enumerate the many benefits that these groups afford to both doctoral students and faculty members. The authors also distribute a survey to faculty organizers of the existing accounting research readings groups and share the results of this survey to supplement their advice with firsthand experiences, the authors also share the results of a survey distributed to faculty organizers of existing accounting research readings groups. The authors’ goal is to encourage the use of accounting research readings groups to inspire, foster, and enhance the research culture within accounting departments and doctoral programs.

This chapter addresses issues of power distribution in the context of doctoral research supervision. In this respect, manifestations of abusive practices constitute real problems for doctoral students in terms of the success and continuation of their research. A first reflection is made on the way this phenomenon is addressed in the literature and the explanations given. Then, it is brought into perspective with the notion of “excessive faculty entitlement” (Ratnam & Craig, 2021), to better understand how this asymmetrical power relationship between the supervisor and the supervisee is constructed and experienced. To provide exploratory answers on how to promote more equitable spaces for doctoral students, this study focuses on monitoring committees which represent an a priori more equitable way of addressing the issue of power distribution in supervision and which are therefore likely to help students in their doctoral journey. Our study of a recorded session of a monitoring committee is based on an analysis of the different discourses at work, discourse analysis being considered as a form of social action that has an impact on the lived experience and its foreseeable consequences (Fairclough, 2001). Characteristic features related to the specific detrimental asymmetries in this situation were identified. Several categories of power asymmetries detected in supervision were found to hinder the identification process at stake and thus the conditions for the doctoral student's success. It is suggested that awareness of these asymmetries could help supervisors to develop a more supportive and equitable relationship, leading to positive change.