eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-01-07 20 .i iv 5434 article Table of Contents for Volume 20, 2025, of the International Journal of Doctoral Studies http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5434 IJDS International Journal of Doctoral Studies PhD doctoral studies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-01-07 20 5413 article Inmaculada Martínez García inmmargar@alum.us.es Francisco Javier Cano García fjcano@us.es Jesús García Martínez jgm@us.es Hans De Witte hans.dewitte@kuleuven.be Aim/Purpose: This study addresses the need to understand the wellbeing of doctoral students and the factors influencing their academic trajectory. Background: Doctoral students’ wellbeing is crucial for their academic success and overall quality of life. This study explores the antecedent variables influencing doctoral students’ wellbeing, complementing the Integrative Model on well-being in doctoral students. Methodology: A qualitative case study approach was employed, involving in-depth interviews with 10 PhD students at a Norwegian university. Following the Integrative Model on doctoral students’ wellbeing, the study combined thematic and discourse analysis to examine students’ experiences and perceptions. Contribution: This research provides insights into doctoral students’ experiences, feelings, and perceptions during their thesis process, contributing to a more nuanced understanding of factors influencing their well-being. Findings: The results reveal that working conditions, particularly remunerated positions, significantly impact students’ experiences. Common feelings include uncertainty, fear of failure, and stress, especially during writing. Stress and anxiety are prevalent, though often normalized. While loneliness is common, students generally report support from supervisors, peers, and family. Supervisors emerge as the primary source of support, with their relationship style greatly influencing student wellbeing. Recommendations for Practitioners: Based on these findings and existing literature, the study proposes measures to enhance doctoral student well-being, including creating spaces for student interaction, implementing funding policies, offering mental health support, designing skill-building workshops, establishing mentoring programs, and providing supervisor training. Recommendation for Researchers: Explore supervisory styles and their impact on student well-being in diverse academic contexts. Investigate the impact of supervisors’ availability, time dedication, and communication patterns on doctoral supervision. Future research should examine supervisors’ perspectives and investigate these relationships across different international settings using quantitative methodologies with larger samples to enhance generalizability. Impact on Society: This research contributes to a deeper understanding of doctoral student experiences and offers a foundation for developing targeted interventions to support this population. Improving doctoral student well-being can lead to higher quality research outputs and more successful completion rates, benefiting academia and society. Future Research: Quantitative studies with larger, more diverse samples from international contexts could further validate and expand upon these findings. Additional research could focus on the effectiveness of different supervisory styles and examine how institutional structures influence doctoral student wellbeing across various academic contexts. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5413 wellbeing PhD students supervisors qualitative case study academic stress eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-02-11 20 5436 article Maria Cristina Canavarro mccanavarro@fpce.uc.pt Marco Pereira marcopereira@fpce.uc.pt Catarina Cardoso catarinafsc.cardoso@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The objective of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of the European Portuguese version of the Motivation for PhD Studies Scale (MPhD). Background: The motivation of doctoral students has been identified as a factor influencing their enrolment in doctoral studies and its completion. Based on the Self-Determination Theory, the MPhD is a 15-item self-report measure that was recently developed with the aim of assessing the motivation for doctoral studies. MPhD assesses five types of regulation: intrinsic, integrated, identified, introjected, and external. However, this scale has not been validated for other cultures or languages, creating a gap attributable to the lack of validated and culturally adapted instruments tailored to doctoral students’ specific characteristics and needs. Methodology: A sample of 299 Portuguese doctoral students (80.6% female) completed a web-based questionnaire that collected sociodemographic and doctoral-related information, the European Portuguese version of the MPhD, and other relevant self-report questionnaires (e.g., Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale). Contribution: Our findings support the use of the MPhD among Portuguese doctoral students. Since the motivation and experiences of Portuguese doctoral students are understudied, this validation will contribute to improving research with these students. Findings: The results supported the original five-factor structure by type of regulation (CFI = .935; RMSEA = .075 [.063-.087], p = .001; SRMR = .0607). Positive associations were found between more autonomous types of regulation and positive outcomes (e.g., self-determination) and between more controlled types of regulation and negative outcomes (e.g., symptoms of anxiety and depression). The scale reliability was very satisfactory. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is suggested that the MPhD be used in interventions and initiatives, as it promotes approaches tailored to the specificities of PhD students and is culturally adapted for the Portuguese population. Practitioners should take into consideration the different types of motivation of PhD students and their implications for their mental health and doctoral progress. It is important to help students with less favorable motivations by promoting more favorable forms of motivation and self-regulation. Recommendation for Researchers: The use of the MPhD in research on doctoral students should be considered since it has been validated for the Portuguese population, presents solid evidence of reliability and validity, and considers doctoral students’ cultural and academic characteristics. This validation facilitates understanding the specific aspects of doctoral students’ motivation, allowing advances in current research. Further validation studies of the MPhD in other countries are also recommended. Impact on Society: The validation of the MPhD will foster research, assessment, and intervention better adapted to the cultural and academic characteristics of doctoral students. This work in the context of the doctorate will help prevent and intervene in maladaptive forms of motivation, impacting a personal, academic, and institutional level. Future Research: With the validation of this scale, research will be able to use this assessment tool and promote further studies on doctoral students. It could also develop further validations of this scale in other countries. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5436 doctoral students motivation for PhD studies scale PhD studies psychometric properties self-determination theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-02-18 20 5437 article Alex Winarno winarno@telkomuniversity.ac.id Deni Hermana hermana.deni@yahoo.com Rudy M. Ramdhan rudy.ramdhan.rr@gmail.com Daniel Kisahwan kisahwand@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This study examines the role of psychological capital (PsyCap) as a moderating variable and burnout as a mediator in the relationship between toxic supervision on academic performance in doctoral programs. Background: Academic supervision is important in supporting students’ success in completing the doctoral program. However, there is a dark side that needs to be more widely revealed in the literature related to this process. Toxic academic supervision (TAS) for doctoral students is toxic leadership, which manifests as being associated with burnout, academic performance, and dropout rates. PsyCap, with the main elements of self-efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience, plays an important role in helping reduce negative and positive academic impacts. However, empirical evidence is needed to show the role of PsyCap in academic supervision of doctoral programs. Methodology: The choice of research method is based on the aim to generalize knowledge in solving fundamental problems and challenges in supervision as a managerial issue in the super academic vision of the hypothetico-deductive method with a survey involving 221 doctoral students from social disciplines selected randomly, inferential analysis using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Contribution: This study contributes significantly to understanding the role of PsyCap in the context of toxic academic supervision and its implications for the mental well-being and academic success of postgraduate students. Furthermore, it offers a new approach to mitigating the negative effects of toxic leadership through PsyCap. This study reinforces the core idea of the Stress-as-Offense-to-Self (SOS) theory, which suggests that negative perceptions of how one is treated, particularly in academic supervision, can trigger feelings of humiliation and failure, ultimately leading to burnout and diminished academic performance. Findings: PsyCap reduces the negative impact of toxic supervision on the academic performance of doctoral students. Even though toxic supervision significantly increases burnout and decreases academic performance, doctoral students with high levels of PsyCap tend to be more resilient to these negative impacts. Self-efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience mitigate the negative impact of toxic supervision on burnout and academic performance. Recommendations for Practitioners: Universities need to develop policies and programs that support the quality of supervision and student well-being. Interventions to enhance PsyCap among students, such as developing self-efficacy, optimism, and resilience, can help mitigate the negative effects of toxic academic supervision and maintain academic performance. These findings reinforce the importance of building PsyCap as a moderating variable to mitigate the negative effects of toxic supervision. Recommendation for Researchers: Exploration of other factors besides PsyCap that may play a role as moderators in the relationship between toxic academic supervision and burnout, such as academic culture, social support, academic environment, or coping styles, is suggested for further studies in relation to toxic supervision, burnout, and academic performance. Impact on Society: This study extends the scope of the SOS theory by incorporating resource scarcity as one of the stress triggers. Future Research: Future studies should also explore differences among PsyCap elements (self-efficacy, optimism, and resilience) that influence the impact of toxic supervision. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5437 burnout academic performance higher education PsyCap stress-as-offense-to-self theory toxic supervision eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-03-17 20 5464 article Anaïs Glorieux anais.glorieux@vub.be Bram Spruyt bram.spruyt@vub.be Theun Pieter van Tienoven theun-pieter.van.tienoven@vub.be Aim/Purpose: This study investigates how PhD candidates experience autonomy (i.e., self-governance and the capacity to make meaningful, self-directed choices) in their doctoral trajectory. It examines their expectations regarding autonomy, the various forms of autonomy they encounter during their doctoral trajectory, and the dynamics that make autonomy challenging. Background: PhD candidates, akin to the academic world at large, navigate a tension between exercising autonomy and conforming to standardization and regulatory frameworks. Within this context, this study explores how PhD candidates manage to balance autonomy and freedom and strive to meet the high and rigorous standards of obtaining a doctoral degree. The theoretical framework for this study consists of Berlin’s (1969) Two concepts of liberty and self-determination theory. Methodology: We use qualitative data from nine focus groups and three one-on-one interviews with PhD candidates (n=42). Data are analyzed using thematic content analysis. Contribution: Previous research highlighted the importance of autonomy in the doctoral trajectory and showed that autonomy can have different dimensions and characteristics. However, research on PhD candidates’ expectations regarding autonomy and how autonomy manifests itself in their trajectory is lacking, considering different dimensions of autonomy. This study contributes by exploring the expectations and experiences of autonomy among PhD candidates and variations herein across disciplines (i.e., life sciences and medicine, natural sciences and bioscience, engineering, and human sciences) and types of appointments (i.e., teaching assistants, personal mandate, or project funding). Literature also shows that autonomy in the work environment is not, by default, beneficial. A second contribution of this study is the identification of challenges and potential pitfalls associated with autonomy in the doctoral context. Findings: First, PhD candidates deem autonomy essential for their research, as it requires creating new knowledge, being able to adapt to unforeseen events, and learning how to become an independent scholar. PhD candidates mainly expect autonomy in their control over time, freedom to develop themselves, and a sense of ownership over the project. However, their experiences predominantly reflect operational autonomy (i.e., autonomy regarding the conduct and organization of research) rather than strategic autonomy (i.e., autonomy regarding the research agenda and content). Second, there are explicit challenges and pitfalls associated with autonomy. PhD candidates mainly encounter “negative freedom,” and often experience autonomy as chaos, citing a lack of clear expectations, lack of control, lack of interaction, and lack of supervisory support as significant pitfalls. Two key dynamics contributing to these issues are the specific supervisor-supervisee relationship and conflicting role perceptions. Additionally, the study identified systematic differences in these matters across and within disciplines. These insights provide a nuanced understanding of the autonomy experienced by PhD candidates and highlight the need for institutions to rethink how they support PhD candidates in managing autonomy. Recommendations for Practitioners: These findings indicate that institutions and supervisors should cultivate an environment wherein autonomy is experienced as positive freedom. Achieving this involves balancing academic freedom with accountability measures (such as training supervisors and co-supervisorship and providing regular feedback) to enhance the quality of supervision. Supervisors, in turn, can promote autonomy for PhD candidates by facilitating regular interactions, providing constructive feedback, and ensuring expertise alignment. Impact on Society: The “publish or perish” culture, characterized by standardization and decision-making based on fixed performance measures, diminishes strategic autonomy for PhD candidates. Excessive operational autonomy can be perceived as chaos, challenging equitable opportunities and outcomes among PhD candidates. Furthermore, it exacerbates feelings of self-doubt and contributes to the development of imposter syndrome. Future Research: Future research should explore how autonomy emerges from the dialogue between supervisors and PhD candidates. It should also investigate the support mechanisms supervisors require to be supportive of autonomy and examine how supervisors tailor their autonomy support to accommodate the heterogeneous group of PhD candidates. Furthermore, future research could focus on identifying and elaborating on additional dynamics that complicate dealing with autonomy within the doctoral context. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5464 PhD candidates autonomy freedom supervisor role perception self-determination theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-04-26 20 5486 article Angel Deroncele-Acosta aderoncele@usil.edu.pe Roger Pedro Norabuena-Figueroa rnorabuenaf@unmsm.edu.pe Aim/Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between psychological capital, academic motivation, and academic performance in doctoral students and to develop a structural equation model that elucidates the interplay among these three variables, providing a comprehensive framework to better understand the factors influencing academic outcomes at the doctoral level. Background: Current research on the relationship between these variables in doctoral students is limited, with mostly independent approaches to each variable. This study seeks to overcome this research gap by exploring the intersection of these variables, providing a more holistic understanding of the motivational processes and positive psychological resources that impact the academic and personal success of doctoral students. Methodology: A quantitative approach with a non-experimental design and cross-sectional and correlational scope. The sample was collected by simple random sampling; 190 doctoral students participated, 82 men and 108 women. Three online scales were applied: the University Academic Performance Scale, the Short Academic Motivation Scale (SAMS), and the Psychological Capital Scale (PsyCap Scale). The following programs were used for data processing: SPSS version 25, AMOS version 24, and R-Project, and a six-step statistical procedure detailed in the manuscript was followed for data analysis. Contribution: This paper significantly advances doctoral education by addressing critical gaps and proposing valuable insights for future research. It offers a comprehensive understanding of challenges within doctoral programs, emphasizing factors like work-study balance and student well-being. Additionally, it advocates for a shift towards a positive paradigm, focusing on well-being and academic motivation. This paper catalyzes further innovation, fostering a deeper understanding of the doctoral experience. Findings: The three scales had a high internal consistency: PsyCap 0.858, AMS 0.844, and University Academic Performance 0.767. It is observed that the internal correlations with the dimensions are high. It was found that 38% of the respondents had a low level of PsyCap, 35% had a low level of academic motivation, and 36% had a high level of university academic performance. Amotivation was a singular behavior that was discussed in the study since all the responses were in the two extremes, high and low, with 0% at the medium level. It is observed that there are significant differences between males and females concerning academic motivation, and there are also significant differences between study cycles in academic motivation and performance. The occurrence of a “motivational curve” in doctoral students has been discovered. This finding shows a high motivation at the beginning of the doctoral program, an abrupt drop during the intermediate cycles, and a progressive and sustained rebound towards the final cycles, reaching the highest motivational peak at the end. It is observed that all the dimensions of the PsyCap variable are linearly positively related, with predominance in the Self-efficacy dimension (0.839); likewise, all the dimensions of the Academic Motivation variable are linearly positively related, with predominance in the Intrinsic Motivation to Know dimension (0.887). In addition, all the dimensions of the variable University Academic Performance are linearly positively related, with predominance in the dimension Contribution in academic activities (0.862). On the other hand, Introjected Regulation is positively related to the organization of teaching resources (0.198), organization of teaching resources is positively related to Self-efficacy (0.122), and Dedication to Study is negatively related to Resilience (-0.150). Some covariance errors were detected, and finally, according to the fit indicators, the estimated structural model is acceptable. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners should develop tailored support programs focusing on building PsyCap and academic motivation, implement early intervention strategies to counteract motivational declines, adopt gender-sensitive approaches, integrate positive psychology practices, promote collaboration among students, continuously monitor program effectiveness, and provide faculty training to create a supportive academic environment. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should further explore the dynamic interplay between PsyCap, academic motivation, and performance longitudinally, employing mixed methods approaches to capture nuanced experiences. Additionally, investigating the effectiveness of intervention strategies targeting these variables and examining cultural and contextual influences on motivation and performance can enrich understanding and inform evidence-based practices. Impact on Society: Understanding the relationship between PsyCap, academic motivation, and university academic performance in doctoral students has significant implications for society. By elucidating the factors that contribute to academic success, this research can inform the development of more effective support systems within educational institutions. Empowering doctoral students with the psychological resources and motivation needed to thrive academically not only enhances individual well-being but also fosters innovation, knowledge creation, and societal advancement. Ultimately, by nurturing the next generation of scholars and researchers, this work contributes to the cultivation of a more knowledgeable, resilient, and prosperous society. Future Research: Among the limitations of the study was that the cross-sectional design restricted the possibility of establishing causal relationships since the data were collected at a single point in time. In addition, generalization of the findings should be approached with caution due to the size and composition of the sample, which was limited to doctoral students from a single country. The exclusive use of self-report scales could also have generated response and perception biases. Future research could adopt mixed approaches that integrate qualitative techniques to delve deeper into participants’ meanings and experiences. Also, the use of larger samples, including cross-country comparative studies, would allow for a more robust understanding of the relationship between psychological capital, academic motivation, and doctoral performance. Longitudinal designs would offer a better evaluation of the evolution of these variables over time. Regarding future thematic lines of research, there is a need to delve deeper into the balance between study, work, and doctoral well-being, as well as the success factors in face-to-face and virtual dynamics in the supervisor-candidate relationship and emotional management in the academic writing process. In addition, analyzing the motivational curve, characterized by a start with high motivation, an intermediate fall, and a final rebound, would allow the design of interventions to mitigate its impact on mental health and academic progress. Likewise, identifying risk and protective factors would contribute to strengthening the resilience of doctoral students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5486 doctoral education doctoral students doctoral research doctoral programs doctoral dissertations doctoral studies PhD student doctoral degree eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-05-21 20 5468 article Joseph Evans Agolla nyagonya2009@gmail.com Mmabaledi Kefilwe Seeletso mmaba.see@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This study examines the challenges in doctoral education supervision support within African universities, focusing on the need for effective strategies to meet the increasing demand for quality doctoral education. Background: The rapid socio-economic development in Africa has put pressure on higher education systems to meet the growing demand for quality doctoral education. Some African universities are attempting to produce doctoral degrees with minimal resources while maintaining doctorateness but are facing criticism from policymakers and stakeholders. The term “doctorateness” refers to the attributes of a doctoral student, including their research strategy, knowledge gaps, and unique contributions to the field. It is frequently seen as a turning point in the PhD process. Methodology: The research uses a critical literature review methodology to propose an input-output support model, arguing that universities should consider doctoral supervision as an input-output model to improve the quality and versatility of doctoral graduates. Contribution: The review presents a model and debate on doctoral education supervision support in a developing context, highlighting both theory and practice. Findings: The study suggests that universities should adopt an “input-output model” for doctoral supervision to improve the quality and suitability of doctoral holders for various employment opportunities. Recommendations for Practitioners: Based on a critical literature review, the study proposes that practitioners rethink doctorateness as an input-output approach to enhance their supervision skills. Recommendation for Researchers: The study contributes to the existing knowledge on doctoral education supervision and encourages further empirical study to validate the proposed model. Impact on Society: Doctoral education is crucial for solving societal problems, producing quality scientific research, preparing academics for future work environments, and serving as a bridge between academia, research, and society. Future Research: The study provides valuable insights and debates but requires further empirical research to validate its applicability. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5468 Africa universities doctoral education supervision support model challenges prospects quality input-output eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-07-04 20 5541 article Aleksandra Tłuściak-Deliowska adeliowska@aps.edu.pl Aim/Purpose: The aim of this study is to analyze doctoral schools as a new form of doctoral education in Poland through the prism of the concept of a learning organization. This paper not only reshapes the landscape of doctoral education but also contributes profoundly to the field of organizational learning theory by examining how this new model can enhance educational environments. By demonstrating the transformative potential of doctoral schools as learning organizations, the author highlights their critical role in driving educational innovation and fostering a culture of continuous improvement within academia. Given the evolving legal and organizational environment and the increasing demands of universities and young researchers, this approach is crucial for the future success of doctoral education. Doctoral schools are undeniably positioned to adapt and thrive in this changing landscape, aligning with the core principles of learning organizations. Background: A learning organization can rapidly adapt to changing conditions and boldly create transformative opportunities for improvement for all individuals associated with its functioning. In a learning organization, it is crucial to focus on the continuous acquisition of new skills, actively searching for opportunities, and boldly introducing innovative patterns of action. Equally important is receiving constructive feedback on mistakes made, learning how to avoid them, and, when they do occur, swiftly correcting them to foster ongoing improvement. Methodology: This study explores the concept of doctoral schools as learning organizations, emphasizing their potential to drive educational innovation and foster a culture of continuous improvement within academia. The author employs qualitative methodology, analyzing literature, and has also incorporated autoethnography to address important aspects of managing a doctoral school relating to individual areas of a learning organization. The basis for the author’s considerations is the theory of the ‘learning organization’ by Peter Senge. Contribution: The novelty of this article lies in its analysis of a relatively new form of doctoral education that has existed in Poland since the academic year 2019/2020 and is still evolving. The contribution also considers this form a learning organization, offering practical implications for policymakers and academic leaders. Furthermore, this study extends existing research on learning organizations by applying this theoretical framework to doctoral education, a field where such an approach has been underexplored. By integrating insights from organizational learning theory, the research provides a broader perspective on how doctoral schools can function as dynamic, adaptive institutions that foster academic development and institutional resilience. This research also fills a gap in the literature by demonstrating how learning organization principles can be systematically implemented in doctoral education. Findings: Doctoral schools in Poland exemplify the characteristics of dynamic learning organizations. Their key features include learning from mistakes, continuously reviewing operational procedures, fostering the ongoing development of management staff, supervisors, and administrative personnel, taking calculated risks, actively searching for ways to enhance the quality and effectiveness of education, and making informed, evidence-based decisions. These aspects underscore the transformative potential of doctoral schools in shaping a more adaptable and innovative higher education system. Recommendations for Practitioners: The doctoral school in Poland is such an innovative concept in relation to previous practices related to educating doctoral students that it requires structural and organizational changes and a shift in mindset among those responsible for training young researchers. Recommendation for Researchers: Future research should investigate the extent to which doctoral schools perceive themselves as learning organizations and the degree to which they consciously implement this concept. Additionally, analyzing these institutions through alternative theoretical models and conducting empirical research would provide deeper insights into their evolving role in higher education. Impact on Society: The findings of this study offer practical implications for doctoral school management. The analyses presented here can inform the development of strategies that align doctoral schools more closely with the principles of a learning organization, ultimately supporting their mission to cultivate a dynamic and progressive academic environment. Future Research: Future research should further explore the extent to which doctoral schools identify as learning organizations and the degree to which they actively implement this concept. Additionally, investigating the specific challenges and strategies in integrating learning organization principles within doctoral education would provide deeper insights. Empirical studies comparing different models of doctoral education could also contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of how these institutions evolve and adapt in response to educational reforms. Furthermore, future studies could focus on identifying the key factors that influence the successful implementation of these principles, such as institutional culture, leadership styles, and faculty engagement. Exploring the potential barriers to adopting a learning organization approach within doctoral schools, including resistance to change or resource limitations, would also be valuable. This would encourage a more nuanced understanding of the complexities involved and inform strategies for overcoming these challenges. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5541 doctoral school PhD candidate doctoral education reform learning organization eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-07-11 20 5552 article Cindy McMullen cindymcmullen1@cs.com Carol Rogers-Shaw crogersshaw1@udayton.edu Corinne Brion cbrion1@udayton.edu Megan Burden-Cousins burdencousinsm1@udayton.edu Colissa Jordan brogdenc1@udayton.edu Aim/Purpose: In the United States, where educational access is shaped by the intersecting forces of race and gender, the expansion of online doctoral education presents both new opportunities and enduring inequities. This study investigated how doctoral students who identify as Black, Indigenous, and Women of Color (BIWOC) enrolled in online doctoral programs experience the impostor phenomenon (IP) and how their social networks and institutional supports influence these experiences. Background: While online education has expanded doctoral accessibility, BIWOC remain underrepresented in these programs and disproportionately experience academic marginalization. National data reveal that women of color represent less than 12% of doctoral degree recipients in the U.S., with even fewer advancing into academic leadership. IP among BIWOC is compounded by racialized gender stereotypes, isolation, and limited culturally affirming support. Methodology: Using a phenomenological qualitative approach, this study conducted semi-structured interviews with 13 doctoral students who identify as BIWOC at a United States midwestern primarily white institution to explore their lived experiences and the role of social networks in navigating IP. Interview data were coded using thematic analysis, guided by intersectionality and impostor phenomenon theory. Contribution: This study shifts the focus from in-person academic spaces to the underexplored terrain of online doctoral education, offering practical and theoretical insight into how BIWOC navigate structural and psychological barriers in virtual learning environments. Findings: Participants reported that family, peers, faculty, and institutional relationships were critical in helping them overcome IP. However, the lack of BIWOC representation, microaggressions, and institutional biases often reinforced feelings of self-doubt. Recommendations for Practitioners: To support BIWOC in online doctoral programs, institutions should develop structured cohort mentorship programs, increase faculty diversity, and better implement culturally responsive pedagogy. Recommendation for Researchers: Future research should explore IP among other marginalized doctoral students (e.g., LGBTQ+, first-generation, disabled students) and investigate the effectiveness of specific institutional interventions for reducing IP in online education. Impact on Society: Addressing systemic biases and the IP in doctoral education can contribute to greater representation of BIWOC in academia and leadership, fostering a more equitable and inclusive higher education landscape. Future Research: Further studies should analyze how different types of social networks (e.g., professional organizations, online communities) influence BIWOC’s doctoral success, as well as explore institutional policy changes that improve retention and inclusion. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5552 impostor phenomenon impostor syndrome BIWOC BIPOC doctoral study intersectionality eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-07-13 20 5579 article Omiros Iatrellis iatrellis@uth.gr Areti Bania aretibania@uth.gr Nicholas Samaras nsamaras@uth.gr Ioanna Kosmopoulou iokosmop@uth.gr Theodor Panagiotakopoulos tpanagiotakop@upatras.gr Aim/Purpose: The potential of Generative AI in education is expanding, yet its role in PhD mentoring and academic guidance remains underexplored. This study evaluates how ChatGPT-generated recommendations can support PhD research, particularly in fostering sustainable and resource-efficient doctoral education. Background: This study examines the ability of ChatGPT to provide structured guidance and actionable insights in PhD supervision. Using a real-world case study on disaster risk management, the research evaluates AI-generated recommendations across different prompt structures to determine their relevance, depth, and applicability to doctoral research. Methodology: A structured evaluation was conducted using input prompts with varying contextual details, including naive prompts, supervisor-selected keywords, ChatGPT-generated keywords, and topic-specific concepts. Five external academic experts assessed the AI-generated outputs for appropriateness, interrater agreement, and research alignment. Contribution: The study demonstrates that ChatGPT can enhance PhD supervision by providing structured academic recommendations, reducing administrative burdens on supervisors, and contributing to the evolution of a “tripartite mentoring model” where AI, supervisors, and students collaborate to tackle complex research challenges. Findings: AI-generated recommendations were most effective when structured around topic-specific concepts. Naive prompts also yielded relevant outputs, whereas keyword-based prompts resulted in less cohesive recommendations. Tailored prompts aligning with specific research pathways were rated as highly actionable and contextually grounded. ChatGPT demonstrated the ability to refine research methodologies and improve knowledge discovery. Recommendations for Practitioners: Universities may consider incorporating AI tools such as ChatGPT to support PhD supervision, particularly to provide structured feedback and guidance. Supervisors should explore AI-assisted mentoring to optimize time-intensive advisory tasks and enhance research productivity. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should explore the effectiveness of AI-driven academic guidance across various disciplines, assessing its impact on research quality, methodological rigor, and doctoral student development. Future studies may also investigate the ethical considerations of AI in PhD supervision, including potential biases in AI-generated recommendations and risks related to over-reliance on automated feedback. Impact on Society: By reducing supervisory workload and enhancing research efficiency, AI-driven academic guidance can promote equitable access to high-quality doctoral education, fostering innovation and sustainable educational practices globally. Future Research: Future research should evaluate AI-driven mentoring across multiple academic disciplines and multilingual contexts to better assess generalizability. Additionally, studies should explore ethical implications, including how disciplinary norms, cultural expectations, and linguistic diversity influence the effectiveness and appropriateness of AI in doctoral supervision. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5579 generative AI PhD mentoring educational technology academic guidance eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-08-02 20 5597 article Steve Haberlin steve.haberlin@ucf.edu David Boote david.boote@ucf.edu Terrie L Bradshaw terrie.bradshaw@ucf.edu Aim/Purpose: The mental health crisis of graduate students is often overlooked, though this population may experience higher rates of stress and anxiety than undergraduates. The purpose of this study was to describe perceptions and experiences of students practicing loving-kindness meditation (LKM) during synchronous online Doctor of Education classes at a large university. Background: Doctoral students’ mental health remains a prominent international concern. In recent years, more attention has been given to factors affecting graduate students’ well-being and psychological distress. Mindfulness-based interventions have shown promising mental health outcomes in higher education. Methodology: Qualitative research was used to examine the experiences of 25 doctoral students, mainly working adults from education and other backgrounds. Weekly, written responses on meditation practice were collected using a confidential online survey, and focus groups were conducted to provide additional insight. MAXQDA software was used to conduct thematic data analysis. Contribution: This study contributes to the growing body of knowledge on loving-kindness meditation as a mental health intervention with higher education students. It adds to the virtually non-existent literature on doctoral students’ experiences with meditation. LKM has also been associated with reducing anxiety and stress in adolescents and with burnout prevention initiatives. Findings: Most participants perceived LKM as a difficult practice, struggled with mind-wandering during sessions, and did not engage if they felt rushed or overwhelmed. A smaller number of students reported experiencing stress relief and changes in perspective towards others. Recommendations for Practitioners: Advanced meditation methods like LKM should be scaffolded by having students initially study an introductory meditation method. Students also need time to adjust to class before engaging in meditation. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should continue to explore factors affecting the feasibility and efficacy of LKM to enhance well-being and reduce psychological distress, informing effective intervention designs and approaches. Impact on Society: The study underscores the importance of addressing the concerning mental health issues faced by doctoral students, an issue that receives less attention compared to undergraduate research on the topic. Additional research will help to normalize LKM as a valid, beneficial practice for mental health in academia and professional environments. Future Research: Future research should include longer-term studies to ascertain whether students’ experiences and perspectives change after greater doses of LKM, examine facilitation delivery, and conduct mixed-methods studies on LKM with doctoral students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5597 doctoral students Ed.D. students loving-kindness meditation mental health mindfulnes eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-08-12 20 5607 article Ünal Deniz unaldeniz23@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This phenomenological study investigates cross-cultural relationships between international doctoral students and their academic advisors in Turkish universities. Background: Through in-depth interviews with 12 international doctoral students from diverse backgrounds in Istanbul and Ankara, this paper explores how Turkish academia’s blend of hierarchical structures and interpersonal warmth influences advising dynamics. Methodology: Phenomenological design using semi-structured interviews with 12 international doctoral students from various countries and disciplines studying in Türkiye. Contribution: Advances understanding of international doctoral education by examining non-Western academic contexts and revealing how cultural-educational frameworks shape advisor-student relationships. Findings: Major findings include: (i) meaning-making processes involve transformation of expectations and identity formation, (ii) challenges encompass communication difficulties and academic expectation misalignments, (iii) effective coping strategies include peer networks and proactive skill development, (iv) successful advising relationships transcend cultural accommodation to create intellectual synergies beneficial for both parties. Recommendations for Practitioners: Engage in mutual cultural learning, establish trust through consistent communication, and adopt transformative guidance approaches that balance hierarchical respect with collaboration. Recommendation for Researchers: Explore longitudinal outcomes, examine institutional support policies, and develop frameworks for cross-cultural mentoring beyond Western models. Impact on Society: Enhances global academic mobility, improves international student retention, and promotes inclusive higher education systems that leverage cultural diversity. Future Research: Investigate applications across different national contexts, examine technology’s role in cross-cultural advising, and develop targeted training programs for international student advisors. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5607 international doctoral students advisor-student relationships cross-cultural advising Turkish higher education academic adaptation cultural dynamics eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-08-22 20 5589 article Stephen Santa-Ramirez srsantar@buffalo.edu Venus Israni venusisrani@gmail.com Iman Lathan imanlath@buffalo.edu Aim/Purpose: This study investigates how Latinx doctoral students in the Southwest region of the United States experience and navigate doctoral education at a historically white institution (HWI), with attention to the social contexts and systems that shape their persistence and belonging. Despite growing interest in diversity in graduate education, the structural and relational challenges faced by Latinx students remain underexamined. Background: This article addresses a gap in the literature by applying Bronfenbrenner and Morris’s expansion of the bioecological model, traditionally used in child development, to understand Latinx doctoral students’ experiences. It also incorporates Latinx critical race theory (LatCrit) to examine how racism, power, and intersectionality influence academic life. Methodology: This qualitative study used narrative inquiry and counterstorytelling to collect and analyze the experiences of Latinx doctoral students. The collaborators were selected through purposeful sampling, and data were analyzed through iterative coding across Bronfenbrenner and Morris’s expansion of the five ecological systems and LatCrit’s focus areas. Contribution: This article uniquely contributes to the body of knowledge by using a bioecological lens to map how Latinx doctoral students’ development is influenced across micro-, meso-, exo-, macro-, and chronosystems. It reframes doctoral persistence as an ecological and sociopolitical process, while keeping in consideration the interplay of Process–Person–Context–Time (PPCT). Findings: Faculty relationships often lacked culturally sustaining mentorship. Students experienced tension when cultural identities clashed with academic expectations. Family, home communities, and sociopolitical climates indirectly influenced their academic engagement. Institutional norms often reinforce whiteness and meritocracy, undermining Latinx knowledge and presence. Over time, student-led organizations provided belonging and resistance amid shifting political contexts. Recommendations for Practitioners: Educators and institutional actors must consider the whole student, beyond the classroom, by incorporating faculty advisor training grounded in the focus areas of the bioecological model and LatCrit’s frameworks. They should design culturally affirming peer mentorship programs, implement policies addressing racial profiling, and ensure campus environments are inclusive of students’ cultural identities. Training faculty and staff in culturally sustaining advising practices and supporting Latinx research agendas is crucial for promoting retention and fostering a sense of belonging. Recommendation for Researchers: Future studies could pursue longitudinal work to evaluate long-term academic and professional outcomes in addition to expanding the use of the bioecological model in graduate education research, exploring cross-racial comparisons, and assessing how intersecting identities (e.g., gender, class, im/migration status, and experiences) shape Latinx doctoral students’ experiences. Impact on Society: The findings emphasize the urgent need for higher education institutional actors to create culturally sustaining environments. By considering the full ecological contexts of Latinx doctoral students, institutions can more effectively support underrepresented populations and dismantle harmful norms that inhibit authentic identity expression. Future Research: Future studies could examine how cultural and academic identities intersect in doctoral programs, how students manage cultural dissonance, and how institutional practices either support or hinder identity-centered scholarship. Longitudinal studies are also needed to track the impact of these dynamics over time. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5589 Latinx doctoral students bioecological model higher education in the United States eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-09-07 20 5559 article Kudakwashe Maguraushe kmaguraushe@gmail.com Dumile Gumede dumileg@dut.ac.za Aim/Purpose: The study aims to identify the factors influencing doctoral completion rates in South Africa by analyzing publication trends and emerging themes. Insights from this analysis are intended to inform institutional strategies and national policies to enhance doctoral success and address systemic challenges in the higher education system. Background: Doctoral education plays a pivotal role in advancing research capacity, innovation, and socioeconomic development in South Africa. However, despite increased enrolments post-1994, doctoral completion rates remain suboptimal owing to systemic, institutional, and personal challenges rooted in historical inequities. Methodology: This study employed bibliometric analysis, using data from the Scopus database, to evaluate research trends, key contributors, and thematic developments related to doctoral completion in South African universities between 1994 and 2024. Tools like Bibliometrix and VOSviewer were used to map and visualize the intellectual landscape, including citation networks and thematic clusters. Contribution: The bibliometric analysis advances discourse on doctoral completion rates in South Africa by using a unique, data-driven perspective that complements existing qualitative and quantitative research, thereby explicitly identifying gaps and priority areas for future research and policy intervention. Findings: Findings highlight supervision quality, financial support, institutional structures, and mental health as crucial determinants. Through thematic mapping, the study reveals ‘doctoral support’ and ‘mental health’ as evolving themes, with a notable increase in publications from 2017, reflecting growing scholarly and policy attention. Recommendations for Practitioners: Those working in higher education settings should prioritize the creation of comprehensive support structures, such as supervisor training programs and accessible mental health resources, to address the academic and emotional hurdles faced by doctoral candidates. Universities should draw insights from current bibliometric findings to craft targeted measures aimed at improving supervision practices, expanding equitable funding opportunities, and fostering resilience among students. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers are encouraged to critically investigate the complex relationship between mental health and doctoral studies, particularly focusing on how tailored interventions can help reduce stress and foster student well-being. Impact on Society: Boosting doctoral completion rates has the potential to enhance South Africa’s research capabilities, drive innovation, address skills shortages, and contribute to national economic growth. This analysis offers insights for enhancing doctoral completion in South Africa and promoting institutional strategies and policies that can foster an equitable and supportive doctoral education system. Future Research: Future research should address underexplored areas such as intersectionality, cultural and linguistic diversity, and the integration of emerging ICT tools in supervision. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5559 doctoral completion South African universities bibliometric analysis doctoral education doctoral support eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-10-05 20 5622 article Yulu Hou houyulu@msu.edu Aim/Purpose: When the COVID-19 pandemic shut borders, disrupted research, and froze hiring, international doctoral students faced some of their life’s most consequential career decisions. This paper addresses the underexplored issue of how these students made career decisions during this period of deep uncertainty and disrupted academic and professional trajectories. Background: While prior studies have documented psychological and academic challenges faced by doctoral students during the pandemic, little attention has been given to the decision-making processes of international doctoral students regarding their post-PhD careers. Methodology: A narrative literature review was conducted, synthesizing 16 peer-reviewed studies published between 2020 and 2025. The review applied prospect theory to interpret students’ responses to career disruptions. The included studies span diverse geographic regions and employ qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. Contribution: The study demonstrates the value of prospect theory in analyzing doctoral career decisions under crisis. It challenges linear models of career development and offers a more contextualized understanding of agency in career decision-making. Findings: Mapped against the four constructs of prospect theory, the review finds that: • Reference points: students recalibrated their reference points in response to disrupted expectations. • Loss aversion: decisions often prioritized avoiding setbacks, such as visa ex-piration or loss of academic progress, over pursuing new opportunities. • Risk seeking under uncertainty: some students pursued unconventional or high-risk career paths to avert certain losses. • Diminishing sensitivity: emotional responses diminished over time as stu-dents adapted to prolonged uncertainty. • The pandemic redefined success as resilience, stability, and adaptation. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practically, this study calls for universities and doctoral programs to adopt flexible policies, offer transparent communication regarding immigration and funding, and expand definitions of success beyond traditional academic benchmarks to support international students during crises. Recommendation for Researchers: Future studies should longitudinally track pandemic-era doctoral graduates, examine comparative institutional responses, and investigate how intersecting identities shape adaptability during disruptions. Impact on Society: By uncovering how international doctoral students navigated high-stakes decisions during the pandemic, this paper informs the development of more equitable, supportive, and crisis-resilient systems in global higher education. Future Research: Research should explore long-term career impacts of COVID-19 on international PhD graduates, institutional preparedness for future crises, and the intersectional dimensions of vulnerability and resilience in doctoral education. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5622 international doctoral students COVID-19 career development prospect theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-10-19 20 5626 article Yuliya S Tokatligil tokatligil.y@gmail.com Aigul Saliyeva aigul.enu@yandex.ru Anastassiya Karmelyuk enuranking@gmail.com Aliya Mambetalina mambetalina@mail.ru Jamilya Nurmanbetova jamilya.nurman@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This study aims to examine the experience of international co-supervision among Kazakhstani and international co-supervisors. There is a lack of systematic data in the scientific literature on international co-supervision, including the influence of institutional and cultural contexts on its productivity. Exploring the unique Kazakhstani experience allows us to offer new analytical perspectives that clarify interpretations of international co-supervision and complement the existing discourse in the field of doctoral training. Background: In Kazakhstan, over the past two decades, the “Kazakhstani + international co-supervisor” model has been implemented, which involves collaboration between two co-supervisors, one of whom is a local scientist, and the other is an international one. This practice is unique among Central Asian countries, replacing the two-stage Soviet model, which included postgraduate studies (candidate of sciences) and doctoral studies (doctor of sciences). The main idea behind the implementation of this model was to ensure the integration of Kazakhstani science into the global research space. However, the practical implementation of international co-supervision remains insufficiently studied. Methodology: The qualitative study was conducted using the case study research approach and thematic analysis to interpret the interview data. Kazakhstani (n=11) and international (n=7) co-supervisors participated in the study. Two key findings and five themes were identified to describe the co-supervisors’ experiences. Contribution: The study contributes to the understanding of international co-supervision by examining the non-Western context of doctoral education. It identifies barriers to the implementation of the “Kazakhstani + international co-supervisor” model related to shortcomings in the institutional organization of co-supervisors’ interactions, language difficulties, cultural characteristics, and differences in research traditions. At the same time, it shows how individual co-supervisors transformed the experience of limited or formal interactions into targeted research collaboration strategies. Findings: Two key findings are highlighted: (1) institutional organization determines the nature of the interaction between the Kazakhstani co-supervisor and the international co-supervisor; and (2) intercultural factors, such as differences in cultural and academic traditions, research approaches, and professional expectations, as well as language competencies, influence the productivity of international co-supervising. Recommendations for Practitioners: The study results can be used by universities to develop transparent and effective regulations for interaction between co-supervisors. Recommendation for Researchers: The authors recommend that researchers conduct longitudinal and experimental studies to comprehensively understand the conditions under which the “Kazakhstani + international co-supervisor” model becomes a driver for integrating local and international research practices, combining resources to pre-pare competitive doctoral students. Researchers should also examine risks that require systemic correction. Impact on Society: The results of the study may provide information on how to adjust international co-supervision policies to produce more competent, flexible, and competitive researchers capable of solving complex interdisciplinary and applied problems. In turn, this will strengthen the innovative and socio-economic development of the country. Future Research: Four directions for future research on co-supervision are proposed. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5626 co-supervision international co-supervision supervisor doctoral student intercultural differences institutional organization Kazakhstan eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-11-03 20 5640 article Philip H Coombes Philip.Coombes@shu.ac.uk Richard Tresidder richard.tresidder@shu.ac.uk Nicola Palmer n.palmer@shu.ac.uk Laura Herriman L.Herriman@shu.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: The conventional model of doctoral education, centered on conducting original research within an apprentice-supervisor framework, has evolved progressively toward alternative models, including shorter duration, the incorporation of a teaching component, a collaborative approach, and an emphasis on practice-based problem-solving. Using bibliometric methodologies, this paper aims to examine the intellectual landscape of doctoral education and supervision research over the past decade by identifying core literature, influential works, and key research trends, thereby supporting knowledge growth, innovation, and informed decision-making. Background: Doctoral education and its related supervision have undergone multi-dimensional transformations over the past two decades, leading to increased scholarly interest and an expanding body of literature. Despite this growth, we still know little about the intellectual structure of research within the field. Furthermore, hitherto few bibliometric and meta-analytic reviews have been conducted, leaving the conceptual landscape of doctoral education and supervision research under-mapped and difficult to navigate. Methodology: The study employs bibliometric methodologies, specifically citation and co-citation analyses, as well as bibliographic coupling, to rigorously and objectively map the intellectual structure of doctoral education and supervision research. These methods provide quantitative insights into relationships between documents, authors, and journals, facilitating the identification of research clusters and networks. Contribution: Drawing on a corpus of over 2,000 journal articles, the study analyses and maps the intellectual structure of the field, spotlighting influential researchers, institutions, and networks. The study identifies the areas where assimilation has taken place as a guide for future research. Further value is derived by identifying areas where there has been limited assimilation, and conclusions are drawn as to why such limited assimilation has occurred. Logical conclusions are then drawn regarding where future assimilation within doctoral education and supervision is needed, and how the field can make distinctive contributions to this literature. These contributions point to more effective collaboration, policymaking, and funding decisions within doctoral education and supervision research. Findings: The interdisciplinary nature of doctoral education and supervision is evidenced by the distribution of journal articles, which suggest a broad range of research interests, with a significant concentration in the social sciences. The findings have implications for various stakeholders, including doctoral students, educators, and policymakers, who seek insights into past research and contribute to an understanding of applying bibliometric review methodologies to capture insights into the intellectual structure of research fields. The study identifies a rapidly growing body of literature, reflecting an increasing interest in research on doctoral education and supervision. Citation and co-citation analyses reveal key academic communities and emerging trends within doctoral education and supervision research. Recommendation for Researchers: The paper represents a call to action, recommending that researchers continue to engage with rigorous bibliometric review methodologies to deepen their understanding of the field of doctoral education and supervision, moving beyond intellectual structure to intellectual content. Impact on Society: The study enhances institutional decision-making in doctoral education and supervision, supporting the development of effective teaching and research environments. Mapping intellectual communities fosters collaboration and knowledge sharing, ultimately benefiting doctoral students, educators, and policymakers. Future Research: While bibliometric analysis provides a broad overview, systematic reviews and meta-analyses could explore other diverse perspectives and methodologies, contributing to the intellectual development of the field. Despite the interdisciplinary nature of doctoral education, publications are predominantly found in the social sciences, which contrasts with the global dominance of STEM doctoral programs. Expanding research beyond social sciences is essential, as supervision practices vary across disciplines, with different approaches, actors, and dynamics shaping doctoral training. Recognizing these differences reinforces the need for tailored approaches – one size does not fit all. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5640 bibliometrics doctoral education doctoral studies doctoral supervision research eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-12-09 20 5670 article Javier Sánchez-Rosas jsanchez@uct.cl Lorena Fernández Fastuca lorena_fernandez@uca.edu.ar Hilda Difabio de Anglat ganglat@gmail.com Sergio Dominguez-Lara sdominguezmpcs@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: To develop and validate psychometric scales to assess supervisory styles in doctoral education – directive, guiding, and hands-off – from both supervisor and student perspectives (SSS-S and SSS-s). Background: Doctoral supervision critically shapes students’ progress, well-being, and completion; yet, most studies rely on qualitative or conceptual typologies, and there is no standardized, validated instrument to quantify supervisory styles. Addressing this gap can help programs diagnose practices and align expectations between supervisors and candidates. Methodology: Two complementary studies were conducted with multi-country, Spanish-speaking doctoral programs. Study 1 established content validity with the assistance of expert judges. Study 2 used online, non-probability sampling to survey 333 supervisors and 510 doctoral students. Instruments were administered, and factor-analytic models (oblique and bifactor) and reliability coefficients were used to evaluate internal structure and consistency. Contribution: This study introduces the first psychometrically validated instruments to quantify directive, guiding, and hands-off supervisory styles through brief, parallel supervisor and student scales, providing a standardized, scalable approach for programs to diagnose and improve doctoral supervision. Findings: Our results indicate that supervisory styles are one-dimensional. The internal consistency coefficients estimated for each style were satisfactory. Two instruments were developed, each tailored to assess the three supervisory styles, comprising three subscales with twelve items in each. Recommendations for Practitioners: Use the instruments to (a) map supervisory-style profiles across programs or departments, (b) target professional development for supervisors (e.g., strengthen guiding behaviors), and (c) facilitate expectation-alignment conversations between supervisors and students. Recommendation for Researchers: Employ the scales to examine links between supervisory styles and outcomes (e.g., student satisfaction, time-to-degree, well-being), test invariance across disciplines or countries, and evaluate changes in style following training or feedback interventions. Impact on Society: By enabling evidence-based supervision, these instruments can help universities enhance doctoral learning environments, potentially improving candidate well-being and completion, and thus strengthening research capacity. Future Research: Validate the instruments in additional languages and contexts; assess predictive validity for academic and psychosocial outcomes; and investigate dyadic (supervisor–student) convergence or divergence and its consequences over time. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5670 theses educational advisers measurement doctoral degrees professional training higher education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2025-12-15 20 5676 article Julia Houben j.l.m.houben@uu.nl Reine C Van der Wal r.c.vanderwal@uu.nl Naomi Ellemers n.ellemers@uu.nl Marije M Lesterhuis m.lesterhuis@umcutrecht.nl Harold van Rijen h.v.m.vanrijen@umcutrecht.nl Aim/Purpose: The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that PhD candidates’ social safety is a complex, systemic matter that requires a systemic solution. Background: Numerous studies and reports highlight that academia is not always a safe working environment for PhD candidates. They, in particular, face heightened vulnerability due to dependent working relationships, temporary contracts, and the often competitive and hierarchical nature of academic institutions. Although attempts are being made to address this issue, current interventions appear to be insufficiently effective. Methodology: A conceptual, multilevel framework of PhD candidates’ social safety is provided by integrating three major theoretical perspectives: Social Safety Theory, Team Psychological Safety, and Psychosocial Safety Climate. Next, through a non-systematic literature review of studies about PhD candidates’ experiences, potential risk factors for their social safety are identified. Finally, the paper outlines how this knowledge can inform universities to develop a strategy to promote social safety among PhD candidates and beyond effectively. Contribution: This paper proposes a shift in perspective – rather than treating the lack of social safety as an isolated problem, university leaders must adopt a systemic approach. This paper demonstrates the complexity of social safety, enabling a better understanding of both risk factors and the formulation of an effective strategy to foster social safety. Findings: The social safety of PhD candidates exists at three levels (individual, team, and organizational) and is influenced by risk factors within the structure, culture, and system of the academic environment. This paper proposes that a systemic approach is needed to address these issues, rather than focusing on individual interventions alone. Recommendations for Practitioners: University leaders should conduct a thorough assessment of their organizational structure, culture, and system to identify risks to PhD candidates’ social safety. This information should be used to develop a comprehensive safety strategy to promote and monitor the social safety of PhD candidates. Recommendation for Researchers: This paper recommends that researchers acknowledge and adopt a more comprehensive approach when studying social safety. Impact on Society: Improving social safety for PhD candidates can lead to improved mental health outcomes, reduced attrition rates, and higher academic performance. It will also contribute to healthier work environments across higher education. Future Research: Future studies should focus on empirical exploration of the three theoretical perspectives on social safety. Additionally, alternative measures to assess social safety could be explored, such as including neurophysiological measures, as feeling socially unsafe can impact an individual’s cognition and emotions. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5676 PhD candidate doctoral studies social safety psychological safety psychosocial safety climate inappropriate behavior academic environment eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-02-01 19 .i iv 5247 article Table of Contents for Volume 19, 2024, of the International Journal of Doctoral Studies http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5247 IJDS International Journal of Doctoral Studies PhD doctoral studies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-02-01 19 5243 article Karen M Collier karen.collier07@gmail.com Margaret R. Blanchard mrblanch@ncsu.edu Aim/Purpose: This study explored the experiences of a group of historically underrepresented graduate students at a research-intensive university to understand their perceived supports and barriers to academic persistence and success and how these related to their background, socioeconomic status, language, and cultural differences. Background: Attending graduate school can provide learning in specialized disciplines, creating opportunities for career advancement and gains in income. Under-represented students (i.e., underrepresented minorities, females in STEM, first-generation students, part-time, and international students) often encounter additional barriers in graduate school, such as a lower sense of belonging, imposter phenomenon, or microaggressions. However, they may find emotional support through family and friends and mentor support through faculty and advisors. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs was used to understand how these graduate student success factors acted as supports and barriers to motivate students to reach their optimal potential. Methodology: In this qualitative narrative study, interview transcripts from fourteen graduate students studying at an R1 university in the United States were restoried into narratives. For the typographic analyses, themes emerged from the individuals’ stories. Similarities in the data were organized into categories, and relationships were sought between the categories. For the rhetorical analyses, short storylines developed from these cases were used to derive opposition statements and syllogisms. Contribution: This study illuminates the graduate student experience through novel analytical methods and a well-regarded psychological theory – Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs – tied to graduate student success factors. Although each person’s graduate experience is unique, the study findings lead to recommendations to enhance the graduate student experience for all students. Findings: Case analyses revealed nine major themes linked to students’ backgrounds, socioeconomic status, language, and cultural differences: (1) mentor support, (2) sense of belonging, (3) financial support, (4) peer support, (5) community, (6) imposter phenomenon, (7) microaggressions, (8) family obligations, and (9) access and opportunity for academic research and writing. Recommendations for Practitioners: Universities can better support graduate students by providing better professional development for faculty to serve as mentors, using a cohort-based model for better peer support, financial counseling for graduate students, better mental health services and access, more parental support considerations, and more opportunities for research experiences. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers will gain a more nuanced understanding of individuals’ circumstances – particularly those students who have many complicating life circumstances (e.g., enrollment status, family, finances, citizenship) – by collecting and analyzing qualitative data. Mixed methods, using validated instruments, could also enhance our understanding of graduate education. Impact on Society: Universities that follow the recommendations in this study will enhance the experiences of graduate students, likely increase graduation rates, and contribute to a more educated and more diverse workforce. Future Research: For universities that have already implemented some of the suggested support structures (e.g., mentor professional development, cohort programs, and financial counseling), future research could investigate their utility to graduate students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5243 sense of belonging mentor support financial support peer support imposter phenomenon graduate student success eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-02-01 19 5245 article Natalie D. Rasmussen natalie.rasmussen@mnsu.edu Joel P Leer joel.leer@mnsu.edu Aim/Purpose: This study aimed to compare the experiences of students who identify as Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) with those of White students in the same Educational Leadership doctoral program that claimed to be unapologetic in its commitment to producing racially conscious leaders. Background: This study critically assesses the doctoral program’s claims as measured by BIPOC and White doctoral students’ perceptions of their abilities as racial equity leaders and their assessments of their transformational learning. Methodology: This qualitative study employed two separate focus group interviews – one for BIPOC doctoral students (n=7) and the other for White doctoral students (n=6). The researchers could comprehend how the participants experienced an Educational Leadership Ed.D. program with curriculum, andragogy, and assessment viewed through the lens of race and how the participants perceived their growth as racial equity leaders. Contribution: This study offers several theoretical and practical applications for Educational Leadership doctoral programs that embed racial equity work. For faculty, the study informs their delivery of race-focused courses and programs to optimize their development of racially conscious leaders. For BIPOC students, the study empowers them to advocate for and demand challenging racial equity-focused curriculum and instruction. For White students, the study reinforces the necessity of a race-focused program for professional development. Findings: There was a marked difference between the BIPOC and White students’ responses. White students reported the most transformational growth in their racial awareness, their understanding of structural racism, and their recognition of where equity leadership skills could be utilized. BIPOC students were cognizant of much of this work before entering the program. However, they reported growth in understanding how best to implement effective racial equity leadership while maintaining healthy boundaries and self-care. Recommendations for Practitioners: Educational leadership doctoral programs with a focus on racial equity work need teaching faculty that espouse and demonstrate anti-racist curriculum, instruction, and assessment without relying on the racialized labor of BIPOC students to “teach” White students about racism. Recommendation for Researchers: The researchers in this study used separate focus groups – BIPOC and White. The data revealed that although the same questions were asked to each group, the BIPOC responses contained more vulnerable, personal details and yielded richer meanings. Future researchers should consider employing a more robust set of focus group questions that require more introspection and self-reflection, which might produce more significant insights. We believe they may yield more nuanced responses from all racial groups. Impact on Society: This study revealed that BIPOC and White educational leadership doctoral students have different and varying needs and challenges based on their racialized lived experiences. Educational leadership doctoral programs must provide the tools and opportunities for their students to be conversant and competent to address issues of structural racism. Future Research: Future research should use transformative learning theory to guide how BIPOC and White faculty in educational leadership doctoral programs assess their abilities to be anti-racist teachers and leaders. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5245 educational leadership Ed.D. programs BIPOC students White students racial equity leadership transformative learning eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-05-07 19 5276 article Karolína Poliaková karolina.poliakova@fsv.cuni.cz Aim/Purpose: This paper presents an in-depth analysis of the media portrayal of Ph.D. programs in the Czech Republic. Specifically, it explores how doctoral study programs, their students, and the Ph.D. degree are represented across various topics and social actors over an 18-month period. Background: The societal perception of Ph.D. studies, especially at the postgraduate level, is significantly shaped by media representations, including their connections to science, academia, and broader social life. Therefore, it is crucial to investigate the portrayal of the Ph.D. phenomenon in the media. The Czech Republic provides a relevant use case because of Central Eastern European (CEE) settings and amplified media coverage. The main factors are several political and social influences and governmental discussions regarding the legality of and against precarious conditions. Methodology: This study utilizes a qualitative method of conventional and directed content analysis to thematically categorize a corpus of 456 articles on Czech news platforms. A subset of these articles (thematic cluster about study conditions) undergoes further analysis to identify represented social actors. The results are clustered and interpreted using examples from the dataset. The instances of studied phenomena are quantified to provide an enumerated representation of individual themes and social actors. Contribution: The author contributes to research on doctoral studies by expanding the existing knowledge through media content analysis within the social constructivist paradigm. Moreover, the CEE region, often overlooked in doctoral studies and science communication research, is highlighted here. Finally, this article enriches the understanding of public relations strategies for higher-education institutions by focusing on earned media channels as opposed to solely owned ones. Findings: The analysis leads to the determination of 10 thematic clusters that can be succinctly categorized into four main areas: “Ph.D. Title,” “University Life,” “Study Conditions,” and “Controversial Issues.” The latter two categories are notably politicized, a fact underscored by the actor analysis, which shows a predominance of political figures in the media coverage. An unexpected result of the research is the significant underrepresentation of student voices in the analyzed sample of media outputs, except for those doctoral students who also hold positions such as student initiative chairs. Additionally, comparing the results to previous research on doctoral studies, it can be argued that many of the critical topics discussed by the research community, such as mental health issues or diversity of the student cohort, are not equally represented in media portrayals. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners, especially communication professionals from higher education institutions and research centers, can leverage these insights to refine their communication strategy. This can help counterbalance prevailing media narratives and provide a more representative portrayal of study programs, focusing on areas currently underrepresented in media discourse. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers from other regions are encouraged to conduct similar studies using the presented framework to map the representation of Ph.D. in respective media outlets. It is advisable to consider the local context in the interpretative phase of the content analysis, as demonstrated in this study. Impact on Society: The findings elucidate the role of the Ph.D. within the national media landscape of higher education, potentially influencing policymakers, journalists, and science communication professionals to reconsider their approaches to media discourse. Lastly, as hinted above, science communication professionals can benefit from the results in terms of future development of media outreach strategy with a focus on targeted topics. Future Research: The presented work would benefit from a broader, multinational comparison and also a complementary audience analysis to understand how Ph.D. students and possible applicants interpret these messages and whether they correlate with their attitudes. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5276 doctoral degree content analysis media representation eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-05-26 19 5294 article Edouard Giudicelli edouard.giudicelli@gmail.com Arielle Syssau arielle.syssau@univ-montp3.fr Royce Anders andersroyce@gmail.com Nathalie BLANC nathalie.blanc@univ-montp3.fr Aim/Purpose: With respect to doctoral students, the present study examined the association between dropout intentions and contextual, dispositional, and affective variables. The aim was to provide a deeper understanding of the factors that promote successful completion of doctoral studies in the humanities and social sciences in France. Background: Key variables relevant to doctoral life that could serve as predictors for dropout intention were assessed. These were research activity, health and private life, academic social life, supervision, university and facilities settings, career prospects, doctoral year, student personality, self-efficacy, and anxiety and depression levels. Methodology: Each of the aforementioned variables was measured at the end of the 2019-2020 academic year within a sample of 202 students from the same university who were enrolled in doctoral programs in the humanities and social sciences. Dropout intention was modeled with a logistic regression model, which allowed for the simultaneous taking into account a gamut of variables. Contribution: This study is the first to jointly assess the variables respective to predicting dropout intention and innovatively account for personality factors in addition to contextual factors. This study offers a deeper understanding of the role that personality may play and altogether reveals the variables that are most associated with doctoral dropout intentions in France. Findings: Through having also modeled personality as a potential risk/protective factor, this study confirms that contextual factors, compared to personality, play a more consequent role in PhD dropout intentions. Furthermore, we show that while personality factors are indeed associated with dropout intention, their links may be best understood through their interplay with contextual factors. Importantly, a sense of self-efficacy, anxiety, and depression was found significant, as well as research wellness, supervision quality, health, and emotional stability. Overall, dropout intentions were found to increase with the doctoral year. Recommendations for Practitioners: Findings suggest that university personnel aiming to reduce the number of doctoral students who plan to dropout should especially consider the following key variables: research conditions, doctoral year, and student characteristics (e.g., personality, depression, and sense of self-efficacy). Recommendation for Researchers: In order to better understand doctoral dropout, future studies should consider the interplay between choice of doctoral discipline and contextual, dispositional, and affective variables, as well as theories of motivation. Impact on Society: In higher education and research, decreasing doctoral dropout is important in maintaining society’s confidence in, and general success of, scientific research and educational practice, as well as increasing the amount of public and private funds dedicated to these valuable endeavors. Future Research: Future research should more intricately assess and control for interactions between individual-level, personality, and contextual factors during the doctorate, as well as include a larger cohort that may consist of both social sciences and traditional sciences majors. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5294 doctoral students dropout intention personality well-being context eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-05-30 19 5302 article Samuel Gross gross@psych.uni-frankfurt.de Lukas Schulze-Vorberg schulze-vorberg@psych.uni-frankfurt.de Miriam Hansen hansen@paed.psych.uni-frankfurt.de Aim/Purpose: Little is known about procrastination in PhD students, as most research focuses on undergraduate students. While there have been several efforts to identify different types of academic procrastinators in undergraduates, no study has attempted to identify different procrastination types in PhD students. Additionally, most of the studies that found different procrastination types in undergraduates did not research how these types differ regarding procrastination antecedents, excluding important information about the characteristics of these types. Background: The present study addresses this problem by identifying different procrastination types of PhD students based on reasons for academic procrastination. Furthermore, more information about these types was gathered by analyzing differences in procrastination antecedents (depression, imposter self-concept, self-worth, mindfulness, self-efficacy, impulsivity, conscientiousness, neuroticism, emotion regulation, rumination). Methodology: A total of 401 German-speaking PhD students from over 100 fields were included in the analysis. An online questionnaire was used to collect data. First, we used a reason for academic procrastination questionnaire to run a latent profile analysis to identify different academic procrastinators. Second, we used multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to analyze differences between the types of academic procrastinators based on reasons for procrastination and antecedents of procrastination. More precisely, we used Tuckman’s procrastination scale, depressiveness in a non-clinical setting scale, imposter self-concept questionnaire, Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale, mindfulness attention and awareness scale, self-efficacy scale, impulsivity scale, big five inventory, emotion regulation questionnaire, and the response style questionnaire. Contribution: The present study provides a deeper insight into academic procrastination among PhD students. Additionally, the identification of procrastination types is based on a variety of reasons for academic procrastination rather than solely procrastination, which adds a new perspective. Validation of the found types helps gain a clearer insight into how these types differ from each other. In line with previous research with undergraduate students, we could show that the high procrastinating types also show significantly higher impulsivity, neuroticism, and rumination and significantly lower self-worth. Contrary to undergraduate students, we could not find any significant differences between the types with regard to emotion regulation. These findings contribute to a clearer picture of procrastinating PhD students and their challenges. Findings: We identified six different procrastination types (moderate procrastinator type (n = 121), insecure type (n = 81), productive type (n = 79), externalizing type (n = 51), strong procrastinator type (n = 25), internalizing type (n = 38) based on the reasons for academic procrastination. The productive and externalizing types seem to be the most functional, and the strong procrastinator and internalizing types are the most dysfunctional. The latter showed significantly worse expressions of procrastination, depression, imposter self-concept, self-worth, mindfulness, self-efficacy, impulsivity, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and rumination. The moderate procrastinator and insecure types appear to fall somewhere between the high-functioning and low-functioning types in terms of analyzed procrastination antecedents. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners should use the reasons for academic procrastination questionnaire (FGAP-P) for assessment. PhD students who strongly agree to procrastinate due to study-related competencies, personality-related variables, beliefs, and task characteristics are the most at risk. Practitioners should be aware that these individuals are more likely to suffer from procrastination, depressive symptoms, negative self-view (imposter syndrome, low self-worth/self-efficacy), impulsivity, and rumination. Interventions that target the reduction of these symptoms should be recommended or applied by practitioners. Recommendation for Researchers: When utilizing latent profile analysis to explore procrastination types in PhD students concurrently, assessing procrastination antecedents associated with the PhD completion process is recommended. This simultaneous assessment is pivotal as it facilitates a comprehensive understanding of the different procrastination types, allowing for the identification of shared characteristics and distinctions among them. By adopting this approach, researchers can move beyond mere classification based solely on type membership and gain deeper insights into the nuances of procrastination types and behaviors. Impact on Society: The findings provide crucial insights for supervising and/or consulting PhD students. Having knowledge about different procrastination types in PhD students helps identify at-risk individuals. Using our findings, interventions could especially target these at-risk individuals, therefore reducing procrastination and enhancing well-being and productivity in PhD students. Future Research: Future research could use longitudinal research designs to assess the stability of procrastination types found over time using real-time data within an experience sampling methods framework. This could help to minimize biases and gain deeper insights not only about interindividual but also intraindividual differences. Furthermore, cross-cultural studies should be conducted to unveil similarities and differences between cultures regarding procrastination and procrastination types. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5302 procrastination PhD students latent profile analysis eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-06-10 19 5308 article Corina R Kaul Corina_Kaul@baylor.edu Nicholas R. Werse Nick_Werse@baylor.edu Brenda K. Jones Davis Brenda_Davis1@baylor.edu Leanne Howell Leanne_Howell@baylor.edu Laila Y Sanguras Laila_Sanguras@baylor.edu Lacy K Crocker Papadakis Lacy_Papadakis@baylor.edu Ryann N. Shelton Ryann_Shelton@baylor.edu Jess Smith jsmith89@bellarmine.edu Aim/Purpose: This study explored changes in writing self-efficacy and writing apprehension among online doctoral students throughout their first dissertation writing course. By examining the facilitators and obstacles to online doctoral student writing success, we concluded that receiving specific, concrete, and iterative feedback is instrumental for the growth of doctoral students’ confidence during the early stages of the dissertation process. Background: Previous scholarship has recognized that the dissertation writing process is a key contributor to attrition rates in doctoral programs. However, there is limited research on how online doctoral students experience writing apprehension and self-efficacy during this crucial stage. Drawing upon self-efficacy theory as a framework, our study sought to fill this gap by investigating changes in these constructs among 53 participants as they composed their first two chapters. Methodology: This convergent mixed methods study employed both quantitative surveys and qualitative reflections collected before and after the completion of a one-term dissertation writing course intervention. We examined participants’ self-perceptions of their mechanics skills, essentials efficacy (overcoming difficulties), relational-reflective efficacy (connecting with others), and relationship building. Contribution: This study contributes to existing research on online doctoral student dissertation writing experiences by revealing the importance of specific, concrete, and iterative feedback in fostering students’ writing confidence. Findings: Our findings revealed small effect sizes in participants’ overall confidence levels related to their academic writing self-efficacy but no statistically significant changes. Nonetheless, qualitative data indicated positive experiences of growth in terms of scholarly proficiency development, which contributes to existing literature gaps. Recommendations for Practitioners: Faculty working with online doctoral students who are writing their dissertations should provide specific, concrete, and iterative feedback to support the growth of students’ writing confidence during the early stages of the dissertation process. Recommendation for Researchers: Future researchers on this topic should expand the scope of their focus beyond just the first term or course and conduct longitudinal studies that encompass different phases of dissertation work in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of changes in writing self-efficacy and apprehension among online doctoral students. Impact on Society: By providing specific, concrete, and iterative feedback to doctoral students during the dissertation writing process, faculty can empower them towards disciplinary mastery and expertise, enabling successful completion of the program and equipping them with expert knowledge to make a meaningful impact in their respective fields and industries. Future Research: Future research should expand the scope of the focus on doctoral student writing apprehension, anxiety, and self-efficacy to include other stages of the dissertation research and writing process, perhaps also examining these writing constructs and how they vary given student characteristics. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5308 writing self-efficacy writing apprehension writing anxiety dissertation writing graduate writing eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-07-02 19 5330 article Azad Ali aali@an.edu Shardul Pandya drspandya@yahoo.com Umesh C Varma ucvarma@an.edu Aim/Purpose. The aim is to conduct a comparative analysis and summarize findings on the difference between the key sections of quantitative doctoral dissertations versus qualitative doctoral dissertations. A summary of the findings will be presented in a tabulated format with bullet points to help clarify the differences between the two approaches. Background. Doctoral students often face challenges in selecting a qualitative or quantitative doctoral approach for writing their dissertation documents. The challenge is usually faced at the outset of the process. Students contemplate which approach and the difference between them. The students also may not know the specific requirements for each section of the dissertation for each approach. Conducting a comparative analysis and providing a tabulated summary of the difference between the two approaches is deemed to be helpful to the students. Methodology. First, this research is an attempt to investigate and analyze the existing literature to establish a contextual framework for a structured and logical dissertation process applicable to both qualitative and quantitative research approaches. Second, the paper applies the framework to both approaches to guide doctoral students in the completion of the dissertation process. Unlike many other studies, this study provides doctoral students with a foundation to develop and build a research identity, leading to quality doctoral dissertations. This study is significant for doctoral students’ preparedness for the dissertation process as they move through different stages and apply appropriate pedagogical approaches to not only connect these stages but also scientifically and logically validate the relationships between these stages. Contribution. Developing a tabulated summary of findings based on comparative analysis for the differences between the key sections of qualitative and quantitative to be used as a reference for doctoral mentors/advisors as they guide their students on the choice between qualitative or quantitative dissertation approaches. This study is different from other studies published on the same topic for two reasons. First, this paper focuses on specific sections of the doctoral dissertation, namely seven sections that are considered “key” sections of the dissertation document. Second, the study provides a tabulated summary at the end. The one-page summary of keywords suggests what is included in each approach (qualitative vs quantitative). The summary of keywords could also initiate further discussion and research on the same topics. Findings. The outcome of this study is the presentation of a tabulated summary of findings on the difference in the key sections of qualitative doctoral dissertations versus quantitative doctoral dissertations. The findings of this research aim to help doctoral mentors/advisors guide students when contemplating the selection of research approach and doctoral students who are conflicted between the two approaches. Recommendations for Practitioners. Performing comparative analysis and presenting the findings in a tabulated summary to doctoral students is deemed helpful. It helps address the challenges the students face at the beginning of their dissertation writing when they contemplate the selection between the two study approaches. Recommendations for Researchers. More research is needed to give examples of the differences between qualitative and quantitative dissertations. Impact on Society. The findings of this research aim to help doctoral mentors/advisors guide students when contemplating the selection of research approach and doctoral students who are conflicted between the two approaches. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5330 doctoral dissertations qualitative vs quantitative dissertations comparative analysis qualitative vs quantitative research eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-07-02 19 5301 article Muhammad N Akbar m.akbar.1@research.gla.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: The aim of this paper is to investigate the determinants of satisfaction with study progress during a period when COVID-19 restrictions were in place and after their removal. Background: The pandemic instigated a period of rapid technological change in global higher education. Relatively little research has examined the combined effect of technological use and the pandemic on academic development. The current work sets out to examine the role of time management, technology use, and health and well-being on self-assessed academic progress. Methodology: An opportunity sample of 494 doctoral students recruited predominantly from universities in the UK completed a survey with measures of technology use, attitudes to technology, self-reported health and well-being, satisfaction with study progress and aspects of time management. During the period of data collection, pandemic restrictions were removed, providing the opportunity for a limited, interrupted time series (ITS) analysis Contribution: This paper presents a model of study progress, which is applied in two distinct periods over which data was collected – during the period of the pandemic when social restrictions were in place and in the period following, when restrictions were removed. Findings: A majority of doctoral students reported being satisfied with their study progress. Several significant correlates of this were identified. A linear model utilising these variables statistically explained 29% of the variance in satisfaction with study progress. For the period when COVID restrictions were still in place, the model explained 47% of the variance, significantly greater than in the subsequent period when restrictions were removed. Effect sizes for happiness with time management, finding software applications difficult to use or learn, currently reported general health, health compared to the previous year and the effects of the pandemic on study were significantly greater during the period of the pandemic. Recommendations for Practitioners: A proportion of the sample reported finding software difficult to use/learn, with this impacting on reported study progress. This suggests a need for technology training for doctoral students. The relationship between time management and study progress also suggests a potential need for support in this area. It is important that technology training takes on board the ‘emotional usability’ of technology. Raising awareness amongst supervisors of doctoral students of both the psychological dimensions of technology use and the need for student support would be beneficial. Recommendation for Researchers: Self-rated academic progress provides a useful measure of academic attainment. The role of doctoral students’ health and well-being in relation to study progress warrants further investigation. To clarify the causal nature of relationships between time management, health and well-being and study progress further work using longitudinal studies is required. Impact on Society: The study suggests the pandemic had a large influence on doctoral students’ education and their health and well-being. With the increasing importance of international postgraduate recruitment for universities, the findings highlight the need for attention to be given for students’ well-being and the support infrastructure which can contribute to this. Future Research: Future work should seek to replicate the findings and examine how determinants of study progress may vary over time and in different populations of doctoral students. Structural equation modelling could be used to further explore the relationships which health, time management, technology use and appraisal have with study progress. More work is needed to assess the potential long-term effects of the pandemic on well-being and academic life. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5301 study progress technology health time management COVID-19 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-07-20 19 5331 article Yuliya Tokatligil tokatligil.y@gmail.com Aigul Saliyeva aigul.enu@yandex.ru Anastassiya Karmelyuk enuranking@gmail.com Aliya Mambetalina mambetalina@mail.ru Kamilla Saliyeva slkamilla@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The research is aimed at understanding the role of curiosity in obtaining a PhD degree. The differences in the expression of curiosity between PhD and unsuccessful doctoral candidates are studied. Background: Differences in the expression of curiosity predict differences in behavior and achievement of results. The role of curiosity in research activities and progress has been recognized in the literature review. However, the influence of curiosity on the success of researchers has received little attention as a subject of empirical research. Methodology: Quantitative methods were used to examine differences in curiosity among PhD candidates and unsuccessful doctoral candidates. The study involved PhD (n=181) and unsuccessful doctoral candidates (n=194) aged 29 to 49 years. A questionnaire of socio-demographic characteristics, the tests “Curiosity” and the “Test for assessing research potential” were used to collect data. Independent groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test, and relationships between variables were studied using the partial correlation matrix and Network Plots, to determine statistically significant differences between the strength of the relationship between two pairs of variables. Partial correlations were compared. Contribution: The study initiates a new line of questioning and contributes to the study of factors influencing the successful completion of doctoral studies. The focus of the study is on a group of respondents who have previously received insufficient attention. Findings: The comparison analysis of partial correlations lets us establish the differences in all components of curiosity (target, motivational, cognitive, productive, dynamic, emotional, regulatory, reflective-evaluative) and research potential. The differences relate to the desire for research, the importance of scientific knowledge, priorities, ways of expressing curiosity, emotional experiences, comparison of intentions, and achieved results. The profiles of curiosity in research activities are described based on the identified differences. Recommendations for Practitioners: From a practical point of view, the research results can help organize and plan the research activities of doctoral students. Recommendation for Researchers: The authors recommend researchers study in more detail the nature of the connections between the components of curiosity and their impact on research success. Future research could focus on a detailed analysis of curiosity profiles, including in the context of various personality traits. It is also recommended that a longitudinal or experimental study be conducted that involves diagnosing curiosity in doctoral students at different stages of training and with different research productivity. Impact on Society: Doctoral studies are considered as an important strategic resource of the modern economy. The development of curiosity can help increase the research productivity of doctoral students and competitiveness in the globalizing scientific world. Future Research: Following research on curiosity as it relates to research activities could contribute to the development of a conceptual framework. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5331 curiosity research potential PhD unsuccessful doctoral candidates doctoral studies Kazakhstan eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-08-10 19 5343 article Amy J Catalano Amy.Catalano@Hofstra.edu Marilyn M DePietto Marilyn.M.DePietto@Hofstra.edu Alexander J Lord Alexander.Lord@qc.cuny.edu Susan T Radin Susan.T.Radin@Hofstra.edu Lydia Williams lydiadwilliams@yahoo.com Aim/Purpose: Despite an increase in the numbers of K-12 educators pursuing doctoral degrees, it is unclear if the field of education has been significantly impacted by the research resulting from their doctoral dissertations. Accordingly, the quality of doctoral programs and dissertations and rate of publication after defense, warrants examination. Background: There have long been discussions regarding concerns about the quality of doctoral dissertations that come in concert with an increase in degrees awarded. This paper presents findings from a study examining dissertation quality for K-12 education doctorates awarded over a ten-year period in the United States. Methodology: The researchers randomly selected and evaluated the methodological quality of more than 500 dissertations during the last ten years from the Proquest dissertation database using a rubric adapted from Ronau et al. (2014). Using this rubric, the team described the quality of dissertations with respect to sampling, design, and validity. Contribution: A new rubric was developed and tested to assess the quality of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies. These results provided large-scale data on dissertation quality that may be used to guide doctoral programs in implementing program changes. Findings: Although the majority of the dissertations studied used qualitative methods of inquiry, quantitative research had significantly higher quality scores. Regardless of the methods used, many studies failed to employ rigorous validity controls. Recommendations for Practitioners: Doctoral programs may wish to make use of these results to improve programming, particularly in methods courses. These results may also be used to guide dissertation advisors and dissertation committee members, along with increasing publication rates among doctoral students. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers may wish to extend this study by looking more closely at the methodological quality in specific subject areas. Research is also needed to improve the rubric developed for this study further and to determine other metrics of impact beyond publication. Impact on Society: Stronger methods sections may lead to more publications of dissertation studies, which can improve impact on educational practice and evidence-based decision-making. Future Research: Future research should assess the quality of research in the context of usefulness, impact on practice beyond publication, and topic currency. Further, the motives behind publishing dissertation work in fields that do not require publication should be examined. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5343 dissertation quality research methods qualitative research quantitative research eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-08-11 19 5345 article IBNATUL JALILAH YUSOF ijalilah@utm.my Siti Khadijah Mohamad sitikhadijahmohamad@usm.my Lukman Hakim Ismail lukman@utm.my Aim/Purpose: Given the limited research on assessing research literacy among postgraduate students in the education field, this study aims to explore the association between research literacy scores and learning experiences. These experiences include reading intensity, participation in formal research-related courses, and engagement in presenting and publishing articles. Background: Postgraduate students are required to master essential skills such as reading, evaluating, interpreting, and synthesizing information from primary research articles, as they are expected to be both consumers and producers of scholarly work like theses and research articles. Developing research literacy, which encompasses these skills, is crucial. Without adequate research literacy, students may misinterpret research findings, compromising the quality of their studies. This not only affects their own work but also negatively impacts other researchers who reference their research outputs. Methodology: This study utilized a survey method with a sample of 236 postgraduate research students in education. The participants were selected through stratified sampling, dividing them into two strata: master’s students and doctoral students. The survey data were analyzed using multiple regression for inferential purposes. Contribution: This study offers guidance on designing supportive programs based on the examined factors influencing research literacy among postgraduate students. Understanding these factors will enable more targeted and effective program development to foster students’ research abilities. Findings: Findings revealed that all five predictors predict the research literacy of postgraduate students in education. Nevertheless, further analysis shows that three of the five predictors significantly predicted research literacy scores. These include the total number of courses attended, t (230) = 2.62, p < .05; the total number of papers published, t (230) = 4.05, p < .05; and the number of articles read monthly. Among these, the total number of articles published emerged as the strongest predictor, followed by the total number of courses attended and the number of articles read monthly. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners in education should focus on enhancing research literacy within formal research courses provided for postgraduate research students. These courses should be tailored to improve research literacy skills and align with evolving needs and expectations, especially in the context of academic publication. Additionally, practitioners should implement interventions that cultivate reading habits, as staying informed directly affects students’ academic publication endeavors. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should investigate additional learning experiences that could impact research literacy. This includes exploring the role of mentorship, collaborative projects, and the use of digital resources in research education. Furthermore, engaging in longitudinal studies to track the development of research literacy over time is recommended. This would provide insights into how research skills evolve throughout the course of postgraduate studies. Impact on Society: This study aims to empower research students by providing them with essential skills and knowledge for critical assessment, engagement, and contribution to research findings. Enhancing research literacy leads to a more informed, problem-solving, and evidence-based research community. Ultimately, this effort can significantly improve the quality of research education. Future Research: Future studies may examine other factors, such as the barriers and challenges that students face in acquiring research literacy skills, including motivational, psychological, and socio-economic factors. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5345 research literacy postgraduate students formal research courses immersion in research reading intensity eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-09-16 19 5375 article Michele Jacobsen dmjacobs@ucalgary.ca Sharon Friesen sfriesen@ucalgary.ca Sandra Becker sandra.becker@ucalgary.ca Aim/Purpose: In this case study research, we aimed to understand the development of effective doctoral supervision practices in Educational Research by examining supervisors’ experiences as doctoral students and how they learned their evolving supervision and mentoring roles as professors. Background: Doctoral supervision is shaped by institutional systems, program structures, research cultures, and national guidelines. Supervisors impact doctoral students’ research experiences, academic success, and personal growth. Many new professors lack formal training, rely on their own experiences being supervised, and learn how to supervise effectively through trial and error and on the job. Methodology: Our case study research involved interviewing five tenured, mid-career doctoral supervisors who were deemed effective based on doctoral student completions. Using reflexive thematic analysis and evaluative coding of interview transcripts, we identified two key findings and nine themes to describe supervisors’ experiences as doctoral students and their on-the-job development and practices as supervisors. Contribution: This study highlights how experiences being supervised as a doctoral student impact and influence the development of supervision practices in combination with various experiences of learning on-the-job during one’s academic career. We expand understanding of the complexity of supervision practice and uncover differences between contemporary contexts and past experiences being supervised. We demonstrate how several supervisors translated impoverished experiences with their own supervisor into targeted efforts to learn how to effectively supervise their own students, to change history, and to deliberately not supervise the way they were supervised. Findings: Two findings are presented: (1) experiences being supervised influence early supervision practices, and (2) learning to supervise on-the-job happens in a variety of ways. Nine themes describe how supervisors’ experiences being supervised influenced their supervisory practices and the various informal on-the-job development approaches, such as learning from students, colleagues, and prior career experiences. Findings highlight the roles of doctoral supervisors, academic peers, doctoral students, programs, and institutions that contribute to developing effective supervisory practices. In our case study, we demonstrate how supervisors can transform academic and research cultures over time. Recommendations for Practitioners: Institutions, programs, and supervisors play crucial roles in ensuring doctoral student success. Institutions should offer structured professional learning and peer mentoring that supports supervisors in developing effective practices early in their careers. By leveraging study findings, institutions can design professional learning opportunities that increase faculty adoption of effective supervision practices and accelerate their learning. Recommendation for Researchers: Given the vital role played by supervisors in research training and talent development of the next generation of researchers and leaders across society, we argue it is crucial to understand and optimize the ways in which doctoral supervisors develop effective supervisory practice as a matter of ongoing research interest. Future research can investigate the importance of intergenerational learning and knowledge transfer in academia, encouraging a more reflective and informed approach to supervisory development. Impact on Society: Findings can inform how to maximize individual, institutional, and governmental investments in higher education. This research can improve outcomes in doctoral education by expanding effective, research-informed development of supervisory practices. Quality supervision impacts doctoral students’ academic success, mental health, and career progression. Understanding supervisory lineage enables universities to enhance current and future doctoral experiences. Future Research: Four questions are provided to guide and promote supervisory development and ongoing research. There is an ongoing need to examine how supervisors and doctoral students define the impact and outcomes of successful supervision and mentoring practices beyond the completion of the thesis. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5375 doctoral supervision effective mentorship educational research supervisor development eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-10-20 19 5379 article Vrinda Acharya vrinda.doc@manipal.edu Mathew Thomas Gil mathew.tg@manipal.edu Aneesha Acharya K ak.acharya@manipal.edu Aim/Purpose: This study investigates how personal resources act as moderators and mediators in the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model. The study introduced intrinsic motivation as a personal resource and explored the mediating and moderating role relating to job demands, job strain, and psychological well-being in a doctoral education setting. Background: Future scholars and professionals are shaped by doctoral education, an essential phase in an academic career. Students’ psychological well-being is negatively impacted by the stress associated with the rigorous demands of the program, such as long hours of study and academic research publications. Understanding the relationship between intrinsic motivation and doctorate students’ mental health has attracted attention recently. Although fostering intrinsic motivation provides positive outcomes, the relationship with overall well-being is still multifaceted. Methodology: The study collected cross-sectional data from 391 full-time PhD students in India’s social science discipline. The investigation performed direct, moderation and mediation analysis of the study construct. Contribution: The current findings offer validation for nurturing the psychological well-being of scholars in the stressful doctoral study environment through intrinsic motivation. Furthermore, by emphasizing the scholars’ intrinsic motivation, the current study contributes to the body of literature on how scholars might prioritize their work-life balance and handle the demands of their programs. Findings: Demands of the doctoral program increase job strain and negatively impact students’ psychological well-being; however, this effect is conditional on the level of intrinsic motivation. This study highlights the significance of intrinsic motivation as a personal resource in the JD-R model that facilitates doctoral students’ psychological well-being. Recommendations for Practitioners: The study recommends that institutions, supervisors, and practitioners create a learning environment that fosters intrinsic motivation among scholars. The study result highlights interventions to enhance student motivation and psychological well-being to enhance the three psychological needs of scholars, i.e., autonomy, relatedness, and competence. Institutions can enhance the scholar’s autonomy by providing a choice of courses during their coursework stage and by providing an opportunity for research grants and collaboration. Supervisors suggested providing constructive feedback, maintaining open communication, and conducting research writing, methodology and time management skills, and growth mindset workshops for students that foster scholars’ competence. A sense of relatedness can be achieved through shared challenges and successes, peer mentorship programs, study groups, peer reviews, and social events. Recommendation for Researchers: The researchers should consider other personal resources (for example, self-efficacy, grit, and resilience) that scholars can use to improve psychological well-being. Researchers should broaden their studies and interventions on resources rather than strategies to reduce the PhD program demands to tackle the job strain among scholars. Impact on Society: Scholars with better mental health may be more productive and resilient and better able to support their communities. We can ensure they build their excellent research results, assist various fields in advance, and engage in social concerns. Future Research: Researchers can investigate the present relationship using longitudinal studies by tracking students’ well-being over time. Further studies can establish causal links, assess the efficacy of intrinsic motivation interventions, and uncover complex interactions between demands and resources influencing mental health among scholars. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5379 psychological well-being personal resources intrinsic motivation job demands-resources job strain eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-11-21 19 5398 article Faith A Butcher faithann.butcher@eastern.edu Shondelyn Jackson-Towner shondelyn.towner@eastern.edu Andre Towner Andre.towner@eastern.edu Heewon Chang hchang@eastern.edu Abere Kassa abere.kassa@eastern.edu Aim/Purpose: This article addresses the lack of research on BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) PhD students’ experiences in collaborative learning processes. It aims to fill this gap by using collaborative autoethnography to analyze the experiences of four BIPOC doctoral students who participated as co-researchers in a year-long collaborative program evaluation self-study of their academic program. Background: The authors discuss their experience in a student leadership role in the collaborative program evaluation process of their doctoral program as a form of collaborative learning, how their identities influenced the processes they participated in, and the themes of what they learned during the evaluation process. The article ends with recommendations to improve the experience and impact of BIPOC doctoral students’ participation and better align the skills learned at the PhD level with the broader job market. Methodology: The study uses the qualitative method of collaborative autoethnography to analyze the perspectives and experiences of four BIPOC doctoral students within a broader cultural context. Contribution: This article provides insight on how to improve the experience of BIPOC doctoral students’ participation in the collaborative process and better align the skills learned at the PhD level with the broader job market. It provides four recommendations: first, align student training with job market realities; second, dismantle systemic and structural barriers; third, respond to the effects of social location; and last, negotiate power through consensus building. Findings: Five themes emerged from the reflections. First, consider how important planning and good communication are to the collaborative learning process in terms of preparation, group dynamics, and resource availability. Second, power disparities existed among faculty, student researchers, and committees. Third, consider how the researchers’ identities affected their interpretations and interactions at the individual, group, and organizational levels. Fourth, the importance of negotiating between diverse perspectives and interests; and finally, what they gained from participating in the collaborative review process. Recommendations for Practitioners: The authors provided four recommendations for improving the experience of BIPCO doctoral students’ participation in the collaborative process and better aligning the skills learned at the PhD level with the broader job market. First, align student training with job market realities. Second, dismantle systemic and structural barriers. Third, respond to the effects of social location. Last, negotiating power through consensus building. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should work toward creating an accepted framework for the collaborative program evaluation process to provide a road map of the journey instead of just providing the compass. Additionally, they should design and conduct a full-scale collaborative program evaluation to engage BIPOC students from the beginning. Finally, they should conduct a participatory-collaborative-inclusive academic program evaluation at different levels of higher education. Impact on Society: This article provides insight on how to improve the experience of BIPOC doctoral students’ participation in the collaborative process. It also demonstrates how collaborative learning assists in aligning the skills learned at the PhD level with the broader job market. Future Research: Future research should work toward creating an accepted framework for the collaborative program evaluation process to provide a road map of the journey instead of just providing the compass. Additionally, it should design and conduct a full-scale collaborative program evaluation to engage BIPOC students from the beginning. Finally, future research could conduct a participatory-collaborative-inclusive academic program evaluation at different levels of higher education. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5398 collaborative learning BIPOC doctoral students collaborative program evaluation eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-11-21 19 5399 article Yulu Hou houyulu@msu.edu Aim/Purpose: This paper aims to explore the nuanced career choices of doctoral students in the USA through the lens of Critical Race Theory (CRT), addressing the underrepresentation and systemic challenges faced by students of color in their postdoctoral career paths. Background: Despite increasing diversity in doctoral programs, racial and ethnic disparities persist in career outcomes. This paper examines how racial identities and systemic inequalities influence the career aspirations and decisions of doctoral students, highlighting the need for race-conscious dialogue in career development. Methodology: A narrative literature review was conducted, focusing on peer-reviewed articles published between 2013 and 2023. The analysis utilized CRT to identify and examine themes related to race and career choices among doctoral students. A total of 23 articles were reviewed to assess the influence of race on career decision-making processes. Contribution: This paper contributes to the body of knowledge by applying CRT to understand the career choices of doctoral students, a perspective that has been underutilized in this context. By integrating a race-conscious lens, this approach builds on existing literature and challenges dominant narratives in doctoral education, emphasizing the critical role of race and systemic factors in shaping career pathways. Findings: The review identifies three major themes: (1) the endemic nature of racism in career choices, (2) the role of counter-storytelling in the career aspirations of students of color, and (3) the intersectionality of race with other identities influencing career decisions. These findings reveal how systemic racism and personal narratives intersect to impact the career trajectories of doctoral students, especially those from underrepresented backgrounds. Recommendations for Practitioners: Universities should recognize and address the role of race in career choices by fostering inclusive environments, providing culturally responsive mentoring, and validating diverse career paths beyond academia. Enhanced support for students from underrepresented groups is essential to mitigate systemic barriers. Recommendation for Researchers: Future research should continue to explore the intersectionality of race, gender, and class in doctoral students’ career decisions. Qualitative studies focusing on the experiential knowledge of underrepresented students and examining alternative career pathways outside academia are particularly needed. Impact on Society: Understanding the racial dynamics in doctoral education can lead to more equitable career opportunities and contribute to diversifying the nation’s intellectual and professional workforce. This paper underscores the importance of addressing systemic racism to create inclusive academic and professional environments. Future Research: Further studies should investigate the structural and institutional factors that shape career pathways for doctoral students, with a focus on how academic and racial biases influence career choices. Expanding the scope to include international doctoral students and their unique challenges in career decision-making is also recommended. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5399 career choices doctoral students Critical Race Theory systemic racism intersectionality eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-12-22 19 5410 article Albertus A. K. Buitendag BuitendagAAK@tut.ac.za Joey Jansen Van Vuuren jansenvanvuurenjc@tut.ac.za Aim/Purpose: This study presents an alternative use of the activity theory methodology as a tool and lens for synthesizing and evaluating qualitative data in scholarly articles. This research offers particular value for methodology experts and researchers by introducing a novel analytical framework that links theoretical frameworks with practical literature review techniques, providing a structured approach to demonstrate analytical rigor in qualitative research synthesis. Background: Many doctoral and other scholars find it challenging to synthesize the literature under review for part of their studies and subsequently fail to demonstrate rigorous analysis and interpretation. Methodology: This methodological research paper introduces a new approach to scholarly literature synthesis and evaluation. As such, no particular methodology is deployed. Contribution: This study proposes a novel method to guide doctoral, master’s, and other scholars in adding and demonstrating evidence of rigor to their work. We do this by showing how the concept of code and theme identification as part of the grounded theory method of inquiry and the elements of activity theory and grouped viewpoints can be used as a lens to examine the literature. We practically demonstrate our suggestion using two straightforward examples. Findings: Employing the suggested method and approach as an analytical instrument can benefit doctoral and other scholars by showcasing a substantial degree of conceptual interconnection among the various theories under review and providing evidence of rigor. Recommendations for Practitioners: Employing the suggested method and approach as an analytical instrument can benefit doctoral and other scholars by showcasing a substantial degree of conceptual interconnection among the various theories under review and providing evidence of rigor. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers can test the validity and effectiveness of our proposed approach in their own studies. Impact on Society: Presenting doctoral students and scholars with an alternate approach to assist with the literature review process. Future Research: The practical application of the suggested approach and method can further be investigated, demonstrated, and evaluated in future studies. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5410 methods in literature review qualitative coding evidence of rigor analytical synthesis activity theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2024-12-26 19 5412 article Eli Shur Eli.Shur@my.gcu.edu Aim/Purpose: This qualitative, exploratory case study aimed to explore the challenges that doctoral graduates experienced during their online programs and the strategies they used to overcome these challenges and obtain their degrees at universities in the United States. Background: About half of the students enrolled in online doctoral programs in the United States will drop out. Doctoral student attrition is costly personally, professionally, and financially, affecting students, universities, and society. Prior research identified a need to explore the experiences of online doctoral students to improve online doctoral completion rates. Methodology: A qualitative exploratory case study included questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, and a focus group interview of online doctoral graduates who graduated from universities in the United States within three years of graduation. Contribution: This study contributes to the current body of academic knowledge by broadening the understanding of academic thriving and suggesting strategies that doctoral students can use to improve their experiences of thriving in their online doctoral program, thus increasing the chances of online doctoral completion. Furthermore, this study contributes to the emerging research on capturing the experiences of online doctoral students. Findings: Online doctoral graduates identified five challenges they faced during their programs, including academic and relationship challenges, doctoral program integration, financial difficulties, health challenges, and isolation. In addition, they identified six strategies that assisted them in completing their programs: mental toughness, building supportive relationships, health-promoting practices, spiritual connection, having strong reasons for graduating, and being proactive. Recommendations for Practitioners: By cultivating the components detailed in the Six-Factor Online Doctoral Success Model, which was developed from this study, online doctoral students, university administrators, and faculty can develop strategies within the online educational environment that facilitate the experience of academic thriving of online doctoral students and may increase the retention and completion rates of doctoral students within these online programs. Recommendation for Researchers: Integrate components of the Six-Factor Online Doctoral Success Model in online doctoral programs. Impact on Society: Improved online doctoral completion rates would likely meet the increasing demand for graduate-level innovators in the U.S. Professionals with terminal degrees can potentially lead to improved leadership, more innovation, and expansion of evidence-based practices used in multiple areas benefitting society at large. Also, this study provides greater insight into humans thriving in high-pressure situations. Future Research: Develop a quantitative tool to measure the components of the Six-Factor Online Doctoral Success Model presented that can be used to assess incoming online doctoral students’ levels of academic thriving to determine fit for the program and areas of strengths and weakness that can inform the online student as they progress in the program. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5412 academic thriving doctoral attrition doctoral completion doctoral persistence doctoral retention doctoral success online doctoral programs resilience thriving eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-12-14 18 .i iii 5055 article Nicole A. Buzzetto-Hollywood nabuzzetto-more@umes.edu Table of Contents for Volume 18, 2023, of the International Journal of Doctoral Studies http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5055 IJDS International Journal of Doctoral Studies PhD doctoral studies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-02-04 18 001 023 5075 article Gordon W Maples gordon.maples@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: Graduate students face immense pressures and challenges as part of the graduate school experience, with few avenues to express their frustrations. While the crisis of graduate student mental health is well-documented quantitatively, and the stresses of graduate school are explored on the institutional level, there are few qualitative studies of these issues. Background: This study aims to explore graduate student attitudes and perceptions about graduate school and academia through the analysis of niche, graduate student-focused memes. Theories of emotional selection, emotional contagion, and collective coping predict that the creation and sharing of niche-interest memes reflect dominant attitudes and perceptions within niche communities under stress. Methodology: This study utilizes content analysis to thematically categorize a sample of 208 meme images created by and posted to the social media account High-Impact PhD Memes. The data is additionally categorized to measure resonance – how well each image was received by the page audience – and visualized using bar codes. Contribution: This study offers a new method for examining the attitudes and perceptions of niche groups online by proposing the measurement of emotional resonance, presents a novel visualization for the presentation of thematic coding and offers a new means to analyze internet memes for both content and emotional resonance. Findings: Findings indicate that the most frequently occurring themes in niche memes are not necessarily the ones that most highly emotionally resonate with the niche community of interest. The population of current and recent graduate students following High-Impact PhD Memes most highly resonated with the issues of literature access, financial/employment stresses, and overwork. Impact on Society: The findings of this study should encourage both researchers and higher education administrators to consider memes as reflections of the emotional states and perceptions of graduate students both collectively and individually, given how they comment on current, pressing issues. Based on the findings here, memes could feasibly be used as elicitation materials in well-being assessments or qualitative research studies to better understand and prompt reflections on the perspectives of graduate students, and ultimately improve programming and supports for the population. Future Research: Future research could apply similar methods to study other niche groups under pressure that use memes as a means of collective coping in order to better understand their attitudes and perceptions. Groups such as LGBTQ+ people, those with niche political affiliations, and neurodivergent people could all be studied with a similar approach. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5075 graduate students internet memes online communities eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-02-20 18 025 053 5081 article Julia Everitt julia.everitt@bcu.ac.uk Carolyn Blackburn carolyn.blackburn@bcu.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: This study examined the perceptions of doctoral supervisors and candidates around how expectations for doctoral supervision are clarified, and the strategies used. Background: Clarifying expectations is recommended in supervisor and candidate handbooks, supervisor training and recognition programme. Formal strategies have been adopted as a blanket approach by some departments, faculties, or universities but little research explores supervisor and candidate perceptions of this practice or available strategies. Methodology: Semi-structured interviews using stimulus material were held with nine supervisors and nine doctoral candidates from a university in England which adopts a team supervision model. Supervisor and candidate dyads were not used. Contribution: This study can be used to consider the process of clarifying expectations. A smorgasbord or selection of strategies is presented, for practice. Findings: Six supervisors were clarifying expectations at the beginning using an informal discussion, although some supervisors used multiple strategies. Candidates did not recall their expectations being clarified. Some supervisors and candidates believed that expectations did not need to be clarified and there were concerns about formal strategies. Team supervision had a positive and negative influence. Four candidates wanted expectations clarifying but the different starting points and power issues suggested that supervisors need to create the space for regular discussions as part of a working alliance. Recommendations for Practitioners: The stimulus material or smorgasbord of strategies can encourage dialogue between supervisors and candidates to enable them to discuss and select appropriate strategies, from the full range available. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers might want to undertake their own studies using stimulus material. The smorgasbord could be used in practice and research undertaken to see how it could be further developed. Impact on Society: Supervisors and candidates using the smorgasbord and the idea of the working alliance can assist to have ongoing conversations about expectations. Future Research: Researchers could conduct studies in other universities to see if similar findings are discovered. Future research could be undertaken where institutions have adopted a formal approach. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5081 research supervision higher education relationships expectations pedagogy andragogy eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-03-10 18 055 075 5090 article Louise Underdahl lunderdahl@email.phoenix.edu Patricia Akojie pakojie@email.phoenix.edu Myrene Agustin Magabo mmagabo@email.phoenix.edu Rheanna Rae Reed rheanna.reed@phoenix.edu Shawishi Haynes shawishi1@email.phoenix.edu Maureen Marzano loewenma@email.phoenix.edu Mar Navarro marianavarro@email.phoenix.edu Margo S Patterson DrPatterson22@email.phoenix.edu Aim/Purpose: Alignment of academic curricula and employer needs is widely discussed yet implementation lags. Research on EdD curricula has universality for other academic programs and may catalyze pedagogical innovation to promote employability in other disciplines. Background: This study contributes evidence-based data to strengthen career relevance of academic programs, align curriculum content with industry requirements, prepare students for the workforce, and improve job placement rates, defined as degree-related employment. Methodology: In this mixed method study, current Doctor of Education (EdD) students and employers of Doctor of Education (EdD) graduates commented on the alignment of the EdD curriculum with industry-specific needs. Contribution: Results may promote corporate and academic partnership to optimize alignment of curricula and industry needs. Findings: Partnerships between educators and employers in developing curricula can bridge the industry specific skills gap and enhance students’ understanding of the professional workplace and capacity to communicate, be empathetic, and solve problems. Recommendations for Practitioners: Educators can strengthen capacity for the adaptability and continuous learning associated with mastering new skills as technology evolves. Employers can provide skilling, reskilling, and upskilling opportunities, offer job shadowing and internships, and participate in collaborative research. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers can develop pedagogy targeting interpersonal, communication, participative, and organizational competencies. Impact on Society: Improving graduate employability creates positive outcomes for graduates, educators, employers, and the global economy. Future Research: Perceived employability is a powerful motivator. Research is needed to reframe curricula to synthesize discipline-specific skills with generic skills, such as teamwork, communication, and critical thinking, that enhance students’ self-confidence and self-perceptions of employability http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5090 graduate employability career competence curriculum employer eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-03-16 18 077 097 5088 article Colin D Reddy creddy@uj.ac.za 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. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5088 research proposal pedagogy problem heuristic cognitive writing scaffolding doctoral eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-03-28 18 099 118 5096 article Mariangela Lundgren-Resenterra mariangela.resenterra@bluewin.ch Claudia Marie Bordogna claudia.bordogna@ntu.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: Recent research highlights the growing decline in doctoral students’ mental health and wellbeing, caused not only by the pressures, stress, and isolation of doctoral studies but also by existential issues around personal development and future prospects. Consequently, we argue that there is an urgent need to reassess the supervisory process to support doctoral students in addressing these concerns. This paper offers a potential solution to this challenge by exploring and examining how integrating coaching methods into doctoral supervision can support doctoral students’ growth and development, thereby increasing their wellbeing and human flourishing. Coaching aims to help individuals produce optimal performance and improvements in personal and professional settings by deploying a series of tools and models. Coaching is essentially a non-directive form of development, enabling people to identify goals and skills and then extracting the capacity people have within themselves to achieve their ambitions. This paper explores how coaching methods could be made a regular feature of doctoral supervision. Background: The need to reconfigure doctoral supervision as a practice to address humanistic issues regarding whole-person development, self-actualisation, and personal worth is nothing new. Over the years, researchers have produced models of doctoral supervision, highlighting the growing need for supervision to incorporate more pastoral and emancipatory elements, which facilitate personal growth instead of focusing purely on academic function and criticality. Although coaching is identified in previous studies as being a valuable addition, nothing examines how to modify existing supervision practices to accommodate more pastoral elements. Methodology: This paper offers a conceptual analysis whereby the argument primarily synthesizes existing research on doctoral supervision to understand why coaching methods may provide a solution to the evolving requirements of student welfare and emancipation. Since the commentary in this paper is not based on the findings of an empirical study, the following two conceptual research questions frame the discussion. First, are coaching methods beneficial when supervising doctoral students? Second, what are the challenges when implementing and integrating coaching methods into existing doctoral supervisory practice? The paper utilises the Normalisation Process Theory as a ‘thinking tool’ to help answer these questions. The theory evaluates phenomena in applied social research settings to help understand how complex practices are made workable and integrated into context-dependent ways. Therefore, the theory acts as an analytical tool, enabling researchers to think through implementation issues when designing complex interventions and their evaluation. Contribution: This paper contributes to knowledge by highlighting ways in which management responsible for a doctoral provision in higher education settings can modify their organisational structures and systems to encourage coaching methods to become a normalised part of doctoral supervision, thereby legitimising its practice. Findings: The Normalisation Process Theory has value because it produces a roadmap for integrating and implementing new or modified practices into existing systems of operation. It, therefore, assists by producing an output that enables a current/new practice to be dissected and categorised under specific headings. In this research context, this output assisted in understanding the operational challenges when considering the normalisation of a practice. The theory helped generate something managers tasked with managing doctoral provision could consider (i.e., institutional paradigms, policies, regulations, etc.) when thinking about what may need to be reconfigured to enable coaching methods to become an integrated and normalised part of doctoral supervision over time. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is recommended that practitioners consider the integration of coaching methods into supervision. First, once implemented, it requires monitoring to ensure the practice’s quality and consistency amongst the supervisory community. Secondly, to assess the impact of the practice on other services within the organisation, such as student services or faith services, and thirdly, to ensure training in coaching methods is made timely and relevant to assist all academics involved in doctoral supervision. Recommendation for Researchers: The authors recommend collecting empirical evidence using the Normalisation Process Theory to evaluate the integration and normalisation of a range of practices in higher education settings. Moreover, once implemented, more research is required on the long-term value of coaching methods within doctoral settings. Impact on Society: Doctoral education is increasingly significant in a world where knowledge is fundamental to generating economic growth. Identified as having the technical and professional skills needed to fuel the knowledge-based economy, student wellbeing, and mental health must be optimal to ensure they can contribute to the knowledge-based economy as effectively as possible. Future Research: More research must be conducted on how doctoral supervision can become more humanistic; for example, by focusing on student self-awareness, reflection, and reframing instead of just the traditional academic function. Consequently, improving these facets is vital in developing sustained wellbeing and life-long success. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5096 coaching PhD research supervision doctoral students Normalisation Process Theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-04-25 18 119 136 5102 article Jon Billsberry jbillsbe@uow.edu.au Corinne Cortese corinne@uow.edu.au Aim/Purpose: The goal of this essay is to critically reflect on the emerging trend for PhDs by Prospective Publication (PbPP) in Australian Business Schools and to explore its appropriateness for fledgling academics. Background: The PbPP is a relatively new and increasingly popular alternative to traditional PhD by monograph (PbM). It is the idea that a doctorate can be completed by writing a series of papers that are published, or close to being published, as journal articles or book chapters. For students, it offers the chance to get a head-start on their publishing careers and helps them find their first academic jobs. For supervisors working in an academic environment increasingly characterized by ‘publish or perish’ dynamics, it guarantees meaningful rewards from doctoral supervision. However, despite the attractiveness of publishing during candidature, it is a very different way to complete a doctorate with many challenges for students, supervisors, and institutions. Methodology: We adopted critical collaborative autoethnography. Through this method, we reflect on our experience supervising and administrating PbPP students and integrate our reflections with the literature on PbPPs to highlight policy concerns and our position on them. Contribution: We argue that the primary goal of the PbPP is to produce students who can conduct research collaboratively after graduation, as opposed to people who can conduct independent research, although the two outcomes are not mutually exclusive. We also argue that assessment of PbPP should be significantly enhanced to determine the nature of the student’s contribution to the thesis, their understanding of research design, and their broader understanding of their subject. Finally, we argue that despite the attractiveness of PbPP, it can only be successfully attempted by students with elite levels of intellect, dedication, critical analytical skills, language skills, resilience, and patience and supervisors with expertise in the field of study, experience of publishing different types of paper, familiarity with the working of the journal publication process, and workload capacity. Findings: PbPP theses should be examined by viva voce. Viva voce examinations of PbPP theses should determine (1) the nature of the doctoral candidates’ contribution to the thesis, (2) whether it is sufficient for the award of a doctorate, (3) the contributions of the papers to advancing the field of research, and (4) the students’ understanding of the theory in their field. Viva voce examinations of PbPP theses should seek to discover the student’s ability to contribute to collaborative efforts of research teams. PbPP students should also sit an examination of their understanding of research philosophy, design, methodologies, and related topics. It should be externally set, administered, and marked by an independent examination board. PbPP candidates need to demonstrate excellent ‘research English’ language skills before commencing. Recommendations for Practitioners: PbPP candidates need excellent intellectual skills – as a rough guide, probably in the top quartile of doctoral candidates. PbPP candidates need to be resilient and able to cope with failure, criticism, and rejection. PbPP candidates need high levels of patience. PbPP candidates should be encouraged to produce their first manuscript early in their candidature. PbPP supervision requires supervisors with advanced levels of subject knowledge, research skills, and publishing outputs. PbPP supervision requires expertise across various forms of research and types of output. Due to the wide range of skills and experience, PbPP supervision is likely to require a team approach. Recommendation for Researchers: As the PbPP grows in popularity, it challenges educational researchers to explore this emerging phenomenon. Does it take a particular type of person to thrive through this process? Does it need supervisors with particular characteristics? How does the experience of PbPP supervisors differ to the experience of PbM supervisors? Do PbPP graduates differ in their abilities to PbM graduates? Impact on Society: People graduating with PhDs typically enter influential and important jobs in society. It is vital that they have the knowledge, skills, and abilities that the qualification confers. In Australia, the PbPP challenges this credibility due to issues of co-authorship, selective study, and shallow assessment. These matters need to be understood and rectified to prevent a loss of credibility in Australia’s Higher Education institutions and its graduates. Future Research: Are there any differences in the knowledge, skills, and abilities of PbPP and PbM graduates? Studies are needed of the characteristics prospective PbPP students need to be successful taking this doctoral route. How does the nature of supervision differ between PbPP and PbM? What is the impact on the skills and abilities supervisors need and the implications for workload? What jobs do PbPP graduates go into and does this differ to PbM graduates? What resistance will the proposals made in this essay meet? http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5102 PhD by Publication PhD by Prospective Publication PhD by Monograph doctorate PhD doctoral education doctoral supervision co-authorship eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-06-11 18 137 171 5155 article Azad Ali azad.ali@iup.edu Shardul Pandya drspandya@yahoo.com UMESH C VARMA ucvarma@an.edu Aim/Purpose The purpose of this study is to introduce an instrument that contains a set of exercises intended to help doctoral students align the key sections of their dissertation document. The exercises are developed after providing cognitive analysis of the factors that make aligning these key sections challenging to many, and after discussing pedagogical tools that can be used to address these challenges. Background Writing doctoral dissertations is a formidable endeavor for numerous students. Among the myriad challenges that are faced is the issue of aligning key sections of the dissertation document. Students often struggle with conceptualizing the alignment among different sections of the various chapters of their dissertation. In this study, we introduce here an instrument that includes a set of exercises to help address the challenges of alignment in chapter one, before the issues spiral and addressing them becomes complicated. Methodology This paper reviews literature that discusses the underlying challenges that face the writing of doctoral dissertations in general and the alignment of the key sections in particular. It analyzes the cognitive factors that contribute to the challenges and examines the pedagogical tools that can be used to address these challenges. The review of the literature, the analysis of the cognitive, and the examination of pedagogical tools lead to the introduction of an instrument that is designed to help address the challenges of aligning the key sections of doctoral dissertations. Contribution This paper presents an instrument with a set of exercises that are intended to help students align key sections of their doctoral dissertation document. This alignment step is crucial to the successful completion of dissertation documents and is best tackled early in the writing. Delaying alignment or worse, ignoring alignment altogether, can complicate the issue and lead to numerous extra steps and delays. Our developed instrument here can be used to tackle this issue of alignment from the beginning and throughout the writing and completion status of dissertation documents. Findings Students are often faced with challenges when aligning the key sections of a doctoral dissertation. They struggle with conceptualizing the alignment process. They often write each section separately, and independently of other sections of a chapter and a dissertation. However, sections of the dissertation document are interrelated, and each section affects the writing of other sections. For the successful completion of the dissertation, the sections need to be aligned, and it would be best if these issues are tackled from the beginning of the writing and throughout the writing of the dissertation. Recommendations for Practitioners A methodological approach to aligning the sections of a doctoral dissertation is crucial for the resulting treatise to be coherent and present a unified purpose that threads through each chapter consistently. Recommendations for Researchers We recommend that doctoral students follow the exercises we introduced in the instrument provided in this paper or take other similar approaches. With-out such an approach, aligning the key sections of a doctoral dissertation will be challenging, the dissertation writing process will be more complicated, and the time necessary to complete it will lengthen. Impact on Society The findings of this research will help doctoral mentors/advisors as they guide students in aligning key sections of their doctoral dissertations. Keywords doctoral dissertation alignment, aligning sections of a doctoral dissertation, doctoral dissertation challenges http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5155 Doctoral dissertation alignment aligning sections of doctoral dissertation doctoral dissertation challenges eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-07-12 18 173 198 5137 article Dimitra Kokotsaki dimitra.kokotsaki@durham.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: This study aimed to explore doctoral students’ perceived resilience and the coping strategies they choose to employ to overcome challenging circumstances during their studies. Background: Doctoral students often experience barriers which may include personal, professional, academic, and institutional-related challenges. The students’ ability to recover from any burdensome situations is essential for their progress, motivation, and well-being. Methodology: The data for this study were gathered utilising qualitative interviews conducted with a diverse cohort of thirteen doctoral candidates enrolled at a single higher education institution in the United Kingdom. These participants were deliberately chosen to encompass a range of backgrounds, including international and domestic students, varying study statuses and stages within their doctoral programs (full-time or part-time, and at the beginning, middle, or end of their studies), as well as differing funding situations (either funded or self-funded). The Grounded Theory methodology was employed as an appropriate analytical framework, providing a systematic set of procedures that facilitated the elucidation of the participants’ conceptualizations and the significance they attributed to the concept of resilience throughout their doctoral pursuits. Contribution: Empirical studies have explored the stressors and motivations of doctoral students’ journeys, but little is known about the in-depth investigation of the choices students make to respond to adversity and how they demonstrate resilience. This study aimed to fill this gap in the relevant literature. Findings: Five emergent contextual conditions represented circumstances of adversity for the study participants. These were relevant to five thematic areas: (1) supervision and supervisory support; (2) key milestones and challenges inherent to the doctoral journey (i.e., self-regulation and finding a daily working routine, data collection, and analysis, the writing process); (3) personal and family-related expectations and responsibilities; (4) study status related considerations (e.g., being an international and/or a part-time student); and (5) challenges arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings demonstrated doctoral students’ state of psychological capital, inner strength, and persistence that they considered in their attempt to employ varied strategies to tackle challenging circumstances. Recommendations for Practitioners: The findings are transferable to different populations of doctoral students from diverse disciplines. Different students may be able to relate to the doctoral-related experiences that are reported and interpreted in this paper through the Grounded Theory analytic lens. This may enhance their sense of relatability with like-minded peers and help them realise that they are not alone in the challenges presented along the doctoral journey. Most importantly, the institutional-related challenges presented in this study will help raise awareness for institutions to employ strategies on human capital and academic identity by placing a stronger emphasis on practical solutions that would encourage, enable, and empower doctoral students to construct their identities. Recommendation for Researchers: The study aims to increase the scholarly knowledge of doctoral students’ resilience and coping mechanisms that they employ during the doctoral journey. Researchers can develop a resilience scale using the results of this in-depth study to understand doctoral students’ perceptions and experiences on a larger scale. The scale will enable students, supervisors, and institutions more broadly to ascertain resilience/psychological capital that students may demonstrate during the doctoral journey based on targeted interventions that can be put in place to support students’ work, progress, and overall doctoral success. Impact on Society: The stressors associated with the doctoral journey may cause obstacles for students to progress and can affect timely completion to the extent that dropping out may become an unavoidable outcome and an obvious decision for some students. During academic challenges, doctoral students’ well-being and mental health are likely to suffer. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated academic challenges even more. It is imperative for educational scholars and researchers to explore how doctoral students perceive and respond to adversity to strategise appropriate interventions that can be designed and put into place to offer support and guidance to facilitate progress and maximise success. Future Research: Further research can extend the study’s findings with the aim to increase transferability in other educational contexts and contents. The findings offer ground for the development of a resilience/psychological capital scale by drawing on the five thematic areas and their key components. The scale can help guide the development of targeted interventions to support doctoral students’ work. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5137 doctoral students resilience psychological capital adversity well-being coping strategies interviews grounded theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-07-13 18 199 227 5118 article Matthew Bahnson mrb6692@psu.edu Gabriella Sallai gms5516@psu.edu Kyeonghun Jwa kfj5158@psu.edu Catherine Berdanier cgb9@psu.edu Aim/Purpose: The research reported here aims to demonstrate a method by which novel applications of qualitative data in quantitative research can resolve ceiling effect tensions for educational and psychological research. Background: Self-report surveys and scales are essential to graduate education and social science research. Ceiling effects reflect the clustering of responses at the highest response categories resulting in non-linearity, a lack of variability which inhibits and distorts statistical analyses. Ceiling effects in stress reported by students can negatively impact the accuracy and utility of the resulting data. Methodology: A longitudinal sample example from graduate engineering students’ stress, open-ended critical events, and their early departure from doctoral study considerations demonstrate the utility and improved accuracy of adjusted stress measures to include open-ended critical event responses. Descriptive statistics are used to describe the ceiling effects in stress data and adjusted stress data. The longitudinal stress ratings were used to predict departure considerations in multilevel modeling ANCOVA analyses and demonstrate improved model predictiveness. Contribution: Combining qualitative data from open-ended responses with quantitative survey responses provides an opportunity to reduce ceiling effects and improve model performance in predicting graduate student persistence. Here, we present a method for adjusting stress scale responses by incorporating coded critical events based on the Taxonomy of Life Events, the application of this method in the analysis of stress responses in a longitudinal data set, and potential applications. Findings: The resulting process more effectively represents the doctoral student experience within statistical analyses. Stress and major life events significantly impact engineering doctoral students’ departure considerations. Recommendations for Practitioners: Graduate educators should be aware of students’ life events and assist students in managing graduate school expectations while maintaining progress toward their degree. Recommendation for Researchers: Integrating coded open-ended qualitative data into statistical models can increase the accuracy and representation of the lived student experience. The new approach improves the accuracy and presentation of students’ lived experiences by incorporating qualitative data into longitudinal analyses. The improvement assists researchers in correcting data with ceiling effects for use in longitudinal analyses. Impact on Society: The method described here provides a framework to systematically include open-ended qualitative data in which ceiling effects are present. Future Research: Future research should validate the coding process in similar samples and in samples of doctoral students in different fields and master’s students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5118 doctoral students attrition persistence stress longitudinal survey SMS sur-vey ceiling effects qualitative eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-11-02 18 229 250 5202 article Tracy Griffin Spies tracy.spies@unlv.edu Gloria Carcoba-Falomir gloria.carcobafalomir@unlv.edu Suheyla Sarisahin suheyla.sarisahin@unlv.edu Fatmana Kara Deniz fatmana.deniz@csun.edu Yunying Xu yunying.xu@gpnu.edu.cn Aim/Purpose: Scholars and practitioners agree that feedback is critical to doctoral students’ academic writing development, yet effective feedback processes are complex. The purpose of this case study was to examine the role of dialogue in a Writing Feedback Group (WFG) in facilitating the development of the scholarly writing of English as an Additional Language (EAL) doctoral students. The research question that guided this study was: How does dialogue within a writing feedback group create opportunities for EAL doctoral students to advance their knowledge and skills pertaining to scholarly writing? Background: Traditional doctoral student writing feedback, characterized as monologic and unidirectional, positions students as passive learners and is difficult for students to use to improve their writing. Dialogic and bi-directional feedback positions students as active learners as they engage in ongoing verbal and/or written exchanges about their writing. Examinations of verbal feedback on doctoral writing show face-to-face exchanges are a source of motivation and necessary for in-depth exchanges about ideas. There is limited understanding, however, as to how dialogue facilitates doctoral students’ development as scholarly writers. This case study examines the dialogue of EAL doctoral students as they read and respond to one another’s scholarly writing. Methodology: This was a qualitative case study of an established writing group. Four EAL doctoral students and one faculty member participated in this study during a 16-week semester. Conversational turns during 12 feedback sessions were analyzed using inductive coding with an interpretive approach to allow research findings to emerge from the data. A constant comparative method was used to classify and compare codes and categories and identify themes related to the study’s research question. Contribution: The findings from this study contribute to the body of knowledge on the role of dialogic feedback in doctoral writing development. The findings show how doctoral students’ dialogue about one another’s writing created critical learning experiences for their writing development. This study provides an explicit and systematic approach to dialogue in writing feedback groups. Findings: Dialogue scaffolded EAL doctoral students’ translation of their complex knowledge to accessible text and helped them respond to the rhetorical context. Dialogue also facilitated doctoral writers’ awareness of the importance of precise language and structural organization for readers of their academic writing. Recommendations for Practitioners: The WFG established a platform for doctoral students to try out their writing and to actively engage with others in receiving and providing ongoing feedback. It is suggested that institutions of higher education create ongoing opportunities for doctoral students to discuss scholarly writing. Writing feedback groups can take many forms, including established groups embedded into coursework or between advisor and advisees. Recommendation for Researchers: This study examined the dialogue of a writing feedback group whose process was highly structured. To develop a deeper understanding of the influence of dialogue on writing, it should be studied in various types of writing groups. Impact on Society: Research and scholarship are critical to advancing our society. Doctoral students who speak English as an additional language bring distinctive cultural perspectives to research. Their voices and research are critical to future academic literature. Future Research: The findings from this study highlight how dialogue in a writing feedback group afforded doctoral students ongoing opportunities to give and receive feedback on critical academic writing skills on their individual current writing projects. Further research is needed to understand the role of dialogue in the WFG on doctoral students’ enduring understanding and the application of academic writing skills on future writing projects. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5202 doctoral writing writing groups feedback eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2023-11-04 18 251 269 5195 article Sara Bano sara.bano@ndsu.edu Cailen O'Shea cailen.oshea@ndsu.edu Aim/Purpose: Our study explores the factors contributing to the Imposter Phenomenon among doctoral students in the United States. Background: Many studies show that Imposter Phenomenon impacts women doctoral students and students from minority groups, especially if they are enrolled in Predominantly White Institutions. Our study focuses explicitly on contributing factors to the Imposter Phenomenon among doctoral students in the United States. The study also explored how Imposter Phenomenon is related to doctoral students’ academic goals and achievements. Methodology: We utilized a qualitative phenomenological research design and conducted semi-structured interviews (45-90 minutes) in person and via Zoom. This study was conducted at a public research university in mid-western United States. A total of 14 (3 male and 11 female) doctoral students participated in the study. These students self-identified as White (9), African American (1), South Asian (2), mixed race (1), and Latina (1). Of the 14 students, 4 were international, and 10 were domestic. These students were from various disciplines, such as Education, Economics, Anthropology, Biology, Plant Sciences, and Engineering. Contribution: The study contributes to the field of psychology and higher education and helps us better understand doctoral students’ conceptions and experiences of the Imposter Phenomenon. The study provides empirical support to some of the previous claims by researchers and provides new insights related to the Imposter Phenomenon. Findings: In our study, participants did not consider the Imposter Phenomenon merely a personal or internal feeling or mental condition as presented in previous studies. We found there are multiple layers of the issue, and sociocultural factors play a contributing role to the Imposter Phenomenon. In our study, we found that relations with family, siblings, peers, and faculty played a significant role in shaping our participants’ sense of self and impacted how they responded to challenges in their academic life. We also noted that institutional culture impacts doctoral students’ self-concept and academic performance. Female doctoral students mentioned institutional culture and prevalent sexism in STEM fields as contributing factors to the Imposter Phenomenon. Overall, gender, race, age, and mental health emerged as major contributing factors to the Imposter Phenomenon among doctoral students. Recommendations for Practitioners: We recommend that higher education institutions should help doctoral students, especially students from underrepresented groups, by providing social, emotional, and economic support. To mitigate the challenges of institutional sexism, racism, and ageism, higher education institutions should consider creating peer support groups and try to foster a healthy and supportive environment for doctoral students. These groups could build on ontological inquiries to bolster student resiliency and self-perception. Also, there is a dire need for easily accessible mental health services on campuses, especially for graduate students. Recommendation for Researchers: Doctoral students, if successful, can play a significant role in society’s future growth. However, doctoral completion rates are currently staggeringly low, and the degree program is long. The situation is exacerbated due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This impacts doctoral students’ emotional, psychological, and economic well-being, and may affect their health and family relationships. Incomplete doctoral degrees can be costly for individuals and society. Higher education institutions must provide better mental health and economic support to help doctoral students succeed in their programs so they can positively contribute to society and the world. Impact on Society: Doctoral students, if successful, can play a significant role in society’s future growth. However, doctoral completion rates are currently staggeringly low, and the degree program is long. The situation is exacerbated due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This impacts doctoral students’ emotional, psychological, and economic well-being, and may affect their health and family relationships. Incomplete doctoral degrees can be costly for individuals and society. Higher education institutions must provide better mental health and economic support to help doctoral students succeed in their programs so they can positively contribute to society and the world. Future Research: We plan to expand our study to better understand the Imposter Phenomenon among doctoral students from cross-cultural perspectives to see if the same factors exist there. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5195 imposter syndrome imposter phenomenon doctoral students qualitative study higher education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-01-10 17 .i iv 4905 article Michael Jones editor@ijds.org Table of Contents for Volume 17, 2022, of the International Journal of Doctoral Studies http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4905 IJDS International Journal of Doctoral Studies PhD doctoral studies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-01-11 17 001 023 4900 article Lynette Pretorius lynette.pretorius@monash.edu Danielle Hradsky Danielle.Hradsky@monash.edu Ali Soyoof seyed.siyoofjahromi@monash.edu Shaoru Zeng shaoru.zeng@monash.edu Elham M Foomani elham.mohammadifoomani@monash.edu Ngo Cong-Lem ngoconglem@monash.edu Jacky-Lou Maestre jacky-lou.maestre@monash.edu Aim/Purpose: It is increasingly recognized that doctoral education programs should better support doctoral students. In particular, it has been noted that students experience significant isolation during their PhD, which negatively affects their educational experiences and their personal wellbeing. Doctoral writing groups are collaborative learning communities that have in recent years received increasing attention to address this issue. This collaborative autoethnography explores the affective benefits (i.e., benefits associated with emotions and feelings) of these doctoral writing groups, particularly focused on the pastorally supportive nature of these learning communities. Background: Writing groups have been shown to promote academic writing skills and build reflective practice, personal epistemology, and academic identity. We have found that a much more significant benefit of our writing groups has been the pastoral care we have experienced, particularly in relation to the turbulent emotions often associated with academic writing. This should, perhaps, not be surprising since it is clear that academic writing is a form of identity work. There is, therefore, a clear need to better support doctoral students, particularly with regard to the more affective components of academic writing. This prompted us to write this collaborative autoethnography to showcase what we consider to be the primary role of doctoral writing groups: pastoral care. Methodology: We employ a collaborative autoethnographic methodology to integrate our personal reflections into the existing literature in the field. Contribution: We argue that doctoral writing groups are vehicles of pastoral care as they promote wellbeing, foster resilience, provide academic care, and build social capital. Findings: We demonstrate that doctoral writing groups foster students’ sense of belonging through self-reflection and the sharing of experiences in a safe space, which builds perceived self-efficacy and self-awareness. Furthermore, through the self-reflection and discussion that is inherent in doctoral writing groups, students also develop a better understanding of themselves and their place within the academy. Recommendations for Practitioners: Our research highlights that writing groups may be designed to teach academic communication skills, but they provide an affective benefit that cannot yet be quantified and which should not be underestimated. Incorporating writing groups into doctoral education programs can, therefore, have a positive influence on the educational experiences of PhD students and improve their overall wellbeing. This paper concludes by providing practical suggestions to help practitioners implement writing groups into doctoral education programs, particularly focused on how these groups can be made more pastorally supportive. Recommendation for Researchers: This paper also extends the theoretical understanding of pastoral care by providing a framework for pastoral care within the doctoral writing group environment. We show how pastoral care can be conceptualized as the promotion of self-awareness, self-efficacy, reflection, and empowerment of doctoral students through nurturing communities where all members are valued, encouraged, guided, and supported. Our experiences, which we have integrated throughout this paper, also highlight the importance of relationship-building within the educational community, particularly when these relationships are characterized by mutual respect and shared responsibility. Impact on Society: The poor well-being of doctoral students has now been well-established across the world, but strategies to improve the academic environment for these students are still lacking. This paper provides evidence that implementing writing groups as a strategy to embed pastoral care in a doctoral education environment helps doctoral students flourish. Ultimately, this can lead to an improved academic research culture into the future. Future Research: Future research should explore other methods of better integrating pastoral care interventions into doctoral education programs in order to reduce isolation and promote student wellbeing. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4900 doctoral education writing groups pastoral care belonging academic identity autoethnography collaborative autoethnography eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-01-23 17 025 038 4886 article Loni Crumb CrumbL15@ecu.edu Aim/Purpose: Latina doctoral students’ educational experiences are often mediated by their social class status, race, and gender. Latinas have sustained an increasing presence in doctoral programs at various colleges and universities across the United States; yet, they are continually underrepresented in doctoral programs at predominantly White institutions. The author identifies evidence-supported, personal and institutional factors that may contribute to working-class Latina doctoral students’ successful persistence at predominantly White institutions. Background: The tension between personal identities versus academic capability can make the doctoral education experience academically, socially, emotionally, and financially challenging for Latinas from low-income backgrounds. Latina/Latino Critical Race Theory and Multiracial Feminist Theory are introduced as lenses to examine aspects of the doctoral education experience that may impede or support Latina students’ retention. Methodology: As a conceptual article, this paper is an examination of research regarding the experiences of doctoral students of color at predominantly White institutions in the United States and summarizes how Latina doctoral students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds can succeed in these environments. Contribution: This article outlines evidence-supported strategies that may influence working-class Latina doctoral students’ successful persistence at predominantly White institutions. Findings: The research highlighted in this article emphasizes how factors such as embracing familismo, increasing faculty diversity, establishing peer networks, and creating inclusive class-concious academic programs and new student orientations, may contribute to the doctoral persistence of Latinas from economically disadvantaged backgrounds attending predominantly White institutions. Recommendations for Practitioners: Personal and institutional factors are recommended for faculty and student affairs professionals to support the doctoral persistence of Latina students such as embracing personal agency and academic efficacy, embracing familismo, recognizing the myth of meritocracy, establishing peer support networks, creating inclusive academic environments, establishing formal faculty mentorships, and fostering class conscious faculty. Recommendation for Researchers: The literature presented in this paper provides ideas for future research opportunities that could further examine how supportive relationships and inclusiveness promote Latina doctoral students’ educational success. Impact on Society: Latinas experience overlapping forms of privilege and subordination depending on their race, social class, gender, sexual orientation, and academic setting. Future Research: Further development of transformative research on this topic may improve inclusive educational practices and potentially increase access to doctoral-level education for Latinas and other economically disadvantaged students of color. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4886 Latinas doctoral education persistence social class Latcrit Multiracial Feminist Theory equity economic disadvantage eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-01-23 17 039 066 4898 article Luis P. Prieto lprisan@tlu.ee Paula Odriozola-González paula.odriozola@unican.es María Jesús Rodríguez-Triana mjrt@tlu.ee Yannis Dimitriadis yannis@tel.uva.es Tobias Ley tley@tlu.ee Aim/Purpose: This paper explores an intervention approach (in the form of workshops) focusing on doctoral progress, to address the problems of low emotional well-being experienced by many doctoral candidates. Background: Doctoral education suffers from two severe overlapping problems: high dropout rates and widespread low emotional well-being (e.g., depression or anxiety symptoms). Yet, there are few interventional approaches specifically designed to address them in the doctoral student population. Among structural, psychosocial, and demographic factors influencing these problems, the self-perception of progress has emerged recently as a crucial motivational factor in doctoral persistence. Methodology: This paper reports on an iterative design-based research study of workshop interventions to foster such perception of progress in doctoral students’ everyday practice. We gathered mixed data over four iterations, with a total of 82 doctoral students from multiple disciplines in Spain and Estonia. Contribution: An approach to preventive interventions that combines research-backed education about mental health and productivity, peer sharing and discussion of experiences, and indicators of progress, as well as self-tracking, analysis, and reflection upon everyday evidence of their own progress. The paper provides initial evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed interventions, across two institutions in two different countries. Further, our data confirms emergent research on the relationships among progress, emotional well-being, and dropout ideation in two new contexts. Finally, the paper also distills design knowledge about doctoral interventions that focus on progress, relevant for doctoral trainers, institutions, and researchers. Findings: Our quantitative and qualitative results confirm previous findings on the relationships among progress, burnout, and dropout ideation. Our iterative evaluation of the workshops also revealed a large positive effect in students’ positive psychological capital after the workshops (Cohen’s d=0.83). Our quantitative and qualitative analyses also started teasing out individual factors in the variance of these benefits. Recommendations for Practitioners: Intervention design guidelines for doctoral trainers include: focusing on actionable productivity and mental health practices, the use of activities targeting perception biases and taboos, or the use of active practices and real (anonymous) data from the participants to make progress visible and encourage reflection. Recommendation for Researchers: The construct of progress, its components, and its relationships with both emotional well-being and doctoral dropout need to be more deeply studied, using multiple methods of data collection, especially from more frequent, ecologically valid data sources (e.g., diaries). Impact on Society: The proposed interventions (and focusing on doctoral progress more generally) hold promise to address the current emotional well-being and dropout challenges facing hundreds of thousands of doctoral students worldwide, ultimately helping increase the research and innovation potential of society as a whole. Future Research: More rigorous evaluative studies of the proposed approach need to be conducted, with larger samples and in other countries/contexts. Aside from the proposed one-shot training events, complementary longitudinal interventions focusing on supporting everyday progress and reflection throughout the doctoral process should be trialed. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4898 doctoral education emotional well-being doctoral attrition progress design-based research preventive intervention eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-02-27 17 067 086 4919 article Aden-Paul Flotman flotma@unisa.ac.za Antoni Barnard barnaha@unisa.ac.za Aim/Purpose: The aim of this study was to explore the value of metaphors as part of a reflexive practice in the context of the evolving frame of reference journey of PhD students in a consulting psychology programme. Background: This study reports on the journey of how the personal frames of reference of PhD students in consulting psychology had evolved at a large open-distance and e-learning university in South Africa. As their respective journeys of becoming consulting psychologists unfolded, participants’ evolutionary journeys were viewed through metaphors. Few studies have investigated how metaphors could be used as a powerful evocative tool to go beyond the rational, conscious and sanitized responses of participants, to explore their underlying frames of reference by surfacing and eliciting implicit meaning. Methodology: This study was based on a hermeneutic phenomenological methodological stance and congruently employed principles of socio-analytic inquiry. The context of this inquiry was a PhD programme in consulting psychology presented at a large open-distance e-learning tertiary institution. Participants comprised ten PhD students. These students were required to engage in various self-reflective exercises throughout their first year, such as journaling and self-reflective essays. Their final exercise was to present their evolving frame of reference as a consulting psychologist, in the form of a visual or tangible metaphor. These final presentations became the protocols for hermeneutic phenomenological analysis in this study. Metaphors were selected through purposive sampling, and they became the “data sources” of the study. Contribution: The study contributes to the teaching of reflexivity in consulting practice. It has implications for the training of doctoral students by making a process available through which students and consultants could access and develop their personal frames of reference. The study shares valuable pedagogical and growth experiences from the perspective of the student in consulting psychology. The research advances the field of consulting psychology by introducing the notion of metaphors as potential space and stimulates further engagement in art-based qualitative inquiry from a socio-analytic stance. Findings: The findings suggest that metaphors have value because they create a connection to emotions, emotional processes and emotional work, facilitate the professional identity construction and reconstruction process and enable a shift from self-reflection to self-reflexivity. It is proposed that metaphors have the inherent capacity to act as potential space. Recommendations for Practitioners: Identity tensions could be alleviated through conscious identity work, when psychologists from different categories transition into consulting psychologists. We pose questions for practitioners to consider. Recommendation for Researchers: Doctoral programmes and research on doctoral studies should explicitly engage with both conscious and unconscious dynamics. This could relate to identity work, relationships and the power of reflexive practices. Impact on Society: Dropout rates of doctoral students are high. The time to complete the degree is also long. This comes at a price for the student, the institution and society. Aspects related to frame of reference, philosophical assumptions, and identity work to be done by the doctoral student should be considered as critical to doctoral programmes and doctoral education. Future Research: Future studies could investigate how consulting frames of reference relate to anxiety, identity and the well-being of doctoral students. Studies could also be conducted to see how the participants’ frames of reference in this study have further evolved over their consulting careers. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4919 consulting psychology hermeneutics metaphors potential space reflexivity eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-03-01 17 087 114 4925 article Shihua Chen Brazill shihuabrazill@montana.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study is to use narrative inquiry to discover and understand how Chinese students leverage their strengths and multiple identities in socializing to American higher education and their profession. Chinese students engage with American academic culture while embracing their multiple identities. I will explore the cultural strengths they use to socialize and develop their personal, social, cultural, and professional identities in their doctoral educational experience. Background: Chinese international doctoral students encounter a unique socialization experience during their doctoral studies because they lack meaningful cross-cultural support. Likewise, it is problematic that Chinese students are often viewed as a homogeneous group and much prior research has emphasized the traditional deficit perspective in explaining how Chinese students must adjust and assimilate to the university environment. Methodology: This qualitative research uses narrative inquiry to study Chinese international doctoral students’ socialization experiences while retaining their authentic voices. Narrative inquiry allows for a more nuanced understanding of the experiences of Chinese students compared to the perceptions imposed by other stakeholders. The narrative methodology provides diverse ways to understand Chinese student interactions within American culture, place, and context. This study applies the three-dimensional approach to retell participants’ stories. The three-dimensional approach is more holistic and provides a broad lens to learn about the interactions, past, present, and future experiences of individuals through time and space. Contribution: This research shifts the narrative from the deficit view to a strength-based perspective as to how Chinese international doctoral students can rely on their cultural values and multiple identities as strengths to succeed academically, socially, and emotionally. Findings: Findings related to the literature in two important ways. First, findings support how the six cultural strengths of Yosso’s community cultural wealth apply to Chinese international doctoral students. Chinese students’ stories align with these strengths and through these strengths, they explore and develop their personal, social, cultural, and professional identity. Second, Chinese students’ stories as a counternarrative challenged and contradicted the essentialist view and misconception that Chinese students are a homogenous group personally, socially, culturally, or academically. Recommendations for Practitioners: The findings from this study offer insight for practitioners into what institutions and departments might do to support Chinese international doctoral students in their socialization journey. It is vital to support the whole student through understanding their multiple identities. Recommendation for Researchers: Chinese students and other diverse learners may benefit from peer and faculty mentors in different ways. Therefore, understanding the unique cross-cultural socialization needs and strength-based perspective will help tailor social activities and inclusive learning environments. Impact on Society: The current political, economic, and social relationships between the U.S. and China make it vital for American institutions to consider Chinese international doctoral students’ cross-cultural socialization journey. Future Research: Though it is hoped that this study is transferable, specific issues of how it can be generalized to other Chinese international doctoral students in other areas of the U.S. are beyond the scope of this study. Future research might explore how Chinese International doctoral students’ socialization experiences differ depending on where they study in the U.S. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4925 doctoral socialization Chinese international doctoral students cross-cultural socialization narrative inquiry multiple identities strength-based perspective eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-03-24 17 115 140 4938 article Ahmed Mohammed Saleh Alduais ibnalduais@gmail.com Abdulghani Muthanna am96715@gmail.com Fabian William Nyenyembe nyenyembefa@yahoo.com Jim Chatambalala jimchatambalala@yahoo.co.uk Md Shahabul Haque shahabu14@yahoo.com Markos Tezera Taye markostezera73@gmail.com Mjege Kinyota kmjege@yahoo.com Patrick Severine Kavenuke patrickkavenuke@yahoo.com Aim/Purpose: Our study explores the perspectives of international doctoral graduates on ‎‎(national) dissertation assessment in China.‎ Background: In the absence of national standards or in the presence of impractical ones ‎for assessing doctoral dissertations, these factors have inevitably led to what ‎‎Granovsky et al. (1992, p. 375) called “up to standard rejected” and “below ‎standard accepted.” Improving upon this debate, this study examines the ‎lived experiences of seven doctoral graduates who have completed their ‎doctoral degrees in a leading university in China.‎ Methodology: An interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA) method was used, which ‎entails seven participant observations, seven semi-structured e-interviews, and ‎‎29 external reviews.‎ Contribution: In the present study, we addressed the issue of doctoral dissertation assessment ‎standards ‎with a view to enhancing understanding of the quality of doctoral ‎education. It ‎emphasizes the strengths of this aspect in China and critically describes the ‎weaknesses based on the experiences of doctoral ‎graduates in China.‎ Findings: Among the major findings of this study are: (a) the external review of the ‎dissertations presented in the literature review appears to be extremely unique ‎in comparison to the countries discussed in the literature and the countries of ‎the participants (Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Malawi, Tanzania, and Yemen); (b) the ‎national assessment strengthens higher education on a macro level, but is ‎detrimental at the micro-level; and (c) while external reviews appear credible ‎as a policy towards the standardization of doctoral dissertation assessment, ‎this credibility evaporates when one considers the quality of reviews provided ‎and the motivation of reviewers to pass or reject a dissertation, including the ‎supervisor’s exclusion from this process.‎ Recommendations for Practitioners: Students seeking a doctoral degree or dissertation should become familiar ‎with the A-Z detail of the requirements for the degree and thesis. In addition ‎to meeting this overt requirement, their efforts must also be directed to meet ‎the covert requirements, including the requirements of the ‎external reviewers, their supervisors, and the country’s laws. There is a ‎necessity for external reviewers to rethink their decisions and attempt to ‎assess objectively, putting aside their personal views and preferences. There is ‎a need to re-examine the flexibility granted to external reviewers for making ‎decisions regarding doctoral degrees.‎ Recommendation for Researchers: Future research should consider involving an increased number of parties in ‎the conflict between doctoral students, supervisors, and external reviewers.‎ Impact on Society: The Chinese government allocates ‎substantial resources for doctoral studies for both international and local students. The spending of government funds on a doctoral student for four years or more, and then the degree is decided by an external reviewer, is uneconomical on the level of financial capital and human capital. Doctoral students are also human beings, and it does not seem ‎logical that one should judge the quality of their efforts over the course of ‎three or more years by reading the doctoral dissertation once. While they were ‎pursuing their doctoral degrees, they kept their families apart, they lived alone, ‎struggled to make it through hardships, and were easily ‎destroyed.‎ Future Research: In the future, more interviews may be conducted with respondents belonging ‎to a variety of universities in China, including Chinese students. Additionally, ‎supervisors and external reviewers (if available) should be included. Last but ‎not least, including decision-makers in Chinese higher education can give ‎future research more credibility.‎ http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4938 China doctoral dissertation doctoral graduates experiences external review national assessment eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-03-28 17 141 159 4939 article David C Coker cokerd@danville118.org Aim/Purpose: The purpose of the research was to examine the function and application of delimitations—what the researcher includes and excludes in a study—in the dissertation process. The aim was to map the delimitations process to improve research, rigor and relevance of findings, and doctoral completion rates using a formalized and standardized approach applied flexibly. Background: All research is bounded whether formally defined or not. Unlike limitations, which are issues which the researcher addressed after the completion of a study and cannot control, delimitations are what a researcher includes and excludes to make a project manageable and focused on the research question. Yet, there was no research identified which specifically discussed delimitations. Researching the structure and utility of delimitations in educational administration dissertations provided a systematic analysis of the formation of the scope and boundary of research in doctoral studies. Methodology: The structure of delimitations in dissertations were examined using descriptive quantitative statistics and a qualitative thematic analysis from 28 universities. The first stage included delimitations from 30 dissertations. Triangulation was conducted using the findings with a training set of delimitations in 15 dissertations with a rubric generated from the primary sample. Contribution: The thematic analysis presented a description and interpretation of the nature of delimitations and a systematic framework to improve the research process in dissertations. Mapping the delimitations process gave a detailed portrait of internal and external characteristics which could aid doctoral students in completing the dissertation. Doctoral attrition rates, poorly completed dissertations, and lack of relevance or applicability of results need remedied. Furthermore, the delimitations rubric provided a systematic method to focus communities of learners around a common goal. Findings: Findings suggested doctoral students used delimitations haphazardly and lacked a systematic application to research. Three major themes emerged from the delimitations sections: rituals, equifinality, and pragmatism. Topics within delimitations sections centered around two axes: the internal topics of sampling procedures and factors/variables and external topics of research design and conceptual/theoretical framework. Recommendations for Practitioners: Poorly understood and developed delimitations negatively impacted findings in dissertations, completion rates, and future research skills of doctoral students. By applying delimitations to a design of research framework in a community of learners, doctoral students and dissertation chairs could improve the dissertation completion process and improve research results using a Delimitations Evaluation Rubric. Recommendation for Researchers: Developing a rules-based process with a formalized and standardized process could give researchers a way to evaluate and plan the dissertation process. Developing and applying rubrics to delimitations could serve as a conduit to effective mentoring, feedback, and empowerment. Impact on Society: Improving doctoral completion rates in a timely manner would be beneficial to students’ long-term and personal interests. A well-defined delimitations process could improve the dissertation, and strengthened dissertations could add to the research base. Future Research: Delimitations are listed in one section, but the scope and boundaries are often fragmented and disjointed throughout a dissertation. By examining complete dissertations for delimitations, there could be further insight. Expanding rubrics as a tool to build a community of learners could develop a holistic approach to doctoral education. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4939 delimitations dissertation education research thematic analysis doctoral education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-05-01 17 161 180 4956 article Alice Shu-Ju Lee alicelee@um.edu.mo William J Donohue wdonohue@lincoln.edu Shelah Simpson ssimpson@liberty.edu Kathleen Vacek kathleen.vacek@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown required doctoral writers to demonstrate resiliency to continue their culminating projects. This study examines the socioecological factors that fostered that resiliency. Background: Resiliency is a key factor in determining whether doctoral writers continue with their culminating projects. Thus far, studies on doctoral student experiences during the pandemic have yet to investigate doctoral students’ adaptive strategies to continue with their projects. Methodology: The qualitative study uses in-depth interviews to document the narrative journeys of four research participants pre-pandemic and in-pandemic. Those narratives are analyzed using an infectious disease resilience framework as a metaphor to highlight the resilience within each participant’s writing ecology. Contribution: The study seeks to reframe the approach to doctoral writing beyond the individual student toward a broader ecological system to better serve those students and the knowledge produced, regardless of a disruptive crisis. Findings: The disruptions that the four participants experienced are documented through their narratives. The participants described their coping strategies related to their workspace, technology, loss of connection, and their breaking point. Recommendations for Practitioners: The resilience shown by the four participants demonstrates areas where institutions can provide assistance to alleviate the pressures placed on doctoral writers. Reframing the dissertation writing process as a socioecological system rather than a cognitive one allows for solutions to problems that are not limited to individual writers. Recommendation for Researchers: Extending the socioecological systems metaphor, further research should investigate other stakeholders in a writer’s ecology to obtain different perspectives on a particular system. Impact on Society: The pandemic has presented an opportunity for educational institutions to reassess how they can cultivate students’ resilience to positively impact their socioecological balance. Future Research: It would be worthwhile to document the post-pandemic experiences of doctoral writers to find out how they seek balance in their ecology as they continue to deal with the post-pandemic fallout. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4956 doctoral writing resilience COVID-19 pandemic writing ecology/ies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-05-22 17 181 199 4970 article Marinette Bahtilla barinette@yahoo.com Aim/Purpose: This study aimed to explore the challenges faced by international doctoral students in Chinese universities and find out what international doctoral students perceive to be effective supervision. Background: As higher education internationalization is proliferating, there is a need for adjustment in every educational system. Despite the rise in the internationalization of higher education in China, very little research has been carried out on internalization at the doctoral level. Since research forms an essential part of doctoral programs, it is necessary to examine the challenges international students face as far as research supervision is concerned. Methodology: This study employed the exploratory case study research design adopting the qualitative research methodology. The study participants were 68 doctoral students from two comprehensive universities in China. A comprehensive university consists of diverse programs and students: for example, master’s programs, doctoral programs, undergraduate programs, and professional programs. Data were collected using a semi-structured interview guide. The qualitative data collected was analyzed thematically. Contribution: This study offers new insights into the research supervision of international doctoral students. This study suggests that every university hosting international students should pay attention to doctoral students’ research supervision and implement appropriate strategies such as those proposed in this study to allow international students to acquire new knowledge and skills as far as research is concerned. This study also proposed some strategies based on what doctoral students perceive to be effective supervision that universities can implement to improve research supervision. Findings: The study found that international doctoral students faced many challenges regarding research supervision. These challenges are language barriers, ineffective communication with supervisors, insufficient time to discuss with supervisors, cultural differences and adapting to a new environment, depression, and forcing students to change research topics. Moreover, this study found that the following strategies can be implemented to improve research supervision of international students: considering student’s research interests when assigning them to supervisors, the need for a specific time to meet with supervisors, providing or directing students where to get research materials, in-service training for research supervisors, and evaluating and modifying criteria for selecting supervisors. Recommendations for Practitioners: University administrators can establish informal research supervision learning communities that can enable supervisors from different universities to share cross-cultural supervision ideas and learn from one another. Moreover, it is necessary for supervisors to guide and direct students both in academics and social life to help them overcome depression; isolation, and adapt to a new environment. Recommendation for Researchers: This study was limited to two universities, and the participants were international doctoral students in English-taught programs. However, the situation may differ with international doctoral students in Chinese-taught programs. As a result, the researchers suggest that another study should be carried out focusing on international doctoral students in Chinese taught programs; their experiences may differ. Impact on Society: Doctoral students are significant contributors to the research productivity of an institution. It is, therefore, necessary to ensure that they acquire sustainable research skills to solve the complex problems affecting the education sector and society at large. Future Research: It is vital to explore international doctoral supervision in other disciplines as well as universities. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4970 international doctoral supervision improving research supervision internationalization of higher education research supervisors research challenges international education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-05-23 17 201 225 4965 article Xingya Xu xxu9@gmu.edu Margret Hjalmarson mhjalmar@gmu.edu Aim/Purpose: Doctoral students’ experiences in PhD programs could be a journey of identity evolution. Existing research on doctoral students’ identities has typically been conducted by faculties. As the main character in the identity evolution process, it is critical to understand doctoral students’ interpretation of their own identities and identity development in PhD programs. The purpose of this paper is to examine how and what education doctoral students discovered when they used self-study and relevant qualitative methodologies (e.g., auto-ethnography) to investigate their identities and identity development through their own practices in PhD programs. Background: This research began as part of a larger project to synthesize studies on doctoral students’ identities. A cluster of articles was identified in which students were examining their experiences as developing individuals from the perspective of identities and identity development. In contrast to most of the previous research on doctoral education, this collection of articles was written by doctoral students as part of their academic and professional practice. Methodology: The larger qualitative systematic review (i.e., qualitative evidence synthesis) of doctoral students’ identity development began with database searches that were not restricted by year (e.g., PsycINFO, Education Research Complete, and Education Resources Information Center). Thirteen articles written by doctoral students discussing their identities and identity development in PhD programs were further identified from selected articles ranging from 2009 to 2021. These articles and their implications were analyzed using a qualitative research synthesis approach. Contribution: Although scholars have looked at doctoral students’ identities and identity development from various viewpoints, the current investigation deepens the understanding of this focus from doctoral students’ own perspectives. Doctoral students are trained investigators with research skills and mindsets. As novice researchers and educators, their open and honest reflections about their challenges, opportunities, and development are worthwhile to identify significant aspects of their identities and identity development in PhD programs. Findings: There are two dimensions to the findings: the Approach Dimension and the Content Dimension. The Approach Dimension is concerned with how doctoral students investigated their identities and identity development, whereas the Content Dimension is concerned with what they found. Findings in the Approach Dimension show that doctoral students applied the self-study inquiry approach or used the notion of self-study inquiry to interpret their identity and identity development. The self-study inquiry encompasses five main features, including (1) Self-Initiated and Focused, (2) Improvement-Aimed, (3) Collaborative/Interactive, (4) Reflective Data Collection, and (5) Exemplar-Based Validation. Doctoral students examined the five self-study features both directly and indirectly in their studies. The investigation revealed four major themes in the Content Dimension, including (1) Identity Development as a Dynamic Process, (2) Multiple Identities, (3) Learning Contexts, and (4) Socialization. Recommendations for Practitioners: The findings suggest that practitioners in PhD programs should be aware of the existence, process, and dynamics of identity evolution in doctoral programs. The best possible way for PhD program administrators, faculties, and advisors to support doctoral students’ growth and identity development is to incorporate doctoral students’ own insights into practice. Given the unprecedented influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the educational environment and the diversity of doctoral students, it is crucial to discover how doctoral students use structured research methods to reflect, learn, and self-support their identity development during their PhD programs. The self-study inquiry process would be a helpful and effective approach to support doctoral students’ advancement. For instance, PhD programs could create self-evaluation assignments or courses that incorporate both self-study and identity development concepts. Recommendation for Researchers: When studying doctoral students’ identity development, it is critical to emphasize the essence of identity, which is people’s perceptions of who they are. We recommend that researchers who study doctoral students could further integrate doctoral students’ insights about their own identity status (e.g., multiple identities) into research. Impact on Society: Successful completion of PhD programs is a critical foundation for doctoral students to serve society as expert researchers and educators. Support for the growth and development of doctoral students could facilitate the completion of their doctoral programs and strengthen their sense of agency through the lens of identity. Future Research: Future research could go beyond the field of education and expand to more disciplines to identify common and diverse factors influencing doctoral students’ identity and identity development across domains. Future research on the post-COVID-19 era and its implications for online programs must also be studied in connection with doctoral students’ identities and identity development. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4965 doctoral students identity identity development self-study first-person perspective eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-06-06 17 227 241 4974 article Farzad Rostami farzadr79@gmail.com mohammad hosseein Yousefi mhh.yousefi@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The present qualitative study examined the perceptions of Iranian Ph.D. candidates toward the responsibilities and activities that supervisors should take during the dissertation writing. Background: Writing the dissertation is the main concern for Ph.D. candidates. In the view of doctorate students, supervisors are the main contributors to establishing a well-prepared dissertation. Methodology: To this end, 15 Ph.D. candidates who either graduated recently or were about to have their viva sessions participated in the study. The data were collected through phone interviews as well as narrative inquiry. The current study adopted the mentorship model as its theoretical framework. The framework is well suited because the supervisors as mentors and persons that are more competent transfer their experience and knowledge to the supervisees as less competent students. The multiple case study has been applied as the design of the current study. Geared toward the objectives of the qualitative study, the data analysis process embraced Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis approach. Contribution: The study has a number of theoretical and practical implications for both supervisors of Ph.D. students as well as teacher educators. Findings: The authors presented and discussed their perceived themes, and they consented to the following four major themes: practicality, professionalism, emotional engagement, and career traits. Recommendations for Practitioners: To ease the burden of writing a Ph.D. dissertation and to soothe the stress of Ph.D. candidates’ experience, supervisors should take the responsibility for their task of supervision by providing moment-by-moment care and guidance to their students. Recommendation for Researchers: The researchers utilized the two instruments of telephone interviews and narrations to collect data. It is suggested that other sources of data collection like observations and focus group interviews be included to gain further conceptions of the attendants. The researchers interviewed the dissertation writer in various majors; however, the topic was not questioned. It is recommended to evaluate the extent of the supervisor’s interest in the topic on the success rate of the project. Impact on Society: The present study revealed that students have different and varying needs and expectations of their supervisors. To meet these needs, supervisors should ask their students to submit a weekly report of their work as well as possible problems and questions. Future Research: The findings were based on the Ph.D. candidates’ perspectives; it is recommended that future research include the voices of the supervisors, too, particularly the supervisors of the same supervisees. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4974 Ph.D. program Ph.D. candidate supervisor supervision mentorship eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-07-20 17 243 261 4987 article John Anthony Fulton john.fulton@sunderland.ac.uk Lynne Hall lynne.hall@sunderland.ac.uk Derek Watson derek.watson@sunderland.ac.uk Gillian Hagan-Green gillian.hagan-green@sunderland.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: This paper explores how professional doctorate candidates responded to the restrictions and changed context of COVID-19. Using connectivism as a theoretical framework, it explores the ways in which their patterns of study were recalibrated in light of the restrictions caused by the pandemic. Specifically, this study aims to: explore the experience of the professional doctorate student during the pandemic; and demonstrate the ways in which networks are recalibrated and adapt to changing circumstances. Background: In 2020, in response to COVID-19 many countries, including the UK, went into lockdown resulting in most doctoral candidates being confined to their homes and restricted to online contact with peers and supervisors. Part-time students have a finely balanced pattern of work which was required to be recalibrated and refocused which required considerable adaptation on the part of the candidates. Methodology: A qualitative methodology was used comprising four focus groups, each consisting of four professional doctorate candidates. Participants were professional doctorate candidates and as such were all mid-career professionals from a variety of backgrounds. Purposeful sampling was combined with theoretical sampling, which ensures the sample is deliberately selected and ensures the emergent development of the theoretical ideas. The focus groups were recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data and identify the main findings, allowing themes to be identified. Contribution: The findings indicated that professional doctorate candidates were highly adaptable and were able to adjust rapidly in response to COVID-19 restrictions. The networks they had previously established had to be refocused through adapting and adjusting patterns of study and developing digital skills to enable them to progress in their doctoral studies. Findings: Three themes emerged from the analysis: recalibrating work-life-study balance; adaptivity in studies and research; and empowerment through Information and Communications Technology (ICT). To progress their doctoral studies, the networks they had previously established had to be refocused through adapting and adjusting patterns of study. Recommendations for Practitioners: While lockdown was an unusual experience, some factors can inform future developments for doctoral education, mainly: the importance of establishing a pattern of study; the importance of connectivism and Information Technology (IT); and how such use can enhance and expand the research process. Recommendation for Researchers: Adaptivity achieved through IT; connectivity and the recalibration of networks were key to enabling doctoral candidates to continue their research. The use of connectivism as a theoretical framework for research merits further exploration, as do methods for online learning and approaches to incorporating digital skills into doctoral studies. Impact on Society: According to connectivism, learning is through the establishment of net-works, and these consist of both the means of gaining and accessing knowledge and the work-life study balance. It is important to examine and improve these networks. Many of the changes imposed by the COVID-19 restrictions are here to stay and this study highlights the ways in which the student experience can be enhanced through digital learning. Future Research: This research could be expanded through further analysis of how IT can enhance research practice. The interaction with digital learning sources could be explored and highlighted. The pattern of networks could also be explored and developed, and the positive and negative aspects could be highlighted. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4987 professional doctorate ICTs digital COVID-19 higher education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-07-23 17 263 277 5002 article Vijay Kumar vijay.mallan@otago.ac.nz Amrita Kaur akaur@kean.edu Sharon Sharmini s_sharmini@upm.edu.my Mohammad Noman nmohamma@kean.edu Aim/Purpose: The study examines the perspectives of convenors, examiners, supervisors, and candidates to gather their views on the presence of the supervisor in oral examinations (doctoral viva) and to reassess the role of the mainly silent supervisor in the doctoral viva. Background: Supervisors are central to candidates’ doctoral journey, and their roles have been well documented. However, supervisors’ role in the doctoral viva remains elusive, insignificant, and misunderstood. Methodology: The study adopts a qualitative survey method and qualitative interviews to examine the perspectives of 94 participants, including conveners, examiners, supervisors, and candidates. Data were collected through in-depth interviews and an open-ended survey and was later analyzed using a qualitative approach. Contribution: The findings have implications for the doctoral viva and policies that seek to make it a collegial and equitable practice. Findings: The findings offer two main explanations that warrant supervisors’ physical presence in oral examinations: psycho-emotional support and procedural/regulatory purposes. Supervisors’ voices serve psycho-emotional and technical purposes and aid in dialogue and knowledge construction. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is recommended that practitioners need to move on from the customary ‘smile and nod’ role of supervisors to allowing their voices to be heard, perhaps at the end of the viva. This would not only facilitate candidates’ performance by offering affirmation and assurance through psychological and moral support but also provide an opportunity for discussion. Recommendation for Researchers: This study furthers our understanding of the ‘anatomy of a doctoral viva’ and examines a comprehensive picture of the supervisor’s role in a doctoral oral exam from all stakeholders’ perspectives. Impact on Society: The role of supervisors in the doctoral viva, beginning from the medieval period, has consistently evolved. The research provides a fresh outlook on supervision where the supervisor is not only recommended to be present during the viva, but also to play an active role. Future Research: Future research should include diverse cultural, institutional, and disciplinary contexts to advance our understanding of the supervisor’s role during oral exams. Also, whether supervisors should have a more active role independent of what a convenor may desire should be investigated. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5002 doctoral viva higher education assessment supervisors’ voice PhD eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-07-28 17 279 300 5004 article Khim Raj Subedi krsubedi@pncampus.edu.np Krishna Bista krishna.bista@MORGAN.EDU Shyaam Sharma ghanashyamsharma@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This study explores how online writing groups facilitate the academic identity development of doctoral scholars. Background: Academic institutions around the world, and especially in developing societies, are demanding increasing amounts of research and publications from their doctoral scholars. The current study used an online writing group to facilitate writing skills development, which bolstered the academic identity development of participating scholars. Academic identity is defined as the becoming and being of an academic scholar, with writing skills as a means of acquiring and performing the status and skills of a scholar. It is reflected in the confidence, contribution, and relationship carried out in writing as a member of the academic community. Methodology: This study utilizes narrative inquiry as a research methodology to capture the experiences of six doctoral scholars from two universities in Nepal. We explore the academic identity of doctoral scholars from a sociocultural perspective, employing unstructured interviews, meeting notes, and entry and exit surveys of the online writing group. Contribution: This article shows how online writing groups offer unique and impactful opportunities for networking, collaboration, and problem-solving, which can significantly enhance their writing abilities and prospects of publication, thereby fostering their intellectual agency and academic identity. Findings: This study reports three findings of the value of online writing groups: addressing gaps in formal education, community as a form of accountability, and virtual community as a platform for identity development. On the final finding of identity development, we identify and discuss four themes from data analysis: growth of self-image as scholars, strengthening of commitment to scholarship, identification of venues for expanding the scope of publication, and enhancement of digital skills. The informal and collaborative nature of online writing support facilitated socially constructivist learning, which was highly conducive to the development of academic identity among emerging scholars. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is recommended that institutions implement and encourage online writing support programs as an effective means of addressing gaps in doctoral education. While this program can fill gaps in the low-resource contexts of developing countries, it can bolster formal mentoring in any context. Recommendation for Researchers: Further research should use large-scale or longitudinal studies to explore how informal, especially online writing support and collaboration, accelerate research and writing skills, scholarly productivity, and overall academic identity formation of doctoral scholars. Impact on Society: As societies around the world accelerate their demand for doctoral degrees and also require research and publications for degree completion, new and creative approaches utilizing emerging technologies could help to fill gaps in curriculum and support systems for their doctoral scholars. Future Research: Future research could expand the scope and take a longitudinal approach for more fine-grained data and developing broader perspectives. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5004 academic identity doctoral scholars communities of practice online writing group narrative inquiry eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-08-18 17 301 321 5011 article Francesco Tommasi francesco.tommasi@univr.it Ferdinando Toscano ferdinando.toscano@unibo.it Davide Giusino davide.giusino2@unibo.it Andrea Ceschi andrea.ceschi@univr.it Riccardo Sartori riccardo.sartori@univr.it Johanna Lisa Degen jd@psychologische-forschungspraxis.de Aim/Purpose: This paper presents a quantitative investigation of the organizational factors predicting the attrition of doctoral students’ experience of meaning and how meaningful experience and meaningless work affect doctoral students’ mental health and achievements. Background: Today’s academic environment subsumes neoliberal principles of individualism, instrumentality, and competition. Such an environment can harm doctoral students’ meaningful experience. Universities’ market-driven practices, indeed, can lower doctoral students’ motivation and affect their mental health. Methodology: In this paper, we referred to empirical knowledge to identify the ways through which today’s academia erodes doctoral students’ meaningful experiences. We hypothesized that environmental sources of meaning (e.g., coherence, significance, purpose, and belonging) become subsumed under neoliberal principles of individualism, instrumentality, and competition. Lower levels of sources of meaning directly predict the experience of meaningless work, which is linked to higher levels of anxiety, depression, and intention to quit among doctoral students. We conducted a cross-sectional study on a sample of N = 204 doctoral students who volunteered to participate by completing a survey with self-reported measures. We analyzed data collected via structural equation modelling to test the associations among the variables. Contribution: The present paper represents one an attempt attempts to investigate doctoral students’ experience as subsumed to market-driven principles of the neoliberal ideology. Findings: Results of structural equation modelling show that higher levels of anxiety and depression symptoms and intention to quit are associated with the lack of external supporting factors (i.e., PhD support), the perception of broad-based managerial practices as meaningless and instrumental, and a general sense of emptiness at work (i.e., meaningless work). Ultimately, doctoral students may strive to have a meaningful experience in today’s academic environment. The experience of meaningless work leads to the risk of mental illness symptoms and quitting intention. Recommendations for Practitioners: This study suggests to practitioners to improve doctoral students’ well-being with multilevel interventions approach as well as including academic stakeholders to have broader practical implications. Recommendation for Researchers: For researchers, it is suggested to focus on the managerial and organizational conditions of the academic environment that influence the basis of doctoral students’ experience of doing a PhD. Impact on Society: This study affords society the importance of prioritizing the academic environment by looking at the meaning in work through the intersection of meaningful experience and meaningless work for doctoral students’ mental health and achievement. Future Research: Future research can consider the role of factors contributing to doctoral students’ meaningful experience by probing doctoral programs to understand students’ mental health and achievement. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5011 doctoral students meaningless work mental health in academia eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-08-23 17 323 344 5013 article Trang Pham trangpham@mail.missouri.edu Aim/Purpose: This study explores the development of academic identity among a group of Asian international doctoral students at a U.S. research university in various settings, including interacting with students and faculty members and reflecting on their personal journeys. Background: In 2020-2021, 132, 000 international doctoral students enrolled in U.S. universities – an increase of 71% since 2000. Despite this, relatively little is known about their academic identity development and how acculturative stress affects their academic growth. Methodology: A conceptual framework was constructed to integrate the concepts of acculturative stress and academic identity development. With the premise that academic identity development comprises three strands of intellectual, network, and institutional, the current framework conceptualizes the intersection of acculturative stress in all three strands to explore the tensions of balancing home-host culture values while international doctoral students grow into a new identity. Reflexive thematic analysis was applied to study the narratives of eight Asian international doctoral students and identified four main themes characterizing the participants’ academic identity development under acculturative stress. Contribution: This study contributes to an understudied area of higher education literature, directing the attention of the academic community to a small but growing group of junior academics. When examined in the confluence with acculturative stress, the conceptualization of academic identity is extended to include academics from cultural minorities. Findings: Acculturative stress intersects with all three strands of academic identity development, inhibiting participants’ progress in their doctoral programs. Acculturative stress also makes participants more hesitant to adopt an academic identity. Recommendations for Practitioners: This paper informs leaders and managers at departmental and university levels about cultural inclusiveness in doctoral training programs. Cultural minority students face the challenge of acculturative stress, an issue that distinguishes them from racial or gender minority groups; therefore, simply replicating race or gender inclusion initiatives is unlikely to be an ideal model for a culturally inclusive program. Recommendation for Researchers: The findings of this study indicate that Asian doctoral international students deviate from the commonly accepted view of academic identity in that they do not define intellectual growth strictly in terms of paper-trailed achievements (e.g., number of publications or grants), and they view jobs within and outside academia as equally attractive. Impact on Society: Doctoral training programs at universities are the suppliers of doctoral-level workers for industry. However, some programs, especially in the social sciences and humanities, focus on academic job placements. To broaden the impact on society, educational leaders need to expand the professional development training elements in such programs to prepare doctoral candidates for opportunities outside of academia. Future Research: Other aspects of doctoral training programs could be explored, such as the development of instructor identity and the changes in student identity. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5013 academic identity acculturative stress cultural inclusion international doctoral students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-09-03 17 345 384 5014 article Serveh Naghshbandi serveh.n@alumni.ubc.ca Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this qualitative study was to identify the main conceptualizations of learning space from doctoral students’ perspectives. The aim was to develop a participatory approach to make students’ multiple voices heard. Background: Doctoral experience is viewed as being influenced by social practices of the scholarly communities; learning space in this context is a collective resource that can be altered through imagination of its inhabitants. The intersection of Lefebvre’s Production of Space in architecture and situated learning theory in education enabled building an integrated conceptual framework to explore learning space of doctoral students in its complexity. Methodology: Three research questions reflected theoretical and practical aims. To answer them, drawing on Design Based Research, I developed multi-phased research through three sequential phases: questionnaire, Photovoice, and prototyping, which respectively addressed subjective, objective, and co-constructed aspects of learning spaces. Contribution: This study is one of the few studies that looks at doctoral students learning spaces within the literature of learning spaces. It supports the development of a participatory procedure to design learning spaces for doctoral students. Findings: Findings suggested that learning space is a layered multi-faceted phenomenon and a changing entity. Doctoral students believed that learning space is an indicator of support from doctoral programs and has a potential to improve and sustain their well-being. Recommendations for Practitioners: Inviting students to take charge of the configurations of their working environment is suggested for higher education institutions. Doctoral students imagined using movable, folding, and writable walls to create private spaces for individuals as well as collaborative workspaces. Recommendation for Researchers: Identifying the interactions between learning space and learning over a longer time frame both in undergraduate and graduate settings can help us view the campus through a spatial ecology model. Also, future research might examine a participatory approach to design and research on learning spaces around parallel partnerships with other research-intensive universities. Impact on Society: Findings from this study identified areas for future studies and actions suggesting implications for learning space studies for the U15 (Group of Canadian Research Universities) and U21 (the leading global network of research universities for the 21st century). Future Research: Considering the radical changes that COVID-19 has brought in how we work, collaborate, study, and engage in social events, it is vital for higher educational institutes to rethink their learning spaces for the post- COVID era to support students’ learning and their meaningful engagement in learning communities and learning spaces. Further exploration on learning spaces in post COVID era is needed to expand the empirical knowledge on learning spaces, and thus, to inform research scholars subsequent work in the educational field. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5014 learning spaces doctoral education design-based research (DBR) participatory design eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-09-04 17 385 399 5017 article Shardul Pandya spandya@an.edu UMESH C VARMA ucvarma@an.edu Azad Ali azad.ali@iup.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to develop instructional rubrics that help in writing and evaluating doctoral dissertation research problem statements. Background: This is a follow up study. In the first paper (Ali & Pandya, 2021), we introduced a model for writing a research problems statement that takes the students through four phases to complete their writing. In this paper, we introduce an instructional rubric to be used for helping to writing the re-search problem statement. Methodology: This paper builds on the previous model, adding to it Socratic questions to trigger critical thinking to help with writing of research problem statement. Contribution: Developing the instructional rubrics is the contribution of this study. The instructional rubrics can help with the writing of a research problem statement. Findings: Writing a research problem statement is difficult by itself. Following the methodological approach suggested in this study will help students with the task of writing their own. Following this instructional rubric will help more with the writing. Recommendations for Practitioners: A methodological approach to writing a research problem statement is helpful in mitigating the difficulties of writing the dissertation. This study tackles the difficulties with writing the research problem statement. Recommendations for Researchers: More research is needed to give examples of research problem statement that shows the writing of the statement through the suggested phases. Impact on Society: The findings of this research will help doctoral mentors/advisors as they guide students in completing the writing of their research problem statement. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5017 research problem statement doctoral research problem doctoral dissertations eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-09-14 17 401 432 5020 article Melanie Vilser M.Vilser@psy.lmu.de Irmgard Mausz Irmgard.Mausz@psy.lmu.de Dieter Frey Dieter.Frey@psy.lmu.de Sabrina Rauh sabrina.rauh@outlook.de Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the perceived efforts, rewards, motives, and coping strategies of a sample of PhD students in Germany based on tested stress models, the Effort-Reward-Imbalance Model and the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping. Background: Pursuing a PhD can be challenging and stressful. Students face conflicts, isolation, and competition as well as difficulties with their supervisors. However, there is little known about how students perceive their PhD. Methodology: Semi-structured interviews were conducted in 2021 with 21 male and female doctoral students from various fields of research. The recorded interviews were transcribed and analyzed according to Mayring’s qualitative content analysis. Contribution: Little is known about the work stress of PhD students. Most studies focus on single aspects (e.g., the relationship with the supervisor or the heavy workload) and use questionnaires that do not show all aspects causing work stress and how to prevent it. In this study, we examined the elements of work stress and coping strategies by using the Effort-Reward-Imbalance Model and the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping in a theoretical framework. Findings: The analysis yielded two main categories for efforts and three main categories for rewards as well as several sub-categories. Participants persisted in the PhD program for five reasons: an intrinsic motivation, an interest in improving one’s skills, the motivation to become an expert in one’s field, the ability to contribute to research, and because of the flexibility and freedom offered during a PhD. Further, the study analyzed how PhD students cope with stress. Engaging in physical activities or spending time with family and friends were the most common coping strategies used, followed by work routines (like scheduling time for deep work and breaks) and seeking assistance from other PhD students. Recommendations for Practitioners: To decrease the stress factors and negative health outcomes, we recommend incorporating personal as well as organizational measurements in the university setting. Through kick-off events and personal development workshops, PhD students should be made aware of the potential stress factors and coping strategies. Mentoring programs with postdocs can further support the doctoral students. On an organizational level, the knowledge about the elements of work stress should be incorporated in the recruiting process and supervisor workshops. Recommendation for Researchers: As past research has investigated the effects of stress on physiological parameters, the framework of this study proposes the incorporation of the imbalance component into biological stress research. Impact on Society: Understanding the efforts, rewards, and motives for a doctoral degree will help to reduce work stress of PhD students and create a more positive over-all workplace, for example, by improving the relationship between students and their supervisors. Future Research: Additional work is required to explore how the Effort-Reward-Imbalance model and coping strategies could interact and influence different outcomes. As the majority of the participants pursed a PhD degree in psychology, further studies need to be conducted that include other disciplines. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5020 coping strategies effort-reward-imbalance motives PhD students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-09-28 17 433 458 5026 article Azad Ali azad.ali@iup.edu Shardul Pandya spandya@an.edu UMESH C VARMA ucvarma@an.edu Aim/Purpose: Identify the prerequisites, the corequisites, and the iteration processes in organizing and writing the literature review chapter of doctoral dissertations. Background: Writing the literature review chapter of doctoral dissertations presents unique challenges. Students waste a lot of time identifying material to write, and the experience is generally that of frustration and time delay. Methodology: This paper reviews literature to identify levels of information helpful for writing the literature review chapter: prerequisites, corequisites, and iteration process. Contribution: The contribution of this paper is different than others that have been writ-ten about the literature review. The intended audiences for this paper are mentors, advisors, or academies that supervise students in writing their doctoral dissertations. This paper introduces the writing of the literature review by organizing the suggestions into groups of topics more familiar to academies than in other fields. The concepts of prerequisites, corequisites, and iteration are very familiar to educators; they often use them in their courses. The academic curriculums are built on such concepts. Thus, grouping the discussion into these terms familiar to mentors, advisors, or doctoral dissertations supervisors will put the findings into a more helpful focus for educators that supervise students in writing the literature review chapter. Findings: Writing a doctoral dissertation literature review is long and complicated be-cause some students delve into the writing without much preparation. Identifying what is helpful before and during the writing and being mindful of the repetitive steps helps guide the students through the writing of the literature review chapter of doctoral dissertations. Recommendations for Practitioners: Before delving into the writing of the literature review, it will be helpful to identify the prerequisites, the corequisites, and the iteration process that goes into the writing literature review. Recommendations for Researchers: Writing the literature review chapter in doctoral dissertations remains challenging. More research would be helpful that focuses on the late writing stages. The suggestions we made in this paper could form a solid start for future research in this topic. Impact on Society: The research findings will help doctoral mentors/advisors guide students in completing the chapter on literature review. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5026 literature review dissertation literature review phases of literature review snowballing in literature review eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-10-13 17 459 477 5028 article Sara Elvira Galbán-Lozano sgalban@up.edu.mx Ligia Garcia-Bejar ligarcia@up.edu.mx Aim/Purpose: To understand the experiences of full-time university professors at a Mexican university who are pursuing a doctoral degree, this study seeks to describe the experiences of doctoral students who are also university professors. The study focuses on the intentions, experiences, and prospects regarding the decision to study for a doctorate as a university professor. Background: This research has a dual background. On the one hand, there is the institutional interest in establishing an academic and professional profile of university professors studying for a doctorate in decision-making. On the other hand, the researchers who conducted this study maintain an interest in deepening knowledge of the doctoral process and researcher training. In the field of educational research, this article seeks to strengthen the almost nil research carried out specifically in Mexico on university professors who study for a doctorate, particularly in private institutions. Methodology: The research design is based on the interpretive paradigm, with a qualitative approach and a phenomenological perspective. A semi-structured interview was used to explore the individual experiences of 17 university professors who are studying for a doctorate. Contribution: This study is unique in that it explores the personal and professional views of university professors studying for a doctoral degree, providing further insight into academic and professional profiles. Findings: Studying for a doctorate while already belonging to a research ecosystem makes the challenges and difficulties of this process easier to cope with, favoring more positive results. Recommendations for Practitioners: To foster more assertive decision-making among university management, the recommendations are addressed to human talent managers, research managers, academic directors, university professors, and doctoral students. Recommendation for Researchers: To strengthen this line of research, it would be necessary to deepen the academic and professional profiles of university professors who are doctoral students and the materialization of an academic trajectory, to have more theoretical and practical elements for the training of researchers in the different fields of science. Impact on Society: Understanding the dynamics of doctoral training processes in the case of university professors in a Mexican context facilitates the formation of research ecosystems, labor insertion, and the consolidation of a professional career. Future Research: Future research should explore other university contexts and the consolidation of the academic career path for university professors. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5028 doctoral studies institutional conditions Mexican context student experiences university professors eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-10-30 17 479 511 5030 article Adesola Paul Adekunle adekunle0315@pg.babcock.edu.ng Ezinwanyi Madukoma madukomae@babcock.edu.ng Aim/Purpose: The main purpose of the study was to find out the influence of information literacy and research self-efficacy on the research productivity of doctoral students in universities in Ogun State, Nigeria. Background: The prosperity of any nation is inextricably tied to its research productivity in both quality and quantity. Hence, doctoral education, among others, is meant to sustain research productivity by training students that will possibly assume the role of researchers in the future. However, despite the importance of research productivity to the prosperity of a nation and the sustenance of scholarship, evidence from the literature has shown that doctoral students globally and in the study’s locale do experience low research productivity, manifested as low publication count, underdeveloped strategies for thesis writing, and unusually prolonged doctoral education. This study, therefore, examined the influence of information literacy and research self-efficacy on research productivity of doctoral students in universities in Ogun State, Nigeria. Methodology: The study used a survey research design. The population of the study was 1,418 doctoral students from six universities in Ogun State already undertaking doctoral programs out of nine licensed by the National Universities Commission (NUC). The Research Advisor’s table was used to select a sample size of 306. A structured and validated questionnaire was used for data collection. Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for the constructs ranged from 0.72 to 0.98. The response rate was 92%. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential (simple and multiple regression) statistics. Contribution: To the best of the researcher’s knowledge, this is the only study that has combined information literacy with research self-efficacy as predictors of doctoral students’ research productivity. Therefore, it has added to the existing literature on information literacy, research self-efficacy, and research productivity by shedding light on the influence of information literacy and research self-efficacy on research productivity. Findings: The findings of this paper are the following. 1. Research productivity of doctoral students in universities in Ogun State, Nigeria was low as majority of the respondents scored below the criterion mean in all the measured items. 2. This low research productivity was notable in publication count, presentations at conferences and thesis writing, leading to unusually prolonged doctoral education for most of the respondents. 3. The study showed that doctoral students in universities in Ogun State, Nigeria possessed a high level of information literacy. 4. There was a positive and significant relationship between information literacy and research productivity (R2= 0.076, F(1,282) = 4.582, p <0.05) of doctoral students in universities in Ogun State, Nigeria. 5. There was a positive and significant relationship between research self-efficacy and research productivity (R2= 0.060, F (1, 282) = 17.218, p<0.05) of doctoral students in universities in Ogun State, Nigeria. 6. Findings revealed that the level of research self-efficacy of doctoral students in universities in Ogun State, Nigeria was high Recommendations for Practitioners: Faculty should ensure that every doctoral student have access to a faculty advisor or mentor who is approachable and accessible. This will provide doctoral students with a roadmap for practice and constructive feedback. By strengthening doctoral students-faculty relationships, more opportunities arise for aspiring researchers to learn the general practices and procedures for conducting and designing studies, collecting, and analyzing data, and writing a well-organized manuscript. Recommendation for Researchers: The resultant model could be adopted by researchers to undergird related studies. Moreover, subsequent research can build on the findings of the empirical study to broaden the scope of research productivity of scholars Impact on Society: The study has accentuated the primacy of research and its continued production to the growth and development of every stratum of the nation. Consequently, it has become incumbent for the government and other stakeholders to promote its continued productivity by creating an enabling environment for doctoral students in Nigeria. Future Research: To further broaden this area of research, the following are suggested for fur-ther studies. Qualitative/focus group investigation of information literacy, research self-efficacy and research productivity of doctoral students. This may reveal more in-depth data not captured in the current study. The study can also be replicated in other states of the nation and other parts of the world as research productivity and its predictors cut across nations. Further studies can investigate other combinations of research productivity predictors. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5030 information literacy information processing self-efficacy research self-efficacy research productivity doctoral studies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-12-09 17 513 532 5044 article Rida Sellali redha.sellali@univ-mascara.dz Nour El Houda Lahiouel Nour.Lahiouel@ul.ie Aim/Purpose: The purpose of the current study is to investigate the effect of expectancy-value beliefs on Algerian doctoral students’ academic burnout. Descriptive-inferential research was adopted to measure the potential association and predictive relationship between the variables of the study. Background: It is commonly known that candidates undertaking a doctoral course experience significant amounts of pressure for the sake of finishing their doctoral programmes. However, their expectations of success and course values, which stem from the very essence of motivation theory, are assumed to be connected to their experience of academic burnout. Methodology: Quantitative research methods were used to study the relationship between the variables of the study. Through snowball sampling, the sample of the study consisted of doctoral students (N= 104) from three different Algerian universities, representing five faculties (Nature and Life Sciences, Science and Technology, Maths and Computer Sciences, Economy, and Languages and Literature). The measures used in this study are adapted versions of the Students’ Expectations and Value Beliefs Survey, and the Maslash Burnout Inventory – Students’ Survey (MBI-SS). Contribution: This study attempts to expand on the existing literature on the rather new concept of student burnout through the inclusion of the expectancy-value variables and offers practical recommendations to practitioners, supervisors, and doctoral students alike. Findings: The findings indicated the existence of significant differences between doctoral candidates in terms of their faculty attachment and years of enrolment in their respective courses. The study also revealed the existence of significant negative correlations between the dimensions of expectancy-value and academic burnout. Students’ success expectancy and course values were significant negative predictors of Algerian doctoral students’ academic burnout. Recommendations for Practitioners: Supervisors are recommended to equip their doctoral supervisees with realistic expectations of the required abilities of the course right from the beginning, elaborate on the abilities needed to finish their respective doctoral programmes, and regularly remind them of the values of their programmes should they experience academic burnout. Recommendation for Researchers: The present study relies heavily on quantitative research methods. Researchers could expand on the same topic of the current study by examining the subjective inclinations of doctoral candidates to understand more about the association of their success expectancy and course values to their experience of academic burnout. Researchers could also expand on the sample of the study in different contexts in the world to add more constructive criticism to the current study, with better probability sampling techniques. Impact on Society: The current study seeks to raise awareness on the importance of doctoral candidates’ perception of their respective doctoral programmes and potentially decrease failure and dropout rates by shifting focus to the regulation of their perceived success expectations and course values. Future Research: As far as future research is concerned, several other variables may more or less be associated with the concept of academic burnout within doctoral students, at least in the Algerian higher education context, such as candidates’ physical and emotional engagement, employment opportunities, and supervision satisfaction. Expectancy-value may have a moderating role in the relationship of these variables with experience of academic burnout, all of which can be studied through Structural Equation Modelling. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5044 academic burnout expectancy-value doctoral students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2022-12-10 17 533 552 5046 article Emily Holtz emilyholtz@tamu.edu Salandra Grice salandra00@tamu.edu Xin Li xinlianna@tamu.edu Ying Xu ying_x@tamu.edu Aim/Purpose: This study aims to understand and assess the self-care perceptions and habits of US domestic versus international graduate students in doctoral programs at an R1 university in Texas. Background: The number of domestic and international students entering doctoral programs in US universities continues to increase each year. However, completion rates within the Ph.D. program remain low, especially for domestic students. Previous research has suggested that mental health and issues of well-being are equated with high-stress levels and depression rather than balance and success. One way to address the low completion rates is to understand how doctoral students balance academic progress and achievement in their prospective doctoral programs with self-care efforts. This study is designed to assess the self-care perceptions and habits of domestic and international graduate students in doctoral programs as well as to understand the differences in perceptions of self-care between domestic students and international students Methodology: In the present study, researchers used an explanatory mixed methods research design to investigate the self-care practices and perceptions of domestic and international doctoral students enrolled in a public university in Texas. In the first phase, quantitative data were collected through a survey to examine the extent to which doctoral students utilize self-care practices (six self-care variables were examined in the survey: physical, cognitive, psychological/emotional, behavior, interpersonal, and existential). The descriptive statistics collected in this phase aided in the purposeful sampling of participants for the second phase of the study. In phase 2, interviews were conducted to identify the nature of self-care and self-care choices practiced by doctoral students and how these characteristics were similar and/or different between international and domestic students. Contribution: Few studies have investigated the self-care practices and perceptions of domestic and international students. The present study contributes to the body of knowledge on self-care perceptions and practices amongst domestic and international doctoral students in a Texas public university. Findings: Through a survey of doctoral students, international students reported higher levels of self-care than their domestic counterparts. After interviews were conducted the researchers found that the students interviewed each understood the need for self-care to avoid stress and burnout, however only some were able to prioritize self-care in their day-to-day routines, citing workload from courses and faculty advisors as preventing self-care. Many attributed this to their family and cultural backgrounds. Recommendations for Practitioners: In conducting this study, researchers concluded that self-care practices among doctoral students should become a priority in higher education programs. The participants in this study understood that they should practice self-care, but they had limited ability to engage in self-care regularly. Therefore, it is recommended that higher education institutions and faculty mentors recognize the importance of self-care for doctoral students and support their students in maintaining a work-life balance to avoid burnout and attrition. Recommendation for Researchers: Additional studies that include a larger sample size and specific self-care routines to be studied would be beneficial for researchers to consider. Impact on Society: Understanding and investing in doctoral students’ well-being and self-care practices could lead to higher completion rates and more productive programs in higher education. Future Research: Future research could be conducted to examine the differing needs of domestic and international students when considering self-care and doctoral students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/5046 self-care domestic doctoral students international doctoral students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-01-20 16 .i v 4690 article Michael Jones editor@ijds.org Table of Contents for Volume 16, 2021, of the International Journal of Doctoral Studies http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4690 IJDS International Journal of Doctoral Studies PhD doctoral studies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-01-20 16 001 029 4682 article Irina Baydarova ibaydarova@swinburne.edu.my Heidi E Collins heidicb@gmail.com Ismail Ait Saadi datotanseri@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This paper compares doctoral student and supervisor expectations of their respective roles and responsibilities in doctoral research supervision relationships in Malaysia. It identifies the areas, and the extent to which expectations align or differ. Background: Incongruence of expectations between doctoral students and their supervisor has been cited as a major contributor to slow completion times and high attrition rates for doctoral students. While researchers urge the need for explicit discussion of expectations, in practice doctoral students and supervisors rarely make their expectations explicit to each other, and few researchers have examined the areas of alignment or misalignment of expectations in depth. Methodology: Semi-structured interviews were held with fifteen doctoral students and twelve supervisors from two research-intensive universities in Malaysia. An inductive thematic analysis of data was conducted. Contribution: This paper provides the first in-depth direct comparison of student-supervisor expectations in Malaysia. A hierarchical model of student-supervisor expectations is presented. Findings: Expectations vary in the degree of congruence, and the degree to which they are clarified by students and supervisors across four different areas: academic practice, academic outcomes, skills and personal attributes, personal relationships. A hierarchical model is proposed to describe the extent to which both students and supervisors are able to clarify their mutual expectations arising throughout the doctoral student-supervisor relationship. Recommendations for Practitioners: Institutions should support discussions with both doctoral students and supervisors of expectations of their student-supervisor interactions, and encourage them to be more proactive in exploring their mutual expectations. Recommendation for Researchers: Data is recommended to be collected from students who have recently completed their studies, given the observation that some student participants were uncomfortable speaking about their supervisors while still in the student-supervisor relationship. Impact on Society: Opening opportunities for discussions of expectations by students and supervisors, supported and encouraged by the institutions within which they work, can help set the scene for positive and productive relationships. Future Research: Findings indicate there is need to examine in depth the impact of gender, and the competing pressures to publish and graduate on time, as they relate to the student-supervisor relationships and experience. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4682 doctoral supervision expectations model Malaysia eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-01-20 16 031 046 4683 article Katherine Myers-Coffman kmyers-coffman@molloy.edu Karolina Bryl klb364@drexel.edu Joke Bradt jbradt@drexel.edu Janelle S Junkin JJunkin@harrisburgu.edu Maliha Ibrahim maliha.ibrahim89@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to detail the experiential learning processes of an 11-week doctoral-level intermediate mixed methods research (MMR) course in which student-researchers conceptualized and implemented an MMR study to apply theoretical and methodological learning in a practical manner. Our aim is to emphasize the value of an applied MMR course for improved student learning and curriculum planning for faculty by highlighting meaningful insights on study design, data integration, team collaboration, and the challenges and opportunities involved in project execution within a time-limited academic course. Background: MMR courses are increasingly being integrated into graduate programs, yet few offer intermediate or advanced courses that go beyond introductory topics and engage students in applied learning. Furthermore, most articles on MMR courses are written from the instructor perspective and not from the student perspective. Methodology: This article is organized by each week of the course curriculum, and the output of the research project, couched within reflections of the applied process, is presented. While this paper is grounded in an experiential reflection of learning, the research project itself is referred to frequently to help elucidate and capture this learning in a systematic way. The applied study employed an explanatory sequential mixed methods design to examine career satisfaction and career preference changes over time in doctoral candidates and graduates. Contribution: This paper contributes to higher education by providing a student-led exemplar of applied learning in MMR pedagogy for doctoral students irrespective of discipline and research topic. It provides a sample research project, executed start to finish with a guiding blueprint that can be adapted by faculty and students in various academic departments, within a quarter or semester long course. Findings: Ultimately, this course led to increased confidence and preparation to conduct interdisciplinary mixed methods research. Unique to mixed methods research, the areas in which we witnessed the most growth included developing mixed methods research questions, choosing a design based on these questions, and engaging in data integration. Recommendations for Practitioners: We provide the following recommendations to instructors interested in developing intermediate- or advanced-level MMR courses: a) obtain input from students on what they are most interested in learning during course conceptualization or early on in implementation; b) consider that a great deal of time outside of the classroom may need to be dedicated to the class project, which may impact the feasibility and successful execution of an experiential course; and c) sufficient class time is dedicated to data integration from quantitative and qualitative inputs. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers interested in further examining learning and proficiency garnered from MMR and other research courses may benefit from including students as co-researchers. In addition, engaging in systematic qualitative research on student and professor experiences in learning and teaching MMR courses could highlight further areas for course refinement and topics for future research. Impact on Society: Given the increasing prevalence of MMR being included in research funding announcements as a preferred methodology, it is imperative to rigorously train researchers in mixed methods research at varying levels of advancement (i.e., introductory, intermediate, and advanced). Future Research: Our small explanatory sequential mixed methods study began as a class project, yet highlighted areas that could be studied further for doctoral candidates and graduates in clinically oriented fields, such as learning what types or qualities of training and mentorship may yield more career preparedness and satisfaction. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4683 mixed methods research applied research experiential learning career satisfac-tion doctoral education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-01-24 16 047 069 4676 article Velisiwe Gasa gasavg@unisa.ac.za Mishack Gumbo Gumbomt@unisa.ac.za Aim/Purpose: This article reports on quantitative analysis of students’ perceptions on dimensions of augmented face-to-face support. It is built upon the findings from a larger research project that was undertaken to evaluate postgraduate support offered to Ethiopian doctoral students. Background: Student support is critical for the delivery of any quality Open and Distance Learning (ODL) system. This is because there are numerous challenges that students enrolled especially in global South ODL institutions are faced with, which can impact negatively on their progress and throughput. Methodology: In this article, the data from a quantitative questionnaire that was collected from a larger research project was used. The questionnaire asked students to respond to questions about their perceptions of the inclusion of face-to-face workshops. The responses were analyzed using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS), version 8.4 statistical package. Contribution: This research exposes the benefits of supplementing distance postgraduate supervision with face-to-face tutorials. Findings: The results show that the student-respondents, in general, experienced all five dimensions (‘supervision’, ‘student needs’, ‘facilitators’, ‘environment’, and ‘institutional support/access’) of face-to-face student support very positive. Recommendations for Practitioners: As this inclusion of face-to-face workshops was found beneficial to the students who are geographically distant and at risk of digitally exclusion, the paper concludes by recommending that such approach should not be discarded but strengthened to supplement distance postgraduate supervision. Recommendation for Researchers: Replication of this study but focusing on the qualitative aspects of the five dimensions identified. Impact on Society: Although this study is limited in scope to the Ethiopia project, implications for geographically distant education and support are relevant to Unisa and other ODL institutions in the global South. This may ultimately help inform distance learning efforts globally through augmented face-to-face supports. Future Research: The study results revealed potential concerns regarding student age and registration timelines. Therefore, more specific research that explores age and registration is required. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4676 postgraduate supervision face-to-face tutorials open and distance learning eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-01-24 16 071 087 4685 article Angela Matthews amatth@umich.edu Aim/Purpose: Adapting to the doctoral environment can be a difficult transition. This article emphasizes the importance of academic socialization as a means of integrating into the doctoral culture and persisting during the initial transition to doctoral study. Background: To address the problem of doctoral attrition, I share a personal narrative of problems and persistence during the first year of doctoral coursework. By sharing my initial resistance to social learning and eventual appreciation of merging the social into the academic, this narrative demonstrates the positive impact of socialization on my first year, thus promoting socialization as a means of acclimating to the doctoral environment. Methodology: This project utilizes the qualitative research method of autoethnography to examine my personal experiences adapting to the doctoral environment and connects those experiences to the larger higher education community. Contribution: Since people often connect more with stories than with numbers, my narrative offers struggling doctoral students an opportunity to see possible aspects of themselves in the lived experiences of someone who persisted, to see that they are not alone with their struggles and understand that supplementing their independent studies with social experiences could be a good way for them to persist in their own doctoral studies. Findings: Although I preferred independent work and significantly underestimated the value of social experiences when entering my first year of doctoral study, peer-to-peer interaction quickly became an essential element in my adaptation to the doctoral environment. Recommendations for Practitioners: Results of this study suggest that even when new doctoral students typically prefer solitary work, they should still seek out social learning experiences as a means of acclimating to the doctoral environment. University faculty and staff should incorporate social learning activities into the first year of their programs to promote socialization of their first-year doctoral students and increase their chances of persistence. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should use a variety of methods to examine the experiences of doctoral students and look at the data in new ways to better understand doctoral student needs and uncover new ideas to assist them. Impact on Society: By sharing storied experiences of struggles and success, I hope to inspire doctoral students to work with their peers and support one another as they try to persist. Future Research: More personal experiences of doctoral students are needed to give us a better understanding of the obstacles they encounter, so we can uncover additional strategies to combat those issues and improve persistence. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4685 doctoral adaptation doctoral socialization transitions persistence attrition autoethnography eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-01-28 16 089 125 4687 article Yoon Ha Choi choiyoon@oregonstate.edu Jana Bouwma-Gearhart jana.bouwma-gearhart@oregonstate.edu Grant Ermis grantermis@calagteachers.org Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to offer a systematic review of empirical literature examining doctoral students’ identity development as scholars in the education sciences. We frame our analysis through a constructivist sociocultural perspective to organize our findings and discuss implications for multiple actors and components that constitute the system of doctoral education, with doctoral students as the central actors of the system. Background: Despite increasing interest in the professional identity development of postsecondary students via their experiences in educational programs, relatively little is known about how doctoral students develop their identity as professionals who engage in scholarship. We focus specifically on the experiences of education sciences doctoral students, given their unique experiences (e.g., typically older in age, more professional experiences prior to starting doctoral program) and the potential of education sciences doctoral programs contributing to the diversification of academia and future generations of students and scholars. Methodology: Our systematic literature search process entailed reviewing the titles, abstracts, and methods sections of the first 1,000 records yielded via a Google Scholar search. This process, combined with backwards and forwards citation snowballing, yielded a total of 62 articles, which were read in their entirety. These 62 articles were further reduced to 36 final articles, which were coded according to an inductively created codebook. Based on themes derived from our coding process, we organized our findings according to a framework that illuminates individual identity development in relation to a larger activity system. Contribution: This systematic review presents the current body of scholarship regarding the identity development of education sciences doctoral students via a constructivist sociocultural framework. We contribute to the study of doctoral education and education research more broadly by focusing on an area that has received relatively little attention. A focus on the identity development of doctoral students pursuing the education sciences is warranted given the field’s promise for preparing a diverse group of future educators and education scholars. Furthermore, this analysis broadens the conversation regarding scholarship on this topic as we present doctoral student identity development as occurring at the intersection of student, faculty, program, disciplinary, institutional, and larger sociocultural contexts, rather than as individualized and local endeavors. Findings: Looking across our reviewed articles, identity as scholar emerged as recognition by self and others of possessing and exhibiting adequate levels of competence, confidence, autonomy, and agency with respect to scholarly activities, products, and communities. Students often experience tensions on their journey towards becoming and being scholars, in contending with multiple identities (e.g., student, professional) and due to the perceived mismatch between students’ idealized notion of scholar and what is attainable for them. Tensions may serve as catalysts for development of identity as scholar for students, especially when student agency is supported via formal and less ubiquitous subsidiary experiences of students’ doctoral programs. Recommendations for Practitioners: We recommend that actors within the broader system of doctoral student identity development (e.g., doctoral students, faculty, organizational/institutional leaders) explicitly acknowledge students’ identity development and intentionally incorporate opportunities for reflection and growth as part of the doctoral curriculum, rather than assume that identity development occurs “naturally.” In this paper, we provide specific recommendations for different stakeholders. Recommendation for Researchers: Our literature review focused on studies that examined the identity development of doctoral students in the education sciences. We recommend further discipline-specific research and synthesis of such research to uncover similarities and differences across various disciplines and contexts. Impact on Society: Doctoral students have the potential to become and lead future generations of educators and scholars. Taking a sociocultural and system-level approach regarding the successful identity development of doctoral students is necessary to better support and cultivate a diverse group of future scholars who are well-equipped to lead innovations and solve problems both within and outside academia. Future Research: Possible areas of future research include focusing on the experiences of students who leave their programs prior to completion (and thus not developing their identity as scholars), investigating specific knowledge, skills, and attitudes associated with activities that studies have claimed contribute to identity development, and examining phenomena or traits that are seen as more biologically determined and less modifiable (e.g., attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, and mental health differences) in relation to doctoral students’ identity development. Finally, we recommend that future research should look into the underlying norms and nuances of ontological, epistemological, and methodological roots of programs and disciplines as part of the “story” of developing identity as scholar. Norms, and related philosophical underpinnings of typical doctoral education (and the tasks these translate into) were not explored in the reviewed literature. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4687 identity development identity as scholar doctoral students education sciences cultural-historical activity theory systematic review eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-02-02 16 127 147 4691 article Amani Khalaf H Alghamdi amani.k.hamdan@gmail.com Sue L. T. McGregor Sue.McGregor@msvu.ca Aim/Purpose: Vision 2030 (Saudi Arabia’s national development plan) expects women (50% of all university students) to contribute to a viable economy and ambitious nation, meaning data about their quality of academic life (QAL) during their university experience are timely and significant. They are key players in the nation’s future. Background: This inaugural, exploratory study addresses this under-researched topic by exploring the spiritual, cognitive, physical, social, and psychological dimensions of Saudi female graduate students’ QAL. Methodology: Data comprised the lead author’s reflections and reflexion and interviews with 17 Saudi female graduate students conveniently sampled from Imam Abdul Rahman bin Faisal University (IAU) (Eastern Province) in January 2020. A new Academic Quality of Life Schema was especially designed for this study and future research. Contribution: A Middle Eastern country’s perspective is shared about female graduate students’ QAL from a holistic perspective (spiritual, mind, and body) and through the lens of a new QAL Schema (cognitive, social, and psychological). Findings: Spirituality was the highest rated holistic QAL dimension (76.6%) followed with body (67.4%) and mind (intellect) (58.8%). Despite a generally positive QAL evaluation (67.6%), participants (a) lamented their inability to sustain previous levels of religious devotion and practice, (b) reported health issues with deep emotions and surprise, and (c) experienced dissatisfaction with the educational aspect of their QAL. Regarding the QAL Schema, (a) their lack of research savviness hampered their ability to learn and enjoy the graduate experience; (b) psychological anxiety hampered their ability to connect with the Creator and poor time management and heavy academic workload compromised exercise and leisure with all three causing an imbalanced lifestyle; and (c) social peer camaraderie and positive classroom environments were appreciated. Recommendations for Practitioners: Women’s colleges should (a) collect subjective data about female graduate students’ satisfaction with university services, specialization and teaching decisions, and faculty members’ and peer colleagues’ support; (b) provide and promote services related to places and means of recreation, leisure, and alone time; and (c) ensure that guidance and counseling offices develop strategies to reduce stress and anxiety factors hindering QAL. Recommendation for Researchers: Future studies should use larger sample frames and, for comparative purposes, previously validated empirical QAL instruments. Saudi-based QAL studies should include religion. Mixed methods research designs are recommended as is a gendered comparative study for the gender-segregated Saudi higher education context. Impact on Society: Deeper understandings of Saudi female graduate students’ QAL will facilitate (a) tailored institutional and faculty support leading to higher enrolment levels, (b) stronger knowledge bases and more sophisticated research skills for students and (c) improved labor force participation. Future Research: Over 1/3 of participants felt their academic gains were not as strong as anticipated, yet few commented about teaching staff or teaching methods. Future research should expand inquiries into the educational aspect of QAL as well as the underrepresented social aspect of QAL. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4691 Saudi Arabia quality of academic life quality of college life female graduate students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-02-13 16 149 170 4700 article Jennifer Cutri jennifer.cutri@monash.edu Sue Wilson sue.wilson@monash.edu Aim/Purpose: This particular study aims to contribute to the recent scholarly inquiry of doctoral student identity work within collegiate, attendee-driven writing networks. The study closely explores the implementation and impact of supportive measures in academia for novice researchers in the form of writing events. This paper draws on two case studies of doctoral students reflecting on the impact of their participation in social, academic literacy networks. The project also explores how these individuals were able to think about and mediate their own identities as they developed their reputations as experts in their field. Background: Completing a doctoral degree is a rich, rewarding endeavour; however, it is also a challenging process. Novice academics are vulnerable to psychosocial and emotional stresses associated with being an academic within the highly competitive environment, such as isolation and burnout. More recently, scholarly interest has emerged regarding the academy’s pressures upon novice researchers, such as those entering full-time academic roles after completing their doctoral studies. Methodology: A qualitative research design was implemented where data collection for this project involved in-depth semi-structured interviewing. The nature of the semi-structured interviews enabled professional dialogue with each participant. The semi-structured nature of the interviews enabled flexibility where follow-up questions and probes allowed for richer data gathering. Data analysis occurred within a sociocultural framework. Contribution: Explicitly focusing on doctoral students, we build upon existing knowledge and understanding of how novice academic writers negotiate, interpret, and understand the impact of their research dissemination and roles. While exploring how these individuals think about and mediate their identities during the initial period of asserting their reputations as experts in the field, this study looks at how collegiate, attendee-driven writing networks can support novice academics to meet the demands for quality research dissemination and strive to meet the metrics expected of them. Findings: This research has found that novice researchers who thrive on social interaction may often find collegiality lacking in their professional lives. Furthermore, those who can find a support network that fosters positive self-belief and provides a means for sharing successes benefit from countless opportunities for empowerment as novice researchers work through their doctorates. Recommendations for Practitioners: This research confirms and provides details around how a collegiate atmosphere for novice academics helps mitigate feelings of isolation, vulnerability, and a lack of self-confidence in their scholastic ability. Overcoming such feelings occurs through learning from peers, overcoming isolation and learning self-managing techniques. Therefore, establishing spaces for collegiate, attendee-driven writing events within doctoral settings is encouraged. Recommendation for Researchers: Further research into the benefits of collegiate, attendee-driven writing events and supporting the process of academic writing and dissemination can focus on transdisciplinary writing groups, as this particular study was centred within a specific faculty. Impact on Society: Within the neoliberal context of higher education, novice academics can benefit from attendee-driven writing events intended to empower them and provide growth opportunities. Through participation in collegiate, attendee driven writing networks, which are social and peer-based, we show that novice academics can learn how to combat unsettling feelings of perfectionism, isolation, fear of inadequacy, and failure. The social element is central to understanding how writers can increase their productivity and dissemination by writing alongside peers. Future Research: Novice researchers also represent early career researchers; thus, exploring collegiate, attendee-driven writing events for practicing academics is also encouraged. As noted above, exploring the potential of transdisciplinary writing networks would also be of value. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4700 academic writing collegiate writing groups social network research training professional identity eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-02-22 16 171 187 4701 article Dr. Sharron Scott sharron.scott@temple.edu Jennifer M Johnson jmjohnson@temple.edu Aim/Purpose: This qualitative study investigated the educational experiences of Black male doctoral students that contributed to prolonged “All But Dissertation” (ABD) status. Background: Explorations of the enrollment and persistent patterns among Black/African American students has shed light on the disparate rates of graduate school completion. While previous scholarship has focused on Black men in doctoral programs, there has been less focus on the experiences of Black male doctoral students who, after successfully completing coursework, comprehensive examinations, and a dissertation proposal hearing, find themselves mired in “All But Dissertation” (ABD) status. The purpose of this research was to explore the intersections of race and gender in the educational experiences of Black male doctoral students that contribute to delayed terminal degree completion. Methodology: Utilizing Self-Efficacy Theory and Critical Race Theory, this phenomenological investigation examines the racialized experiences of three Black male doctoral candidates enrolled in diverse graduate programs. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to identify how race and gender intersects with faculty advising, mentoring, student behaviors, and the ways faculty members support or impede doctoral student progression during the dissertation phase. Contribution: This study contributes to research in three critical ways: (1) it expands our understanding of the experiences of doctoral students specifically between completing coursework and defending a dissertation; (2) it illustrates the types of racialized encounters experienced during graduate study that contribute to prolonged ABD status and program attrition; and (3) it offers strategies for campus administrators and faculty to consider to extend structures of support to promote degree attainment among Black male doctoral students. Findings: This study’s findings indicate that racialized dynamics during doctoral education create environments that negatively impact doctoral student self-esteem and diminish motivation to complete doctoral studies. Through the narratives of Rico, Jeremy, and Kevin, three core themes emerged that illustrate the salience of race in the doctoral program experiences of Black males: (1) Underrepresented & Undervalued, (2) Challenging Transitions, and (3) Gendered Racism. First, each participant attended doctoral programs at predominantly White institutions, and all shared the commonality of being the only or one of a few Black male doctoral students in their program. Being underrepresented in the program led to challenges finding faculty members who valued their burgeoning research interests and were willing to support them through the dissertation process. Additionally, participants described challenging transitions at each stage of their doctoral program, which ultimately contributed to extending their time as students. Not only did they describe having different levels of preparedness to begin doctoral study, limited feedback from faculty through coursework and on dissertation proposal drafts prolonging their time as doctoral candidates. Finally, participants described their experiences navigating gendered racism, or racism that was attributed to their identity as Black men. Exasperated by their underrepresentation in the academy, participants talked about being surveilled on campus, having their intellect questioned, and the struggles associated with getting approval for their research. Recommendations for Practitioners: The experiences highlighted by participants offer insights into the institutional policies and procedures that can be implemented to support Black men. Specifically, findings speak to the importance of diversity. Campuses should work to ensure there is structural diversity within programs, and that faculty can guide students through a diverse array of research interests and topics as well. Faculty should offer clear and consistent feedback on student writing at all stages of graduate education to better prepare students for the transition to writing a dissertation independently. Finally, as racism is endemic to education, administration should promote spaces where students of color can talk about their racially charged experiences navigating the academy. Recommendation for Researchers: This work would benefit from additional research exploring the experiences of doctoral candidates across diverse institutional contexts. This includes intentional exploration of experiences of students enrolled in online doctoral programs, executive doctoral programs, and other types of programs that have emerged. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4701 All But Dissertation doctoral candidates African American Male eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-02-23 16 189 209 4702 article Mikaël De Clercq mikael.declercq@uclouvain.be Mariane Frenay mariane.frenay@uclouvain.be Assaad Azzi aazzi@ulb.ac.be Olivier Klein oklein@ulb.ac.be Benoit Galand benoit.galand@uclouvain.be Aim/Purpose: The present study aimed at (1) identifying the naturally occurring patterns of motivation among doctoral students and (2) assessing their impact on the doctoral completion process. Background: Grounded in the self-determination theory, the paper investigated needs satisfaction and the doctoral completion process. Methodology: Two complementary methods were used. First, k-mean clustering was used to classify 461 doctoral students according to their feelings of competence, autonomy and relatedness. Second, the completion process of these five profiles was investigated through multi-group path analyses. Contribution: This paper provided a motivational perspective on doctoral completion process that highlighted significant individual differences. Findings: Five profiles were identified corresponding to different combinations of satisfaction of their innate psychological needs. The results also revealed significant differences in the completion process from one motivation profile to another. Recommendations for Practitioners: The doctoral supervision needs to consider the specificities of the patterns of motivation among doctoral students. Recommendation for Researchers: A more important investigation of motivational patterns is required to fully understand the doctoral completion process. Impact on Society: A better consideration of motivational profiles would increase doctoral students’ well-being and their persistence. Future Research: The effect of motivation and context on student satisfaction and professional efficiency could be further explored. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4702 PhD student motivation retention quantitative research person-centered approach supervisor eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-03-26 16 211 236 4738 article Liana Roos liana.roos@ut.ee Erika Löfström erika.lofstrom@helsinki.fi Marvi Remmik marvi.remmik@ut.ee Aim/Purpose: The study set out to understand the challenges doctoral students experience at different systemic levels of doctoral education through the perspective of ethical principles. Background: Doctoral students experience various challenges on their journey to the degree, and as high dropout rates indicate, these challenges become critical for many students. Several individual and structural level aspects, such as student characteristics, supervisory relationship, the academic community as well national policies and international trends, influence doctoral studies, and students’ experiences have been researched quite extensively. Although some of the challenges doctoral students experience may be ethical in nature, few studies have investigated these challenges specifically from an ethics perspective. Methodology: The study drew on qualitative descriptions of significant negative incidents from 90 doctoral students from an online survey. The data were first analyzed using a reflexive thematic analysis, and then the themes were located within different systemic levels of doctoral studies: individual (e.g., doctoral student, the individual relationship with supervisor) and structural (e.g., the institution, faculty, academic community). Finally, the ethical principles at stake were identified, applying the framework of five common ethical principles: respect for autonomy, benefiting others (beneficence), doing no harm (non-maleficence), being just (justice), and being faithful (fidelity). Contribution: Understanding doctoral students’ experiences from an ethical perspective and locating these among the systemic levels of doctoral studies contributes to a better understanding of the doctoral experience’s complexities. Ethical considerations should be integrated when creating and implementing procedures, rules, and policies for doctoral education. Making the ethical aspects visible will also allow universities to develop supervisor and faculty training by concretely targeting doctoral studies aspects highlighted as ethically challenging. Findings: In doctoral students’ experiences, structural level ethical challenges out-weighed breaches of common ethical principles at the individual level of doctoral studies. In the critical experiences, the principle of beneficence was at risk in the form of a lack of support by the academic community, a lack of financial support, and bureaucracy. Here, the system and the community were unsuccessful in contributing positively to doctoral students’ welfare and fostering their growth. At the individual level, supervision abandonment experiences, inadequate supervision, and students’ struggle to keep study-related commitments breached fidelity, which was another frequently compromised principle. Although located at the individual level of studies, these themes are rooted in the structural level. Additionally, the progress review reporting and assessment process was a recurrent topic in experiences in which the principles of non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice were at stake. Recommendations for Practitioners: Going beyond the dyadic student-supervisor relationship and applying the ethics of responsibility, where university, faculty, supervisors, and students share a mutual responsibility, could alleviate ethically problematic experiences. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend that further research focus on experiences around the ethics in the progress reporting and assessment process through in-depth interviews with doctoral students and assessment committee members. Impact on Society: Dropout rates are high and time to degree completion is long. An ethical perspective may shed light on why doctoral studies fail in efficiency. Ethical aspects should be considered when defining the quality of doctoral education. Future Research: A follow-up study with supervisors and members of the academic community could contribute to developing a conceptual framework combining systemic levels and ethics in doctoral education. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4738 doctoral students’ experiences ethical principles ethical challenges doctoral education systemic perspective eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-03-26 16 237 252 4735 article Genia M. Bettencourt gbettenc@usc.edu Megan L Bartlett megan.bartlett.2@go.stcloudstate.edu Rachel E. Friedensen refriedensen@stcloudstate.edu Aim/Purpose: Multiple barriers exist within doctoral education in the United States that can undermine the success of students, particularly for students with marginalized identities. While mentorship can provide an important form of support, it must be done in an intentional way that is mindful of issues of equity and power. Background: By applying a power-conscious framework to current practices of doctoral mentorship in the U.S., we propose key considerations to help support doctoral students and shift power imbalances. Methodology: As a scholarly paper, this work draws upon a comprehensive review of existing research on doctoral mentorship in the U.S. Contribution: As a relatively recent development, the power-conscious framework provides an important tool to address issues of inequity that has not yet been applied to doctoral mentorship to our knowledge. Such a framework provides clear implications for mentorship relationships, institutional policies, and future research. Findings: The power-conscious framework has direct applicability to and possibility for reshaping doctoral mentorship in the U.S. as well as elsewhere. Each of the six foci of the framework can be integrated with research on doctoral students to help formal and informal mentors enhance their practice. Recommendations for Practitioners: Throughout our analysis, we pose questions for mentors to consider in order to reflect upon their practice and engage in further exploration. Recommendation for Researchers: Research on doctoral mentorship should explicitly engage with broader dynamics of power, particularly as related to understanding the experiences of marginalized student populations. Impact on Society: The demanding nature of and precarity within U.S. doctoral education leads to high rates of departure and burnout amongst students. By re-envisioning mentorship, we hope to begin a broader re-imagining of doctoral education to be more equitable and supportive of students. Future Research: To examine these claims, future research should explore doctoral student mentorship relationships and how power dynamics are contained therein both within the U.S. and in international contexts. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4735 mentorship doctoral students power conscious doctoral education United States eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-04-08 16 253 272 4741 article Amy J Catalano Amy.Catalano@Hofstra.edu Susan T Radin Susan.T.Radin@Hofstra.edu Aim/Purpose: Doctoral students who are parents are increasingly more common, particularly in female-dominated disciplines, such as education. This study aims to examine the experiences of parents pursuing an education doctorate Background: This study examines the experiences of doctoral students who are parents and their perceptions of support in order to determine how programs and faculty can better serve students. Methodology: This mixed methods study examines the experiences of 52 doctoral students who were parents or became parents during their doctoral program. Methods includes surveys and interviews. Contribution: Very little published literature focuses on the experiences of both mothers and fathers who are doctoral students. This study is unique in that education doctoral students are generally established professionals with families and career success. Findings: Among participants, 37% were women who became pregnant during the program. While most parents persisted in the program to graduate with a doctorate, several participants, including fathers, discussed their decisions to leave the doctoral program due to family responsibilities. Recommendations for Practitioners: In order to uphold standards for a high-quality doctoral education, while also supporting student-parents, recommendations are presented for both doctoral programs and students. Recommendation for Researchers: Further research is needed on LGBTQ families and single-parent families of lower incomes. Impact on Society: Differences between workloads and barriers to advancement still persist for mothers in comparison to fathers. Future Research: Future research should examine the experiences of fathers more fully. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4741 doctoral studies Ed. D parents motherhood academia eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-04-26 16 273 290 4742 article Sylvie Roy syroy@ucalgary.ca Jody Dennis jody.dennis@ucalgary.ca Stefan Rothschuh stefan.rothschuh@ucalgary.ca Jingzhou Liu jingzhou.liu@ucalgary.ca Jennifer MacDonald jennifer.macdonald2@ucalgary.ca Marlon Simmons simmonsm@ucalgary.ca Aim/Purpose: This paper reflects on participation in an International Doctoral Research Seminar, held in Beijing, China, to consider what it means to locate difference and make meaning in a globalized world in relation to teaching and learning. Background: The impetus for our inquiry stems from our shared experience at the seminar, which brought together 12 graduate students and six faculty members from three universities. We came with diverse life stories, educational and professional experiences, and research interests. Alongside presentations and school visits, some students questioned how teaching and learning practices differ in China compared to their experiences in Canada. Methodology: We employ an interpretive approach which allows us to revisit our individual stories and to explore different views of meaning-making in a globalized context. Specifically, two authors, positioned by different backgrounds (Chinese and Canadian), share their life histories and experiences for wider dialogue with other delegation members. We consider their experiences at various levels of education (K-12, leading up to graduate school, and at the doctoral seminar) as a mode of generating dialogue around the different contexts in relation to teaching and learning. Contribution: Our article contributes to the area of globalizing teaching and learning. We invite students and educators to revisit their lived experiences and advocate for daily practices that might defy sameness caused by the forces of globalization to instead contribute to epistemological diversity and tolerance. Findings: Through the process of unpacking the lived experiences of the two authors, we encounter the complexities of already being products of a globalized world. We reveal how a singular normative mode of knowing is perpetuated in many educational institutions. Difference, however, was located in the nuances of our stories. Thus, cultivating a practice of paying attention to the dynamic forms of knowing as they emerge can be a process of unlearning sameness toward rich meaning-making. Recommendations for Practitioners: We challenge educational practitioners to reflect on the ways in which meaning is, and can be, generated to resist uniformity and honor the lived experiences of students. We offer an opening to engage in narrative opportunities to promote dialogue and facilitate collaboration. Recommendation for Researchers: We open possibilities to consider a different ethic for generating meaning that resists overpowering global powers and honor local knowledge. Impact on Society: Our article provides an interpretive lens of global meaning-making to discuss critical social, cultural, and ecological dilemmas facing humanity through individuals’ narratives and life histories. Future Research: Future research will inquire into practical and ethical considerations that might play out in local settings (lectures, seminars, assessments, research proposals) and global collaborations, such as future doctoral seminars, to confront western exclusivity. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4742 meaning-making difference globalization praxis stories ethics eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-05-01 16 291 317 4755 article Basil Cahusac de Caux basil.caux@aum.edu.kw Aim/Purpose: To date, few studies have investigated the impact of global health crises on the academic writing of doctoral candidates. This paper seeks to start a conversation about the impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on doctoral candidates’ academic writing output and strategies. Background: This paper employs and analyses data elicited from surveys and interviews involving doctoral candidates from around the world. Data were collected during April 2020, at a time when government-mandated lockdowns and restrictions on movement were in full force in many countries around the world. Methodology: Surveys were conducted with 118 doctoral candidates from over 40 institutions based in four continents. Follow-up interviews were carried out with four doctoral candidates enrolled in an Australian institution. A qualitative descriptive design, employing thematic analysis, is used to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on doctoral candidates’ writing output and strategies. The data analysis includes statistical descriptions of the surveys. Contribution: This paper provides insights into the myriad challenges and obstacles facing doctoral candidates during the COVID-19 pandemic. It describes the writing strategies adopted by doctoral candidates during a period of significant societal disruption, and illustrates how thematic analysis can be employed in research involving global health crises. Findings: Despite the adoption of novel approaches to academic writing, which appear in an insignificant minority of respondents, doctoral candidates’ overall commitment to academic writing has been negatively impacted by the pandemic. Similarly, delays to academic research activities caused by the pandemic have resulted in a significant decline in commitment (motivation) to academic writing and a substantial impact on doctoral candidates’ ability to write about their research. Recommendations for Practitioners: Supervisors and mentors should strive to provide doctoral candidates with timely feedback during the pandemic. Given the impact of the pandemic on doctoral candidates’ mental health and motivation to write, increased institutional and peer support is required to help doctoral candidates overcome academic issues during the pandemic and future health crises. This researcher recommends consulting regularly with and offering individually tailored solutions to doctoral candidates who are struggling to work on their theses during the pandemic. Similarly, institutions should empower supervisors in ways that allow them to provide greater levels of support to doctoral candidates. Recommendation for Researchers: Further research on the impacts of the pandemic on various academic cohorts, such as early career researchers (doctoral candidates, postdoctoral researchers, and assistant professors) and student cohorts (e.g., undergraduate and postgraduate), will clarify the extent to which the pandemic is impacting the academic writing of doctoral candidates. Impact on Society: The pressure placed on doctoral candidates to produce quality academic writing seems to have been heightened by the pandemic. This has a range of adverse effects for the higher education sector, particularly administrators responsible for managing doctoral candidate success and the academe, which recruits many of its faculty from holders of doctorate degrees. Future Research: Additional focus on academic writing of doctoral candidates during the pandemic is needed. Research should include randomised samples and represent a range of academic disciplines. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4755 COVID-19 academic writing writing output writing strategies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-05-01 16 319 337 4744 article Getnet Tizazu Fetene getnet.fetene@gmail.com Wondwosen Tamrat wondwosentamrat@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This study was conducted to examine the rate of delay, explanatory causes, and coping strategies of PhD candidates at Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia’s premier university, over the last ten years. Background: Delayed graduation is a common theme in doctoral education around the world. It continues to draw the concern of governments, universities, and the candidates themselves, calling for different forms of intervention. Addressing these challenges is key to resolving the many obstacles into doctoral education. Methodology: Ten-year archival data consisting of 1,711 PhD students and in-depth interviews with ten PhD candidates were used as data-generation tools. The data collection focused on progression patterns, reasons for study delays, and the coping mechanisms used by doctoral students when they face challenges. While the candidates were interviewed to narrate their lived experience pertinent to the objectives of the study, the archival data regarding the PhD students were collected from the Registrar Office of the University under study. Contribution: Amid an ongoing global debate about best practices in doctoral education, the research on study delays contributes not only to filling the existing empirical gap in the area but also in identifying factors, for example, related to financial matters, family commitment, and student-supervisor rapport, that help address the challenges faced and improving the provision of doctoral education. Findings: The findings of this study revealed that the cumulative average completion time for a PhD study was 6.19 years— over two years more than the four years given as the optimum duration for completing a PhD program. The institutional pattern of delays over the last ten years indicates that doctoral students are requiring more and more years to complete their PhDs. The study further revealed that completing a PhD in time is a process that can be influenced by many interacting factors, which include student commitment and preparation, favourable academic and research environment, and positive student-supervisor rapport. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is important for practitioners and higher education institutions to find ways to improve the on-time completion of doctoral programmes in order to minimise the continued financial, emotional, and opportunity costs the higher education sector is currently incurring. Recommendation for Researchers: The fact that this study was limited to a single institution by itself warrants more studies about time-to-degree in PhD programs and causes for study delays as well as studies about successful interventions in doctoral education. Future research should particularly explore the nature of the advisor/advisee relationship and other critical factors that appear to have a significant role in addressing the challenges of study delay. Impact on Society: The expansion of PhD programmes is an encouraging development in Ethiopia. The findings of this study may help improve completion rates of doctoral students and reduce program duration, which would have significant implication to minimise the ensuing financial, emotional, and opportunity costs involved at individual, national, and institutional levels. Future Research: Given the growing number of universities in Ethiopia and their possible diversity, PhD students’ profiles, backgrounds, and expectations, more research is needed to examine how this diversity may impact doctoral students’ progression and persistence. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4744 PhD studies doctoral education PhD study delay delayed graduation Addis Ababa university eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-05-08 16 339 362 4766 article Alex Casteel Alex.Casteel@gcu.edu Nancy Bridier nancy.bridier@my.gcu.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this article is to present clear definitions of the population structures essential to research, to provide examples of how these structures are described within research, and to propose a basic structure that novice researchers may use to ensure a clearly and completely defined population of interest and sample from which they will collect data. Background: Novice researchers, especially doctoral students, experience challenges when describing and distinguishing between populations and samples. Clearly defining and describing research structural elements, to include populations and the sample, provides needed scaffolding to doctoral students. Methodology: The systematic review of 65 empirical research articles and research texts provided peer-reviewed support for presenting consistent population- and sample-related definitions and exemplars. Contribution: This article provides clear definitions of the population structures essential to research, with examples of how these structures, beginning with the unit of analysis, are described within research. With this defined, we examine the population subsets and what characterizes them. The proposed writing structure provides doctoral students a model for developing the relevant population and sample descriptions in their dissertations and other research. Findings: The article describes that although many definitions and uses are relatively consistent within the literature, there are epistemological differences between research designs that do not allow for a one-size-fits-all definition for all terms. We provide methods for defining populations and the sample, selecting a sample from the population, and the arguments for and against each of the methods. Recommendations for Practitioners: Social science research faculty seek structured ways in which to present key research elements to doctoral students and to provide a model by which they may write the dissertation. The article offers contemporary examples from the peer-reviewed literature to support these aims. Recommendation for Researchers: Novice researchers may wish to use the recommended framework within this article when developing the relevant section of the dissertation. Doing so provides an itemized checklist of writing descriptions, ensuring a more complete and comprehensive description of the study population and sample. Impact on Society: The scientific method provides a consistent methodological approach to researching and presenting research. By reemphasizing the definitions and applications of populations and samples in research, and by providing a writing structure that doctoral students may model in their own writing, the article supports doctoral students’ growth and development in using the scientific method. Future Research: Future researchers may wish to further advance novice researcher knowledge in developing models to guide dissertation writing. Future studies may focus on other essential areas of research, including studies about recruitment methods and attrition strategies, data collection procedures, and overall research alignment. Additionally, future researchers may wish to consider evaluating doctoral student foundational knowledge about populations and samples as part of the research process. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4766 population of interest target population sampling frame sample unit of analysis unit of observation eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-05-11 16 363 377 4757 article Andrew Kelly andrew.kelly@ecu.edu.au Kylie J Stevenson k.stevenson@ecu.edu.au Aim/Purpose: This paper analyses the textual features of contract cheating websites that offer thesis writing services for doctoral students and considers implications for practice. Background: Contract cheating is an increasing challenge for higher education institutions, governments and societies worldwide. However, relatively little is known about the prevalence of online thesis writing services and the ways in which these companies attract doctoral students as customers. Methodology: This study has a three-step textual analysis methodological approach: firstly, identifying contract cheating websites that target doctoral students; secondly, applying a top-down thematic approach to the literature to identify potential vulnerabilities; and, thirdly, using these themes in a textual analysis to interrogate the language used on these websites. Contribution: Much of the current research into contract cheating has focused on coursework students. This study builds on the small sub-field of scholarship that has investigated contract cheating in a research writing context, and in contradistinction to previous studies, analyses the persuasive language features used by online contract cheating websites in the context of commonly reported doctoral student challenges. This is a novel approach not yet explored in the literature. Findings: The analysis reveals that contract cheating websites include specific language to appeal to doctoral students’ vulnerabilities across four common themes: ‘balancing work and personal life’, ‘the complexity of doctoral academic writing’, ‘self-efficacy’ and ‘academic career progression’. Recommendations for Practitioners: The themes present in this study highlight the critical role thesis supervisors can play in supporting doctoral students’ thesis writing progression, as well as the value of peer learning groups in building self-efficacy. The limited research literature into contract cheating in a doctoral context also suggests a need for increased training and awareness-raising programs for supervisors, thesis examiners and new graduate students. Recommendation for Researchers: Future studies that further investigate the prevalence of these themes across a broader scope of websites and countries will provide greater insights into the extent to which these websites are a global threat to vulnerable doctoral students. Impact on Society: The paper provides a foundation for researchers and graduate schools to raise greater awareness of contract cheating amongst doctoral students and, in so doing, combats the reputational risks it can have on universities and the potential safety risks for the general public. Future Research: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with doctoral students and supervisors that explore their awareness of contract cheating for thesis writing and their ability to identify research writing that has been completed by a third-party. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4757 contract cheating academic integrity doctoral students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-05-15 16 379 393 4775 article Christopher M Clark cmclark8@gmail.com Kate Olson olson.kate1@gmail.com Ozge Hacifazlioglu ozgehacifazlioglu@gmail.com David L Carlson david.l.carlson@asu.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of the study was to contribute to knowledge about the ways in which incorporating a Community of Practice into doctoral seminar teaching and course management could be a practical and sustainable path to professional development for doctoral faculty aspiring to become stewards of the practice of teaching. Background: This report documents a reflective self-study conducted by four professors engaged in a community of practice while team-teaching a linked pair of EdD seminars on action research at Arizona State University. Methodology: This reflective study used field notes and written reflections as its sources of data to examine how participants’ identities as professors of education changed during and after participating in a team-taught professional doctoral pair of courses. Contribution: An important goal of the community of practice was to promote faculty professional development as stewards of the practice of teaching. Engaging in disciplined reflection on teaching is uncommon in American graduate education and rarely documented in the literature of post-compulsory education. Findings: Analysis of post-hoc reflective accounts and contemporaneous notes revealed a general pattern of gradual transformation by the teaching team members. The professors moved from anxious concern about appearing competent to growing confidence and appreciation for the potential of a community of practice to provide significant professional benefits to students and faculty. Salutary features of reflective team teaching in a community of practice persist in participants’ subsequent teaching practice. Recommendations for Practitioners: Reported benefits include eagerness for team teaching, increased openness to pedagogical suggestions from peers, comfort with being observed by colleagues while teaching, and willingness to revise plans when initial plans and practices are not working effectively for students. Recommendation for Researchers: Data analysis and testimony support the claim that engaging in a CoP, in this case, did support their identity transformation as stewards of their own practice as instructors and professors of education. However, the study design does not support a claim that most or all future Communities of Practice in doctoral education will produce similar salutary results. Testing this proposition will require additional research in settings and programs different from the one represented here. Impact on Society: Implementing communities of practice in doctoral programs can make room for professional development for both the faculty team and for the students. Future Research: Further studies could be conducted to document the ways in which other communities of practice can be used to develop faculty instructors in masters and doctoral programs and in undergraduate education. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4775 community of practice stewards of practice team teaching doctoral seminar reflective self-study systematic reflection eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-05-29 16 395 428 4785 article Shihua C Brazill shihuabrazill@montana.edu Aim/Purpose: This narrative inquiry study uses a strength-based approach to study the cross-cultural socialization journey of Chinese international doctoral students at a U.S. Land Grant university. Historically, we thought of socialization as an institutional or group-defined process, but “journey” taps into a rich narrative tradition about individuals, how they relate to others, and the identities that they carry and develop. Background: To date, research has employed a deficit perspective to study how Chinese students must adapt to their new environment. Instead, my original contribution is using narrative inquiry study to explore cross-cultural socialization and mentoring practices that are consonant with the cultural capital that Chinese international doctoral students bring with them. Methodology: This qualitative research uses narrative inquiry to capture and understand the experiences of three Chinese international doctoral students at a Land Grant institute in the U.S. Contribution: This study will be especially important for administrators and faculty striving to create more diverse, supportive, and inclusive academic environments to enhance Chinese international doctoral students’ experiences in the U.S. Moreover, this study fills a gap in existing research by using a strength-based lens to provide valuable practical insights for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to support the unique cross-cultural socialization of Chinese international doctoral students. Findings: Using multiple conversational interviews, artifacts, and vignettes, the study sought to understand the doctoral experience of Chinese international students’ experience at an American Land Grant University. The findings suggest that Chinese international doctoral students use cultural capital (aspirational, linguistic, familial, social, navigational, and resistance) as leverage in this cross-cultural socialization process. Recommendations for Practitioners: The findings from this study offer insights for practitioners into what institutions and departments might do to support Chinese international doctoral students in their socialization journey. It is vital to support the whole student through understanding their different forms of capital. Recommendation for Researchers: Future researchers may want to further explore how students experience this process. An important question for future researchers to consider is: do Chinese international doctoral students benefit from multilingual discourse with their peers and from a multi-lingual command of the literature? Also, does the ability to read scholarly publications in both Chinese and English bridge a gap and strengthen professional identity development? Impact on Society: Significant impact on society includes improved opportunities for cross-cultural learning, international partnerships, and support for positive socialization experiences where diverse students may use their cultural capital as strengths and express new ideas. Moreover, there is also an economic benefit for the institutions and communities that rely on international students’ economic contributions. Future Research: Future research may want to explore how students perceive and experience multilingualism as a benefit in their education; for example, does the ability to read scholarly publications in both Chinese and English bridge a gap and strengthen professional identity development? http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4785 Chinese international doctoral students socialization cultural capital strength-based perspective narrative inquiry eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-06-11 16 429 447 4790 article Katey E Park katey.park@ryerson.ca Annabel Sibalis Annabel.sibalis@ryerson.ca Brittany Jamieson bjamieson@ryerson.ca Aim/Purpose: Although the high rates of stress and psychological distress in graduate students has been well-documented, Canadian samples are underrepresented in the extant literature. The present study explores prevalence rates of burnout and psychological distress in a sample of psychology master’s and doctoral students at a university in a large urban Canadian city, as well as factors relating to their well-being, social support and stress. Background: There are economic and productivity setbacks stemming from high stress and mental health challenges. Burnout and psychological distress of graduate students are associated with hindered academic progress, mental and physical health challenges, and reduced productivity. Further, emotionally exhausted doctoral students are at heightened risk for non-completion of their degrees. Methodology: Sixty-two psychology graduate students completed an online survey that assessed burnout, psychological distress (anxiety, depression, and stress symptoms), perceived social support, collegiate sense of community, financial strain, and rank-ordered nine domains of graduate school stressors. Contribution: The present paper contributes to the body of knowledge that graduate students residing in an urban Canadian city experience high rates of burnout and psychological distress. High levels of social support outside the academe were not protective factors in mitigating burnout. Findings: Participants reported high levels of perceived social support and sense of community. However, over half (60%) of respondents met criteria for burnout, and one in three students met criteria for problematic levels of stress, anxiety, and/or depression. In a rank ordering question, “thesis, dissertation or other research”, “classwork” and “finances” ranked in the top three most stressful aspects of graduate school for respondents. Recommendations for Practitioners: Graduate students experience unique stressors related to their mental health and well-being that differ from undergraduate students and young working professionals. Mental health practitioners may be better equipped to support graduate students with knowledge of these specific factors impacting mental health and well-being. Recommendation for Researchers: Based on these findings, four areas of recommendations for psychology graduate institutions and training programs are discussed. These recommendations highlight the need for change across systemic levels and call for integrative efforts to improve wellbeing for psychology graduate students. Impact on Society: Enhancement of doctoral student well-being could contribute to long-term benefits in academia and in higher education. Future Research: The study took place before the emergence of COVID-19, which has undoubtably impacted graduate students globally. Research on student experiences during this unprecedented time is needed, as are additional supports (e.g., virtual programming to reduce social isolation; contingency plans for data collection). http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4790 graduate students mental health burnout job demands-resources model well-being eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-06-12 16 449 467 4805 article Jeffrey K Grim jgrim@umich.edu Christina S Morton cspr@umich.edu Robert M DeMonbrun rdemonbrun@smu.edu Heeyun Kim heeyunk@umich.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of our study was to gain a better understanding of the socialization factors that contribute to the aspirations of doctoral students of Color to pursue teaching careers. Background: Internationally, there has been a renewed call to diversify the professoriate. While the literature often examines early pathway issues and hiring bias, one efficient solution is to continue encouraging the socialization of those doctoral students of Color already interested in pursuing a teaching career. Methodology: We used a sample of 2,717 doctoral candidates of Color from over 221 doctoral-granting institutions in the USA who completed a survey about their graduate experiences. The sample of participants indicated they aspired to a teaching career at the beginning of their doctoral study, yet not all were interested in the same career choice by the end. To analyze our data we used Logistic Regression Modeling (LOGIT) to test which socialization factors (i.e., anticipatory, formal, informal, and personal) contribute to teaching career aspirations. Contribution: We found that factors associated with anticipatory and personal socialization contributed greatest to the continued aspiration of being a teaching faculty member, along with teaching experience. These results are somewhat different than previous literature and practice that places a greater emphasis on formal and informal socialization experiences as contributing to a future teaching faculty career. Findings: Anticipatory (publishing before the start of a PhD program), formal (teaching experience), and personal socialization (sense of belonging) were most related to aspirations to pursue a teaching faculty career, while more factors more traditional in the literature (e.g., relationship with advisor, career and research support, etc.) were not significantly correlated with the desire to pursue a teaching faculty career. Recommendations for Practitioners: We recommend that faculty advisors, graduate education administrators, and academic leaders pay close attention to the personal and social development of doctoral students of Color in order to sustain their interest in teaching in higher education. In addition, it is important for academic leaders to recognize doctoral socialization begins before a student enters a PhD program, so more attention should be given to the opportunities for undergraduate students of Color to learn about the academy through research and publication. Recommendation for Researchers: Doctoral socialization as a topic of study has continued to be of interest to scholars, but there are more quantitative and mixed-method scholarship that could be used to influence academic leaders and policymakers. In addition, scholars should continue to complicate and refine graduate socialization theory in order to understand and represent racially diverse populations. Impact on Society: Multiple interventions will be needed in order to increase the amount of faculty of Color in the professoriate but improving pre-PhD experiences and sense of belonging for doctoral students of Color could be a targeted policy intervention for academic leaders. As researchers and practitioners in the field are looking for ways to better support doctoral students of Color, a nuanced understanding of developmental needs is essential not only for graduation but for intended career aspiration. Future Research: With these findings, we offer opportunities for future research to further our understanding of socialization for doctoral students of Color. Future studies should include more robust measures of socialization factors along with longitudinal research designs in order to understand the temporal developmental needs for students of Color along multiple pathways to the professoriate. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4805 graduate education doctoral socialization race sense of belonging teaching eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-07-26 16 469 485 4839 article Azad Ali Azad.Ali@IUP.edu Shardul Pandya Shardul.Pandya@capella.edu Aim/Purpose: Provide methodology suggesting steps to doctoral mentors to work with students in constructing their research problem statement in their dissertation. Background: Writing a doctoral dissertation is a long journey, and it typically starts with writing the research problem statement. Students face challenges in articulating the research problem statement. Clearly articulating the research problems statement influences the success of the entire dissertation. Methodology: This paper uses a widely used framework to describe student adjustment to graduate studies in general and to doctoral programs in particular. Contribution: This study provides a framework for mentors and advisors to assist them in guiding students in writing their research problem statement. Findings: Writing a research problem statement is difficult by itself. Following the methodological approach suggested in this study will help students with the task of writing their own. Recommendations for Practitioners: A methodological approach to writing a research problem statement is helpful in mitigating the difficulties of writing the dissertation. This study tackles the difficulties with writing the research problem statement. Recommendation for Researchers: More research needs to be done to expand the use of a methodological approach to writing in other sections of the dissertation. Impact on Society: The findings of this research will help doctoral mentors/advisors as they guide students in completing the writing of their research problem statement Future Research: Future research should follow a similar methodological approach in guiding students in writing the other sections of the dissertation http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4839 research problem statement research dissertation problem statement eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-07-26 16 487 512 4811 article Juliann S McBrayer jmcbrayer@georgiasouthern.edu Katherine Fallon kf10548@georgiasouthern.edu Steven Tolman steventolman@gmail.com Daniel W Calhoun dwcalhoun@georgiasouthern.edu Emily Ballesteros eb14372@georgiasouthern.edu Taylor Mathewson tm07649@georgiasouthern.edu Aim/Purpose: This study examined an educational leadership doctoral preparation program to better understand how students’ self-efficacy evolves from the lens of a scholarly practitioner researcher as they progress through specified checkpoints to degree completion. The aim was to identify what factors contributed to building scholarly practitioner researcher skills and what factors hindered the development of doctoral students as they progressed through their educational leadership preparation program. Background: Doctoral programs have the highest attrition of graduate programs, with almost half of the successful students taking six to seven years to complete. Thus, educational leadership doctoral preparation programs must find ways to enhance students’ perceived capability in an effort to facilitate their progress through the program in a timely manner. The researchers believe having high research self-efficacy coupled with evidence-based practices to strengthen scholarly practitioner research skills may be a contributor to effective program progression if viewed from the lens of a scholarly practitioner researcher. Methodology: A mixed-methods study utilizing an ex-post-facto research design based on descriptive statistics coupled with an analysis of qualitative data examined students’ perceived self-efficacy of educational leadership doctoral students in relation to their rate of progression. Contribution: This study provides other doctoral programs a lens into the importance of maintaining students’ high self-efficacy, specifically in the area of scholarly practitioner research to ensure efficient progression through the program to completion in a timely manner. Findings: Educational leadership doctoral students in the specified cohorts reported high self-efficacy at the pre-, mid-, and post-assessment checkpoints in the program during their coursework tier, and findings revealed this high self-efficacy was sustained throughout this progression to the dissertation tier. Four overarching narrative themes influencing students self-efficacy in scholarly practitioner research were identified as Social Support, Academic Challenges, Discipline, Effort, and Motivation, and Personal Challenges. Recommendations for Practitioners: Educational leadership and related doctoral programs should consider using a scholarly practitioner researcher approach. This focus may lead to faster rates of degree completion and better prepared students to solve problems of practice in their practitioner settings. Recommendation for Researchers: While the results are promising in support of evidence-based practices to prepare scholarly practitioner researchers, in turn sustaining or supporting high levels of self-efficacy may prove impactful, thus warranting further research. Impact on Society: Ensuring high levels of self-efficacy may help students to complete their doctoral degree in a timelier manner due to the perception they are capable of program completion and may also, better prepare students to serve as scholarly practitioner researchers in their educational settings. Future Research: Future research should continue longitudinally to examine self-efficacy from the lens of a scholarly practitioner researcher to better understand how this shapes doctoral students’ efforts and capabilities in their doctoral work from admit to program completion. Additionally, future research can quantitively assess a model identifying the relationship between self-efficacy and the four identified themes for the development of doctoral students’ research skills as scholarly practitioners. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4811 self-efficacy educational leadership leadership preparation problem of prac-tice scholarly practitioner researchers eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-07-26 16 513 531 4813 article Devyani Pande devyani@u.nus.edu Panchali Guha panchali.guha@u.nus.edu Aim/Purpose: This article explores the content of PhD student tweets. It has three main aims: (a) to examine what is discussed regarding the PhD process, (b) to evaluate whether tweets express primarily positive or negative sentiments, and (c) to uncover the key themes discussed in both positive and negative tweets. Background: Recent surveys of PhD students have raised concerns about their wellbeing by pointing to high prevalence rates of adverse mental health conditions. However, our understanding of which factors pose the highest risks is still evolving. Self-selection into surveys also raises the possibility of discounting positive aspects of the PhD experience. We use a different data source (Twitter) to explore both these issues. Methodology: Using 16,928 tweets with the Twitter hashtags #phdlife and #phdchat, we first conduct dictionary-based sentiment analysis in R to determine whether tweets are dominated by positive or negative sentiment. We then hand-code the dominant sentiment of a randomly selected subset of 1,994 tweets and qualitatively analyse positive and negative tweets separately to uncover the key themes in each category. Contribution: This article contributes to the emerging literature on the wellbeing and mental health of PhD students by using a novel data source (tweets). It highlights both positive and negative aspects of the PhD student experience. Findings: We find that most tweets express positive rather than negative sentiment, indicating that PhD students do enjoy many aspects of their experience. Negative tweets are dominated by mental health concerns. They also highlight problems with academic culture (especially the normalization of overwork) and the effects of the pandemic on students. Recommendations for Practitioners: Our results indicate that there is a need to change the academic culture of normalizing overwork, ensure adequate institutional provision of mental health support and ability to spot signs of emotional distress, devise strategies to combat the imposter phenomenon, and respond to the particular challenges that the pandemic has created for PhD students. Recommendation for Researchers: The authors recommend that future research explore the specific challenges and opportunities faced by PhD students in different disciplines and geographical locations. As the data used here were collected during the pandemic, it would be useful to track post-pandemic sentiments to observe changes. Impact on Society: Improving the graduate experience of PhD students and providing them adequate mental health support will help to ensure their continued productivity and wellbeing. Future Research: Future research in this area should focus on the efficacy of different interventions to address key problems, such as the imposter phenomenon, stress, anxiety, depression, and isolation. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4813 PhD Twitter sentiment analysis mental health #phdlife #phdchat eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-07-26 16 533 552 4818 article William J Donohue wdonohue@lincoln.edu Alice Shu-Ju Lee alicelee@um.edu.mo Shelah Simpson ssimpson@liberty.edu Kathleen Vacek kathleen.vacek@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to document the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic for doctoral students who were proposing, conducting, or writing up their doctoral thesis, dissertation, or other culminating project. Background: For doctoral students, the process of designing, implementing, and writing a culminating project is a key part of the learning experience. These projects typically require students to direct their own learning and to manage setbacks, obstacles, and challenges as they arise. During the COVID-19 pandemic, doctoral students around the globe had to undertake this key learning experience in the context of a global crisis. Methodology: During August and September 2020, 235 doctoral students from around the world completed an online questionnaire consisting of demographic questions and three open-ended questions about their experience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Analysis involved several cycles of In Vivo Coding of the data, which yielded codes, categories, and eventually themes. At each stage, the researchers collaborated to generate the codes, and the categories and themes arose through several rounds of discussion. Contribution: Our study adds to the small body of knowledge on doctoral students’ experiences from around the world during the COVID-19 pandemic by identifying categories of experience through qualitative, open-ended survey questions. The study highlights doctoral students’ challenges and how these were either exacerbated or mitigated by pandemic-induced changes. Findings: Our survey respondents described impacts on their culminating projects’ progress in five major categories: research design, access to resources, workload, mental health, and finances. Recommendations for Practitioners: The five categories of impacts emerging from our participants’ responses may be useful for faculty and administrators of doctoral programs to consider in reviewing their programs’ responses to the pandemic and making future plans for providing academic continuity in crisis situations as well as re-evaluating the priorities and structures of doctoral program to better support students overall moving forward. Recommendation for Researchers: Further research is needed to better understand how the pandemic impacted individual students’ research and writing processes, including adaptive strategies. Impact on Society: Institutions need to be aware of systemic strain on doctoral students under the best of conditions and be especially aware of the impacts of a crisis and plan contingencies to assist students with a focus on the areas of finances, resource access, workload, research design, and mental health. Future Research: Future research should seek out additional perspectives of male doctoral students. Additionally, data capturing perspectives from students at other points in time are needed as the pandemic continued to unfold after this study’s data collection period. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4818 doctoral education COVID-19 pandemic doctoral writing eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-07-26 16 553 568 4836 article Mengye Yu yumengye1@126.com Simon M Smith Simon.Smith@winchester.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: Grounded Theory (GT) has grown and developed into several strands making its application all the more problematic, argumentative and remaining potentially as a research methodology to avoid when it comes to doctoral research, early-career research. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to revisit GT as a general approach and present an evolved and more considered step-by-step guide to conduct research using this methodology. A leadership development context is applied in this paper to examine how this methodology could work for a new generation of researchers, i.e., new to doctoral research or an early career researcher. Background: Since its academic inception in the seminal text in 1967 (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), GT has emerged and developed to become a popular choice for researchers contemplating qualitative data approaches amongst a variety of subject backgrounds. However, the divergent development and criticized approaches within GT families can lead researchers to avoid such a research methodology. This can especially be the case within doctoral research or other early-career research. Indeed, a specific/explicit GT guideline or framework to assist doctoral students in conducting GT research does not currently exist. Methodology: There is a general review of GT approaches followed by theoretical development of a framework and an applied doctoral example. Contribution: The three evolved methods in GT research and the developed supporting author-designed three-phase research framework will contribute to two aspects. Firstly, the step-by-step guideline can reduce the sense of confusion within an area where criticisms and conflicting approaches exist. This will hopefully assist the next generation of GT researchers in conducting their research through detailed processes and applications. Secondly, there is arguably a need for more GT applications and evolvements to further enrich the body of knowledge that exists in this area and further support a diversity of subject research. Findings: The authors outline numerous differences and similarities within divergent GT practices. By integrating Glaser’s four core principles and three evolved methods, the authors design a three-phase research framework that presents a transparent step-by-step guide. This framework attempts to mitigate criticisms within GT approaches whilst maintaining clarity, flexibility, depth, and rigour within a study. Recommendations for Practitioners: Three GT evolvements (the two-step literature review method, two-step open-coding method, and two-step theory-constitute method) provides greater clarity within a rigorous author-designed three-phase research framework that demonstrates a transparent step-by-step guide. These techniques can encourage a new generation of GT researcher through confident and structured analytical techniques. Recommendation for Researchers: We hope the presented framework and concise view of GT in action will inspire other doctoral students and new GT researchers to conduct GT research following an evolved GT framework. Impact on Society: The debates and innovations around GT, like in this paper, are needed within a methodological society to keep the area contemporary and constantly evolving. Future Research: The framework presented will need further testing beyond the parameters set out here. We hope future research can adopt the evolved GT techniques and procedures to enforce research quality overall and inspire further GT methodological developments. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4836 grounded theory doctoral students early career researchers methodology eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-07-29 16 569 592 4840 article Kylie E Evans kee32@case.edu Megan R Holmes mxh540@case.edu Dana M Prince dmp137@case.edu Victor Groza vkg2@case.edu Aim/Purpose: This descriptive study examines indicators of well-being and sources of emotional connection for social work doctoral students at American institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic, including symptoms of depression, anxiety, work-related burnout, emotional connection to others, and changes in child care among parent respondents. This study also explores if particular groups of doctoral students experience heightened risks to well-being during the pandemic. Background: Social isolation strategies associated with the COVID-19 pandemic present challenges for doctoral student well-being, mental health, professional relationships, and degree persistence. Of particular concern is the potentially disproportionate impact the pandemic may have on the well-being of students who already face additional barriers to degree completion, such as parents and caregivers, as well as those who face obstacles associated with structural oppression, including persons of color, women, and sexual minority (SM) students. Methodology: Baseline data was used from a longitudinal survey study conducted by the authors on social work doctoral student well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants (N = 297) were recruited through the Group for the Advancement of Doctoral Education in Social Work’s (GADE’s) publicly available list of 89 member institutions in the United States. The majority of respondents identified as women (80.1%), 35% of the sample identified as a person of color and/or non-White race, 30% identified as a sexual minority, and 32% were parents of children under 18 years of age. Contribution: This study contributes to the larger body of literature on factors associated with risk, resilience, and well-being among doctoral students, and it offers a specific exploration of these factors within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study deepens our understanding of social work doctoral students in particular, who have higher rates of doctoral enrollment by women and persons of color than many other academic disciplines. Findings: Emotional connection to loved ones was significantly correlated with lower levels of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and work-related burnout. Outcomes varied by race, with Black and Asian respondents indicating higher levels of emotional connection to loved ones as compared to White respondents, and Black respondents indicating lower levels of anxiety and depression compared to White respondents. SM respondents indicated significantly lower levels of emotional connection and higher levels of depression and anxiety, as compared to heterosexual respondents. Parents reported receiving substantially less child care assistance than they were before the pandemic, but also reported lower levels of anxiety, depression, and work-related burnout compared to childless respondents. Recommendations for Practitioners: Recommendations for doctoral program directors and chairs include implementing a purposive communication strategy, faculty modeling self-care and boundaries, creating opportunities for connection, scheduling value-added activities driven by student interest and needs, approaching student needs and plans of study with flexibility, and creating virtual affinity groups to help students connect with those facing similar challenges. Recommendation for Researchers: Outcome evaluation studies of doctoral program initiatives and policies to promote student well-being--both during and in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic-- is warranted. Impact on Society: The COVID-19 pandemic presents complex financial, interpersonal, and programmatic challenges for doctoral faculty and program directors, many of which affect the well-being and mental health of their students. Findings and recommendations from this study may be used to address the needs of doctoral students and support their path to doctoral degree completion. Future Research: Future studies should include measures that tap a broader range of indicators of depression, anxiety, and emotional connection, and additional domains of well-being. Multivariate analyses would permit predictive conclusions, and follow-up qualitative analyses would offer deeper insights into doctoral students’ well-being, coping skills, and experiences within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4840 doctoral students COVID-19 well-being emotional connection burnout eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-09-08 16 593 609 4867 article Solveig Cornér solveig.corner@helsinki.fi Kirsi Pyhältö kirsi.pyhalto@helsinki.fi Jouni A Peltonen jouni.peltonen@oulu.fi Erika Löfström erika.lofstrom@helsinki.fi Aim/Purpose: This study focused on advancing understanding of individual variations in doctoral students’ interest in their doctoral studies and how they related to experiences of burnout and drop-out intentions in Denmark and Finland. Background: Ph.D. students’ experiences of interest, burnout, and dropout intentions among Finnish and Danish Ph.D. students have not been researched before. Research with a person-centred approach exploring individual variations in students undertaking doctoral studies in two comparable but distinct socio-cultural contexts is limited. Methodology: This study uses exploratory factor analysis, K-means cluster analyses in combination with Pairwise comparisons, ANOVA, and Chi-square test. A total of 365 doctoral students in social sciences and humanities disciplines in Finland and Denmark responded to a Cross-Cultural Doctoral Experience Survey. Contribution: This study contributes understanding on individual variation in doctoral students’ interest across two socio-cultural contexts by identifying four personal interest profiles. The profiles were invariant across the contexts. The study also shed further light on the interrelation between the interest in research and the risk for suffering from burnout and entertaining dropout intentions. Findings: The interest profiles identified among the Ph.D. students were the High interest profile, the Moderate interest profile, the Developmental, research and impact interest profile, and the Development and impact interest profile. All interest profiles exhibited high levels of the developmental interest, however they varied especially in the weight given to instrumental and research interests. Ph.D. students in the Moderate interest profile showed signs of burnout, and they were prone to consider dropping out. Also, individuals in the Development and impact interest profile considered more frequently dropping out of their studies. Recommendations for Practitioners: Investing in the identification and support of interest among Ph.D. students is worthwhile, as interest is not a permanent characteristic of the individual, and the combination of research, development, and impact interest indicates a lower risk for burnout and drop-out intentions. Recommendation for Researchers: It is possible that interest profiles are the same across the two national contexts investigated in this study, but their underpinnings and premises are different. It is likely that a qualitative approach would shed more light on these foci. Impact on Society: The results imply that personal interest was not determined by the socio-cultural differences between the countries, indicating that cultivating doctoral students’ personal interest, particularly a combination of research, development, and impact, provides a potential buffer for doctoral students’ burnout and drop-out, which has been raised as global concerns among policy makers, researchers, and doctoral education developers and administrators during the past decade. The study has impact on doctoral studies in international communities. Future Research: The results in this study reflect specific characteristics of social sciences and their applied nature. It remains for future research to investigate the extent to which the identified four profiles of interest in relation to burnout and drop-out intentions emerge in the natural sciences. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4867 doctoral education Ph.D. students interest profiles burnout drop-out intentions cross-cultural comparison eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-09-24 16 611 631 4869 article Rebecca Logue-Conroy rebecca.logueconroy@rutgers.edu Justin Harty justinharty@uchicago.edu Lara Markovitz lara.markovitz@wustl.edu Jaimie O'Gara jaimie.o'gara@clarke.edu Joyce Y Lee lee.10148@osu.edu Aim/Purpose: The overarching purpose of this paper was to examine how a collaborative working group of doctoral students from different institutions evolved into a community of practice and developmental network. Specifically, the aim of this study was to examine this group’s progression from working group to support group, a process that occurred through academic support, social support, professional networking, professional development, and skill development. Background: Although doctoral cohorts are often formed within the same school, some informal groups may develop among students in the same discipline from different schools. The authors explored how the formation of a working group, through attendance at an annual academic conference, enhanced their doctoral education and expanded their network through social and academic support. Methodology: The participant-researchers in this study used collaborative autoethnography to collectively examine their participation in this group formed outside of their respective schools of social work. Having worked together for over a year, meeting monthly through video calls, on a discrete project, the participant-researchers embarked on this collaborative authoethnography as they discovered their transformation from working group to support group. This group of five participant-researchers examined their own feelings about their participation in the group and the consequent benefits of belonging to such a group. Contribution: This study makes an important contribution to the doctoral education literature about how doctoral students from different schools can form informal groups that serve as a key source of intra-disciplinary networking, resources, opportunities, and support. This contribution helps to further the research on what kinds of supports doctoral students need in order to remain in their programs and graduate. Findings: We found that a working group of doctoral students from different schools of social work can develop into a community that can be used for social, academic, and networking support. We discovered that relationships with peers across schools provided a supportive environment that was distinct from those formed within our schools. Joining together to achieve a common research goal encouraged members to extend content-specific support. In addition, this group found that members had the opportunity to compare experiences at their respective doctoral programs, which enhanced peer support. Recommendations for Practitioners: Special interest groups at national conferences should encourage doctoral students at different schools to form communities of practice or similar groups. This group formation may lead to opportunities for doctoral students to work on a common project (e.g., website, publication) and serve as a source of social and academic support. Recommendation for Researchers: More research is needed on whether this relationship among doctoral students within the same discipline at different schools is equally helpful among students in different disciplines. Additional research is also needed on whether communities formed during doctoral studies can promote future collaboration as students become professors or researchers. Impact on Society: The present study’s model is applicable for use in academic settings where doctoral students convene for conferences relating to research, teaching, and practice. This model can facilitate the formation of inter-university working groups among students with similar research interests, career trajectories, and life responsibilities. Such groups can enrich peer support, promote collaboration, and enhance professional development. Future Research: More research is needed on whether this kind of social support group amongst doctoral students can be sustained as the students transition into academic careers. Additional research is also needed on whether these types of informal groups work across research focus or whether it works best when students have the same research focus. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4869 doctoral students collaborative autoethnography social support communities of practice developmental networks higher education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-10-06 16 633 656 4871 article Aireen Grace Andal aandal@urfu.ru Shuang Wu shuang.wu@auckland.ac.nz Aim/Purpose: This paper identifies and examines cross-cutting experiences from the perspective of two doctoral students, whose research was affected by the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Background: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be challenging for higher education scholars in terms of proceeding with their research and how the pandemic sets the scene for changes in higher education’s future. Due to increased anxiety levels because of uncertainties, the paper provides a reflection of doctoral experiences from two students – one in Russia at the data collection stage, and one in China (enrolled in New Zealand) at the proposal stage. Methodology: Through collaborative autoethnography and joint-reflection, we analyze our experiences as doctoral students focusing on methodological adjustments, ethical dilemmas, adaptation strategies and supervisor-supervisee relationships. Conducting a collaborative autoethnography provides a richer analysis of the interplay between perspectives, compared to a traditional autoethnography. Collaborative autoethnography also provides conditions for a collective exploration of subjectivities of doctoral students through an iterative process. After providing separate individual accounts, we discussed our experiences, analyzed them, and engaged in a joint-reflection from our consensual interpretations. Contribution: Our work aims to contribute to existing discussions on how COVID-19 impacted on doctoral students’ coping strategies during the pandemic. The paper encourages doctoral students to further discuss how they navigate their doctoral experiences through autoethnography and joint-reflections. Findings: Three main themes transpired in our analysis. First, we encountered roadblocks such as interruptions, frustrations and resistance to adapt our doctoral studies in the pandemic context, which align with the recent literature regarding education during the coronavirus pandemic. Second, we faced a diversity of burdens and privileges in the pandemic, which provided us with both pleasant (opportunity to create change) and unpleasant (unknown threats) situations, thereby enabling us to construct and reconstruct our stories through reflection. Third, we experienced a shared unfamiliarity of doing doctoral studies during the pandemic, to which the role of the academic community including our supervisors and doctoral colleagues contributed to how we managed our circumstances. Recommendations for Practitioners: We speak to our fellow doctoral students to dare navigate their doctoral experiences through collaborative reflections. In practice, by reflecting on our experience, we recommend that new doctoral students remain flexible and mindful of their doctoral journeys and recognize their agency to deal with the unexpected. We thus encourage the view of doctoral studies as a process rather than outcome-oriented, as we gain experience from processes. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend using both collaborative autoethnography and joint-reflection as an instructive tool for qualitative research. Such engagements offer important discussions towards further communications and exchange of ideas among doctoral students from various backgrounds. Impact on Society: More broadly, this work is an invitation to reflect and provoke further thoughts to articulate reflections on the impact and various ways of thinking that the pandemic might bring to the fore. Future Research: Doctoral students are welcome to contribute to a collectivity of narratives that thicken the data and analyses of their pandemic experiences in higher education to reinforce the role of doctoral researchers as agents of history in the trying times of a pandemic. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4871 doctoral studies higher education COVID-19 collaborative autoethnography reflection eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-10-11 16 657 688 4870 article Carolin Kreber carolin_kreber@cbu.ca Cyril Wealer cyril.wealer@uni.lu Heather A Kanuka hakanuka@ualberta.ca Aim/Purpose: The study seeks to establish the potential role that policy and disciplinary contexts of doctoral education play in supervisors’ subjective understandings of PhD supervision. It also intends to show how research into the different ways in which supervision may be understood can help supervisors become more effective in their practice and additionally help institutions design more effective professional development opportunities for supervisors. Background: Previous research has highlighted the linkages between quality PhD supervision and positive student outcomes; nonetheless, why supervisors do what they do remains poorly understood. A few studies with small samples sought to better understand supervisors’ views on supervision and also identified qualitatively different ways of understanding supervision. The present study with a larger sample builds on and extends this work by looking specifically at the concrete intentions by which supervisors engage, in particular supervisory activities they consider important, differentiating the findings by policy context and discipline. Methodology: Participants included full-time faculty members with extensive PhD supervision experience from UK and Canadian institutions, thirty from each country with ten each from History, Biology, and Engineering. The study was comparative in that a data set generated in a previous study of the same design the researchers carried out with thirty supervisors from the UK (Kreber & Wealer, 2021) was drawn upon and compared to the new Canadian data set. The study was primarily qualitative and relied on two rounds of face-to-face interviews with each participant. In the introductory phase supervisors in each sample identified their views on the purposes of PhD study in their field and the goals of their supervision, and in the main research phase they articulated the concrete intentions by which they engage in supervisory activities with particular students. Data from both phases were subjected to inductive thematic analysis, facilitated by NVivo and Excel software respectively. The thematic analysis of statements of intent, the main data source, revealed six qualitatively different understandings of supervision, in each sample, which then were further examined for differences across policy contexts and disciplines. Contribution: Policy context did not appear to make a difference in the self-reported intentions by which supervisors engage in distinct supervisory activities. Six qualitatively different ways of understanding PhD supervision emerged from a thematic analysis of intentions within each of the samples: ‘Enculturation’, ‘Functional’, ‘Emancipation’, ‘Critical Thinking’, ‘Care/relationship building’ and ‘Preparation for career/life’. Given that the first five ways of understanding doctoral supervision were also identified by Lee (2008), the study enhances confidence that supervisors tend to understand supervision in terms of this limited range of qualitatively different ways. The six concepts also allow us to identify, describe, and better understand supervisors’ personal conceptions of their supervision practice (which concepts feature strongly and which are in the background), which is helpful for encouraging supervisors to reflect on why they do what they do in their supervision practice. Findings: ‘Enculturation’ and ‘Functional’ appeared as the dominant concepts for supervisors, in relation to the supervisory activities they had identified, with the other four concepts being addressed less frequently in their statements of intent. When intentions were articulated, not in relation to specific activities but as underlying their supervision practice more generally, supervisors tend to espouse objectives that emphasize core academic values, rather than the ‘functional’ perspective. The comparative design employed pointed to more commonalities than variations across the two policy contexts and three disciplines. Identifying statements of intent and sorting them into qualitatively different understandings or ‘concepts’ of supervision allowed us to describe the personal and multidimensional conceptions of supervision held by individual supervisors and observe their idiosyncratic nature. Recommendations for Practitioners: Academic development professionals in universities charged with providing professional development on supervision are encouraged to make use of both the method employed in this study and its findings to encourage supervisors to become aware of the assumptions underpinning their supervision activities and to develop alternative conceptions and approaches to supervision that may be better suited to meet students’ needs. Recommendation for Researchers: The findings call for a deeper investigation into the reasons for observed small variations in intentions behind supervisory practices, beyond a focus on the particular disciplines and national contexts considered in this study. Impact on Society: Supervisors who are reflective practitioners and able to adapt their practices to the needs of particular students are likely to provide more effective supervision, which contributes to the completion of high-quality doctoral research and, by extension, to countries’ economic, social and cultural development. Future Research: New directions for research include a focus on development or changes in conceptions of supervision over time as well as on the linkages between conceptions of supervision, effective supervision practice, and positive student outcomes. We also strongly recommend that attention be paid to the concrete practical value of research on doctoral studies and encourage the pursuit of actionable and engaged scholarship on doctoral studies and supervision. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4870 doctoral supervision intentions qualitatively different ways of understanding supervision personal conceptions of supervision eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-10-31 16 689 713 4875 article Meryl Pearce Churchill meryl.churchill@jcu.edu.au Daniel Lindsay daniel.lindsay@menzies.edu.au Diana H Mendez diana.mendez@jcu.edu.au Melissa Crowe melissa.crowe@jcu.edu.au Nicholas Emtage nicholas.emtage@jcu.edu.au Rhondda Jones rhondda.jones@jcu.edu.au Aim/Purpose: This paper investigates the association between publishing during doctoral candidature and completion time. The effects of discipline and of gaining additional support through a doctoral cohort program are also explored. Background: Candidates recognize the value of building a publication track record to improve their career prospects yet are cognizant of the time it takes to publish peer-reviewed articles. In some institutions or disciplines, there is a policy or the expectation that doctoral students will publish during their candidature. However, doctoral candidates are also under increasing pressure to complete their studies within a designated timeframe. Thus, some candidates and faculty perceive the two requirements – to publish and to complete on time – as mutually exclusive. Furthermore, where candidates have a choice in the format that the PhD submission will take, be it by monograph, PhD-by-publication, or a hybrid thesis, there is little empirical evidence available to guide the decision. This paper provides a quantitative analysis of the association between publishing during candidature and time-to-degree and investigates other variables associated with doctoral candidate research productivity and efficiency. Methodology: Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to examine the predictors (discipline [field of research], gender, age group, domestic or international student status, and belonging to a cohort program) of doctoral candidate research productivity and efficacy. Research productivity was quantified by the number of peer-reviewed journal articles that a candidate published as a primary author during and up to 24 months after thesis submission. Efficacy (time-to-degree) was quantified by the number of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) years of candidature. Data on 1,143 doctoral graduates were obtained from a single Australian university for the period extending from 2000 to 2020. Complete publication data were available on 707 graduates, and time-to-degree data on 664 graduates. Data were drawn from eight fields of research, which were grouped into the disciplines of health, biological sciences, agricultural and environmental sciences, and chemical, earth, and physical sciences. Contribution: This paper addresses a gap in empirical literature by providing evidence of the association between publishing during doctoral candidature and time-to-degree in the disciplines of health, biological sciences, agricultural and environmental sciences, and chemical, earth, and physical sciences. The paper also adds to the body of evidence that demonstrates the value of belonging to a cohort program for doctoral student outcomes. Findings: There is a significant association between the number of articles published and median time-to-degree. Graduates with the highest research productivity (four or more articles) exhibited the shortest time-to-degree. There was also a significant association between discipline and the number of publications published during candidature. Gaining additional peer and research-focused support and training through a cohort program was also associated with higher research productivity and efficiency compared to candidates in the same discipline but not in receipt of the additional support. Recommendations for Practitioners: While the encouragement of candidates to both publish and complete within the recommended doctorate timeframe is recommended, even within disciplines characterized by high levels of research productivity, i.e., where publishing during candidature is the “norm,” the desired levels of student research productivity and efficiency are only likely to be achieved where candidates are provided with consistent writing and publication-focused training, together with peer or mentor support. Recommendation for Researchers: Publishing peer-reviewed articles during doctoral candidature is shown not to adversely affect candidates’ completion time. Researchers should seek writing and publication-focused support to enhance their research productivity and efficiency. Impact on Society: Researchers have an obligation to disseminate their findings for the benefit of society, industry, or practice. Thus, doctoral candidates need to be encouraged and supported to publish as they progress through their candidature. Future Research: The quantitative findings need to be followed up with a mixed-methods study aimed at identifying which elements of publication and research-focused support are most effective in raising doctoral candidate productivity and efficacy. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4875 cohort program completion doctorate research productivity time-to-degree eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-11-06 16 715 735 4876 article Jo Collins j.p.collins@kent.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: The aim of this article is to make a case of the role of validation in doctoral education. The purpose is to detail findings from three studies which explore PhD students’ experiences and perceptions of belonging in one UK university-ty, in order to hypothesise how validation and self-validation could make a difference in doctoral education, and what practices might support this. Background: The article draws on research into doctoral identity and work on ‘doctoral capital’ to explore how PhD students’ perceptions and experiences of not belonging to doctoral communities negatively impacts on their wellbeing. It extends this research by incorporating theories from Education and Psychology to build a theory of validation in doctoral education. Methodology: The article reports on three studies on PhD journeys and communities undertaken at one UK university. It draws on interview data from thirty doctoral candidates, which was thematically analysed using NVivo 12. Taking a qualitative approach to provide a rich and holistic focus on participant ‘meaning making’, the studies explore how PhD students understand belonging, where they receive validation and feel they need validation, and where self-validation can make a difference to their positivity about the PhD. Taking this approach to understand processes of ‘meaning-making’ paves the way to scaffold solutions through ‘reframing’ processes such as coaching and mentoring. Contribution: Thinking about PhD students’ belonging through the dimension of validation allows for practical support for developing belonging to be scaffolded, specifically through creating spaces to draw coaching skills into supervisory training and PhD student support (e.g., peer mentoring). This is significant as scholarship has shown that coaching has positive effects on wellbeing. This article contributes to understanding of where and how validation and self-validation manifest in doctoral education for PhD students. This contribution identifies ways in which external validation can help to scaffold internal self-validation; thus, offering a way of potentially mitigating risk factors to PhD students’ wellbeing. Specifically, validation can be understood as a ‘reserve’ that can be drawn on for ‘self-validation’. Validation is a solutions-focused theory. As a conceptual apparatus to understand doctoral students’ perceptions, validation theory also provides a frame for scaffolding practical ways for PhD students to build doctoral identity. Findings: The article focuses on challenges to PhD students building communities, supervisory relations and self-validation. It finds that supervisory feedback is a key area where PhD students seek validation. Two arguments are offered. First, that validation is a crucial process in (positive) doctoral identity work. Second, the argument is offered that making spaces for coaching skills to support PhD students can increase opportunities for validation (e.g., via supervisory training) and self-validation (e.g., via peer mentoring). Recommendations for Practitioners: Those who support doctoral researchers can potentially support the development of validation skills and self-validation skills. Some recommendations are included around supporting supervisory training in feedback and listening skills, peer mentoring as a way to foster a transition between external validation and internal self-validation for PhD students, and a worksheet for students’ self-validation is included as an appendix. Recommendation for Researchers: This article extends existing literature on PhD students’ emotion work by offering a new dimension to understand how belonging is developed amongst PhD students. Thinking about belonging through the dimension of validation shifts work on belonging towards possibilities of practical support. Impact on Society: Whilst the term ‘validation’ has been used in undergraduate educational research, and in Psychology (in theory and in clinical contexts) drawing these terms together to create a theory to understand doctoral identity work in higher education has larger potential applications. ‘Validation’ could potentially prove useful within doctoral education context to understand and scaffold PhD students’ development as they navigate transitioning identity positions during candidature. Thus, although the studies are limited in scope to the UK context, the findings could be more widely applied to other higher education contexts. Future Research: Two areas for future research are identified. First, to understand whether and how different groups of doctoral candidates (e.g., such as international students, LGBTQ+ students, etc.) have different validation needs and priorities in their doctoral identity work. The second is to understand the possible impact of using coaching with PhDs in different contexts (e.g., through peer mentoring schemes, supervision, and self-validation). http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4876 validation self-validation doctoral identity work belonging PhD students graduate teaching assistants eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-11-08 16 737 756 4877 article Shan Simmonds shan.simmonds@nwu.ac.za Walters Doh Nubia dohwalters@yahoo.com Aim/Purpose: There is a significant amount of research on supervision, assessment, and socio-economic benefits in South Africa. However, there have been relatively few attempts to analyse the research proposal phase, which remains a critical part of doctoral education in South African. Background: As part of the broader transformation agenda in South Africa, universities are under pressure to produce vastly more high-level doctoral graduates. The aim is to allow South Africa to build its knowledge base so it can address the socio-economic problems inherited from the apartheid regime. In South Africa, quality in doctoral education is mainly understood and measured in terms of throughput rate. The danger is that greatly increasing the number of doctoral graduates will have a deleterious effect on the quality of the studies done. At present, the general view is that the research proposal phase is an administrative requirement or merely a planning phase in doctoral education. However, the research proposal phase is when doctoral students have their first opportunity to show their capacity for high-level intellectual engagement. This article explores what doctoral students and supervisors regard as necessary for a quality research proposal and how they view this phase of the doctoral journey. Methodology: This qualitative research used phenomenology to capture the lived experiences of participants. There were nineteen (19) participants from three South African universities. Eleven (11) of them were supervisors and eight (8) were doctoral students. Semi-structured interviews generated the data that were used to explore how participants experience and construct their understanding of quality at the research proposal phase. Contribution: The study makes three contributions: (i) it increases our understanding of the research proposal phase of doctoral education, (ii) it provides an alternative understanding of quality attributes: those centred on research learning. At present planning to meet administrative requirements dominates notions of quality; and (iii) it positions the doctoral research proposal at an intersection of different views of knowledge production: mode 1 that favours disciplinary knowledge production, mode 2 that favours cross disciplinary knowledge production and mode 3 that favours quadruple helix innovation systems of knowledge production. Findings: The findings indicate that participants understand quality in terms of planning for research, compliance with administrative requirements, confinement of research ideas within disciplinarity boundaries and the calibre of academic support. These understandings inform the common perceptions of the research proposal phase and its quality attributes. Participants’ narrow understanding of the research proposal phase and its quality attributes have, in turn, supported the view that writing of research proposals is a matter of technical compliance. This has deprived the research proposal phase from harnessing the full potential of research learning. It has also restricted the epistemological imagination of students, as econometrics parameters are being used to measure the production of knowledge. Recommendations for Practitioners: The possibility of enhancing the quality of the doctoral research proposal phase could be increased if those directing doctoral education were more aware (i) that the support programmes should encourage significant doctoral research; (ii) of the importance of having courses that are an integral part of the research proposal phase, which enable candidates to develop the ability to sustain a cohesive, coherent, critical and logical academic argument, and (iii) of the necessity for interdisciplinary research at the level of doctoral education. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers from diverse social and cultural contexts need to improve the quality of their research proposals through engaging in research learning. This would require deeper understandings of social and cultural diversity of the context from which the research proposal phase is being experienced. This requires further research on understanding how students negotiate the transition from different social learning contexts into doctoral education. Impact on Society: Implementation of the recommendations would help to establish a robust standard of doctoral education, which could enhance the personal, professional, social, and economic growth of South African society. Future Research: Future research should explore different approaches to support services to identify the kind of support services that would enable doctoral students to engage in quality interdisciplinary research. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4877 doctoral education research proposal phase doctoral students supervisors quality eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-12-01 16 757 776 4883 article Devasmita Chakraverty devasmitac@iima.ac.in Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore reasons that engineering education researchers experience impostor phenomenon. Background: Experiencing impostor phenomenon includes a psychological discomfort experienced by some high-achieving individuals who, by the very virtue of being successful, mistakenly believe that they are fraudulent and faking their success. Impostor phenomenon has been studied more broadly in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), with little research specifically in engineering and computer science and none, to the author’s knowledge, in engineering education research. As an emerging discipline, some of the challenges in engineering education research include its poor connection with engineering teaching and learning, establishing multidisciplinary collaborations, and advancing global capacity. As a result of its poor connection with engineering fields, and being a new discipline, it is possible that engineering education researchers hold an identity that is different from engineering researchers. Some of them could be experiencing their training differently, struggling to find mentors from a similar background, and possibly feeling like impostors. Methodology: Using purposive sampling and snowball sampling, US-based engineering education researchers participated in a short survey and a semi-structured interview. The survey consisted of demographic questions, items of the Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale, and an open-ended question about an instance when participants experienced impostor phenomenon. Interviews examined, in detail, reasons for experiencing impostor phenomenon as engineering education researchers. The scale provided a measure of the intensity of impostor phenomenon. Interviews were analyzed inductively through constant comparison using a constructivist approach. Contribution: Findings indicate various axes of othering that made it difficult to develop a sense of belonging, especially for women, and contributed to impostor phenomenon. Othering occurred through identity-based experiences (gender-identity, engineer-identity), different methodologies used to conduct research, and different vocabulary used for academic communication. Findings: The sample comprised of eleven participants (PhD students, postdoctoral scholars, and faculty), all of whom experienced high to intense impostor phenomenon (range: 61-91/100; mean 75.18). Participants were predominantly white women from twenties to forties. Interviews indicated two reasons for experiencing impostor phenomenon: (1) existing in a separate world from engineering (referring to cultural differences between engineering and engineering education including differences in communication styles, methodologies, and identities); and, (2) facing gendered experiences (for women). Recommendations for Practitioners: It is recommended that practitioners are mindful of the tensions between worldviews, commonly used methodologies, and demographic differences between engineering research and engineering education research that could shape one’s experience in the field and contribute to “othering” during doctoral training and thereafter. Recommendation for Researchers: Doctoral and post-doctoral training in engineering education research could be more inclusive and open to different research methodologies. Future studies deeply exploring various training challenges experienced by engineering education researchers could illuminate how the field could become more inclusive. Impact on Society: The current study provides a nuanced understanding of the dichotomy between engineering and engineering education research, including the different styles in academic communication, research methodologies used, and identities. It also provides an understanding of the gendered experiences women have in the field, pointing to an overt or covert lack of recognition. Both these factors could make some feel like outsiders or impostors who question themselves and doubt their competencies and belonging in the field. Attrition from the field could be costly, even to the society, at large, given that the field is relatively new, evolving, and not (yet) as diverse in its worldviews, methodologies, and the demography of those it attracts for doctoral training and beyond. The study provides evidence-based understanding of how training in engineering education researchers could be re-imagined. Future Research: Future research could examine, in detail, aspects of engineering education research training that may contribute to impostor phenomenon, poor belonging, poor identity, and othering experiences. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4883 engineering education engineering education research STEM education higher education impostor phenomenon impostor syndrome eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2021-12-10 16 777 794 4879 article Inusah Salifu isalifu@ug.edu.gh Joseph Seyram Agbenyega jagbenyega314@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: To utilize Pierre Bourdieu’s (1984, 1986) concepts of capitals, habitus, and field to explore and critically analyze doctoral students’ learning experiences with a new doctoral curriculum introduced by a Ghanaian university. Background: Global competition and labor market reforms have ignited the need for higher education institutions to reimagine their doctoral programs, develop and align them with labor market demands and national priorities. Methodology: The research was conducted as a qualitative inquiry based on which the purposive sampling technique was used with 18 doctoral students from a Ghanaian university. Participants took part in individual interviews and data were analyzed using thematic coding procedures developed based on Bourdieu’s (1984; 1986) theorization of capital, habitus, and field Contribution: The study may benefit universities in monitoring the quality of doctoral students’ learning experiences. Findings: The research found that, although the participants were broadly satisfied with some aspects of their programs, the additional cost associated with its duration, the lack of quality and timely feedback from supervisors, and difficulty accessing conference funding were key challenges to achieving the ultimate goals of the new doctoral curriculum. Recommendations for Practitioners: The paper draws attention to human dispositions, values, and beliefs (habitus) which operate with different forms of capital in fields of doctoral training. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers may focus on tools that help to transform supervisor habitus and the kinds of support that work for individual students. Impact on Society: The strongest message gleaned from this study is that to improve doctoral students’ learning experiences, it is necessary first to develop a student-supervisor relationship built on mutual respect, clear timelines for achieving supervision targets, and commitment to achieving the targets. The research further challenges the higher education system in Ghana and in deed, the world at large, to look beyond the objectified capital (certificates) and to develop relevant skills that students require to be professionally ready for the labor market. Future Research: One of the study’s limitations is that the sample was selected from one university in Ghana. Future research may compare doctoral curriculums and students’ learning experiences across several Ghanaian universities. Again, this research used the perspectives of only students. A future study may draw on multiple perspectives to provide depth and breadth of knowledge on the doctoral program. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4879 Bourdieu’s concepts doctoral studies doctoral curriculum Ghanaian university doctoral students’ learning experiences eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-12-23 15 .i v 4482 article Michael Jones editor@ijds.org Table of Contents for Volume 15, 2020, of the International Journal of Doctoral Studies http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4482 IJDS International Journal of Doctoral Studies PhD doctoral studies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-12-23 15 001 028 4474 article Dawn Culpepper dkculpep@umd.edu KerryAnn O'Meara komeara@umd.edu Amy Ramirez aramire1@terpmail.umd.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to understand how one graduate program shaped doctoral students’ scholarly identities as interdisciplinary scientists. Background: Scholarly identity refers to the ways individuals see themselves as legitimate, contributing members of their academic community. However, much of the research on scholarly identity focuses on students and faculty within traditional, discipline-bound contexts. We therefore know little about how doctoral students develop scholarly identities that are interdisciplinary in nature. By interdisciplinary, we refer broadly to scholarly work that uses methods, concepts, frameworks, or perspectives from two or more academic fields or disciplines, or scholarly work aimed at addressing research problems that spans multiple academic fields or disciplines. Methodology: This qualitative, ethnographic case study focuses on the University of Maryland’s Language Science Center (LSC), which houses a National Science Foundation Research Traineeship (NRT) Program for doctoral students in the interdisciplinary language sciences, which includes fields such as linguistics, hearing and speech, computer science, and neuroscience. The LSC is nationally and internationally known for its interdisciplinary graduate training program and thus provides a platform for understanding the components of graduate training that contribute to students’ scholarly identity development as interdisciplinary scientists. We draw from four years of qualitative data collection, including student interviews, student and faculty focus groups, ethnographic observations, and document analysis. Contribution: Across the public and private sectors, there is a strong push for developing interdisciplinary solutions to society’s problems. However, many colleges and universities are not organized to encourage interdisciplinary collaboration and research. Focusing on the ways one graduate program facilitated interdisciplinary scholarly identity development for doctoral students therefore provides graduate programs with a potential roadmap for navigating the barriers that may block the development of students with interdisciplinary research interests. Findings: We found curricular and co-curricular NRT program activities contributed to students’ scholarly identity development as interdisciplinary scientists by connecting them (or “plugging them in”) to a pre-existing, interdisciplinary network of students and faculty; increasing doctoral student competence in the methods, cultures, and perspectives of other disciplines; encouraging doctoral students to find common ground with scholars from different disciplinary backgrounds; and broadening doctoral students’ views of the potential impact and application of their work. Recommendations for Practitioners: Graduate training programs in the interdisciplinary sciences should think strategically about the kinds of activities that help students develop a scholarly identity and the conditions and contexts in which scholarly identity development might be undermined. We offer multiple examples of the kinds of activities graduate programs can consider using to facilitate scholarly identity development and the underlying mechanisms that make such activities successful. Recommendation for Researchers: Developing a scholarly identity is an important component of doctoral student success and should be considered as a useful potential theory for individuals who study graduate education. Impact on Society: Graduate programs play a critical role in training not only the next generation of faculty, but also the next generation of scientists in government and industry. If more graduate programs can successfully train doctoral students to be interdisciplinary scientists, societal benefits could include more responsive and adaptive solutions to pressing social problems. Future Research: Future researchers should consider how different graduate training elements produce students with different types of interdisciplinary scholarly identities, how the scholarly identity of students trained in interdisciplinary graduate programs continues to evolve as they transition into both academic and non-academic careers, and the strategies and experiences of faculty members who mentor students from outside of their own disciplines. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4474 graduate education scholarly identity interdisciplinary research eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-12-26 15 029 056 4475 article Laura Roberts rightangleresearch@comcast.net Aim/Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to reveal the assessment tools and a theory preferred to mentor doctoral students with integrity and trustworthiness. The connection between mentors’ feelings of trustworthiness and protégé success were explored. Background: This study examines the concept presented in 1983, 1985, and 1996 by Kram of mentor relations (MR) theory, which illustrates that graduation rates can improve with effective mentoring. In the United States, doctoral programs have low graduation rates. Scholars and researchers agree that doctoral programs must develop ways and means to improve their graduation rates. This researcher examined an extension of Kram’s mentor relations theory by employing the Mentor Integrity and Trustworthiness (MIT) theory, which depicts that mentors with a strong sense of integrity and trustworthiness provide a safe haven for protégés to succeed. As supported by Daloz, a trustworthy mentor provides a safe haven for protégés to take the intellectual risks required to produce an original contribution to the canon of scholarly knowledge in the form of a doctoral dissertation. Methodology: A quantitative research methodology of data collection ensued including the researcher generated MIT scale and the mentors’ perceptions of protégés’ independence (MPPI) scale, a survey to establish acceptable levels of internal consistencies for items on the two scales, a supported evidence of the content validity of the two scales, the researcher’s analysis of the validity of the MIT theory, and a multi-stage sampling method to recruit a research sample of 50 mentors from four universities in the eastern part of the United States from several education-related doctoral programs. The doctoral programs were diverse in terms of selectivity, type of degree, and mentors’ years of experience. Contribution: This research study contributes to existing literature knowledge by generating the relationship between mentors’ feelings of trustworthiness and protégés’ success as measured by graduation rate and the number of awards won by protégés. The validation of the mentor integrity and trustworthiness (MIT) scale and the mentor perceptions of protégé independence (MPPI) scale, and the supported evidence of content validity and reliability for both scales will deepen and extend the discussion of doctoral mentoring in higher education. Findings: Results indicated that mentors’ feelings of trustworthiness were correlated with the number of dissertation awards won by protégés and with graduation rates. Graduation rates and dissertation awards rates were not measured directly, but were reported by the mentors. In addition, the researcher found that mentors perceived their protégés to be independent scholars, in general, however, minimally in the area of writing the research methods section of their dissertation. Recommendations for Practitioners: The researcher discussed the practical implications for mentors’ professional development in trustworthiness and integrity. The researcher also provided the Right Angle Research Alignment table to help protégés organize and manage the research methods section of their dissertation. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should continue to explore MIT theory with experimental methods to attempt to improve the internal validity of the theory. Impact on Society: The researcher encourages scholars to test the MIT theory in mentoring relationships that go beyond doctoral studies such as mentoring in business and in the arts. The researcher also encourages scholars to test whether the MIT theory is relevant in other kinds of teaching relationships such as coaching and tutoring. Future Research: Further research questions that arise from this study are as follows: What can mentors do to improve their integrity? What can mentors do to improve their feelings of trustworthiness? How can the MIT and MPPI instruments be refined and improved? http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4475 doctoral mentoring mentor trustworthiness mentor integrity transformation to independent scholar protégé development eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-12-31 15 057 074 4467 article Hyrine Mueni Matheka hmueni@gmail.com Ellen E.P.W.A. Jansen e.p.w.a.jansen@rug.nl Adriaan W.H.A Hofman w.h.a.hofman@rug.nl Aim/Purpose: Kenya plans to be a middle-income country by the year 2030. To achieve this development target, the country has rapidly expanded its university sub-sector in order to produce the requisite skilled professionals. This has put a strain on the available PhD holders thus heightening the pressure on universities to produce more PhD graduates to meet the required larger pool of highly qualified professionals to service the academia and other sectors of the economy. However, the PhD graduation rate per year is very low and unexplained. This study sought to explain the factors influencing PhD success rates in Kenyan universities. Background: This cross-sectional study set out to establish how PhD students’ background and program characteristics are related to their success. This knowledge will inform policies and strategies to enhance PhD training and success in Kenya. Methodology: Data on 1,992 PhD students was collected from 10 universities by using the Microsoft Excel data tool to collect administrative data. The researchers utilized the data collection to construct a quantitative research design. The PhD students were enrolled in the following program domains/clusters: Humanities and Social Sciences, Business and Economics, Physical and Life Sciences, Applied Sciences and Medical Sciences. Contribution: PhD success factors have been extensively studied in developed countries. This paper builds on this body of knowledge with a specific focus on developing countries like Kenya. Findings: Students’ background characteristics (age, nationality, gender, financial support and marital statuses) were not related to PhD students’ success, however, full-time employed PhD students had better progression than their part-time colleagues. Program characteristics (program cluster and mode of study) were significantly related to students’ success. Students who had delayed for two years or more years had limited chance to graduate. Recommendations for Practitioners: To improve the PhD education system, practitioners should endeavor to monitor and track the progress of their PhD students. To do this, the researchers recommend that the universities collect and keep good records of these types of data. Universities should come up with strategies to build on or mitigate against the factors that have been identified to influence PhD success. Recommendation for Researchers: The researchers recommend further research, especially in developing countries, to understand the PhD study systems and inform effective interventions. Impact on Society: To identify, conceptualize or mitigate against the factors which influence PhD success lead to higher success in PhD training in order to enhance knowledge to solve societal problems. Future Research: Further research is recommended especially in the context of developing countries to establish how supervisor–student interactions, availability of infrastructural resources, and students’ motivation, efficacy and well-being relate to PhD success in Kenyan universities http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4467 PhD students’ success background characteristics program characteristic mode of study eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-01-07 15 075 087 4476 article Erika Burton kriezelman@email.phoenix.edu Aim/Purpose: This study investigates the professional development needs of educators with a Master’s degree and seeking or having a doctoral degree in education. Background: Understanding the professional development needs of educators is important for meeting these needs. The literature focuses on post-bachelor education but does not address professional development and doctoral degree needs. Methodology: Educators with a Master’s degree in education seeking or having completed a doctoral degree participated in one 30 minute semi-structured interview. Contribution: This research can be used as a guide for how to support Master’s-level educators seeking doctoral degrees. Findings: Master’s level students earning a doctorate degree in education found professional development satisfied through their programs when experiential learning opportunities were provided and in-depth institutional support. Recommendations for Practitioners: Educators seeking a doctorate degree in education to meet their professional development needs should seek out higher education opportunities that include mentorships and experiential learning opportunities. Recommendation for Researchers: Further research is necessary to understand how additional professional development needs can be met in higher education and in the creation of successful professional development partnerships. Impact on Society: Required teacher professional development can increase classroom performance if necessary educator needs are met. Future Research: Additional research on professional development successes in schools partnering with higher education institutions potentially for a dual purpose of obtaining doctorate degrees may provide an invaluable increase in classroom performance. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4476 professional development doctorate success doctorate barriers doctorate pro-gram education doctorate doctorate eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-01-27 15 089 110 4484 article Rebecca G. Mirick rmirick@salemstate.edu Stephanie P Wladkowski swladkow@emich.edu Aim/Purpose: This study explored the experiences of women doctoral students and their perceptions of the impact of this experience on their academic careers. Background: While more women than men graduate from doctoral programs in all non-STEM fields, women are more likely to take non-tenure positions or positions at less prestigious programs such as community colleges or teaching focused institutions. This creates a lack of diversity at research intensive programs as well as potentially highlighting gender inequities within the pipeline from doctoral education to full professorship. The source of these differences in career outcomes are not fully understood, and it is unclear whether mothers are self-selecting away from research intensive positions, they are less able to obtain the required professional training for these experiences, perhaps in part due to a lack of university based supports, or they experience discrimination based on gender biases around caregiving. Methodology: In this cross-sectional, descriptive study, women doctoral students and graduates (N=777) completed a survey about their experiences as doctoral student mothers. Contribution: Little is known about the availability of supports for doctoral student mothers across fields, or their experiences with parenting during their doctoral programs. This study provides a broader view of doctoral student mothers’ perspectives as well as their understanding of the impact of their doctoral education experience on their career trajectories. Findings: Participants reported informal supports were often available (e.g. flexibility (57.1%), peer support (42.9%)) but identified a need for subsidized childcare (67.7%) and paid leave (53.3%). Many found motherhood decreased productivity (70.1%) and 55.8% said it impacted their career, including a new definition of an “ideal” position, changed career goals, professional development opportunities, being less competitive job candidates, delays in completing their program and entering the job market and a positive impact on career. Recommendations for Practitioners: Implications for doctoral programs are the need for more formal family-friendly policies, including subsidized childcare and conference travel support, improving the quality of mentoring for these students and facilitating access to a diverse array of professional development opportunities. Recommendation for Researchers: These findings suggest that there are multiple, complex factors impacting women’s career trajectory post-graduation once they have children. Researchers should consider multiple pathways to career decisions for women with children. In addition, these findings suggest that researchers exploring this topic should consider both field of study and whether women have a child at the point of program entry. Impact on Society: An underrepresentation of women in prestigious academic positions and leadership positions has a negative impact on young women who desire an academic career. The lack of women with children in these positions creates a problematic lack of diversity in leadership and a dearth of role models for women students with children. The benefits of diversity in leadership are well known. These findings can be used by doctoral programs and academic institutions to increase gender and parental status diversity in these positions, to the benefit of students, faculty, departments, and institutions. Future Research: Future research should explore the impact of supports on measures of doctoral student success (e.g. publications, conference presentations) and the impact of these experiences on students’ careers following graduation. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4484 parenting doctoral education motherhood supports academia eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-02-23 15 111 133 4507 article Jason A LaFrance jlafrance@flsouthern.edu Diane LaFrance dlafrance@flsouthern.edu Teri D Melton tamelton@georgiasouthern.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this exploratory qualitative case study was to understand dissertation chair agency, chair preparation, and academic supports provided by experienced Educational Leadership Ed.D. dissertation chairs in the United States. Background: Previous research has identified attrition rates of 50-60 percent in education doctoral programs. This research helps identify the faculty profiles and academic supports provided by Educational Leadership faculty who have served on successful dissertation committees. Understanding these findings may help to improve retention and completion in other doctoral programs. Methodology: This was an exploratory qualitative case study. Ten doctoral faculty who have successfully chaired 419 Ed.D. Educational Leadership dissertations at accredited U.S. colleges and universities were interviewed. Data were analyzed using the constant comparative method. Contribution: The findings from this study contribute to the body of knowledge on doctoral retention and dissertation completion by providing information on promising practices from the perspective of dissertation chairs. Findings: While successful dissertation chairs exhibited expertise as researchers, seven of the ten participants reported that they had limited training for chairing dissertations. Academic supports included coursework that was organized coherently with a focus on opportunities for substantive feedback, writing support and research methodology. Recommendations for Practitioners: Dissertation chairs should utilize their agency to ensure that the program has the proper resources to support doctoral education. This includes adequate writing support for graduate students, courses taught by faculty who are engaged in research and understand the requirements for completing a dissertation, and protecting faculty time so that they are able to provide students substantive feedback within coursework and at the dissertation phase. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should continue to explore the causes of attrition in doctoral programs and identify specific actions that can be taken to improve program completion rates. Impact on Society: Increasingly U.S. institutions of higher learning are being called to validate their success and improve retention rates. Understanding the faculty profiles and academic supports utilized by successful doctoral faculty has the potential to improve retention and thereby increase completion rates and consequentially alleviate the stressors that ABD students experience. Future Research: Future research could focus on expanding the findings of this study by exploring the perspectives of faculty based on institution type and examining how socio-emotional factors such as student-student and faculty-student relationships are intentionally established in programs with high graduation rates. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4507 doctoral dissertations dissertation chair doctoral attrition doctoral reten-tion graduation rate educational leadership programs educational leader-ship faculty development eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-02-27 15 135 158 4508 article Delma M Ramos dmramos@uncg.edu Varaxy Yi varaxy@csufresno.edu Aim/Purpose: This qualitative study examined the racist and sexist experiences of doctoral women of color in the academy. Background: Doctoral women of color (e.g., Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, African Americans, Latina Americans, and Native Americans) continue to experience racism and sexism in academic spaces. While few studies have explored the experiences of doctoral students of color and doctoral women of color, with a larger emphasis on how they respond to racism, our study sought to further the knowledge and discourse surrounding the intersectionality of racism and sexism in academic contexts by examining the intersectionality of race and gender systems that impact the lived realities of doctoral women of color as women and people of color. Methodology: This qualitative study employed multiracial feminism and Mellor’s taxonomy of coping styles as theoretical foundations to explore and understand how doctoral women of color experience and navigate racist and sexist incidents. Contribution: The study contributes to research in various areas: (1) it expands our understanding of how doctoral women of color experience racism and sexism, (2) it deepens our perspective about the strategies and methods that they employ to negotiate and overcome these experiences, which can directly inform efforts to support and retain doctoral and other students of color, and (3) it encourages scholars to examine the experiences of doctoral women of color from an anti-deficit approach that acknowledges the social networks, skills, and knowledge that doctoral women of color rely on to disrupt and persist in inequitable contexts as they pursue academic success. Findings: Our findings contribute a classification system that incorporates experiences of doctoral women of color with racism and sexism. Categories in this classification include covert, overt, and physical and material experiences. Our findings also present a classification system that represents navigational strategies of doctoral women of color, or the ways they respond to and overcome racist and sexist experiences. Categories in this classification include defensive, controlled, and direct strategies. Recommendations for Practitioners: First, our findings suggest a critical need for administrators and educators to understand the experiences of women of color and recognize the impact these experiences have on their persistence and success in college. Research on doctoral women of color is limited and very little is known about the entirety of their experiences in graduate programs. This study addresses this gap by exploring how doctoral women of color persist despite the intersectionality of racist and sexist alienation and marginalization. It is important that faculty and staff engage in culturally relevant education and training in order to better understand how to support doctoral women of color as they face these situations. We need more educators who engage in culturally relevant and responsive practices and pedagogy that seek to include their students’ whole identities and lever-age these identities in the classroom. Additionally, more educators need to be trained in ways to recognize and address racist and sexist incidents in their class-rooms and dismantle systems of oppression rather than reinforce them. Specifically, we need to better equip educators to recognize the hard-to-distinguish sexist incidents, which, as our participants suggested, are well concealed within the fabric of our gendered and sexualized society. Second, this study can benefit those in program and resource development to create effective programming and strategies to engage these acts of resilience that enable women of color to succeed in graduate school. Rather than approaching the support and development of doctoral women of color from a deficit perspective of assisting them through challenges, it is more important to fully-engage with these students to recognize what coping strategies they have used that can better inform successful retention programs. Furthermore, mentorship from faculty was highlighted as an important means for participants to address and cope with their negative experiences. Thus, more mentoring relationships between faculty and the student and across student peer groups should be intentionally engaged. This is a system of support also noted in extant literature. As part of the doctoral socialization process, mentoring has many benefits for doctoral students. Specifically, for doctoral women of color, mentoring relationships can be a critical tool for supporting them in managing negative experiences, especially considering that it can minimize feelings of loneliness and isolation. Recommendation for Researchers: Our research contributes to the literature with emphasis on the ways in which doctoral women of color respond to and cope with racism and sexism. Women in this study recount racist and sexist experiences and describe their decision-making processes about how and whether to respond. There were specific reasons that shaped their responses and coping strategies, which highlight awareness and confidence in their individual abilities. The study’s findings also contribute to and expand Mellor’s taxonomy, specifically the incorporation of sexism as a system inherently interlocked with racism. Current literature on doctoral women of color mainly highlights their experience with racism; this gap reinforces our contribution to the literature, specifically, in illuminating predetermined societal roles and expectations for doctoral women of color in academia. Most importantly, our research highlights the assets and agency that doctoral women of color mobilize in the face of racism and sexism. These assets include long-term goals and aspirations, awareness of interlocking systems of oppression shaping their experience in academic environments, commitment to empowering their communities through education, and the support they find within their personal and academic networks. These assets and agency serve as foundation to challenge longstanding deficit perspectives on doctoral women of color in academic spaces and for faculty and program administrators to consider when developing support services. Impact on Society: Our findings encourage faculty, program administrators, and researchers to pay attention to racist and sexist issues as intersecting oppressions rather than distinct manifestations of prejudice to be confronted separately. Our findings also highlight the assets doctoral women of color rely on to overcome oppression and marginalization including their long-term goals and aspirations, awareness of interlocking systems of oppression shaping their experience in academic, commitment to empowering their communities through education, and the support they find within their personal and academic networks. Our hope is that this work encourages systems of higher education to create tangible ways to support doctoral women of color as they grapple with the multiple systems of domination that threaten their success in education, which is intertwined with success in other aspects of society. Future Research: Lastly, future research may explore how the matrix of domination mediates responses of doctoral women of color to racism and sexism. This philosophical inclination is linked to our decision to use Mellor’s taxonomy of coping styles as an introductory framework for our work in understanding navigational strategies. To that end, we argue that the taxonomy as it stands characterizes participants’ responses based on their immediate approach to incidents. This framing fails to include the timing someone might need to process and decide to how to respond. Mellor’s taxonomy positions participants who do not choose to respond immediately as compliant and acquiescent to racialized spaces and events. By doing so, we run the risk of oversimplifying and essentializing the complex processes individuals faced with racism and sexism undertake. At the same time, future research can examine the connection between responses or coping styles and ways that participants are internally transformed in their abilities and desires to address future incidents. There is an inordinate amount of focus on how individuals interact with oppressive incidents and yet very little is known about the ways that these interactions shape future responses. Additionally, the ways that doctoral women of color navigate situations outside the academy is not explored. For example, some of our participants shared how racist and sexist encounters empowered them or inspired them to address other incidents and to interact with family and community members. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4508 women of color doctoral students racist incidents sexist incidents oppression marginalization resistance achievement empowerment eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-03-06 15 159 179 4513 article Devasmita Chakraverty devasmitac@iima.ac.in Aim/Purpose: This US-based study explored various facets of impostor phenomenon experienced during PhD training in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Specifically, the purpose of this research was to identify certain experiences that trigger this phenomenon. Background: Competent high-achievers who do not believe in their efforts leading to accomplishments sometimes experience the impostor phenomenon. It is characterized by the notion that one has fooled others into overestimating their ability, not attributing one’s accomplishments to ability, and living with the fear of being discovered as a fraud. Methodology: Data were collected using convenience and snowball sampling. Qualitative, semi-structured interviews from 90 PhD students were analyzed thematically. Contribution: Study findings contribute to a less-understood area of what constitutes triggers for the impostor phenomenon among PhD students in STEM fields. Findings: Participants described the following themes that triggered impostor phenomenon during PhD training: 1) Progress and public recognition, 2) Comparing oneself with others, 3) Developing skills: public speaking and scientific writing. 4) Application of new knowledge, and 5) Asking for help. Recommendations for Practitioners: PhD faculty, mentors, advisers, and administrators should be cognizant of the triggers that could give rise to the impostor phenomenon among their students. Professional development activities for students could focus on earlier and more rigorous training for improving scientific communication. Recommendation for Researchers: Future research should continue to explore if other stakeholders in academia such as postdoctoral trainees and faculty also experience similar stress due to the impostor phenomenon. Impact on Society: Institutes of higher education should continue to focus on improving student mental health and retention rates, alleviating some of the PhD training stressors by designing interventions that improve students’ mindset and self-efficacy. Future Research: Findings point to avenues for further research on how to support those with impostor phenomenon. Future research could explore the topic in other disciplines outside STEM and examine if long-term interventions could mitigate impostor-feelings, including the nature and length of interventions that could be helpful. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4513 impostor phenomenon impostor syndrome doctoral training STEM training graduate school mindset eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-03-29 15 181 198 4529 article Juliann S McBrayer jmcbrayer@georgiasouthern.edu Steven Tolman steventolman@gmail.com Katherine Fallon kf10548@georgiasouthern.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if there was a relationship between doctoral students’ candidacy examination scores and estimated time to degree completion, measured by dissertation progression. Background: Time to degree completion in doctoral programs continues to be an issue and reasons for high attrition rates for doctoral students are broad and include varied core components of the academic pathway such as challenges with critical thinking during coursework, stress about passing comprehensive examinations, poor academic writing, and lack of knowledge around scholarly practitioner research. Methodology: An ex post facto, correlational research design utilized quantitative data to determine whether a relationship existed between candidacy examination scores and time to doctoral degree completion. Contribution: If student’s ability to score higher on the candidacy examination increases their likelihood of dissertation activity, completion of specified benchmarks such as a pre-prospectus, prospectus, and final dissertation defenses, one year following the candidacy examination, programs have evidence-based support to retain a comprehensive examination. Findings: The findings denoted a weak to moderate relationship between candidacy examination score and dissertation progression (defending pre-prospectus and/or prospectus) within one year from taking the candidacy examination. Thus, the researchers believe this identification of this relationship warrants further research to continue to examine how candidacy examination scores impact progress to degree completion with a focus on academic writing and scholarly practitioner research. Recommendations for Practitioners: We recommend for practitioners the continued implementation of the candidacy examination for students to aid in addressing any issues or misunderstandings students may have prior to the bulk of their data collection and analysis by assessing students’ abilities in academic writing and scholarly practitioner research and in turn, improve time to degree completion. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend that future research is conducted to gather a longitudinal understanding of the implications of administering a comprehensive examination followed by a pre-prospectus and prospectus defense will positively impact student’s progression through their research and result in the dissertation being completed in a more timely manner. Impact on Society: Doctoral programs need to provide support to avoid students who are progressing through a doctoral program and successfully completing coursework, being halted at the All But Dissertation (ABD) stage and as a result fail to complete these programs due to poor academic writing and lack of knowledge around scholarly practitioner research. Future Research: A longer analysis timeline and larger sample size would help in further understanding the true beneficial or potentially harmful implications this continued implementation of the candidacy examination has on individual students’ progression through to degree completion. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4529 doctoral program comprehensive examination candidacy examination degree completion Doctor of Education EdD eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-04-13 15 199 216 4534 article Shametrice Davis shametrice.davis@csulb.edu Leslie Reese Leslie.Reese@csulb.edu Cecelia S Griswold Cecelia.Griswold@csulb.edu Aim/Purpose: This paper examines the experiences of African American students in a doctor of education program at a comprehensive university in Southern California. Background: Qualitative case study methodology and critical race theory is used to highlight asset rather than deficit narratives of the participants, illuminating another aspect of commonly understood experiences for underrepresented students in education. Methodology: Qualitative case study methodology was used for a sample of 14 African American doctoral students in the Southern California area. Critical race theory provided a framework through which to support data analysis and subsequent findings. Contribution: The original contribution of this paper is the asset-narrative of African American doctoral students at an institution that is not research-driven. Findings: Findings assert that (1) asset narratives of African American students need to be highlighted, (2) action-research as an option for dissertation completion is important for Ed.D. programs, and (3) racial identity of African Americans is complex, therefore broader understandings of black identity are needed, and must be coupled with anti-deficit ideology. Recommendations for Practitioners: Recommendations for practitioners include expanding understandings of African American identity coupled with anti-deficit ideology to enhance student interactions with both faculty and peers throughout doctoral education. Recommendation for Researchers: It is suggested that future research continue to focus on doctoral student experiences in institutions that are not research intensive. Impact on Society: This research provides an original contribution by furthering understandings of the complexity of the African American experience with identity, research, and doctoral education experiences. Future Research: Future research should focus on other underrepresented populations in doctoral education at universities that are not research-intensive. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4534 African Americans critical race theory doctoral education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-04-21 15 217 235 4537 article Doreen Forbrig d.forbrig@fu-berlin.de Aim/Purpose: While scientists play a crucial role within modern knowledge societies, the attractiveness of scientific careers in Germany is moderate due to career uncertainty and the limited perspectives of long-term retention in academia. This study identifies (intra-individual) changes in the career intentions of early career researchers. Furthermore, supporting factors for the stability of research career intentions are shown. Background: Recent studies investigated early career researchers’ career intentions and predictors for their development in cross-section. These studies determine influences of individual factors, such as interests or self-efficacy beliefs, and organizational aspects like working and doctoral training conditions. By contrast, there is little knowledge about intra-individual changes in career intentions in the course of academic qualification. Methodology: Longitudinal data of 101 research associates at a German university were collected via survey questionnaires in 2016 and 2018. Descriptive analysis was used to investigate changes in career intentions in consideration of doctoral phases. Logistic regression was applied to predict the stability of research career intentions over time. Contribution: So far, research investigated the career intentions of early career researchers in Germany solely in cross-section. The present paper contributes in two ways. Firstly, intra-individual changes in career intentions are identified from a longitudinal perspective. Secondly, the stability of research career intentions is explained, considering various individual and contextual factors based on the Social Cognitive Model of Career Choice. Findings: Descriptive analyses illustrate the tendency of declining interest in scientific careers in the course of academic qualification. The stability of research career intentions is predicted by changes in attractiveness ratings of a professorship and subjective assessments of research abilities relative to peers. Changes in academic self-efficacy beliefs have no significant effect. Recommendations for Practitioners: Firstly, the attraction of and the path to a professorship must be structurally strengthened. Secondly, early career researchers should be supported in developing realistic assessments of their subjective research skills relative to peers. Mentoring in addition to academic supervision, mental support, or opportunities for peer counseling are expected to be valuable offers. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers seeking to explain the career intentions of early career researchers should be aware of their changeability. Hence, they should be investigated in extended longitudinal studies. Furthermore, impostor feelings as influencing factors on career intentions need further research. Impact on Society: Research and knowledge are the basis for innovation and progress. In today’s knowledge society, research is in direct competition with both other countries and the private sector. In order to attract the “brightest minds” for academia, universities and research institutes must gain a deeper understanding of factors influencing the stability of research career intentions. Future Research: Future research should focus on specific instruments of promoting early career researchers and how they affect the development of realistic assessments of individual research skills. Moreover, international ECRs should be explicitly considered since a researchers’ visa status potentially affects career prospects and individual career intentions. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4537 research career intention early career researchers stability of research career intentions scientific career impostor phenomenon eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-05-04 15 237 263 4538 article Dr. Mansour Saleh Alabdulaziz malabdulaziz@iau.edu.sa Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study is to identify the challenges Saudi doctoral students studying in UK universities face with their supervisors, shed light on their experiences, and examine the extent to which these experiences impact their ability to complete their thesis. Furthermore, the aim is to examine the aspects of supervision the students found to be effective during their studies. Background: The overall intention of this article is to provide more information about the experiences and challenges Saudi mathematics students face with their doctoral supervisors in UK universities. Therefore, overcoming these difficulties will enhance the academic success rates of Saudi students, and will help them to complete their studies on time when studying at UK universities. Methodology: This was a multi method project resulting in the collection of both qualitative and quantitative data. It started with a questionnaire, which was administered to 300 Saudi doctoral students, 32 of whom subsequently agreed to be interviewed. The sample was randomly selected from doctoral students who were specializing in curricula and methods of teaching mathematics and other related areas. Contribution: This study added information to the literature on Saudi mathematics students’ experiences and challenges with their doctoral supervisors in UK universities. This also represents the first study to be context on this subject within Saudi Arabia. Findings: There are some positive and negative challenges experienced between doctoral students and their supervisors, which are comprised of four main dimensions: team supervision, the supervisory relationship, the elements of effective supervision in their current supervisors, and supervisors’ written feedback. Additionally, based on their experiences, the students stated the specific elements of supervision that were effective, including general knowledge of the research area and research methods, receiving continued support from the supervisory team, and the establishment of regular and realistic deadlines, friendliness, approachability and flexibility, the provision of detailed feedback on students’ work, joint meetings with both first and second supervisors, constructive criticism, and sufficient interest in their research. Recommendations for Practitioners: The stakeholders in Saudi Arabia should take advantage of the answers given by the participants to help those and future students. Furthermore, this study invites doctoral students to solve the challenges they face with their supervisors immediately, in order to be able to complete their thesis on time. Additionally, it is important that university and departmental administrative bodies consider tracking their study paths to better assist students. Furthermore, universities should be clear regarding the different roles and responsibilities of the students and their supervisors before the candidates commence their studies. Recommendation for Researchers: Further research is needed to explore supervisors’ views and experiences, as well as staff supporting and coordinating doctoral programs who may have a more holistic view of the supervisory process. Impact on Society: The study participants’ experiences of their doctoral studies could be highly beneficial for comprehending the problems that confront them when studying, which will enable better assistance to be provided. Future Research: Future studies could be extended to other areas of the education field. Furthermore, particular measures can be implemented to enhance supervision, which could be associated with satisfaction levels and/or the performance of students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4538 doctoral students supervisors UK universities experiences and challenges eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-06-04 15 265 284 4568 article Elke Stracke elke.stracke@canberra.edu.au Vijay Kumar vijay.mallan@otago.ac.nz Aim/Purpose: This paper introduces the Feedback Expectation Tool (FET) as an easy-to-use and flexible pedagogical tool to encourage dialogue on feedback between supervisors and candidates. The main aim of this pedagogical innovation is to allow negotiation to understand expectations and establish boundaries through transparent practices. Background: Feedback is a key element of learning and development and vital to developing scholarship. The literature indicates that supervisors and candidates often have different expectations about feedback. We developed the FET as a tool to encourage dialogue on feedback between supervisors and candidates so that they could understand each other’s expectations, negotiate, and work together in the most beneficial way possible. Methodology: We sought qualitative survey data from doctoral supervisors and candidates attending two universities. Participants identified key issues they faced with feedback. Based on current literature, qualitative survey data, and our insights as feedback researchers and academic developers, we developed a list of 13 conflicting statements. From this, we created the FET. Contribution: This paper shows how the FET evolved as an educational, developmental tool. It includes the tool (the FET) for easy and immediate use by supervisors and candidates. The FET makes an innovative pedagogical contribution to supervision practice and the wider body of knowledge around these practices. Findings: The paper presents and discusses the 13 FET statements that are the synthesized result of the literature review, the analysis of the qualitative survey data, and our experience. Each statement has contradictions that offer opportunities for dialogue between the supervisor and the candidate. Recommendations for Practitioners: Supervisors can use the FET successfully as a pedagogical tool when talking with their doctoral candidates. Every supervisor and candidate will use the FET in a way that works best for them both. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers could conduct studies in other research sites and countries and in specific disciplines. These studies would help us better understand the FET as a pedagogical tool so we could develop it further. Impact on Society: The FET is designed to help learning take place. It achieves this by creating a common understanding of the complexities in the feedback process. To keep up with ongoing changes in society in general, and in Higher Education and doctoral education in particular, we present the FET as a living document. Future Research: The authors are conducting follow-up research to discover how useful the FET is as a tool to help achieve more open and collegial feedback practices in doctoral supervision. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4568 dialogue doctoral supervision expectations feedback Feedback Expecta-tion Tool (FET) eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-06-07 15 285 304 4567 article Anbareen Jan anbaralee@gmail.com Ali Shafiq aleeshafiq@gmail.com Saeed Pahlevan Sharif samsharif6@gmail.com 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. 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. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4567 research supervision supervisee-supervisor relationship postgraduate re-search SEM AMOS eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-06-17 15 305 327 4572 article Meredith L Conrey meredithconrey@shsu.edu Gene Roberts, Jr. gene.roberts@shsu.edu Melissa R Fadler mfadler@shsu.edu Matias M Garza mmg070@shsu.edu Clifford V Johnson, Jr. cvj002@shsu.edu Misty Rasmussen mrr062@shsu.edu 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 number of individuals obtaining doctoral degrees in higher education, departments, colleges, and universities need to understand whether graduates find that their degree has been useful. Because there is a demand for agencies to emphasize skills and work-related training, the perceived value of the degree can inform policymakers on changes in curriculum and programming to increase the perceived value of the doctoral degree. Future Research: Future research should expand upon the number of students who are interviewed, and students in other academic programs may be interviewed to understand similarities and differences. Longitudinal studies should be conducted to understand if the perception of degree value changes over time. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4572 doctoral degree perception of value human capital theory qualitative re-search methods higher education administration professional goals eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-06-26 15 329 352 4589 article Devasmita Chakraverty devasmitac@iima.ac.in 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 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. Recommendation for Researchers: Research characterizing the qualitative characteristics of the impostor phenomenon across the STEM pipeline (undergrads, PhD students, postdocs, and faculty) would help understand if the reasons and manifestations of this phenomenon vary among differing demographics of students and professionals. Impact on Society: Organizations could focus on the training, development, mental health, and stressors among postdocs in STEM, particularly by focusing on career transition points (e.g., PhD to postdoc transition, postdoc to faculty transition), especially for those at-risk of experiencing this phenomenon and therefore dropping out. Future Research: Future research could examine how to manage or overcome the impostor phenomenon for students and professionals, focus on disciplines outside STEM, and investigate how socialization opportunities may be compromised due to this phenomenon. Longitudinal studies might characterize the phenomenon better than those that focused on the impostor phenomenon at a single time-point. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4589 impostor phenomenon impostor syndrome higher education post-doctoral training socialization STEM STEM postdocs transition eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-06-26 15 353 371 4378 article Julia Kirk julia.kirk@lmunet.edu Andrew Courtner andrew.courtner@lmunet.edu 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, possibly even stronger, the candidate’s ability to complete the doctoral degree. Impact on Society: Adults are self-directed individuals. Adults returning to school are found to have higher readiness for self-directed learning. Fostering this self-directed learning through social collaboration in a doctoral program can help doctoral candidates be more successful. Future Research: Additional factors may exist that influence the completion of a doctoral degree: life circumstances, job change, health, relationships with faculty, etc. These factors could be measured in conjunction with self-directed learning to gain a more comprehensive picture as to why some students do not finish their doctoral degrees in education. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4378 doctoral candidate education self-directed learning eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-06-28 15 373 392 4579 article Sylvia Mendez smendez@uccs.edu Valerie Martin Conley vconley@uccs.edu Katie Johanson kjohanso@uccs.edu Kinnis Gosha kinnis.gosha@morehouse.edu Naja A Mack naja.mack@morehouse.edu Comas Haynes Comas.Haynes@gtri.gatech.edu Rosario A Gerhardt rosario.gerhardt@mse.gatech.edu 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 chatbots may serve to expand their use in the realm of mentoring. Scaling virtual faculty mentoring opportunities may be an important breakthrough in meeting mentoring needs across higher education. Future Research: Future chatbot research must focus on connecting chatbot users with human mentors; standardizing the process for response creation through additional data collection with a cadre of diverse, renowned faculty; engaging subject matter experts to conduct quality verification checks on responses; testing new responses with potential users; and launching the chatbots for a broad array of users. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4579 chatbot supplemental mentoring engineering underrepresented minority doctoral students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-07-02 15 393 414 4598 article Shaoan Zhang Shaoan.Zhang@unlv.edu Chengcheng Li chengcheng.li@unlv.edu Mark Carroll mcarroll@unlv.nevada.edu P. G. Schrader pg.schrader@unlv.edu 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 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 part-time 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. Recommendation 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 program, mentors, and peers. Impact on Society: With consideration of the unique needs of part-time students and the application of technology-based learning community, opportunities are provided for mentors and doctoral students to engage in scholarship and develop a sense of belonging to their doctoral program. Future Research: Future research can examine the differences between male and female doctoral students, different race groups, and disciplines. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4598 situated learning mentoring technology part-time doctoral student program design eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-07-08 15 415 431 4594 article Joanna Szen-Ziemianska jszen-ziemianska@swps.edu.pl 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-making. Impact on Society: Supporting the effectiveness of doctoral students is significant as failure comes at great professional and personal cost to the doctoral student. There are also potential costs in terms of faculty disillusionment and impacts on university reputation. Economic benefits to the nation may also be forfeited when doctoral students fail to graduate. Future Research: It would be valuable to corroborate the model presented and extend it through the development of a mentoring support scale which identifies more linearly specific doctoral students’ needs. Longitudinal studies are also required to verify long-term effects of the programme. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4594 doctoral education doctoral students mentoring programme peer-mentoring psychosocial support eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-08-03 15 433 460 4613 article Devasmita Chakraverty devasmitac@iima.ac.in 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 mass, racial discrimination, and other unpleasant experiences. Conversations around training, development, and means to address psychological distress could focus on culturally-relevant experiences of the impostor phenomenon. Future Research: Future research could look at the experiences of other underrepresented groups in STEM such as Native Americans and Hispanics as well as among faculty of color and individuals from other fields beyond STEM. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4613 impostor phenomenon impostor syndrome Black STEM doctoral train-ing postdoctoral training higher education STEM PhD STEM postdoc-toral scholar eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-08-27 15 461 483 4622 article Devasmita Chakraverty devasmitac@iima.ac.in Donna B Jeffe jeffedonnab@wustl.edu Katherine P Dabney kdabney@vcu.edu Robert H Tai rht6h@virginia.edu Aim/Purpose: In response to widespread efforts to increase the size and diversity of the biomedical-research workforce in the U.S., a large-scale qualitative study was conducted to examine current and former students’ training experiences in MD (Doctor of Medicine), PhD (Doctor of Philosophy), and MD-PhD dual-degree programs. In this paper, we aimed to describe the experiences of a subset of study participants who had dropped out their MD-PhD dual-degree training program, the reasons they entered the MD-PhD program, as well as their reasons for discontinuing their training for the MD-PhD. Background: To our knowledge, the U.S. has the longest history of MD-PhD dual-degree training programs dating back to the 1950s and produces the largest number of MD-PhD graduates in the world. Integrated dual-degree MD-PhD programs are offered at more than 90 medical schools in the U.S., and historically have included three phases – preclinical, PhD-research, and clinical training, all during medical-school training. On average, it takes eight years of training to complete requirements for the MD-PhD dual-degree. MD-PhD students have unique training experiences, different from MD-only or PhD-only students. Not all MD-PhD students complete their training, at a cost to funding agencies, schools, and students themselves. Methodology: We purposefully sampled from 97 U.S. schools with doctoral programs, posting advertisements for recruitment of participants who were engaged in or had completed PhD, MD, and MD-PhD training. Between 2011 and 2013, semi-structured, one-on-one phone interviews were conducted with 217 participants. Using a phenomenological approach and inductive, thematic analysis, we examined students’ reasons for entering the MD-PhD dual-degree program, when they decided to leave, and their reasons for leaving MD-PhD training. Contribution: Study findings offer new insights into MD-PhD students’ reasons for leaving the program, beyond what is known about program attrition based on retrospective analysis of existing national data, as little is known about students’ actual reasons for attrition. By more deeply exploring students’ reasons for attrition, programs can find ways to improve MD-PhD students’ training experiences and boost their retention in these dual-degree programs to completion, which will, in turn, foster expansion of the biomedical-research-workforce capacity. Findings: Seven participants in the larger study reported during their interview that they left their MD-PhD programs before finishing, and these were the only participants who reported leaving their doctoral training. At the time of interview, two participants had completed the MD and were academic-medicine faculty, four were completing medical school, and one dropped out of medicine to complete a PhD in Education. Participants reported enrolling in MD-PhD programs to work in both clinical practice and research. Very positive college research experiences, mentorship, and personal reasons also played important roles in participants’ decisions to pursue the dual MD-PhD degree. However, once in the program, positive mentorship and other opportunities that they experienced during or after college, which initially drew candidates to the program was found lacking. Four themes emerged as reasons for leaving the MD-PhD program: (1) declining interest in research, (2) isolation and lack of social integration during the different training phases, (3) suboptimal PhD-advising experiences, and (4) unforeseen obstacles to completing PhD research requirements, such as loss of funding. Recommendations for Practitioners: Though limited by a small sample size, findings highlight the need for better integrated institutional and programmatic supports for MD-PhD students, especially during PhD training. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should continue to explore if other programmatic aspects of MD-PhD training (other than challenges experienced during PhD training, as discussed in this paper) are particularly problematic and pose challenges to the successful completion of the program. Impact on Society: The MD-PhD workforce comprises a small, but highly trained cadre of physician-scientists with the expertise to conduct clinical and/or basic science research aimed at improving patient care and developing new diagnostic tools and therapies. Although MD-PhD graduates comprise a small proportion of all MD graduates in the U.S. and globally, about half of all MD-trained physician-scientists in the U.S. federally funded biomedical-research workforce are MD-PhD-trained physicians. Training is extensive and rigorous. Improving experiences during the PhD-training phase could help reduce MD-PhD program attrition, as attrition results in substantial financial cost to federal and private funding agencies and to medical schools that fund MD-PhD programs in the U.S. and other countries. Future Research: Future research could examine, in greater depth, how communications among students, faculty and administrators in various settings, such as classrooms, research labs, and clinics, might help MD-PhD students become more fully integrated into each new program phase and continue in the program to completion. Future research could also examine experiences of MD-PhD students from groups underrepresented in medicine and the biomedical-research workforce (e.g., first-generation college graduates, women, and racial/ethnic minorities), which might serve to inform interventions to increase the numbers of applicants to MD-PhD programs and help reverse the steady decline in the physician-scientist workforce over the past several decades. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4622 MD-PhD program doctoral training challenges biomedical-research work-force attrition medical education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-09-06 15 485 516 4630 article Laura Roberts rightangleresearch@comcast.net 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? http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4630 doctoral mentoring tough-love mentoring theory mentor integrity and trustworthiness theory mentors’ high standards theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-10-01 15 517 539 4637 article Hanna Nori hanna.nori@utu.fi Marja H Peura mahepeu@utu.fi Arto Jauhiainen artojau@utu.fi 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. 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 played an important role in their doctoral studies. There were also a few ‘heroic tales’ about hard work and survival in spite of all the hurdles and distresses. Recommendations for Practitioners: PhD students are a very heterogeneous group. Their motives and goals for applying for doctoral studies vary, and their backgrounds and life situations affect their studies. There are three critical points educational practitioners should pay special attention to (1) supervision and support (mentoring), (2) length of funding, and (3) granted research periods. Recommendation for Researchers: Because Finland and the other Nordic countries have a long tradition of equal educational opportunities, we need comparative studies on the same topic from countries with higher educational disparities. Impact on Society: Inequalities in educational opportunities and experiences originate at the very beginning of the educational path, and they usually cumulate over the years. For this reason, the achievement of educational equality should be promoted not only through education policy but also through family, regional, and social policy decisions. Future Research: The Bourdieuian concepts of cultural, social, and economic capitals are also relevant in doctoral education. PhD students’ family backgrounds are reflected in their motives, experiences, and interpretations in the academic community. Future research should explore how to best support and reinforce the self-confidence of doctoral students from lower SES backgrounds. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4637 doctoral students doctoral education doctoral capital cluster analysis content analysis eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-10-02 15 541 558 4642 article Jayson W Richardson jayson.richardson@du.edu Marsha Carr Carrm@uncw.edu Jeremy L. D. Watts jwatts@andersonuniversity.edu Aim/Purpose: This study focuses on how a short-term international study abroad program to England impacted doctoral students’ cultural competencies. Background: The case study captures the experiences of six school leadership doctoral students who traveled abroad to East London, England. The overarching goal of this experience was to improve their self-efficacy for culturally competent school leadership. Methodology: Through this case study of six doctoral students in an educational leadership doctoral program, the researchers sought to answer the following question: How do knowledge, attitudes, skills, and behaviors around cultural competencies of U.S. school leaders shift because they participated in an international internship? Through pre-post surveys and follow-up interviews, the researchers explored how the international experience impacted cultural competencies. Contribution: The primary goal of this experience was to improve self-efficacy for culturally responsive school leadership. The doctoral students were either aspiring school leaders or were currently serving as a building leader of a P-12 school. It is from these students that we can learn how a short-term international experience might impact school leaders, and in return, the students and staff they serve. This study adds to the limited literature about the benefits of study abroad programs for educational leadership students in doctoral programs. Findings: The doctoral students in this case study gained knowledge and skills because of this study abroad. Knowledge was gained about educational systems and self-awareness. Skills learned included relationship skills, travel skills, and skills related to empowering teachers. Attitudes about diversity shifted to be more encompassing. Further, the behaviors of doctoral students changed because of this trip. The results from the pre-test and post-test on cultural competence indicated a significant improvement in cultural competence for the group. Recommendations for Practitioners: The knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behavioral shifts captured in this study spoke to profound growth around cultural competencies. It is through preparing these doctoral students before the international sojourn, guiding them during the experience, and following up with them upon return that we were able to create a supportive, meaningful, and impactful study abroad experience for future school leaders. Thus, these experiences will likely impact their collective leadership in the future. Recommendation for Researchers: Though research about the benefits of study abroad programs for graduate students is limited, several studies are about the benefits of study abroad and international programs in undergraduate education. There is all but a lack of literature focused on doctoral educational leadership students and study abroad. Nevertheless, for many students who choose to study overseas, it may be the first opportunity they have to explore a new country and to be fully immersed in a culture that is different from their own. Through these experiences, many development opportunities can affect how students view their professional work. Impact on Society: Through exposure to others, by experiencing diverse ways of thinking and doing, and through critical conversation, institutions of higher education can develop school leaders to be culturally competent, culturally responsive, and socially just. As demonstrated in this study, international experiences are one decisive way to start this conversation. Future Research: Research has shown that it is possible to increase students’ cultural competence through study abroad. As such, in the current study, the researchers took a mixed methods approach to understand how cultural competencies around knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors shifted. As a result, we found that each doctoral student increased their cultural awareness in significant ways. Students gained knowledge by comparing the cultures within education systems and gained self-awareness about their own cultural awareness issues. More research needs to be done to better understand the impact of study abroad experiences on graduate students in educational leadership programs. These experiences could be short experiences (i.e., one to two weeks) or longer experiences (i.e., more than two weeks). Further, focusing on developing cultural competency before, during, and after a trip in different educational fields other than educational leadership (e.g., literacy, curriculum & instruction) could have significant school-level effects. Lastly, extending study abroad experiences into locations where English is not the first or primary language could provide opportunities for developing language skills while enhancing patience, cross-cultural communication, and problem-solving skills that could be beneficial personally and professionally. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4642 leadership preparation school leaders cultural competency culture intercultural study abroad educational leadership eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-10-07 15 559 573 4641 article Uditha Ramanayake rmuar1@students.waikato.ac.nz Aim/Purpose: This paper aims to provide important learning insights for doctoral students, researchers and practitioners who wish to research on sensitive topics with research participants from a significantly different culture from their own. Background: Embarking on doctoral research in different cultural contexts presents challenges for doctoral students, especially when researching a sensitive topic. Methodology: This paper uses an autoethnography as its research methodology. Contribution: This paper extends the literature on doctoral researchers’ experiences of exploring the lived experiences of senior travellers who have faced major life events. Little of the previous literature on the experiences of PhD students has explored the experiences they had while researching on a sensitive topic in a different cultural context to their own. To fill this knowledge gap, this paper presents an autoethnography of my experiences. Findings: This paper presents some critical insights into undertaking research in another culture. Its findings are outlined under the following four themes: (a) Feeling vulnerable, (b) Building rapport, (c) Preparing for the unexpected, and (d) Exploring lived experiences. Recommendations for Practitioners: When conducting sensitive cross-cultural research, understanding researchers’ vulnerabilities, rapport-building and preparing for the unexpected are very important. The use of a visual element is beneficial for the participants in their idea generation process. Visual methods have the potential to capture the lived experiences of participants and enable them to reflect on those. Recommendation for Researchers: Doing cross-cultural sensitive doctoral research poses a number of methodological and practical challenges. It was very important to gain a wider cultural understanding of the country and its people in my cross-cultural doctoral research. To this end, this paper suggests that future doctoral researchers consider volunteering with the community as a way to gain understanding of the research context when preparing to undertake cross-cultural research. Impact on Society: The findings support the importance of cultural sensitivity when doing cross-cultural research. Future Research: Future research could be conducted in a different cultural setting to reveal whether the key themes identified here are universal. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4641 PhD student doctoral research cross-cultural research sensitive research autoethnography eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-10-10 15 575 593 4645 article Kyungmee Lee k.lee23@lancaster.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: This article investigates thirteen students’ lived experiences on an online PhD programme, aiming to develop a better understanding of the nature of doing a PhD online. Background: A large number of adult students with full-time professional roles and other social responsibilities have returned to universities to pursue their doctoral degree in order to advance their personal and professional lives. Online PhD programmes are now one of the viable choices for those who wish to combine their PhD study with other professional and personal roles. However, little has been known about students’ lived experiences of doing a PhD online, which are seemingly different from those of other doctoral students who are doing their studies in more conventional doctoral education settings. Methodology: The present qualitative study employs a phenomenological approach to develop an in-depth understanding of doctoral students’ lived experiences in doing their PhD studies online. The present study was conducted in an online PhD programme at a Department of Education in a research-intensive university based in the United Kingdom (UK). Thirteen students voluntarily participated in a semi-structured interview. The interview transcripts were analysed following Van Manen’s (2016) explanations for conducting a thematic analysis. Contribution: The paper presents seven themes that illustrate the essential nature of doing a PhD online, answering the two questions: (1)What are the lived experiences of online PhD students? and (2) What are the particular aspects of the programme that structure the experiences? Findings: The characteristics of online PhD studies are multifaceted, including different elements of PhD education, part-time education, and online education. Those aspects interact and create a unique mode of educational experiences. In a more specific sense, the journey of an online PhD – from the moment of choosing to do a PhD online to the moment of earning a PhD – is guided by multiple, often conflicting, aspects of different doctoral education models such as the professional doctorate, the research doctorate, and the taught doctorate. The present study demonstrates that experiential meanings of doing a PhD online are constructed by the dynamic interplay between the following six elements: PhDness, onlineness, part-timeness, cohortness, practice-orientedness, and independence. Throughout the long journey, students become better practitioners and more independent researchers, engaging in multiple scholarly activities. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is essential to understand the unique characteristics and experiences of PhD students who choose to pursue a PhD in online programmes. Based on the understanding, online doctoral educators can provide adequate academic supports suitable for this particular group. The study findings highlight the importance of supporting students’ adjustment to a new learning environment at the beginning of the programme and their transition from Part 1 to Part 2. Recommendation for Researchers: It is crucial to develop a separate set of narratives about online PhD education. Common assumptions drawn from our existing knowledge about more conventional doctoral education are not readily applicable in this newly emerging online education setting. Impact on Society: It is important for online PhD students and potential ones in the planning stage to better understand the nature of doing a PhD online. Given the growing popularity of doctoral education, our findings based on the reflective narratives of thirteen online PhD students in this paper can support their informed decision and successful learning experiences. Future Research: A comparative study can more closely examine similarities and differences among diverse models of doctoral education to capture the uniqueness of online PhD programmes. It is worthwhile to investigate students’ experiences in online PhD programmes in disciplines other than education. A more longitudinal approach to following an entire journey of PhD students can be useful to develop a more comprehensive and holistic understanding of an online PhD. Some critical questions about students’ scholarly identity that emerged from the present study remain unanswered. A follow-up phenomenological research can focus on the existential meanings of being a scholar to this group of students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4645 online doctoral education PhD programme part-time doctoral student co-hort community supervision scholarly identity phenomenology eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-10-13 15 595 614 4649 article Li Bai l1.bai@qut.edu.au Chun Yan Yang c2.yang@qut.edu.au Aim/Purpose: International PhD students suffer a lot of stress. However, many studies about international students focus on identifying the stressors these students experience rather than the stress-coping strategies, and those that explore international students’ coping behaviour often report maladjustments. Background: This study intended to fill the research gap by examining the strategies that Chinese students employed to psychologically adjust to their PhD study. Methodology: Narrative inquiry method was employed to give voice to the research participants. Six Chinese doctoral students in social sciences in Australian universities were purposefully sampled and interviewed three times during their candidature in order to gain an in-depth understanding of their lived experiences of stress-coping. Contribution: This paper provides positive stress-coping strategies used by six Chinese doctoral students, which can be used by international doctoral students or those who work with doctoral students from abroad to improve their psychological well-beings. Findings: These Chinese PhD students adopted positive stress-coping strategies of regulating their emotions and retaining their motivation. They adopted illusory and interpretive forms of secondary control by reframing realities to obtain psychological peace when faced with stress. The ways that Chinese PhD students handled stress suggest that the Chinese moral education and the characteristic motivation for learning attributed them with positive personal characteristics to battle the adverse conditions. Recommendations for Practitioners: Institutions/departments can initiate support groups for PhD students from the same disciplines where students can express their stress, seek assistance from senior doctoral students and exchange their strategies. Institutions/departments can also support international doctoral candidates by taking a more flexible approach to policies and procedures concerning doctoral students taking leave both in terms of when it is taken and the duration. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers can focus on international doctoral students’ positive stress-coping experiences as well as negative experiences to present a balanced picture of the doctoral journey. Impact on Society: The findings from this research on doctoral students’ stress-coping can equip doctoral students with strategies to handle their psychological challenges, which in turn may enhance their overseas doctoral experiences, reduce the dropout rates, and raise awareness of supervisors and institutions about doctoral students’ psychological well-beings. Future Research: Future research can examine the stress-coping experiences of other international doctoral students, focusing not only from the individual psychological angle but from the academic and social perspectives. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4649 Chinese PhD students stress coping secondary control qualitative interviews psychological adjustments eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-10-22 15 615 635 4652 article Gaeun Seo gaeunseo@gmail.com HeyJin T Yeo hyeo8@illinois.edu Aim/Purpose: This qualitative study was conducted to illuminate the under-researched aspect of doctoral students’ career decision-making by examining their internal cognitive processes based on the Cognitive Information Processing (CIP) theory. Specifically, this study compared doctoral students’ career decision-making from two career groups, those pursuing the professoriate versus those pursuing careers beyond the professoriate. Background: Due to PhD workforce supply-demand imbalances in academic job markets and to a growing interest in careers outside academia around the world, an increasing number of doctoral recipients have pursued careers beyond the professoriate, which are considered non-traditional career paths in doctoral education. While a growing number of studies have investigated these changing trends, it remains limited to fully capture more introspective domains of the career choice processes. Given that the career decision-making experience is highly individualized, it is critical to explore doctorate students’ own narratives about career decision-making. Methodology: Individual structured interviews were conducted with 30 doctoral students from a public research-oriented university in the United States. Employing Directed Content Analysis, two researchers developed the initial coding categories based on the guiding theory, CIP theory, and deductively analyzed the data to identify emerging major themes. Contribution: Findings from the study highlight the core factors that influence doctoral students’ career choices across fields, which allows developing centralized career resources and support systems at the institutional level. Specifically, findings pointed to different approaches for doctoral students to (re-)assess their career choice while providing implications for institutions, academic departments, and individual stakeholders such as faculty advisor and doctoral students, to develop systematic career support in this changing academic job market. Findings: Data analysis uncovered three core factors impacting doctoral students’ career decision making, which are (1) roles of the first-hand experience in career confirmation/shift; (2) dissimilar career readiness status by group; and (3) impact of personal career values. Recommendations for Practitioners: Both institutions and academic departments could reassess the culture and value of career development and refine co-curricular activities to offer adequate professional development opportunities in doctoral training to develop career support systems aligned with students’ diversified career needs and interests. As time and first-hand experiences are identified as critical factors facilitating their career progress, doctoral students may want to proactively seek diverse opportunities to gain first-hand experience in and outside campus. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers could continue similar research in other universities and countries where similar concerns exist. These studies would help fully clarify common influential factors on career choices of doctoral students across fields. Impact on Society: Considering the realities of doctoral students’ diversified career interests and career outcomes, institutes of higher education should make intentional efforts to broaden the definition of “successful” PhD career outcomes, which ultimately helps break the prevailing myth that doctoral students or recipients who pursue careers beyond the professoriate, called nontraditional or alternative career paths, are considered as failures or incompetent. Future Research: Future research should consider examining diverse doctoral student populations such as early-stage doctoral students to discover additional factors influencing their career decision-making. The authors also recommend cross-cultural studies in other countries where similar career concerns exist, such as the U.K. and the Netherlands, to develop a more comprehensive understanding of how doctoral students’ career decisions are made. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4652 doctoral student career decision-making professoriate career careers beyond the professoriate qualitative research Cognitive Information Processing theory graduate student career development eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-10-29 15 637 652 4658 article Annemarie Vaccaro avaccaro@uri.edu Chiquita Baylor ckbaylor@gmail.com Desiree Forsythe desi_2158@uri.edu Karin Capobianco karin.cap23@gmail.com Jana Knibb jknibb@ccri.edu John Olerio jolerio@uri.edu Aim/Purpose: This paper contributes to the scholarly literature on intersectionality and social injustice (invisibility, hypervisibility) in higher education and serves as a model for enacting doctoral education where research, theory, and practice converge. Background: Invisibility and hypervisibility have long been documented as social injustices, but very little literature has documented how doctoral students (who are also university employees) make meaning of intersecting privileges and oppressions within post-secondary hierarchies. Methodology: This study used a 10-week Duoethnography with co-researchers who were simultaneously doctoral students, staff, instructors, and administrators in higher education settings. Contribution: This paper offers a unique glimpse into currere—the phenomenon of theory and practice converging—to offer an intensive interrogation of life as curriculum for five doctoral students and a professor. Findings: This paper illuminates rich meaning-making narratives of six higher educators as they grappled with invisibility and hypervisibility in the context of their intersecting social identities as well as their varied locations within post-secondary hierarchies/power structures. Recommendations for Practitioners: Duoethnography can be an effective strategy for social justice praxis in doctoral programs as well as other higher education departments, divisions, or student organizations. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers can use Duoethnography to explore a plethora of social justice issues in doctoral education and across staff, faculty, and Ph.D. student experiences within the power structures of post-secondary education. Impact on Society: Examining intersectionality, invisibility and hypervisibility is an important way to delve into the complexity of oppression. There will be no justice until all forms of oppression (including hypervisibility and invisibility) are extinguished. Future Research: Future research can more deeply explore social injustices and the intersections of not only social identities, but also social locations of doctoral students who are simultaneously employees and students in a university hierarchy. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4658 doctoral education duoethnography invisibility hypervisibility intersectionality eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-11-28 15 653 684 4669 article Alexander J. Hish alexander.hish@duke.edu Gabriela A. Nagy gabriela.nagy@duke.edu Caitlin M. Fang caitlin.fang@duke.edu M. Zachary Rosenthal mark.rosenthal@duke.edu Lisalynn Kelley lisalynn.kelley@duke.edu Christopher V. Nicchitta christopher.nicchitta@duke.edu Kafui Dzirasa kafui.dzirasa@duke.edu Aim/Purpose: National and international survey studies have begun to identify heightened levels of depression, anxiety, and burnout among doctoral students. Nevertheless, little research has been done to evaluate which interventions may support doctoral student wellness. Background: To guide future interventions research, this study evaluated perceptions of the acceptability and effectiveness of wellness approaches among biomedical doctoral students. Methodology: In this study, 69 biomedical doctoral students were sampled from a research institution in the southeastern United States. Participants completed a structured psychiatric diagnostic interview and self-report questionnaires. Questionnaires assessed participants’ beliefs about the acceptability and effectiveness of 36 wellness approaches in reducing burnout symptoms and depression symptoms, and the participants’ attitudes towards psychological services. Contribution: This study demonstrates that approaches to support biomedical doctoral student wellness should be tailored according to a student’s history of problems with mental health. Findings: Among candidate approaches, those involving spending time socializing with friends and family were rated most favorably by the entire sample. However, participants with high burnout or depression symptoms negatively evaluated approaches involving social engagement. Participants with high burnout symptoms or a history of psychological diagnoses or treatment rated individual therapy more favorably. Recommendations for Practitioners: Social engagement is highly valued by biomedical doctoral students, above and beyond institution-based wellness resources. University administrators should prioritize interventions favored by students struggling with symptoms of burnout and mental health problems, especially individual therapy. Recommendation for Researchers: Randomized trials should be conducted to assess the effectiveness in reducing problems with mental health of the approaches rated favorably, particularly those involving social engagement. Studies should investigate facilitators and barriers to approaches rated highly likely to be effective, but not acceptable, including peer support groups and individual therapy. Impact on Society: In the interest of preventing attrition from biomedical doctoral programs and promoting the wellness and success of future scientists, it is important to develop training programs sensitive to the mental health needs of their students. This study provides important insights guiding next steps in intervention testing and implementation to support biomedical doctoral students. Future Research: Future studies should validate the findings in this study with large internationally representative samples of students across various fields of doctoral study. Future intervention studies should include rigorous evaluation of facilitators and barriers for approaches rated favorably in this study. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4669 burnout depression doctoral students intervention wellness eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-11-30 15 685 704 4665 article Maria Teresa Patrício teresa.patricio@iscte-iul.pt Patrícia Silva Santos ana.patricia.santos@iscte-iul.pt Aim/Purpose: This article examines the experience and practice of doctoral students by focusing on different dimensions of the PhD socialization process. It addresses the question of whether university collaborations with businesses influence the experience and practice of PhD students. Background: The study explores the academic culture in the PhD process through the analysis of the experiences and practices of doctoral students in two groups – those without business collaborations (academic trajectories) and those with business collaborations (hybrid trajectories). Academic trajectories are seen as traditional academic disciplinary based doctoral education, while hybrid trajectories cross boundaries collaborating with companies in the production of new knowledge. Methodology: The article uses a qualitative methodology based on extensive interviews and analysis of the curriculum vitae of fourteen Portuguese PhD students in three scientific domains (engineering and technology sciences, exact sciences, and social sciences). The doctoral program profiles were defined according to a survey applied to the directors of all doctoral programs in Portugal. Contribution: The study contributes to the reflection on the effects of collaboration with companies, in particular on the trajectories and experiences of doctoral students. It contributes to the understanding of the challenges associated with business collaborations. Findings: Some differences were found between academic and hybrid trajectories of doctoral students. Traditional products such as scientific articles are the main objective of the PhD student, but scientific productivity is influenced by trajectory and ultimately by career prospects. The business culture influences the trajectories of doctoral students with regard to outputs such as publishing that may act as a barrier to academic culture. PhD students with academic trajectories seem to value international experiences and mobility. Minor differences were found in the choice of topic and type of research activity, revealing that these dimensions are indicative of the scientific domain. Both hybrid and academic students indicate that perceptions of basic and applied research are changing with borders increasingly blurred. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is important for universities, department chairs, and PhD coordinators to be concerned with the organisation, structure, and success of doctoral programs. Therefore, it is useful to consider the experiences and trajectories of PhD students involved with the business sector and to monitor the relevance and results of such exchange. Key points of contact include identifying academic and business interests, cultures, and practices. A student-centred focus in university-business collaboration also can improve students’ well-being in this process. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should consider the processes of interaction and negotiation between academic and business sectors and actors. It is important to understand and analyse the trajectories and experiences of PhD students in doctoral programs and in university-company collaborations, since they are the central actors. Impact on Society: This analysis is relevant to societies where policy incentives encourage doctoral programs to collaborate with companies. The PhD is an important period of socialization and identity formation for researchers, and in this sense the experiences of students in the context of collaboration with companies should be analyzed, including its implications for the professional identity of researchers and, consequently, for the future of science inside and outside universities. Future Research: More empirical studies need to explore these processes and relationships, including different national contexts and different scientific fields. Other aspects of the academic and business trajectory should be studied, such as the decision to pursue a PhD or the focus on perceptions about the future career. Another point that deserves to be studied is whether a broader set of experiences increases the recognition and appreciation of the doctoral degree by employers inside and outside the academy. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4665 doctoral education academic culture university-business collaboration PhD student’s trajectory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-12-01 15 705 736 4671 article Melanie D. M. Hudson mhudson17@liberty.edu Lucinda S. Spaulding lsspaulding@liberty.edu Angela Y Ford aford5@liberty.edu Laura E Jones lejones2@liberty.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this systematic grounded theory study was to generate a model explaining how grit and a growth mindset develop and influence persistence in doctoral completers. Since doctoral attrition has historically plagued institutions of higher learning, with conflicting explanations reported in the literature, program leaders will benefit by understanding factors associated with persistence. Background: Although the initial literature regarding doctoral persistence relied on the more traditional student involvement and integration models of higher education, the changing landscape of doctoral education—a steep increase in the number of distance education programs, as well as students’ time and energy constraints—calls for a closer look at individual student factors over engagement efforts. Methodology: The systematic approach of grounded theory was adopted to fulfill the purpose of constructing a model explaining the process of grit and growth mindset development in doctoral students who persist to completion. Both quantitative data from a total population of 51 completers, in the form of the Short Grit Scale instrument and Dweck’s Mindset Instrument, as well as qualitative data from interviews and reflective journals of a sample of 12 doctoral completers were analyzed to produce the Grit Growth Model suggested by the findings. Contribution: The Grit Growth Model contributes empirical evidence of the antecedents of the characteristics of grit and growth mindset, which has been limited in the literature to date. A unique contribution of this study is the suggestion of a departure from the typical approach of leaders in post-graduate institutions from a student-integration/engagement approach, to a more direct personal development strategy, with specific direction given by the Grit Growth Model, as well as the additional Student Development Model of Doctoral Persistence. Findings: The findings produced the Grit Growth Model, which revealed sub-themes of expectations, engagement, service, and personal loss in the life experiences of the doctoral completers, as well as values surrounding religious faith and passion. Personal characteristics of flexibility and shame resilience were identified, and findings confirmed prior persistence literature that acknowledged the imminent value of personal and academic relationships. The central theme of personal and social responsibility (PSR) carries theoretical, empirical, and practical implications for doctoral or any other leaders who wish to develop grit in others, as well as individuals seeking to develop the trait within themselves. Recommendations for Practitioners: Given the findings of this study, doctoral program leaders should make a concerted effort to add a direct student development focus to their portfolio of strategies to support student persistence, as visualized in the Student Development Model of Doctoral Persistence. Programmatic elements, such as direct provision of grit, growth mindset, and PSR resources through doctoral student communication platforms, could deliver persistence support by means of advancing student metacognition of these principles. Additionally, modules that introduce and inspire growth in these areas using the quantitative instruments for grit and a growth mindset, followed by reflective journaling, direct instruction videos, and post-tests, are suggested. Recommendation for Researchers: Future researchers in any field can build upon this model by replacing doctoral persistence with their own long-term goals or achievements and representing their findings by adjusting the model accordingly. In this way, the significance of the Grit Growth Model lies in its adaptability to future inquiry, providing a meaningful template to illustrate confirmatory or alternative findings. Impact on Society: For educators at any level or individuals who wish to develop grit and a growth mindset within themselves or others studying the array of categories of experiences and beliefs on the Grit Growth Model will illuminate multiple paths to follow on this quest. Accessing resources from Duckworth’s Character Lab (https://characterlab.org/), Dweck’s mindset works© website (https://www.mindsetworks.com/default), or the AAC&U’s Personal and Social Responsibility site (https://www.aacu.org/core_commitments) are suggested concrete starting points. Future Research: In subsequent research along these same lines, it would be desirable to solicit a follow-up interview to dig deeply into more nuanced life experiences that may not emerge in the initial interview. Additionally, due to the limitations of snowball sampling, future confirmatory research should focus on samples from a wider population who completed at a more diverse group of universities. Finally, although the interview sample size of 12 participants produced findings with theoretical saturation, a larger sample from a wider variety of disciplines and demographics, including unmarried doctoral completers, may paint a more complete picture of the common experiences and values of completers from a broader range of personal and professional backgrounds. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4671 grit growth mindset doctoral persistence higher education personal and so-cial responsibility eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-12-20 15 737 758 4670 article Anna Sverdlik anna.sverdlik@mail.mcgill.ca Lynn McAlpine lynn.mcalpine@mcgill.ca Nathan C. Hall nathan.c.hall@mcgill.ca Aim/Purpose: Research on doctoral students’ well-being suggests that an interplay of social and psychological factors, such as integration into the scholarly community and perceptions of self-worth, shape students’ experiences. The present research examined the role of these factors in the well-being of doctoral students. Background: Imposter syndrome has long been discussed both formally and informally as a prevalent experience of doctoral students. Existing research provides empirical support for the role of perceived belongingness to one’s scholarly community in maladaptive self-perceptions (i.e., imposter syndrome), as well as the role of imposter syndrome in doctoral students’ well-being. However, no studies to date have directly explored the extent to which imposter syndrome mediates the relationship between perceived belongingness and well-being in a single model. Methodology: The present research sought to evaluate perceived belongingness as a predictor of imposter syndrome and how imposter syndrome, in turn, predicts well-being (i.e., depression, stress, and illness symptoms) in doctoral students. Depression, stress, and illness symptoms were identified in the literature as the most prevalent well-being concerns reported by doctoral students and therefore were evaluated as the outcome variables in the present research. In line with previous research, we expected perceived belongingness to negatively predict imposter syndrome, and imposter syndrome, in turn, to positively predict depression, stress, and illness symptoms. Two studies evaluated the proposed model. Data for both studies was collected simultaneously (i.e., one large sample) with 25% of the sample randomly selected for Study 1 (cross-sectional) and the remainder included in Study 2 (longitudinal). In Study 1, we tested this hypothesis with a cross-sectional design and explored whether imposter syndrome was a significant mediator between perceived belongingness and well-being. In Study 2, we aimed to replicate and extend the results of Study 1 with a prospective design to further assess the directionality of the relationship from perceived belongingness to imposter syndrome and, in turn, the role of imposter syndrome in changes in depression, stress, and illness symptoms over a five-month period. Contribution: The present results represent evidence of the process by which doctoral students develop imposter syndrome and some of the consequences of imposter syndrome on doctoral well-being. Additionally, the present study includes a large-scale sample of international doctoral students across the disciplines, thus revealing the prevalence of imposter syndrome in the doctoral experience. Findings: Overall, the results of the present research provided support for our hypotheses. In Study 1, perceived belongingness was found to be a negative predictor of imposter syndrome that, in turn, predicted higher levels of depression, stress, and illness symptoms. Additionally, imposter syndrome was found to significantly mediate the relationship between perceived scholarly belongingness and the three outcome variables assessing psychological well-being. Study 2 further revealed perceived scholarly belongingness to negatively predict imposter syndrome five months later, with imposter syndrome, in turn, predicting increases in depression, stress, and illness symptoms in our doctoral student sample. Recommendations for Practitioners: Several recommendations are made for practitioner based on the present findings: First, by acknowledging the critical role of perceived social belongingness in students’ well-being, faculty and administrators can establish structures to better integrate students into their scholarly communities, and departments can foster a supportive social atmosphere for their doctoral students that emphasizes the quality of interactions and consultation with faculty. Second, information sessions for first-year doctoral students could highlight the prevalence and remedies of feeling like an impostor to normalize these otherwise deleterious feelings of inadequacy. Finally, professional development seminars that are typically taught in graduate programs could incorporate an explicit discussion of well-being topics and the prevalence of imposter syndrome, alongside other pragmatic topics (e.g., publishing protocols), to ensure that students perceive their departmental climate as supportive and, in turn, feel less like an imposter and better psychologically adjusted. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should continue exploring the various antecedents and consequences of imposter syndrome, specifically focusing on at-risk students, as well as the role of imposter syndrome in doctoral-level dropout. Impact on Society: Imposter syndrome is a harmful experience that can lead to a variety of life-altering outcomes, such as developing or intensifying a mental illness. Doctoral students, as society’s future researchers and high-skilled professionals, have a great impact on society as a whole, and efforts should be extended into maintaining doctoral students’ well-being in order for them to perform at an optimal level. The present research sheds light on one aspect of the doctoral experience that is detrimental to the well-being of doctoral students, thus informing doctoral students, advisors, and departments of one area where more resources can be allocated in order to facilitate the health, both physical and psychological, of their students. Future Research: Future research should explore additional outcomes to fully understand the impact of perceived belongingness and imposter syndrome on doctoral students. Some such outcomes may include academic performance (e.g., presentation/publication rates), motivation (e.g., perseverance vs. intention to quit), and more general psychological adjustment measures (e.g., satisfaction with life). Such research, in combination with the present findings, can help the understanding of the full impact of imposter syndrome on the academic and personal experiences of doctoral students and can contribute to psychologically healthier and more academically productive experiences for doctoral students as they navigate the myriad challenges of doctoral education. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4670 doctoral education doctoral well-being imposter syndrome mental health graduate education doctoral socialization eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2020-12-27 15 759 786 4673 article Minghui Hou mhou009@odu.edu Alma Jam jamaima@isu.edu Aim/Purpose: In our reflexivity in this duoethnographic study, we aimed to identify and elicit the authentic voices, thoughts, and experiences of international students from China and Cameroon to explore international education equity’s complexities through the internationalization of curriculum in doctoral programs at U.S. institutions. Background: Many studies have addressed the need for education equity in terms of gender, age, and socioeconomic status. However, few studies have explored the complex tensions of international education equity for international graduate students as they relate to the internationalization of the curriculum in doctoral programs in the context of neonationalist political rhetoric. Methodology: A duoethnographic method was utilized to create dialogic narratives and provide multiple perspectives on a variety of topics across disciplines and forms of practices of one’s life history to act and give meaning to actions. As two researchers and international doctoral students from China and Cameroon, we conducted interviews and discussions to maintain an ongoing dialogue debriefing our experiences. Contribution: By focusing on the experiences as international doctoral students, this duoethnographic study encourages readers to recognize how different cultures, experiences, and needs reinforce and influence one another and the importance of ensuring education equity for international doctoral students’ success. Findings: Three elements of international education equity were defined as authentic inclusion, differentiated teaching strategies and assessments, and individualized resources including but not limited to financial and cultural resources. Four prominent themes emerged related to international education equity for international doctoral students: (1) academic support related to teaching and learning strategies, assessments, language support, and mentorship; (2) financial support related to university funding and employment opportunities; (3) administrative support related to staff/faculty/community training on intercultural competence and training related complexities of visa status for international doctoral students; and (4) community support in the context of geopolitical tensions. Recommendations for Practitioners: The findings highlight the need for research universities to address international doctoral students’ concerns, develop and innovate practices to ensure international education equity, and help international doctoral students to study in a safe and welcoming environment. Recommendation for Researchers: The findings suggest further critical research into the rationale of the difficulty in international education equity and the impact of equity in the curriculum and learning spaces of higher education through exploring the similarities and nuances between international doctoral students from China and Cameroon. Impact on Society: These findings aim to ensure international educational equity and to build a welcoming environment for international doctoral students through collaboration among education providers, policymakers, and the community. Future Research: Future research may use international educational equity to explore diverse international doctoral students’ experiences, needs, and challenges in studying at U.S. research universities, and how those experiences, needs, and challenges shift their mobility. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4673 international education equity curriculum internationalization Chinese Cameroon current administration academic financial community eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-01-15 14 . i vii 4178 article Michael Jones editor@ijds.org Table of Contents for Volume 14, 2019, of the International Journal of Doctoral Studies http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4178 IJDS International Journal of Doctoral Studies PhD doctoral studies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-01-15 14 001 031 4168 article Kelsey Inouye kelsey.inouye@linacre.ox.ac.uk Lynn McAlpine lynn.mcalpine@learning.ox.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: This systematic review synthesizes the literature on doctoral writing and feedback published in peer-reviewed English-language journals between 1997 and 2017 to provide insight into how these topics have been theorized and approached. The goal was to examine how this literature characterizes the development of academic identity in doctoral students to better understand the conceptual relationships underpinning previous studies, and advance work on writing, feedback, and identity to support budding researchers. Background: Research on doctoral writing and identity development has been a focus of research in higher education over the past two decades, as identity development has been recognized as a key outcome of doctoral study; the PhD program is meant to transform students into independent researchers. As a site of identity development, writing—and feedback on writing—are central to doctoral growth. Methodology: The systematic search resulted in 887 citations, of which 579 abstracts were read reducing the number of relevant citations to 95. These 95 full text papers were reviewed, and 37 studies met our inclusion criteria. Frequently cited papers were identified and 3 were added to the final corpus for a total of 40 articles. (Limitations include the constraint to English-language articles and the exclusion of books, book chapters, and conference papers.) All 40 articles were open coded for definitions of academic identity, theoretical frameworks, research context, and key themes. Contribution: This paper contributes a comprehensive analysis of the theoretical perspectives on identity development underlying recent work on doctoral writing and feedback. It demonstrates that this literature takes a largely sociocultural approach to identity: conceived as shaped largely by social structures and interactions. This review also confirms a complex relationship between writing, feedback, and identity in which doctoral students draw upon feedback on their writing to learn about what it means to be a researcher in practice, and how to communicate like a researcher in their relevant discourse communities, thereby advancing their research thinking and encouraging critical reflection on writing and research practices. Findings: The review revealed that the literature draws primarily on sociocultural perspectives, that is, examining writing and feedback through the lens of the practices of the groups in which the individual engages - with academic identity development, though rarely defined, represented as an iterative process of writing and feedback. We noted two gaps resulting from this perspective, which are highlighted by the very few studies taking different perspectives. The first is the lack of attention to individual variation in agency as regards seeking out and using feedback. The second is the potential influence of feedback on critical thinking, which is seen as central to PhD progress. Future Research: Future research may adopt varying theoretical approaches to identity development to shed light on the role of individual agency in identity construction. Future studies that focus on the process of how students respond to and are influenced (or not) by feedback would be useful in illuminating the connections between feedback, writing, and the development of research thinking—all of which contribute to identity development. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4168 academic identity doctoral writing feedback systematic review eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-01-15 14 033 067 4174 article Mohammed S Alkathiri msalkathiri@iau.edu.sa Myrna R Olson myrna.olson@und.edu Aim/Purpose: This study aimed to investigate doctoral student preparation for the professoriate through a formal course entitled “The Professoriate.” Background: Many studies addressed the need for improved graduate preparation, however, the study of doctoral student experiences in preparation courses, designed as part of the doctoral academic programs, has received less attention. Methodology: Eleven doctoral students (one withdrew from the study) were enrolled in a formal course that was designed to prepare them for the professoriate. The study was conducted using an ethnographic case study approach with multiple data collection methods that included observation, interviews, member checking, and examination of related documents. Contribution: Acquainted with critical realist ontology, the researchers argued that it was necessary to investigate the concerns and preparation of doctoral students in order to better clarify the complex experiences that underlie their practices of making meaning and maintaining balance and well-being in the professoriate. Findings: Three prominent themes emerged that pointed out the experience of doctoral students with regard to their preparation for the professoriate: (1) Perceived concerns with regard to working in the professoriate; (2) Students’ preparatory practices and preparatory opportunities available to them; and (3) Students’ perspectives about “The Professoriate” course and its value. Recommendations for Practitioners: The findings highlighted that educators in doctoral programs need to address and evaluate students’ concerns and preparatory activities in order to make adjustments for students that enhance their success in the program as well as in the professoriate in future. Recommendation for Researchers: The findings suggest further research into the formal preparatory opportunities available for students within doctoral programs and the barriers affecting students’ ability to participate in informal preparatory activities. Impact on Society: The findings supported the importance of providing formal preparatory courses as part of doctoral programs. Formal courses within doctoral programs allow students to devote their time for preparation which will help them to better understand the professoriate and plan for their careers. Future Research: Future research may continue the study of formal opportunities to prepare for the professoriate that are available for doctoral students from different disciplines, the experiences of doctoral students taking part in such opportunities, and the impact on doctoral student readiness for the professoriate. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4174 doctoral education doctoral student preparation the professoriate eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-01-18 14 069 084 4177 article Bjørn Tore Johansen bjorn.t.johansen@uia.no Rose Mari Olsen rose.m.olsen@nord.no Nina cecile T Øverby nina.c.overby@uia.no Rudy Garred rudy.garred@uis.no Elisabeth Enoksen elisabeth.enoksen@uis.no Aim/Purpose: The aim of this study is to contribute to current knowledge of team supervision. Specifically, we examine the relationship between main supervisor and co-supervisor regarding credibility in the division of roles and responsibilities within supervision teams. Background: The overall intention of this article is to provide more information about the dynamics in the relationship between supervisors and to identify and describe the mechanisms that support the doctoral students in their endeavor for doctorateness. Methodology: A qualitative descriptive approach combined with a thematic analysis is used to analyze in-depth interviews with ten supervisors working in five different doctoral supervision teams. Contribution: The body of literature in the field of doctoral supervision at Norwegian universities is scarce. Moreover, the supervisor perspective has received less attention than the doctoral student perspective. We contribute to reduce this knowledge gap by bringing forward the voices of five supervisor teams at three different universities. Findings: The informants of this study reported that the responsibilities within their respective supervisor teams were clarified and well understood. There was a unanimous agreement that the main responsibility of the supervisor process lays with the main supervisor. Furthermore, it was claimed that this main responsibility includes both monitoring progress, ensuring feasibility, and acting if something is not going according to plan. Our results clearly support the fact that there is power imbalance within the teams, but this does not seem to lead to any conflicts in our sample. Although the power dynamics took on a hierarchical form as opposed to a horizontal form, none of the informants mentioned conflicts related to division of responsibility. Recommendations for Practitioners: This paper invites others to consider their learning journey as well as their experience and reflection of the relationship between main supervisor and co-supervisor within supervision teams. Recommendation for Researchers: The study provides a framework for exploring power dynamics in the relationship between main supervisor and co-supervisor regarding the division of roles and responsibilities within a supervisory team from different institutions and academic fields. Impact on Society: Providing better team supervision for doctoral students is crucial for creating doctorateness. Clarity about division of responsibility and power is of crucial importance for the well-functioning of supervisor teams. Future Research: We recommend future research to examine whether the findings presented here could be replicated in other supervisory contexts. New studies should aim to use additional data collection approaches such as focus groups, including doctoral students, as well as obtaining data via survey approaches. Future research could benefit from a multi-pronged data collection approach, which was not feasible within the current project. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4177 team supervision power dynamics responsibility academic competencies doctoral programs eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-01-18 14 085 104 4179 article Steven Tolman steventolman@gmail.com Juliann S McBrayer jmcbrayer@georgiasouthern.edu Deborah Evans de01439@georgiasouthern.edu Aim/Purpose: This study examined doctoral faculty of educational leadership within the state of Georgia in the United States. The aim was to illustrate the academic qualifications and practitioner experiences of the faculty that develop students in educational leadership programs to be scholarly practitioners and future educational leaders. Background: Faculty of educational leadership programs prepare their students to hold imminent senior leadership roles in P-12 school administration and higher education administration. In this apprenticeship model, doctoral faculty utilize their academic qualifications and/or practitioner experiences to develop students into scholarly practitioners. Methodology: A descriptive quantitative study utilizing content analysis was conducted to examine faculty of doctoral programs in educational leadership (n=83). True to this methodology, the inquiry of this study sought to better understand the academic qualifications and practitioner experiences of doctoral faculty in the field of educational leadership. Contribution: This study serves as a primer for faculty and researchers to visualize the doctoral faculty of educational leadership programs. It can serve as a catalyst to encourage empirical studies of educational leadership faculty and their effectiveness in preparing scholarly practitioners. Findings: Key findings included that nearly 2/3 of the faculty have their terminal degrees from a Research 1 institution, 3/5 hold a PhD, and 3/4 have practitioner experience in their respective field. Recommendations for Practitioners: Doctoral programs should examine the diversity of the academic qualifications and practitioner experiences of their faculty and develop strategies to enhance their programs with these complimenting skill sets. Recommendation for Researchers: Descriptive studies effectively “dip our toe” into a new area of inquiry. Considerations for future research includes examining student perceptions of their faculty who hold either a PhD or Ed.D, as well as those who are academics versus practitioners to better understand their effectiveness. Impact on Society: True to the work of John Dewey, education serves as the vehicle to promote a democratic society. Recognizing these doctoral faculty are preparing the future leaders of education, understanding the experiences of faculty will allow for better insight into those who are ultimately shaping the future of education. Future Research: Future research should focus on empirical studies that explore the effectiveness of faculty based on their academic qualifications and practitioner experiences through the lens of student perceptions. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4179 academic qualifications Doctor of Education doctoral faculty educa-tional leadership practitioner experiences scholarly practitioners eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-01-22 14 105 132 4161 article Patricia L. Hardre hardre@ou.edu Lihui Liao llh@ou.edu Yaser Dorri yaser.dorri@ou.edu Malea Beeson Stoesz malea.beeson@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: Dropout is a critical problem in graduate college programs across disciplines and institutions. Yet relatively little research has assessed graduate students’ motivations for dropping out across disciplines, or systematically modeled perceptions that contribute to dropout intentions. Background: Perceptions drive critical decisions that people make about their lives, and a core set of these perceptions consistently predict adults’ educational intentions and choices. This study investigates how a set of critical perceptions predict the strength of graduate students’ dropout intentions. Methodology: This study models their differential contributions using structural equation modeling, in AMOS®. Participants were 886 masters and doctoral students across programs and colleges in a Southwestern university in the United States. Findings: The best-fitting model demonstrated most significant influences on graduate students’ dropout intentions were predicted by: satisfaction with the overall graduate experience (not just program-of-study), self-efficacy for professional success (not just coursework), and the Perceived Graduate Experience Gap (expectations vs. experience in graduate school). Model fit was excellent for the whole group, and demonstrated some nuanced differences for subgroups, notably by degree type and point-in-program. Recommendations for Practitioners: These findings illuminate considerations useful to graduate faculty and program administrators concerned about improving retention and completion. They can inform policies and practice for preventing and reducing graduate student dropout. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4161 graduate education graduate student retention dropout intentions graduate student perceptions self-efficacy satisfaction graduate college experience graduate experience gap competence identity development eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-01-30 14 133 159 4195 article Laura R. Roberts rightangleresearch@comcast.net Christa M Tinari ctinari@peacepraxis.com Raymond Bandlow bandlow.r@gmercyu.edu Aim/Purpose: Doctoral student completion rates are notoriously low; although statistics differ depending on which study one consults, a typical completion rate is about 50%. However, studies show mentors can use strategies to improve students’ graduation rates. Our purpose was to learn from effective mentors about the processes they believe are most important in guiding doctoral students to the successful completion of a dissertation and, specifically, the strategies they implement to help students with writing and research methods. The study was confirmatory and exploratory; we posed several hypotheses and we were attentive to emergent themes in the data. Background: This paper addresses the problem by providing practical strategies mentors can use to help students succeed. Methodology: We conducted semi-structured interviews of 21 effective mentors of doctoral students representing highly ranked educational programs at universities across the United States. We conducted conventional and summative content analysis of the qualitative data. Contribution: This research showed that effective mentors provide students with technical support (e.g., scholarly writing and research methods), managerial support (e.g., goal-setting and time management), and emotional support in the form of encouragement. This research goes beyond prior studies by providing specific strategies mentors can apply to improve their practice, particularly regarding support with research methods. Findings: The data showed that encouragement, help with time management, and timely communication were key strategies mentors used to support students. Mentors also provided resources and directed students to use skills learned in previous coursework. Many mentors spoke about the importance of writing a strong research question and allowing the question to guide the choice of methods rather than the other way around. Mentors also said they pushed students to conform to APA style and they used Socratic methods to help students develop the logical organization of the manuscript. Many mentors referred students to methodologists and statisticians for help in those areas. Recommendations for Practitioners: Individual mentors should conduct a self-assessment to learn if they need to improve on any of the technical, managerial, and interpersonal mentoring skills we identified. Moreover, doctoral programs in educational leadership and related areas are advised to conduct careful assessments of their faculty. If they find their faculty are lacking in these mentoring skills, we recommend that they engage in professional development to increase their capacity to provide effective mentoring. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend that future researchers continue to explore strategies of effective mentors. In particular, researchers should interview mentors who specialize in quantitative methods to learn if they can offer clever and innovative approaches to guide doctoral students. Impact on Society: We conclude this paper with practical strategies to help mentors become more effective. We also make some policy recommendations that we believe can improve the mentoring process for doctoral programs in education. We believe better scholarship at the doctoral level will provide new knowledge that will benefit society at large. Future Research: This research was a springboard for some new research questions as follows. We recommend future researchers to study how often effective mentors meet with students, how quickly they provide feedback on written drafts, and their strategies for delivering tough feedback in a caring way (i.e., feedback that the student’s work did not meet expectations). http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4195 doctoral student mentoring writing support research methods support best practices empirical paper eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-01-31 14 161 185 4196 article Georges Djohy gdjohy@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This article uses the enrollment approach contained in the Actor-Network Theory (ANT) to challenge the deterministic perspectives of doctoral socialization and offers a new perspective based on co-construction between social and technological entities mobilized during the doctoral education as a driver of success. Background: Most studies have used deterministic approaches to show that the success of doctoral education is the outcome of socialization as shaped by the individual/personal, racial/ethnical, national/cultural, organizational/institutional and disciplinary contexts in which supervisors and supervisees cooperate. In doing so, they overlook the complexity of student-supervisor relationships and the gradual power-based processes of negotiation and persuasion that make the doctoral education successful. Analyzing the author’s own doctoral journey, the article highlights that the doctoral success is rather the result of a socio-technological enrollment as reflected in power-based supervisory politics. Methodology: The methodological approach consisted in an autoethnography that self-reflected on all stages of the doctoral processes and the author’s collaboration with his thesis supervisor from March 2012 until October 2016. Contribution: This paper reveals that the use of an approach of co-construction between technology and society also makes it possible to better understand the relationships between students and supervisors and the implications for socialization in a doctoral setting. Findings: The success of doctoral socialization is not necessarily a matter of individuals, disciplines, or contexts, but rather it depends on the level of articulation and implementation of the supervisory politics inspired by the imbalanced power relations among those involved. The deconstruction of the doctoral supervisory politics reveals that enrollment is an important component that mobilizes human and non-human resources from various scales. Enrollment strategies play a key role in how doctoral students start, progress and complete their doctorate. Recommendations for Practitioners: The results and analysis on socio-technological enrollment-based doctoral education can be useful in the context of support policies towards improving student supervision and facilitating doctoral studies in higher education. Recommendation for Researchers: The paper invites researchers in sociology, anthropology, psychology, education sciences, and other scientific disciplines to a theoretical reconsideration of student-supervisor relationships in the context of research and support to higher education. Impact on Society: The content of this article will help improve collaboration among supervisors and supervisees in higher education and could, thus, contribute to reducing attrition and doctoral dropout. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4196 doctoral education doctoral socialization PhD students supervisory politics Actor-Network Theory (ANT) socio-technological enrollment eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-03-07 14 187 216 4238 article Liezel Massyn massynL@ufs.ac.za Constance D Graham connie_g@hotmail.com Aim/Purpose: This conceptual paper proposes interaction support based on the Interaction Equivalency Theorem (EQuiv) to support interaction for non-traditional doctoral students who have been identified as attrition risks. Background: The master-apprentice form of doctoral education consists primarily of interaction with the supervisor for academic purposes. If this interaction is impaired, it may affect the ability to complete the dissertation due to insufficient knowledge, and it may also create a sense of isolation, which can lead to attrition. Nontraditional students have many characteristics that may inhibit this interaction such as being part-time or studying at a distance. Institutions have been urged to develop profiles of students at risk of dropping out based on past trends and offering intervention to students at risk. In conjunction with risk profiles, the EQuiv offers the potential to individually optimize interaction under time and resource constraints, with a view towards deep and meaningful learning. Methodology: The paper is a conceptual paper using a systematic review of the literature, covering 50 years. Articles were sourced from various databases and journals. Contribution: This article offers recommendations for improving interaction opportunities for nontraditional doctoral students in the master-apprentice form of doctoral education who are at risk of dropping out. It sheds a light on a distinct population whose needs are often overlooked. Additionally, the envisioned use of the EQuiv by organizations and academic departments is an expansion of its intended use by course designers. Additional original work is demonstrated by (a) the development of an EQuiv quality matrix to assess and rank the EQuiv literature, (b) a model of how the EQuiv might be employed to compensate for insufficient interaction, and (c) a representative model of socialization agents and knowledge transmission. Findings: The doctoral experience and EQuiv literature have shortcomings regarding interaction support to non-traditional doctoral students. The literature on the doctoral experience does not capture the invisible problems of the nontradi-tional doctoral student who is under the master-apprentice form of doctoral education. Although institutions are urged to develop risk profiles based on characteristics of students who have dropped out, it still does not capture this specific group of students. Additionally, the socialization requirements of traditional doctoral students under the master-apprentice system are unclear, so the requirements of nontraditional doctoral students under this system are also not specified. Most EQuiv research does not pay attention to the cautions of Anderson (2003a), so the literature is based on situations that do not reflect the intent of the EQuiv. However, it is proposed that the EQuiv could be used as a substitution or augmenting of the S2T interaction in the master-apprentice model. Recommendations for Practitioners: The proposed recommendations might assist practitioners in developing a risk identification process to support non-traditional doctoral students at risk within cost and time constraints for both students and departments. Recommendation for Researchers: An empirical study of nontraditional doctoral student interaction experiences and requirements should be conducted, followed by an analysis of the interactions in the EQuiv. Additionally, the role of socialization of nontraditional doctoral students in the master-apprentice form of education should be explored. Furthermore, a literature review on various risk profiles might be of use to institutions wishing to develop preliminary profiles. Further research on the Interaction Equivalency Theorem is proposed. The EQuiv in its current form has been largely confined to the distance education discipline, mostly focusing on structured courses. The article enlarges the scope of the theory to also contribute to the field of doctoral education. Further research could focus on exploring the applicability of interaction pref-erences, substitutability and the strength of the interactions with this cohort of students. An adaptation of the EQuiv might assist practitioners in developing a risk identification process to support non-traditional doctoral students at risk within cost and time constraints. Impact on Society: Support to non-traditional doctoral students in other countries may improve if the interaction is optimized, which in turn may affect persistence. Future Research: Exploration of management models in support of doctoral student interaction. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4238 doctoral education persistence interaction equivalency theorem part-time non-traditional students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-03-07 14 217 236 4239 article Erin Breitenbach ebreitenbach@atsu.edu Aim/Purpose: New models of curriculum and instruction are needed to help increase completion rates of doctoral programs, as only about half of all students who begin doctoral programs complete them. This paper presents preliminary results of an evaluation of a promising new model called the Ewing Model© where the culminating projects of a doctoral program is completed in a series of five sequential courses with a cohort. Background: The Ewing Model©, a new model for completing a doctoral research project (DRP) in an online Doctor of Education (EdD) program, was implemented and evaluated for two predictors of doctoral program completion – social connectedness and usefulness of the curriculum and instruction. Previous research has shown these are salient factors predicting doctoral student success. Methodology: This was a cross-sectional, quantitative study. An online survey of students who were in the midst of taking one of five sequential DRP courses was emailed in the middle of a term. Survey question answers were posed as 5-point Likert scale options, and means were calculated. Contribution: This paper provides evidence that the Ewing Model© for completing a culminating project in a doctoral program that facilitates social connectedness and provides structure might be effective in helping students to complete their doctoral programs. Findings: Social connectedness and usefulness of the curriculum and instruction were generally high among students going through the DRP process. The frequency of online discussion forums was found to play a role in how connected students felt. Recommendations for Practitioners: Institutions of higher education could consider using a similar model to achieve improved social connectedness and usefulness of the curriculum and instruction, which may help doctoral students complete their doctoral programs. They might also consider incorporating other teaching strategies into the same model that may intervene on other predictors of doctoral program completion. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should take into account that many other individual and environmental factors besides social connectedness and usefulness of the curriculum and instruction influence doctoral program completion. Impact on Society: The findings have implications for improving doctoral program completion rates, which also alleviates the economic, social, and emotional strain that results from unfinished doctoral degrees. Future Research: Future research could focus on evaluating variations of the Ewing Model© depending on the unique requirements of different types of culminating projects in doctoral programs, assessing other known predictors of doctoral program completion besides social connectedness and usefulness of the curriculum and instruction, and assessing student completion rates using this model. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4239 retention attrition completion Ewing Model social connectedness doctoral research project applied research project dissertation culminating project usefulness of curriculum and instruction eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-03-07 14 237 258 4248 article Amanda Rockinson-Szapkiw dr.rockinsonszapkiw@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: Despite the literature documenting the importance of family in persistence, doctoral students’ Academic-Family integration has been relatively ignored. Thus, in this study, the construct of doctoral academic-family integration is defined, followed by the creation and validation an instrument. Background: The challenge of integrating the doctoral degree program and family is a central concern for doctoral students and higher education personnel. Setting up boundaries to achieve a satisfactory balance between academic and family life is an issue that affects a doctoral student’s decision to persist. Methodology: An expert panel and principal component analysis (PCA) was used to analyze data from a sample of doctoral students to examine the validity of the Doctoral Academic-Family Integration Inventory (DAFII). Cronbach alpha coefficients were calculated to examine reliability. Contribution: While higher education institutions have made strides in work-family integration theory, research, and policy for their faculty and staff, the academic-family (AF) topic has not emerged as readily in policies and initiatives for doctoral students (Lester, 2013). The topic of AF balance of doctoral students, both in distance and residential programs, is understudied despite the fact that family is a consistent factor identified in doctoral persistence and attrition. Findings: An expert panel and PCA was used to analyze data, resulting in a 22 item valid Doctoral Academic-Family Integration Inventory with three components – Academic-Family Balance, Academic-Family Boundary Setting, and Academic-Family Interference. Cronbach alpha coefficients results demonstrate that the inventory has good reliability. Recommendations for Practitioners: Having the DAFII will likely prove to be of substantial utility to faculty and administrators in doctoral programs. The scale may be used as a formative assessment for doctoral students entering a program to provide information about academic-family boundaries and to address weaknesses in academic-family balance that could result in attrition. Recommendation for Researchers: This research provides a psychometrically sound instrument that can be used to advance the research on academic-family integration, a term that has not been previously defined and a topic that has been sorely understudied despite the fact that family is central to doctoral persistence. Researchers now have an instrument to examine this construct. Given the limited research on academic-family integration, the DAFII also provides a tool to extend research on persistence. Impact on Society: Understanding academic-family integration is vital as many doctoral students begin developing patterns for integration in their program that they carry into the workforce. Future Research: Further validation of the instrument can be pursued with doctoral students as well as graduate students in STEM and non-STEM fields, given the limited population sample used in this study. Future research is needed to examine how academic-family integration may vary within same-sex relationships and based on the doctoral student’s gender identity. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4248 doctoral student persistence academic-family integration academic-family boundaries academic-family balance retention persistence eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-03-08 14 259 276 4240 article Yan Gao gladys7gy@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: For the purpose of better understanding the reasons of their withdrawal and experiences, this study seeks to elicit the voices of Chinese international students who have withdrawn from doctoral studies in Canada. Background: This study used Tinto’s institutional departure model as a framework. His model illustrates that the experience of individuals in that institution modifies their initial intentions and commitments. The scholarly literature on degree completion of graduate students and existing studies on experiences of international students in the North American context also guided the inquiry of this study. Methodology: This is a qualitative study with narrative inquiry as a means for investigation and exploration. Four participants were recruited by purposive sampling, and in-depth interview was used as the approach to collect data. Data were collected in Mandarin and were transcribed into texts. Two rounds of analysis were applied and then the findings were translated into English. Contribution: This study added information to the literature on international doctoral students’ experiences and explained how socio-cultural factors could impact doctoral students’ decision-making. Findings: The themes included: experiences with doctoral supervisors; partnership and the perception of gender roles; family of origin and the importance of education; and educational differences between China and Canada. Recommendations for Practitioners: At a practice level, universities could consider delivering series of workshops to help international graduate students start their journey. Departmental administrative bodies could consider building community for doctoral students and tracking their study paths to better assist students. Given the increased number of international students on campuses, it is time for university staff and faculties to become more aware of what a more diverse student population means. Professional development workshops would help to develop professors’ cultural awareness. Recommendation for Researchers: My research is an example of addressing translation issues in cross-language and cross-cultural settings. Qualitative research is considered valid when the distance between the meanings as experienced by the participants and the meanings as interpreted in the findings is as close as possible. Therefore, I would recommend in the condition that if the researcher and the participant(s) share the same language, the best practice would be to transcribe and analyze data in the original language to shorten the distance from the meanings that are made by participants and the meanings that are interpreted by the researcher(s). Language meanings do lose during the translation process; as researchers, we should try our best to present our participants as truly as possible. Impact on Society: The number of international students who choose to conduct doctoral studies is increasing every year. They are making contributions to the host countries in various ways such as contribution to the enrichment of higher education, the development of research, the promotion of global understanding etc. However, their study status and overall well-being may not be getting enough attention from both the scholarly research and in real practice. Thus, the experiences shared by my research participants who used to be doctoral students and left their studies halfway could add value and knowledge to the understanding of this group of students and to better assist the internationalization of higher education institutions. Future Research: Future studies could probe more on other ethnicities and cultures. Also, numerous studies have been conducted to examine the relationship between doctoral students and their supervisors; however, the incompatibility between doctoral students and their supervisors and coping strategies in that situation is still an area that needs more investigation. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4240 doctoral students withdrawal cultural differences Chinese international students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-03-16 14 277 305 4250 article Dara E Naphan-Kingery dara.naphan-kingery@vanderbilt.edu Ebony O McGee ebony.mcgee@vanderbilt.edu Stacey Houston shousto@gmu.edu Portia Botchway portia.botchway@vanderbilt.edu Jeremy Lynch jeremy.lynch@vanderbilt.edu Faheemah N Mustafaa fmustafaa@berkeley.edu Aim/Purpose: We sought to understand factors that dissuade engineering and computing doctoral students in the United States from pursuing a career in the professoriate. Background: Many PhD students start the doctoral process excited about the possibility of becoming a professor. After a few years of doctoral education, however, many become less interested in academic careers or even come to loathe the idea of a faculty position. Methodology: Participants in a larger study (N = 744) completed a comprehensive survey about their educational experiences and career aspirations. This study focused on a subset of these respondents (n = 147), who indicated they did not want to pursue faculty positions and explained their reasoning with a brief open-ended response. We coded these open-ended responses. Contribution: We found a general lack of interest in the professoriate and disgust over the associated pressure-filled norms and culture; this aversion is the article’s focus. Respondents were critical of institutional norms that emphasize research (e.g., stress related to grant writing, publishing, and promotion as junior faculty) and described their own experiences as PhD students. Findings: Findings support rethinking the outdated faculty model and interchanging it with healthier and more holistic approaches. Recommendations for Practitioners: These approaches might include advocating for and emphasizing the contributions of research, teaching, and professional excellence as well as removing the secrecy and toxicity of tenure and promotion that discourage individuals from becoming the next generation of engineering and computing educators and knowledge makers. Recommendation for Researchers: Future researchers should explore in greater depth the extent to which junior faculty’s experiences in the professoriate influence doctoral students’ and postdoctoral scholars’ attitudes toward working in academia. To the extent that this is the case, researchers should then explore ways of improving faculty experiences, in addition to improving doctoral students’ experiences that are unrelated to their socialization. Impact on Society: Having a deeper understanding of the reasons why some doctoral engineering and computing students are uninterested in the professoriate is critical for removing barriers toward becoming faculty. Future Research: Researchers should explore the factors that would improve doctoral students’ perceptions of the professoriate, and better understand how they might disproportionately affect members of historically underrepresented groups. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4250 doctoral programs engineering and computing academic careers eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-03-17 14 307 324 4252 article Kam C Chan kchan@pace.edu Barbara R Farrell bfarrell@pace.edu Patricia Healy phealy@pace.edu Annie Wong wonga@wcsu.edu Aim/Purpose: Although there are calls for better teaching training for accounting doctoral students, there are limited research findings on rankings of accounting doctoral programs based on the teaching effectiveness of their graduates. Background: There are two research objectives of this study. First, we rank the US accounting doctoral programs based on the student perceptions of the teaching effectiveness of their graduates using student ratings in ratemyprofessors.com. Second, we examine whether the ranking is associated with the presence of formal teaching training in the doctoral programs. Methodology: Overall quality ratings posted in ratemyprofessors.com are collected for 822 accounting professors who graduated in 2001-10 from 75 US accounting doctoral programs. The curriculum information is collected from the web pages of their doctoral programs. Contribution: This study fills two voids in the literature. Unlike previous accounting doctoral studies that rank programs based on the amount of research output of the graduates, this paper ranks programs based on the perceived teaching effectiveness of the graduates. It also adds insights into the importance of offering formal teaching training to doctoral students, which is called for by the AACSB. Findings: We find that the teaching ranking in this study is only mildly related to previous research rankings that were based on the research output of doctoral graduates. We also find that doctoral programs with higher rankings in this study are more likely to have formal teaching training in their programs. Recommendations for Practitioners: Given the findings in this study and the literature, accounting doctoral program administrators should incorporate or strengthen a formal teaching training component in doctoral programs. Recommendation for Researchers: There is a need for researchers on doctoral program evaluations to broaden their scope of assessment to include both teaching scholarship and research output of the doctoral graduates. Impact on Society: The findings in this study show that there is limited formal teaching training for accounting doctoral students, which is consistent with results in the literature of other fields. This study echoes the calls for more training on how to teach to improve the teaching ability of the graduates. When doctoral graduates become more effective professors, the learning outcome among college students can be improved as a result. Future Research: Future research can explore other better and more direct measures of teaching effectiveness in the evaluation of the accounting doctoral graduates and the accounting doctoral programs. The effect and the methods of more innovative pedagogical training on doctoral students can also be examined. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4252 doctoral program accounting doctoral program accounting program teaching training ratemyprofessors student rating eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-03-17 14 325 350 4254 article Petros G Malakyan malakyan@rmu.edu Aim/Purpose: This study explores the various teaching and learning approaches, curriculum design, and program requirements for 70 doctoral programs in leadership. Background: Early research indicates that few studies have addressed learner-centred and process-based approaches to leadership studies among doctoral programs in leadership worldwide. This study is the first complete review of programs in the interdisciplinary field of leadership. Methodology: A qualitative method approach through internet-mediated research was employed to identify explicit and implicit textual data on learning approaches of doctoral programs in leadership. The sample represents a list of 70 doctoral programs in leadership studies and organisational leadership (62 programs are in the United States and eight in Europe, Canada, Philippines, and South Africa). Contribution: This study provides an overview of doctoral program characteristics, delivery methods, coursework and research requirements, discipline-relevant teaching and learning approaches, and process-based approach to leadership. It may serve as a resource and a roadmap to assess teaching and learning approaches of doctoral programs in leadership for program reviews and improvement. Findings: The significant findings of this study are: (a) 91.4% of doctoral programs are coursework-driven, leaving little room for original research. (b) 46% of programs show lack of evidence to context-based approaches to learning (learning as a social activity served outside of classroom environment where learning tools and the context intersect with human interactions). (c) Various teaching and learning approaches, including those prescribed to constructivist, interactionist, situated, and action-based learning approaches. Recommendations for Practitioners: Leadership cannot be understood or learned without social interactions in context. In order to produce experts and “stewards of the field,” a clearer learner-centred strategy to doctoral education, including context-based experiences, should be considered. This pedagogical approach needs to be explicitly articulated (on the public website) to enable students to make an informed decision about doctoral programs in leadership. Recommendation for Researchers: In order to produce theoreticians and “stewards of the discipline” (Golde & Walker, 2006), doctoral curricula design and implementation should seek a balance between coursework, independent research, and creation of collaborative learning environment between students and faculty. Further, due to the shift from the leader-centred to the process-based understanding of leadership, doctoral programs in leadership should consider the relationship process between leaders and followers as one academic inquiry or continuum. Impact on Society: Doctoral programs in leadership that utilise more learner-centred and context-based approaches for knowledge acquisition (epistemologies) as well as studying the leadership phenomenon as a relationship process are more likely to become more impactful and sustainable in society. Future Research: More research seems necessary to identify the extent to which learner-centred approaches within doctoral programs in leadership positively impact on doctoral students’ motivation for learning, program completion, retention, and personal and professional development. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4254 teaching and learning approaches doctoral programs leadership organisational leadership learner-centred approach eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-03-20 14 351 365 4251 article Julie P. Combs JPC002@shsu.edu Brandolyn E. Jones Brandolyn.E.Jones@lonestar.edu Susan Troncoso Skidmore skidmore@shsu.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore relationships between preadmission criteria and doctoral student performance ratings and to develop a model to predict student persistence in one doctoral program of educational leadership. Background: Individuals responsible for program admission decisions have a responsibility to minimize bias in the candidate selection process. Despite an interest in doctoral degree completion, few researchers have examined preadmission criteria and the ability to predict doctoral student performance, particularly in education programs. Methodology: Preadmission variables and postacceptance performance ratings were used in this cross-sectional predictive study (Type 5; Johnson, 2001) of 102 doctoral students in one educational leadership program. Analyses included descriptive statistics, a Pearson r correlation matrix, and predictive discriminant analysis. Contribution: In addition to strengthening the extant literature base, we attempted to respond to the charge levied by other researchers for faculty members in educational preparation programs to reassess current practices used to recruit and retain students. Findings: Using predictive discriminant analysis, we determined that separate models for students of color and White students most accurately predicted program performance, indicating that a one-size fits all approach was not optimal. The GRE-Q and undergraduate GPA were useful predictors of doctoral student persistence. Additionally, the GRE-V and graduate GPA were also useful predictors but differentially so for students of color and White students. Recommendations for Practitioners: We found value in using the GPA and GRE in admission decisions with some modifications. Programs directors are advised to evaluate their own selection processes to understand the utility of their preadmission criteria. Recommendation for Researchers: Although the functions that worked best in predicting continuance were grouped by ethnicity in this study for our students, future researchers might consider disaggregation by gender or some other characteristic to optimally identify a model specific to the student groups represented in their sample. Impact on Society: Working from an activist stance, we use our awareness of the positive correlation between degree attainment and socio-economic mobility in the United States, coupled with the existing realities of students of color who seek access to a space within the dominant culture, to urge admission committees to evaluate closely the variables used in their admission selection and to understand to what extent the selection process results in a fair selection across student groups. Future Research: Future studies could be conducted to understand why these differences exist. Other variables for future researchers to consider include time since the candidates obtained their master’s and bachelor’s degrees, the length of time to obtain those degrees, and the type of degree obtained. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4251 doctoral students educational leadership admission selection Graduate Record Examination (GRE) grade point average (GPA eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-04-03 14 367 382 4275 article Lilia Mantai lilia.mantai@sydney.edu.au Aim/Purpose: This paper investigates the role of social support in the PhD. Despite universities’ efforts to provide a collegial PhD experience, candidates report isolation and loneliness in doctoral education – a factor contributing to attrition. Background: Previous research (Mantai & Dowling, 2015) defined social support in four categories: moral, emotional, guiding and mentoring, companionship, and collegiality. Social support is facilitated in various formal and informal groupings. Socialisation into scholarly communities promotes researcher identities through a sense of belonging. Developing a strong researcher identity through social connections benefits a student’s physical and emotional well-being, PhD progress, and investment in researcher careers. Methodology: This paper is based on thematic analysis of focus groups and one-on-one interviews with 64 PhD candidates from two Australian metropolitan universities. Contribution: Students’ perspectives on social support during PhD study are largely missing in the literature, as more importance is placed on academic support. This paper provides rich empirical evidence to show that support afforded by candidates’ personal, social, and professional relationships is critical in doctoral candidates’ identity development. Findings: First, investigating social support from the student perspective shows that it promotes students’ researcher identity development, sense of belonging, and community. Second, the paper extends our understanding of what social support means as it examines this concept in the context of student diversity. This paper confirms social support in the PhD extends beyond the institutional higher degree research environment and includes outside support by family, friends as well as online communities. Recommendations for Practitioners: Promote and improve support services, networking opportunities, and social connections within academia and beyond. Invest in understanding students’ diverse backgrounds and individual circumstances as well as goals. Recommendation for Researchers: Evaluate existing social support structures in place and identify social support needs of doctoral candidates at your particular institution. Impact on Society: Institutions, governments, and individuals heavily invest in PhD degrees financially and psychologically. This research aims to improve outcomes for society by developing skilled and confident graduates. Future Research: Future research ought to focus on the issues experienced by students of particular demographic backgrounds and on how to best support them. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4275 social support relationships PhD doctoral experience researcher development student diversity belonging eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-04-04 14 383 401 4274 article Pamela Felder pamela.felder@gmail.com Kimberly A Kline klineka@buffalostate.edu Debra Harmening debra.harmening@utoledo.edu Tami Moore tami.moore@okstate.edu Edward P. St. John edward.p.st.john@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This work examines the role of professional development in higher education graduate programs through the use of reflective teaching approaches. We discuss the relevance of a professional development framework in supporting the exploration of moral reasoning in addressing challenges in the higher education profession. Background: Shifts in demographics within college university environments has resulted in increased diversity among students facilitating the need for professional development experiences that involve moral reasoning and self-reflection as resources to increase cultural awareness. Methodology: Case study overviews of higher education courses focused on supporting the development of graduate students’ professional interest illustrate ways moral reasoning can be examined to facilitate self-awareness as a professional skill and competency. Four teaching strategies reflect how professional learning can be used to shape students’ experiences, knowledge of critical issues, and understanding of organizational development in higher education. Contribution: This paper contributes to the knowledge of professional development in higher education graduate programs and the experiences faculty and graduate students. Findings: Strategies discussed provide a basis for further research to examine the role of professional learning framework in developing effective pedagogical strategies that facilitate moral reasoning, social justice, democratic values, and diversity. Previous research on the experiences of graduate students has not explicitly discussed the proposed professional learning framework across graduate student experiences. Recommendations for Practitioners: Administrators responsible for managing higher education graduate programs may find this work useful for understanding how moral reasoning can be used as tool for teaching professional development in graduate programs. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers of professional development within graduate programs may find the use of moral reasoning helpful in understanding strategies that support facilitating discussions of critical issues related to cultural awareness. Impact on Society: Moral reasoning is an effective resource for building the professional insight and awareness needed for understanding multiple experiences in the workplace. Future Research: Additional research is needed to understand how moral reasoning could be used to support the professional development of higher education graduate students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4274 professional development graduate programs moral reasoning racial and cultural awareness eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-05-03 14 403 430 4328 article Kieran Fenby-Hulse kieran.fenby-hulse@coventry.ac.uk Ross English R.English@brighton.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: This article provides a much needed insight into the experiences of doctoral researchers in the UK that identify as Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay, Trans-, Queer, or outside of heteronormative or cis-normative identities (LGBTQ+) to address the question of what support, culture, and pedagogy might better support doctoral researchers who identify as LGBTQ+. Background: While experiences of LGBTQ+ students in UK Higher Education have been explored in recent studies, the experiences of doctoral students have not been differentiated, documented, or analyzed. Methodology: Through an online questionnaire sent to UK institutions, this study captures and reflects on the diverse experiences of doctoral education. The study took a predominantly phenomenological approach, placing the focus on understanding how individual researchers experienced their working environment. Contribution: This questionnaire offers a ‘campus climate’ study, providing a much-needed insight into the experiences of doctoral researchers in the UK in 2017. The study also highlights the importance of acknowledging the diversity of doctoral researchers and adapting supervisory and institutional support to meet the differing needs of doctoral researchers. It considers themes such as the impact of the working environment, experiences of macroaggressions and harassment, the need for researchers to work internationally, and the visibility of role models. The complex nature of the supervisor-student relationship is also considered throughout. Findings: Although many LGBTQ+ doctoral students felt they were studying in a supportive institution, the questionnaire highlights a diverse range of inclusivity issues as well as direct instances of homophobic and/or transphobic behavior. Recommendations for Practitioners: From this questionnaire, it is concluded that there is a need for a critical examination of systems and spaces in which doctoral education takes place and the implementation of systems and spaces that are inclusive. There is a need for all those involved in doctoral education to understand how identifying as a LGBTQ+ researcher can impact on your experience of doctoral education. And, finally, there is a need for better LGBTQ+ visibility, better representation, and better mentoring. Recommendation for Researchers: If doctoral education is to meet the needs of an increasingly diverse workforce, research needs to take into account the views and experiences of minority and marginalized groups that may challenge or be in tension with the views of the larger research population. Impact on Society: As the demographic of the doctoral researcher population diversifies, it is increasingly important that our approach to doctoral education and the systems and processes that underpin doctoral education are adapted to meet the needs of that diverse population. Future Research: There is potential scope for future studies to focus specifically on issues of intersectionality, disciplinary differences, health and wellbeing, representation, voice, and agency, as well as productivity, attainment, and career development of LGBTQ+ doctoral researchers. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4328 LGBTQ+ supervision doctoral education postgraduate research equality diversity inclusion eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-06-06 14 431 464 4361 article Diana F Davis diana.davis@anu.edu.au Aim/Purpose: This paper explores students’ perceptions of qualities they believe their ideal supervisor should possess as well as those they see as characterizing their current and past supervisors. Background: Over more than three decades, multiple cultural contexts and diverse methodologies, research studies have demonstrated that what person related human qualities in postgraduate research supervision have greater valence for students than does discipline/research expertise. This paper probes why this might be so. Methodology: Across 15 Australian universities and all disciplines 698 students participated in an opt-in online survey which invited students to provide descriptors of their supervisors’ qualities as well as those of their ideal supervisor. The survey was student centred in that it required them to nominate the qualities of their supervisor/s rather than asking them to respond to statements about supervisors/supervision on a Likert scale. Contribution: This research which was designed to allow students to characterise their actual supervisors and their ideal supervisor in an unconstrained and anonymous way demonstrated their dominant valuing of, firstly, human traits consistent with emotional intelligence and, secondly, the professional aspects of supervision especially in relation to research process. In providing a snapshot of the janus face of supervision, these uniquely student generated perspectives on supervisory qualities provide data not only supportive of previous studies with very different methodologies but also with implications for supervisor development programs and supervisor benchmarking within universities. Findings: The resultant student initiated perceptions of positive and negative qualities of supervisors support the findings of other studies which show that students value and seek cognitive and affective person related qualities in supervisors over discipline/research expertise qualities. For 25 percent of the sample there were no qualities in common between their principal supervisor and their ideal; this increased to 50 percent with one quality in common. Recommendations for Practitioners: In developing and honing individual philosophies of supervision, supervisors should reflect, for example, upon the ways in which they present to and interact with students as individuals, their availability to students, their interest in students' research and career development. Those delivering supervisor development programs should consider the balance in such programs between process- oriented material and human interaction strategies. Recommendation for Researchers: Research in the doctoral space has tended to be summative as in post completion evaluations of the experience or cross-sectional sampling of experience or what is valued as in the current study. Longitudinal research which samples perspectives both within and beyond candidature is needed. This should thus encompass the experiences of those who complete and those who do not over a period of perhaps six years. Impact on Society: Globally since the late 1990s, universities have initiated doctoral training programs and codes of conduct pertaining to the supervisory relationship yet evidence suggests that supervision issues remain vexatious. The sector thus needs to address the efficacy of such programs in ameliorating issues raised by students. The silent acknowledgement of late stage doctoral attrition – and the lack of follow up as to the complex interrelationship of factors prompting such a personally difficult and societally wasteful decision – remains a besetting problem for the sector. Future Research: Two critical issues would usefully guide future research in the doctoral education space. Firstly, the ultimate efficacy of supervisor development programs requires evaluation and follow up. Secondly, the perspectives of those who exit the PhD process virtually without trace need to be investigated and evaluated for policy implications. Further some respondents in this study had supervisory roles themselves and the qualities they attributed to self as supervisor were closer to the ideal than those of real supervisors. This suggests that a more extensive investigation of how supervisors see themselves in the supervisory role would be useful as such research would potentially impact on the nature of supervisor development programs in the future. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4361 supervisory qualities supervision supervisory relationships postgraduate attrition eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-07-13 14 465 478 4381 article Alessa Hillbrink alessa.hillbrink@uni-muenster.de Regina Jucks jucks@uni-muenster.de Aim/Purpose: This study aimed at investigating whether doctoral students are already confronted with expectations that reflect a primacy of research and whether they adopt such views for themselves. Background: There is a consensus among academics in the university system that research is typically valued more strongly than teaching in terms of prestige, rewards, and career options. Such prioritization of research may hamper junior academics’ development as teachers, especially at the beginning of an academic career – the doctoral stage. Methodology: We measured the expectations that others put upon doctoral students (N = 55, all with teaching duties) in the discipline of psychology using pictures of research and teaching situations. Participants each chose one picture to illustrate what they anticipated their friends and their parents (private groups) as well as their colleagues and their supervisors (work-related groups) think they are doing. Afterwards, they described their own view of the research-teaching relationship. Contribution: The study expands the knowledge on how others in doctoral students’ networks might shape their development as researchers and teachers through the expectations they communicate. Moreover, it shines a light on doctoral students’ own views of research and teaching. Findings: There was a clear primacy of research in terms of the assumed expectations of others; yet, doctoral students assumed that private groups expect them to teach more strongly than work-related groups expect them to teach. For their own views, doctoral students described mainly positive types of research-teaching rela-tionships, whereby research and teaching were oftentimes seen as equally im-portant. Recommendations for Practitioners: In the face of a primacy of research in academia, teaching should not be left for private conversations, but naturally be a topic among colleagues and with the supervisor as well. Recommendation for Researchers: These findings underline the need to include private relationships into models of junior academics’ development as teachers, since these relationships can represent a counterpart to more research-focused expectations at work. Impact on Society: We should not underestimate the relevance of doctoral students’ own motivation and perspectives for the quality of their research and teaching in a system where the primacy of research narrative circulates. Future Research: Future research could compare doctoral students’ anticipations to the expectations the different groups in their networks really hold. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4381 doctoral students research teaching expectations primacy private relationships supervisor colleagues prioritization academics eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-07-13 14 479 497 4383 article Omolabake Fakunle omolabake.fakunle@ed.ac.uk Mollie Dollinger m.dollinger@latrobe.edu.au Joyceline Alla-Mensah joyceline.alla-mensah@nottingham.ac.uk Blair Izard blair.izard@uconn.edu Aim/Purpose: The aim of this paper is to explore trends and motivations for doctoral students’ participation in domestic and international conferences. We draw on doctoral students’ perceptions and experiences from four contexts (USA, Scotland, England, Australia) to further explore variations across different global contexts. Background: There is increased recognition of the importance of conferences within doctoral education. Yet very little is known or understood about doctoral students’ participation and motivations for participating in conferences. Methodology: Our sample includes doctoral students from four institutions studying in a School of Education. We used an online survey and follow-up focus group interviews to investigate doctoral students’ perceptions and experiences of conferences. Contribution: There are few studies on doctoral students’ participation in conferences. This study contributes to the literature on doctoral students as it investigates the trends and rationale for doctoral students’ participation in national and international conferences. We highlight the importance of conferences as learning sites for doctoral students. Furthermore, our research highlights dissimilarities and ambiguities in the provision of support for doctoral students’ regarding what we describe as the social aspect of their researcher learning and development, in this case, in networking activities. Findings: Our findings show that a) at both the individual (doctoral students) and institutional level, there is an implicit understanding of the importance of networking and yet programs rarely formally require conference attendance; b) students’ motivations to attend conferences may be mediated by their career aspirations and supportive structures (i.e., funding); and c) conferences support doctoral students’ learning and confidence in future networking. Recommendations for Practitioners: Our recommendations to doctoral education training programs and/or supervisors are to explicitly discuss and promote networking and/or conference attendance, and to find ways to support students to engage in networking outside their immediate study environment. Recommendation for Researchers: Our recommendation to researchers is to further investigate the importance of networking behaviors and experiences on doctoral student training and/or career outcomes. Impact on Society: This research highlights the importance of recognizing the learning needs of doctoral students who are expected to work in a complex, globally connected society as part of the reality of higher education in the 21st century. Future Research: Results from the study could help inform a larger study on the trends and motivations of doctoral students’ networking across all disciplines. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4383 doctoral education doctoral/PhD students networking academic conference academic workforce eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-07-21 14 499 524 4368 article Fernanda Helfer f.helfer@griffith.edu.au Steve Drew Steve.Drew@utas.edu.au Aim/Purpose: The overall aim of this study was to improve our understanding of engineering student satisfaction and expectations with PhD supervision and their perceptions of the roles in a supervisory relationship. Background: Studies on PhD supervision quality are highly valuable, mainly when they provide information on supervision experiences from students’ perspectives, rather than from supervisors’ perspectives. Understanding how PhD students think, their preferences and their perceptions of roles in a supervision process can help enhance the quality of supervision, and consequently, form better researchers and produce better research outcomes. Methodology: The method employed in this investigation was based on a student survey with scaled and open-ended questions of 30 full-time engineering PhD students from a research institution in Australia. Contribution: Studies that provide a better understanding of how engineering PhD students think and how they expect a supervisory relationship to be are limited. This study can be used to derive recommendations for improving supervisory relationships, particularly in engineering schools and institutions. Findings: The majority of the students perceived most of the supervisor and student roles in close agreement with the roles described in the literature and existing codes of practice for the supervision of higher degree research students. The main reasons for dissatisfaction with supervision were identified as being the lack of involvement of supervisors in the research projects, particularly in the writing process, and the lack of supervisor’s knowledge in the field being supervised. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is recommended that the roles of each party in a supervision process be discussed and clarified at the beginning of any PhD candidature to avoid false student expectations. The right supervisory fit should be ensured early in the candidature, and additional supervisors should be added to the team if the expertise of supervisors is deemed insufficient. The use of supervisory panels as opposed to individual supervisions to ensure that responsibilities are shared and to increase the range of advice and support available to each student is highly recommended. Recommendation for Researchers: It is recommended that this type of research be expanded to other disciplines. It is also recommended that specific actions be taken to improve supervision and these be correlated to satisfaction rates and/or student performance. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4368 doctorate higher education relationship advisor survey eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-07-30 14 525 542 4408 article Daniel W. Salter daniel.salter@mail.waldenu.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this conceptual paper is to align key aspects of the heroic journey archetype with existing research and writing about doctoral students, thereby extending previous discussions of this topic. Background: While obtaining a doctoral degree is often described as a heroic journey, that assertion has not been fully explored from a depth psychology standpoint. Because myth is a form of pedagogy, key heroic archetypes (Pearson, 1986; 1991) provide a means to describe and understand the student experience. Methodology: This synthesis of the scholarship on doctoral education is framed within an alignment of the heroic journey monomyth described by Campbell (2008) to the progression of doctoral student experiences (Gardner, 2009). Various movie characters are used to illustrate the three primary stages of the heroic journey: the departure, initiation, and the return. Contribution: Consistent with other applications of archetypal psychology to education (e.g., Mayes, 2010), the paper presents a way for faculty and students to understand and reflect on the overall educational process. Findings: A more elaborated view of the doctoral journey is provided, including the sequence of challenges faced by students in the process and the types of Hero energies expressed at different points. Recommendations for Practitioners: The responsibilities of doctoral program faculty to create an experience that helps assure success and to mentor students appropriately are reinforced. Recommendation for Researchers: While not a research study, the discussion in this conceptual paper provides a broader context for use of the monomyth as an organizing framework for studies of doctoral education. Impact on Society: The commonly recognized 50% success rate of the best-and-brightest in higher education speaks to the size and scope of the challenge and the resulting stresses from taking this journey. Based on the apparent congruency of the monomyth to the process of doctoral education, continued use of this archetype to address these challenges would seem to be indicated. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4408 doctoral education heroic journey archetypes Jungian psychology eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-08-07 14 543 566 4409 article Kate McCormick kate.mccormick@cortland.edu Libba Willcox sewillcox@valdosta.edu Aim/Purpose: Graduate programs aim to prepare students for future professional roles, yet doctoral graduates often earn faculty positions at institutions that differ from those in which they were socialized. Navigating this “preparation gap” can produce feelings of uncertainty, tension, and, ultimately, dissonance. This collaborative autoethnographic study explores the gap as it was experienced by two early career faculty in a U.S. context. Background: The landscape of academia is rapidly changing, meaning graduate programs cannot prepare each graduate student for every potential professional role offered to them. Therefore, as doctoral graduates emerge from their respective graduate programs, an inevitable gap in preparation exists. This gap in preparation mirrors a gap in the graduate socialization literature, which is limited in describing how early career faculty are socialized into their first positions. Methodology: The paper discusses a year-long collaborative autoethnographic study conducted by two tenure-track early career faculty in Education & Arts fields at universities in the U.S. The study employs Clancy’s (2010) theory of Perpetual Identity Constructing as a theoretical framework to examine the perceived dissonance produced during the transition from doctoral graduates to early career faculty. Contribution: This collaborative autoethnographic account of two early career, tenure-track faculty members’ transition from doctoral graduate to assistant professors expands the literature on doctoral socialization, academic identities, and the potential of qualitative modes of inquiry. Specifically, it recognizes that doctoral graduates experience dissonance and undergo identity construction during the first year. Findings: Our findings revealed three categories repeated in our collaborative autoethnographic data that potentially serve as a window to illuminate the complexity of the dissonance across the gap: support, connection, and control. Each category includes varying levels of dissonance with the self, department, institution, and fields of which we were part. Using Perpetual Identity Constructing theory, each category was examined through the three-stages of academic identity construction. Recommendations for Practitioners: The study has implications for practitioners, specifically those who help to prepare doctoral students for positions at teaching-intensive universities. We recommend doctoral granting institutions expand formal and informal socialization programming to enhance students’ awareness and preparation for the contexts and tensions they may encounter. Recommendation for Researchers: Additional fine-grained studies, like ours, are warranted to further illuminate the complex interaction between the gap in socialization and the academic identity construction process as early career faculty. Impact on Society: Awareness that deconstruction and reconstruction of identity continues beyond doctoral socialization could better prepare future faculty for the perpetual identity work across a career; it has the potential to produce better adjusted early career faculty who improve student outcomes and conduct research that impacts society. Future Research: Based on the findings of this study, future areas of research should further investigate the experiences of early career faculty, in particular their socialization experiences during the transition from candidacy to first career positions. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4409 early career faculty doctoral socialization collaborative autoethnography eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-08-07 14 567 580 4406 article Vassiliki Zygouris-Coe vzygouri@ucf.edu Sherron Killingsworth Roberts Sherron.Roberts@ucf.edu Aim/Purpose: The doctoral experience is a complex, challenging, and life-changing process. Cultivating a scholarship mindset is a requirement for success in early and later academic careers. This paper presents a situated framework for socializing doctoral students' scholarship mindset. Background: Faculty of doctoral education programmes prepare students for higher education and other scholarly positions. Methodology: In this situated framework, two doctoral faculty utilized their academic qualifications, programmatic experiences, and related academic literature to develop a framework that has been successful in a particular School of Teacher Education context. Contribution: The situatedThe situated framework, which includes steps to Develop, Nurture and Challenge, Apprentice, and Celebrate scholars, can serve as a guide to encourage review and evaluation of doctoral education programmes and the ways in which they develop doctoral students' scholarship mindset and preparation. framework can serve as a guide to encourage review and evaluation of doctoral education programs and the ways in which they develop doctoral students' scholarship mindset and preparation. Findings: Key findings included increased doctoral student participation in events and experiences that contributed to developing a scholarship mindset and strengthening their scholarly publication and research trajectory. Recommendations for Practitioners: Doctoral students need to engage in ongoing, strategic experiences that will positively impact their scholarship trajectory. Retention of doctoral students is not just a matter of successful completion of course work. Recommendation for Researchers: Research in the environmental learning contexts of doctoral education programmes and in the ways in which doctoral academic mentors engage students in scholarship may prove useful to programme developers. Impact on Society: Scholarship during doctoral studies and beyond will contribute to the development of quality education, knowledge, and research at all levels. Future Research: Future research should focus on empirical studies that explore the effectiveness of this situated framework through the perspectives of additional faculty and doctoral students at the particular university context. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4406 doctoral education; doctoral mentoring; doctoral programmes; scholarship; scholarship mindset socialisation eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-08-07 14 581 595 4415 article Vijay Kumar vijay.mallan@otago.ac.nz Amrita Kaur amrita@uum.edu.my Aim/Purpose: The quality, degree of effort and persistence required in doctoral studies can be sustained through intrinsic motivation. Despite the critical role of motivation, studies that examine ways to promote doctoral students’ motivation are lacking. This study, drawing on the self-determination theoretical (SDT) framework, aims to offer advice for supervisory practices to facilitate the satisfaction of three basic psychological needs- autonomy, competence and relatedness of doctoral students’ motivation. The focus was on the experiences of the doctoral candidates who participated in this study. Background: Prior studies have established that creating environment and ways that lead to satisfaction of three basic psychological needs are capable of producing optimal outcomes. Based on that assumption the current study explores the ways in which supervisory practices lead to satisfaction of the three needs. Methodology: The study adopted a qualitative approach and used the experience sampling method to collect data from 11 full-time doctoral students from a research-intensive university in New Zealand. In total, 72 entries that captured students’ real-time psychological experience of supervision in a repeated manner were used to analyse the data. Contribution: It proposes theory driven practices/guidelines for supervisors to adopt for effective supervisory practices for intrinsic motivation of doctoral students. Findings: Thematic analysis guided by the research question revealed that to have students experience autonomy support the supervisors must respect students’ research interest, encourage self-initiation, and be amenable to changes suggested by the students. To have students experience the feeling of competence, the supervisors carefully need to consider the quality, mode and time of feedback and provide students with optimal challenge level. Finally, to facilitate students’ need for relatedness, the supervisors should offer personal and professional support to students and look after their emotional well-being. Recommendations for Practitioners: This study highlights the need for supervisors to acknowledge the role of need satisfaction and mindfully adopt the practices to facilitate the satisfaction of the three needs for the intrinsic motivation of the doctoral students. Recommendation for Researchers: The researchers should consider the psychological health and well-being of doctoral students for persistence and successful completion of their studies. Impact on Society: The study can help improve doctoral studies completion rates as well as produce doctoral candidates with a positive and healthy disposition for future workforce. Future Research: The current study relies only on students’ self-report data. In future inclusion of data from supervisors of their own practices would enhance the quality of findings. Additionally, an analysis to chart changes in students’ experiences over time would provide a deeper understanding of the effect of supervisory practices. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4415 higher education supervisory practices doctoral studies motivation self-determination theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-08-12 14 597 611 4413 article Mohammed S Alkathiri msalkathiri@iau.edu.sa Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess to what extent current doctoral students developed self-authored perspectives, as well as to assess whether or not there was an association between the number of years in the doctoral program and the development of three dimensions of self-authorship (i.e., Epistemological, Intrapersonal, and Interpersonal). Background: Self-authorship is a way of knowing that assists adults in the management of their lives in a way that helps them succeed in society. It is important to study the development of self-authorship in doctoral students because such development is necessary for individuals to overcome the challenges they experience in doctoral programs. The importance of this study rests on the fact that self-authorship development may prompt doctoral students’ ability to succeed in the completion of their doctoral degrees, as well as to meet the challenges of their future in academia. Methodology: Forty-five doctoral students in a Teaching and Learning program were surveyed on three constructs: Epistemological, Intrapersonal, and Interpersonal. The Doctoral Students’ Self-Authorship Questionnaire was developed by the author based on Baxter Magolda’s theory of self-authorship development. Three level-two constructs of self-authorship were conceptually and operationally defined. Contribution: There is no instrument available (i.e., a questionnaire) to assess the self-authorship perspectives of doctoral students. Although it is expected that people will develop self-authored perspectives as they get older, it is unknown to what extent current doctoral students develop self-authorship. No previous studies have assessed doctoral student self-authorship. Findings: The findings showed that participants had advanced levels in all three dimensions and continued to develop towards self-authorship. However, results showed a nonsignificant association between years in the doctoral program and self-authorship development. In other words, although doctoral students spend many years in certain programs, this spent time does not contribute significantly to their development of self-authorship. Recommendations for Practitioners: The current study suggested that doctoral programs should investigate their students’ development toward self-authorship and provide them with more opportunities to better improve their self-authorship. Recommendation for Researchers: The findings suggest further research into the developmental opportunities available for students within doctoral programs that assist students’ ability to develop self-authored perspectives. Impact on Society: The findings supported the importance of assessing doctoral students’ self-authorship as part of doctoral programs. Without the assessment of doctoral student development of self-authorship in their programs, less effort might be taken to address student needs in developing self-authorship. Future Research: Future research may continue the study of self-authorship for doctoral students from different disciplines or schools, especially where attrition rates are high. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4413 self-authorship developmental theory doctoral students teaching and learning higher education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-08-15 14 613 635 4419 article Laura Roberts rightangleresearch@comcast.net Susan C Ferro-Almeida almeidasu@yahoo.com Aim/Purpose: Doctoral education faces a serious problem: many students across the country begin the degree, but never graduate. However, effective mentoring can help students attain graduation, signaling their successful transformation to scholar. We believe the power of the mentor to bring about the transformation from student to scholar has to do with the quality of the relationship between mentor and protégé. In particular, we believe this relationship is most effective if it is characterized by the mentor’s tough love. Our purpose in this study was to interview mentors who are considered effective, to learn their thoughts on the importance of trust relationships, and to learn their ways in nurturing these relationships. Background: A mentor is a senior, more experienced person who guides a junior, less experienced person (in this context, a doctoral student). The role of the mentor is to provide guidance, modeling, technical support, personal support, and psychosocial support. In this paper, we sought to put forth a theory to explain the kinds of behaviors and attitudes that would characterize an effective mentor. The theory, called tough love theory, is a merger between parenting theory and trust theory. According to tough love theory, mentors who are benevolent, competent, honest, reliable, and demanding will bring about optimal growth of students. Methodology: We conducted semi-structured interviews of 21 effective mentors of doctoral students representing seven universities across the United States. We conducted conventional and summative content analysis of the qualitative data. Contribution: This study contributes new insights to guide a doctoral mentor on ways to develop a relationship with a protégé that will provide a catalyst for growth. Findings: The findings were consistent with tough love theory. Moreover, an emergent theme of the research was the dynamic nature of the mentor–protégé relationship, whereby the dependent student transforms into an autonomous, independent scholar. Recommendations for Practitioners: We recommend that doctoral mentors become tough love mentors, i.e., mentors who are trustworthy and who possess high standards. Recommendation for Researchers: These findings have implications for the development of mentor relations theory. Specifically, we identified the following characteristics that effective mentors believed to be necessary for protégé success: trustworthiness and high standards. Impact on Society: We believe the characteristics of effective mentors may generalize to doctoral study in other disciplines, such as the sciences and the arts. We also believe the characteristics of effective mentors may generalize to other contexts, such as business. Future Research: We encourage future researchers to test the tough love mentoring theory with quantitative data. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4419 trust authoritative style tough love collegiality doctoral mentoring empirical and theory-building paper eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-08-19 14 637 649 4414 article Anique A Falconer falconeranique@gmail.com Borivoje-Boris Djokic boris.djokic@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine to which degree age, race, and Socioeconomic Status (SES) influence academic self-efficacy and academic self-handicapping behaviors in doctoral. Background: Across all disciplines, more than 50% of students who begin a doctoral program do not persist to graduation. Although the issue of student retention and psychological factors have been proffered, much attention has not been placed on this relationship. Past researchers have focused primarily on academic-related, student-related, institutional, and financial factors. Methodology: A quantitative study was conducted, using the exploratory factor analysis. One-hundred and sixty-five participants, of legal age, who had completed at least one semester of a doctoral program, were involved in this current study. Contribution: The findings from this study increase the empirical evidence reported on the scarce literature on student retention and psychological factors in doctoral students. Findings: The factor analysis test did not show a statistically significance between the dependent variables -academic self-efficacy and academic self-handicapping- and any of the independent variables – gender, race, age, and socioeconomic status. Recommendations for Practitioners: Higher education leaders should make a proactive effort to understand the issue of student retention from a psychological perspective and make implementations to reduce these problems for doctoral students. Recommendation for Researchers: Future researchers should explore in-depth psychological variables that contribute to the high attrition rates in doctoral students. Impact on Society: A better understanding of the factors affecting the cognitive strategies and self-constructs of doctoral students could provide those working in academia with a better understanding of the problem and increase awareness at a societal level. Future Research: It is recommended that future research be carried using a mixed methods approach to offset the limitations found in the quantitative strand and gain thick, rich data from the qualitative strand. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4414 doctoral students student retention academic self-efficacy academic self-handicapping eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-09-02 14 651 673 4422 article Donna L Brien d.brien@cqu.edu.au Craig Batty craig.batty@uts.edu.au Susan J Carson sj.carson@qut.edu.au Alison Owens a.owens@cqu.edu.au Margaret McAllister m.mcallister@cqu.edu.au Anthony Tuckett a.tuckett@uq.edu.au Aim/Purpose: This article reports on university-funded research conducted to inform, design and implement applied industry-integrated training that could support higher degree by research (HDR) candidates in the disciplines of nursing and creative arts. Background: Doctoral candidates contribute in steadily increasing numbers to the intellectual and economic capital of universities globally, however, the quality of candidate progression and outputs has also been widely criticised. How to best support doctoral candidates for success is therefore a critical focus for universities and an ongoing area of research. Methodology: The study was framed as an action research project as it was driven by the identification of a problem embedded in professional practice that invited action and reflection as well as participation from other practitioners in the field. Contribution: This article presents a multidimensional, industry-focused model for HDR training that effectively engages HDR candidates with key threshold concepts for research. Findings: Doctoral training needs to be more holistic, integrative and career-focused to meet the needs of increasing numbers of candidates with diverse backgrounds and post-doctoral career pathways. Recommendations for Practitioners: This article provides a doctoral training model that can be adapted to other disciplines and industry contexts. Recommendation for Researchers: This article provides a doctoral training model that can, and should, be adapted to other disciplines and industry contexts in order to build more substantive and reliable evaluative data. Impact on Society: As secure career pathways in academia are diminishing, while the number of doctoral candidates are increasing, the integration of industry partners and applied contexts into holistic doctoral training is critical for the working futures of doctoral graduates. Future Research: Further implementations and evaluations of the training workshop provided in this article would advance understandings of training design and implementation options and issues. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4422 higher degree by research (HDR) training doctoral training doctoral support action research eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-09-25 14 675 702 4436 article Rebekah L St. Clair rlsc3@gatech.edu Julia Melkers julia.melkers@pubpolicy.gatech.edu Kevin Ford fordjk@msu.edu Julie Rojewski rojewsj@msu.edu Deepshikha (Dia) Chatterjee chatterjee.dia@gmail.com Nael A. McCarty namccar@emory.edu Stephanie Watts wattss@msu.edu Tamara E Dahl dahltami888@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to understand doctoral and postdoctoral trainee preferences for different models of career development resources and how career-relevant social capital affects these preferences. Background: The supply and demand mismatch within the academic job market is augmented by a growing complaint that trainees are not prepared for a range of careers beyond the academic. So, trainees are often put in a position to seek out resources to navigate their career search processes, yet, the career development strategies that they pursue and the preferences that they have for different types of career development resources is not well understood. Drawing from existing higher education and social capital theory literatures, we examine how trainee preferences for career development resources are shaped by the career support received from their Principal Investigator (PI) and peers, as well as their own self-efficacy. Methodology: We focus on doctoral and postdoctoral trainees in the biomedical science and engineering disciplines at two sites (but involving three institutions) funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training (BEST) Program, a program designed to help prepare trainees for a broad variety of bio-medically related careers within and outside of academic research. Using a survey of both BEST and non-BEST trainees (those not formally in a BEST program), we conducted descriptive and logistic regression analyses of survey data to assess the factors affecting trainee preferences for three different types of career development models: (1) an intensive cohort career development experience (BEST “cohort”), (2) ad-hoc resources (“cafeteria”), or (3) choosing not to seek any career development resources at all. Contribution: This study contributes to the doctoral trainee research base by (1) taking a quantitative approach to cohort based interventions for career development, concepts historically largely examined by qualitative methods, (2) distinguishing among the types and sources of support to better tease out the different types of relationships trainees may have, (3) identifying these issues for both the experiences of the doctoral student and the lesser-studied postdoctoral fellow, and (4) moving beyond a single institution study context by examining data from three different university programs, which allows us to control for institutional and demographic characteristics which importantly is recognized as a significant need in cohort model research. Findings: We find that social capital in the form of a supportive environment and peer support was critical for shaping career development preferences. Cohort programs were particularly attractive to trainees interested in careers outside of academic science and who had low career self-efficacy. Trainees who reported high levels of PI support were less likely to pursue other career development resources, while students reporting low levels of PI support were more likely to choose to participate in a career development focused BEST cohort community. Trainees who reported low levels of PI, department, and peer support were less likely to participate in formal career development events or resources offered by academic institutions. Recommendations for Practitioners: These findings can inform university and career development administrators about the social context in which trainees develop and how that matters for how they prefer and value different formats and intensities of career support. Our recommendations point to the importance of developing (if possible) different models for providing career development resources, so trainees can take advantage of the ones most suitable for them. We further recommend programs consider different marketing strategies for the types of career development programs they offer in order for trainees to understand their options and engage in the resources that make the most sense for them. Highlighting the benefits of cohort based programs will help attract those trainees who desire and need that type of support. This clarity in program goals not only helps to set and manage expectations for trainees to know what the outcomes can be, it also helps to inform programs in terms of what resources to use and measure in helping move trainees along in their own career progression. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend empirically differentiating the different types of support trainees may receive, as our results emphasized that the source of support matters. We also recommend that this study be replicated across different disciplines to assess the extent to which these findings apply universally. Impact on Society: This research is especially important for its impact for the job market and graduate higher education. With the growth in graduate career development training available across U.S. campuses, by designing and targeting the appropriate interventions for career development in academic institutions we can better prepare trainees for their next steps after training as they enter into the job market. Future Research: Future research needs to further examine the black-boxes that are the doctoral student and postdoctoral experiences. This literature is growing, but we need a more concerted effort to understand how factors like support (in its various forms) work with other factors, like career development efficacy. Within this context, future research should look at first generation trainees, as well. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4436 social capital biomedical career development doctoral students postdoctoral fellows eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-09-27 14 703 720 4439 article Mariangela Lundgren-Resenterra mariangela.resenterra@bluewin.ch Lucilla Crosta lucilla.crosta@online.liverpool.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: This paper explores how online structured doctoral programmes (OSDPs) can sustain more fully the collective dimension of supervision for student emancipation leading to academic success. The paper answers the following research question: What mechanisms, if any, are responsible for successful online supervision leading to student academic success, and under what conditions can this occur? Moreover, what does academic success mean for the different parties involved? Background: Recent research on online supervision has highlighted that such supervision’s effectiveness relies on creating a relationship based on converging personal expectations and preferences, generating a common language between supervisors and supervisees to assure student emancipation for academic success. Further research reveals that creating such a relationship is more challenging in an online environment because of increased student isolation due to distance issues. We, however, contend that this approach is limiting as it fails to consider its collective aspect for enculturation purposes more fully, which is relevant for student emancipation and academic success. Methodology: The research relies on autoethnography, focusing on the self as a relational subject generating social relations as a basis for collective reflexivity relevant for a successful supervision experience. This paper employs the critical realist paradigm and, more specifically, Archer’s reflexivity approach for causal explanations. Contribution: This paper discusses how collective reflexivity triggered through social relations impacts student enculturation generating their agency for emancipation, and how such emancipation can have a causal effect on student academic success. However, academic success can differ in meaning depending on the nature of reflexivity that students embrace. Findings: This study identifies that supervision generates relationships that can be performative or emancipatory in nature, depending on how students engage in a reflexive discourse relevant to their enculturation leading then to emancipation and academic success. Recommendations for Practitioners: This paper explores the problem of how higher education institutions can support a more collective approach towards online supervision with students relying more fully on their social network for the successful completion of their studies. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should explore and understand interpretive inquiry and qualitative research through the lens of critical realism, primarily through Archer’s reflexivity approach. Reflexivity refers to people making choices depending on their internal conversations, impacting how they think and act, and consequently on their agency for social emancipation. Impact on Society: Such considerations have the potential to widen the discourse regarding the purpose and role of online supervision, which should encourage students to engage with others in collective reflexivity to become critical beings for the emancipation of all parties involved. Future Research: Future research should consider how OSDPs could help to support a supervisory process encompassing the individual and performative approaches to supervision complying with institutional and economic demands with a more collective and emancipatory approach by focusing on social relations supporting doctoral candidates’ emancipation as critical beings. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4439 autoethnography collective reflexivity corporate agency critical realism online supervision eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-10-25 14 721 739 4446 article Katherine Fulgence Swai katherine.fulgence@outlook.com Aim/Purpose: The paper establishes how doctoral supervisors develop the supervision skills needed to handle the doctoral supervision process in the contemporary world. Background: While the existing literature confirms that PhD holders can supervise doctoral students, there is a need to provide supporting evidence that the skills they possess qualify them to do this. Methodology: Using the qualitative research approach, the study established the knowledge and skills that are needed to supervise doctoral students in the contemporary world. Through thematic analysis of 82 scholarly publications, the study established, in order of preference, five mechanisms through which doctoral supervisors develop supervision skills, i.e. the supervision process, doctoral education, institutional guidelines, institutional training courses and individualized learning. Contribution: The study contributes to the ongoing research on the supervision of doctoral studies in the 21st century. Findings: Findings show that a well-structured doctoral education, including the related processes, imparts the knowledge and skills needed for doctoral supervision. Likewise, a combination of the mechanisms and an individual’s commitment, in terms of time and engagement, develop the skills that are relevant for doctoral supervision. Recommendations for Practitioners: Higher Education Institutions need to make supervisors aware of the potential of these mechanisms for developing the skills necessary for doctoral supervision and encourage them to use them Recommendation for Researchers: Further research on the development of doctoral supervision skills should broadly consider the role of different programmes in developing doctoral supervision skills in different contexts. Impact on Society: The study has implications for doctoral supervisors and universities as regards the need to ensure that both mechanisms are instituted to enable doctoral supervisors to develop doctoral supervision skills. Future Research: Since the study was done theoretically, it might be important to conduct further research using mixed-methods research with a phenomenological design to establish the skills possessed by doctoral supervisors and the mechanism they used to develop the supervision skills in any context. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4446 doctoral supervision supervisors principal investigators doctoral education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-11-16 14 741 760 4458 article Dustin Pappas dpappas2016@fau.edu Ayodele Bain abain2@fau.edu Maysaa Barakat barakatm@fau.edu Francine Baugh fbaugh@fau.edu Leila Shatara lshatara@fau.edu Mary Wilson mwilso61@fau.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this case study is to describe the experiences of educational leadership doctoral students when taking a conference course for the fulfillment of their program’s experiential learning requirements. The research explains how the course added to students’ understanding of educational research and development as research scholars. Background: Research on doctoral student learning experiences in the contexts of professional conferences is limited. The present research examines a unique group context and the perceptions of doctoral student learning and development through the lens of adult learning theory. Methodology: This basic qualitative case study includes doctoral student perspectives on their learning and development as a result of participation in a professional educational leadership conference as course experience. Researchers conducted a review of literature, engaged with participants in a focus group style debriefing, and completed a document analysis of participants’ written reflections following a multi-day conference. Contribution: The present research contributes to the field of educational leadership research by providing first-hand accounts of participation in a conference as course experience to promote student learning and development as research scholars. Findings: Findings suggest that participant learning experiences varied when analyzed through the lens of adult learning theory and are categorized into three types of learning that include non-learning, non-reflective learning, and reflective learning. In addition, participants’ development as research scholars is reported to be influenced by the conference and course design elements that promoted relative autonomy, embedded reflection, and interpersonal support. Recommendations for Practitioners: The present research has implications for both doctoral program design and professional conference planning. Experiential learning activities that extend beyond classrooms present students with opportunities for learning and socialization into a field of study. Recommendation for Researchers: The paper informs and challenges researchers to focus on the experiences of conference attendees and highlights a need for a more nuanced evaluation of conference courses. Impact on Society: Professional conferences present opportunities for doctoral students to develop as research scholars that ask questions to address societal problems. The following research suggests that conference learning experiences may be enhanced through an experiential course design and principles of relative autonomy, incorporation of reflection, and embedded interaction. Future Research: In the future, research of doctoral student learning at conferences may consider applying other methodologies (e.g., narrative research, quantitative) and consider the inclusion of student outcome variables like doctoral student motivation, interests, and social and emotional learning. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4458 scholarly development educational leadership conference doctoral students adult learning theory socialization experiential learning eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-11-17 14 761 782 4450 article Erin Breitenbach ebreitenbach@atsu.edu Josh Bernstein jbernstein@atsu.edu Candace L Ayars cayars@atsu.edu Lynda Tierney Konecny lkonecny@atsu.edu Aim/Purpose: This qualitative case-study explores how a doctoral student’s family influences the doctoral student’s success from the perspective of doctoral students who were enrolled in an online doctoral program. Background: Previous research has shown that family can significantly influence doctoral student success; however, it is not clear what is meant by family nor what the details of the influence of family look like from the perspective of the doctoral student. Methodology: A qualitative case-study method was used. More than 500 former students enrolled in an online doctoral program were emailed a web-based survey that elicited information about who they considered to be in their family, how they thought their relationship with their family changed while they were a doctoral student, and how much they thought their family understood what it means to be a doctoral student. One hundred thirty-three (24%) former students participated in the study. Qualitative data were analyzed both manually and electronically by three researchers who subsequently triangulated the data to confirm themes. Contribution: This study defines ‘family’ from the doctoral student perspective and provides an in-depth look at how family influences doctoral student success including explanation of family support and lack thereof that previously has been shown to be significant to facilitating or hindering doctoral student success. Findings: Doctoral students mostly considered their immediate and extended family (i.e., spouses, significant others, children, grandchildren, parents, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, and parents-in-law) to be family, but some considered friends and coworkers to be part of their family as well. Most doctoral students experienced positive family support, but for those who did not, two major themes emerged as problematic: a reduction in the amount of time spent with family and family not understanding the value of earning a doctoral degree. Recommendations for Practitioners: Institutions of higher education should consider these findings when creating interventions to increase retention of doctoral students. Interventions might include orientation programs to help family members understand the value of earning a doctoral degree, the time commitment necessary to complete a doctoral degree, and ways to support a family member earning a doctoral degree. Recommendation for Researchers: The findings inform future research by surfacing more specific information about what family support and lack thereof looks like for doctoral students and what interventions for improving family support might include. Impact on Society: Improving family support may improve doctoral student success by adding more doctoral-trained leaders, innovators, scholars, and influential educators to society and by supporting the financial investment of students and their families by decreasing attrition. Future Research: Future research should focus on creating quantitative instrumentation to measure the influence of family on doctoral student success. Student populations from different types of doctoral programs (e.g., PhD, MD, DO) might be studied as well. Interventions aimed at improving family support should be designed, implemented, and evaluated for effectiveness. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4450 doctoral student doctoral student success retention attrition family support family integration qualitative orientation eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-11-26 14 783 801 4463 article Pamela Felder pamela.felder@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This work contributes to the expansion of dialogue on doctoral education research in the United States, South Africa, and within the context of higher education internationalization. There is an emphasis on identifying and reinterpreting the doctoral process where racial and cultural aspects have been marginalized by way of institutional and systemic exclusion. An underlying premise is to support representation of marginalized doctoral student experiences to raise questions about participation and contributions within the dialogue on doctoral education research and practice. Background: Decades of reporting provide evidence of statistical portraits on degree at-tainment. Yet, some large-scale reporting does not include representation of historically marginalized doctoral students until the 1970s in the United States, and the 2000s for South Africa. With the growth of internationalization in higher education, examination of the impact of marginalization serves to support representation of diversity-focused discussions in the development of regional international education organizations, multilateral networks, and cross-collaborative teaching and research projects. Methodology: The philosophical approach for this conceptual paper embraces the Sankofa tradition as a process of going back to previous trends in literature on doctoral degree completion to identify opportunities for interrogation and reinterpretation of the doctoral experience. A dimensional framework of diversity and critical race theory, CRT, guides interpretation of racial and cultural perspectives focused on exclusion, structural diversity, and the psychological/behavioral experiences related to doctoral degree completion in the United States and South Africa. A purposeful sampling strategy is used to identify of literature sources where these dimensions are identified. Contribution: A major contribution of this work is the use of a dimensional diversity framework in doctoral education in both the US and South Africa. Findings: Interpretation of previous studies reveal critical insight for understanding the racial and cultural aspects of the doctoral process through comparison of perspectives on the historically marginalized doctoral experience in the United States and South Africa. They include consideration of the social developments leading to the current predicament of marginalization for students, awareness of the different reporting strategies of data, implementation of cultural philosophies to broaden the focus on how to understand student experiences, and an understanding of the differences in student-faculty relationships. Recommendations for Practitioners: Recommendations for practitioners highlight the application of cultural approaches in the development and implementation of practical strategies for supporting historically marginalized doctoral students. Recommendations for Researchers: Recommendations for researchers consider the application of cultural ap-proaches in the development of scholarship supporting historically marginal-ized doctoral students within a global context. Impact on Society: Intended outcomes for this work include increasing awareness about historically marginalized doctoral students. Recommendations are focused on improving their academic and career experiences in the United States and South Africa with global implications regarding their contributions. Future Research: Future research should consider the application of cultural philosophical ap-proaches when examining the historically marginalized doctoral experience within global, national, and local contexts. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4463 doctoral studies internationalization racial and cultural diversity eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2019-11-27 14 803 817 4451 article Ray R. Buss ray.buss@asu.edu Aim/Purpose: This paper examined whether, and how, graduates of an EdD program continued to (a) engage in scholarly practitioner efforts and (b) employ inquiry skills in their workplace settings after completion of their doctoral studies. Background: Little research has been conducted on follow-up of graduates of doctoral programs. The limited research that has been done, typically, was conducted to examine employment status and satisfaction, salary, and adequacy of preparation. Generally, studies have not explored the effects of graduates’ preparation on subsequent use of the skills. Methodology: A mixed method study was conducted. In all, 67 graduates completed an online questionnaire (~52% response rate) assessing their efforts with respect to using scholarly practitioner skills and inquiry skills. Eleven of the graduates were interviewed and these data were used to examine more closely graduates’ use of these skills. Graduates worked in various K-12, community college, university, and other education-related settings. Contribution: This study begins to fill the gap that exists with respect to examining the effects of graduates’ preparation on subsequent use of those skills. In particular, the study was conducted to examine whether and how program graduates continued to use scholarly practitioner and inquiry skills developed during their doctoral preparation in their subsequent professional work. Findings: The quantitative and qualitative data indicated graduates continued to act as scholarly practitioners and engaged in inquiry skills. The interview data were particularly robust and replete with examples of how graduates used these skills/abilities in their workplaces. Recommendations for Practitioners: EdD programs that provide affordances for students to apply skills as scholarly practitioners and employ inquiry as practice methods during students’ preparation will foster skills/abilities that can be applied in subsequent professional practice by educators after graduation. Recommendation for Researchers: Additional studies of graduates’ application of skills/abilities learned in doctoral programs are warranted because of the limited research that has been conducted in this area. Impact on Society: Developing educators’ scholarly practitioner skills and inquiry as practice methods will allow educators to more effectively attack the problems of practice they encounter on a daily basis and improve the educational situations of those they teach and serve. Future Research: A likely next step would be to explore the use of scholarly practice skills and inquiry skills using a case study approach to examine more closely how educators apply these skills/abilities in daily practice. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4451 doctoral program graduates scholarly practitioner inquiry skills CPED EdD eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-01-17 13 . i iii 3938 article Michael Jones editor@ijds.org Table of Contents for Volume 13, 2018, of the International Journal of Doctoral Studies http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3938 IJDS International Journal of Doctoral Studies PhD eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-01-17 13 001 008 3936 article Bonnie Amelia Dean bonnie_dean@uow.edu.au Aim/Purpose: In the time that we study for our dissertation, our learning takes many turns. Sometimes we feel excited, motivated and accomplished, while other times frustrated, tired or unsure. This paper presents a poem to illustrate one student’s PhD journey through reflection on those fluctuations, milestones and learning moments experienced along the way. Background: Central to the journey presented here is learning about the interpretivist paradigm, its approaches, methods and critics. Interpretivism is a qualitative research approach which, in many disciplines, continues to be the positivist’s poor cousin. Methodology: This original paper takes an autoethnographic approach, expressed through poetry. Autoethnography uses self-reflection to connect personal experience to wider social and cultural understandings and has been seldom applied to investigate and uncover the contested and emergent doctoral experience. Contribution: Little opportunities arise during doctoral studies for the student to pause, reflect and communicate new learnings or knowledge without the boundaries of academic discursive conventions. In this way, the poetic medium of expression offers an original contribution to the field. The poem also illuminates the struggles with finding voice, an ontology that resonates, and the place that marks independence from others in becoming a researcher. Findings: Poetry affords ideas and feelings intensity through a distinctive style and rhythm of literature. This original poem offers a creative artefact that can be useful for supervisors and students at any stage of their dissertation, to ignite conversation on the challenges of higher education study. Recommendations for Practitioners: This paper invites others to consider their learning journey and discovery of self, to reflect on and record the milestones, tensions and catalysts of learning. Recommendation for Researchers: It opens doors particularly for those exploring, or wanting to explore, qualitative research through an interpretivist paradigm where knowledge is socially or experientially co-constructed and the researcher is inseparable to the research. Impact on Society: Becoming a researcher as synonymous with being a learner is a crucial discovery that widely connects to being a practitioner in any field. Learning to love the red pen is a metaphor of doctoral studies used to denote acceptance of feedback on written work as well as acceptance more broadly that there is always more to learn. Future Research: What if we encouraged doctoral students and academics to challenge convention and write/produce/create authentic expressions of learning? Encouragement should be afforded to doctoral students and academics to reflect during and beyond their research journeys, in a medium that personally resonates to empower deeper insights and understandings. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3936 autoethnography interpretivist paradigm learning poetry eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-01-24 13 009 029 3941 article Jane Palmer jane.palmer@usq.edu.au Tanzi E Smith Tanzi.Smith@uts.edu.au Dena Fam Dena.Fam@uts.edu.au Jennifer Kent jenniferknt@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The aim of this paper is to identify some of the issues in writing a trans-disciplinary doctoral thesis and to develop strategies for addressing them, particularly focusing on the presentation of data and data analysis. The paper, based on the authors’ own experience, offers guidance to, and invites further comment from, transdisciplinary doctoral candidates, their supervisors and their examiners, as well as the broader field of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary researchers. Background: The paper uses the authors’ experience of writing four very different transdisciplinary doctoral theses to examine the diverse responses received from examiners and what this means for the thesis writing process. The theses and examiners’ reports span an array of disciplinary and transdisciplinary epistemologies, ontologies, and world views. Methodology: A preliminary review of the examiners’ reports revealed a common concern with the definition of ‘data’ and with ‘data analysis’. The examiners’ reports were then more formally coded and thematized. These themes were then used to reflect critically on the four theses, within a broad interpretive framework based on the idea of writing ‘convincingly’, and in light of current literature on the meaning of ‘data’ and the idea and aims of transdisciplinarity. Contribution: The paper offers specific strategies for doctoral candidates, their supervisors, and examiners in working with the burgeoning number of doctoral research projects that are now taking place in the transdisciplinary space. Findings: Doctoral candidates engaged in transdisciplinary research need to define what they mean by data and make data visible in their research, be creative in their conceptions of data and in how they communicate this to examiners, specify the quality criteria against which they wish their work to be assessed and hold discussions with their supervisors about examiner appointments and briefing, and communicate to examiners the special value of transdisciplinary research and the journey on which it takes the researcher. Our conclusion connects these findings to the development of an emerging concept of transdisciplinary research writing. Recommendations for Practitioners: See below under ‘Recommendations for Researchers’ (For the purpose of this paper, practitioners are the researchers). Recommendation for Researchers: The paper makes the following recommendations for transdisciplinary doctoral researchers: • Make the data visible and argue for the unique or special way in which the data will be used • Make clear the quality criteria against which you expect the work to be judged • Be creative and explore the possibilities enabled by a broad interpretation of ‘data’ • Transdisciplinary research is transformative. Communicate this to your examiner. Impact on Society: As more complex and ‘wicked’ problems in the world are increasingly addressed through transdisciplinary research, it is important that doctoral research in this area be encouraged, which continues to develop transdisciplinary theoretical frameworks, methodologies and applications. The strategies proposed in this paper will help to ensure the development of high quality transdisciplinary researchers and a greater understanding of the value of transdisciplinary research in the wider research community. It also draws attention to the potential benefits of similar strategies in multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research. Future Research: Further exploration is needed of how researchers across disciplines can ‘talk’ to one another to resolve complex problems, and how the solitary transdisciplinary scholar, such as the doctoral student, can effectively communicate their research contribution to others. These issues could also be explored for multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research teams. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3941 transdisciplinarity doctorate examination doctoral writing data analysis higher degree research students research communication eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-02-11 13 031 048 3939 article Foroozan Shokooh fshokooh@hotmail.com Shahram Yazdani shahram.yazdani@yahoo.com Aim/Purpose: This study analyses the concept of doctorateness and its defining characteristics and gives a definition for it by examining the various ways it is used in doctoral education literature. Background: The term ‘doctorateness’ is an immature unclarified concept referred to as a common quality for all doctoral awards. With the emergence of different types of doctoral studies worldwide, a clear definition for this concept is a requirement. Defining doctorateness can result in major implications for research and the practice of doctoral education, as determining attributes of doctorateness will pose serious expectations regarding standard setting for the process and outcome of doctoral programs and requirements of doctoral students. Methodology: In this study, Walker and Avant’s eight step method of concept analysis is used. The method is a systematic approach frequently used to analyze relatively new concepts. Contribution: The current study moves beyond the earlier studies by isolating defining attributes of the concept and giving a clear conceptual definition for doctorateness. Findings: Five defining attribute of doctorateness refined from literature include independent scholar, developmental and transformative apprenticeship process, original conceptual contribution/scholarship, highest academic degree, and stewardship of the discipline. Based on the defining attributes a definition is formulated for the concept of doctorateness. In addition to giving a definition a conceptual model consisting of five conceptual areas of purpose, process, product, prerequisite, and impact according to the usage of concept in the literature is also presented. Recommendations for Practitioners: By using the conceptual model and defining attributes presented in this study practitioners and professionals in doctoral education can study the effective design for doctoral programs and utilize the definition as a basis for evidencing doctoral awards. Future Research: Defining attributes can also contribute to psychometric researches related to tool development and constructing tools with explicit criteria for doctorate judgment. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3939 doctorateness definition concept doctorate doctoral education model eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-02-12 13 049 078 3954 article June Maul junemaul@gmail.com Ronald Berman ronald.berman@gcu.edu Cathrine (Cathy) Ames cathrine.ames@gcu.edu Aim/Purpose: Retention of doctoral students, particularly during the dissertation stage, has been a decades-old concern. The study examined the value of dissertation chairs’ use of a cloud-based video technology for coaching doctoral students, and its influence on psychological factors previously linked to retention. The psychological aspects included social presence, research self-efficacy, social isolation, and motivation Background: Prior research identified the importance of addressing psychological factors that lead to student retention and the development of future researchers capable of producing quality research. Methodology: An exploratory case study included a survey of dissertation chairs, interviews of dissertation chairs and doctoral students, and review of documents and artifacts in a university in the southwestern United States. Contribution: The findings revealed several aspects of the video technology that dissertation chairs and their doctoral students identified as valuable from a psychological perspective, and there were several unexpected findings. Findings: Coaching using an emerging video technology positively influenced psychological factors leading to improved research self-efficacy, scholarly writing, efficiency and effectiveness of the academic coaching process, which resulted in student retention. Students identified the relationship established with their dissertation chair while using video technology led to their decision to remain in the doctoral program. Recommendations for Practitioners: Use coaching opportunities to develop research self-efficacy as well as to increase social presence, which will help reduce social isolation and increase student retention. Recommendation for Researchers: Integrate emerging cloud-based video technologies for conducting research to engage multiple researchers at different locations. Impact on Society: This virtual coaching approach can improve the research capabilities and reten-tion of doctoral students in today’s online world during the dissertation phase. Future Research: To validate the relationships found in this study, future research should focus on the quantitative aspects of the psychological factors identified in this study. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3954 emerging technology video meeting technology virtual coaching doctoral stu-dent coaching doctoral student retention social presence research self-efficacy social isolation intrinsic motivation web conferencing eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-02-17 13 079 107 3958 article Cathrine (Cathy) Ames cathrine.ames@gcu.edu Ronald Berman ronald.berman@gcu.edu Alex Casteel Alex.Casteel@my.gcu.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this quantitative descriptive study is to provide a preliminary examination of students’ retention factors of engagement, communication, and isolation that may be affected by the introduction and use of online communities for dissertation development within an online doctoral program. Background: This research is a continuation of the university’s 5-year research initiative to address the high national rate of doctoral attrition by investigating whether private online workspaces provide a virtual platform to increase student interaction, enhance student communication, and reduce student perception of isolation. Methodology: A quantitative descriptive study of 698 doctoral students (n1 = 355, n2 = 179, n3 = 184) in the online environment across three survey periods over a span of 30 months. Contribution: In 30 months, student engagement increased, perceptions of effective communication by students with dissertation committees improved, and student perceptions of isolation remained unchanged. Findings: The implementation of online workspaces for doctoral students addressed factors experienced in online doctoral programs. The introduction of private doctoral workspaces significantly improved doctoral students’ perceptions of more effective communication with their dissertation committees. Perceptions of isolation remained unchanged with the introduction of the technology. Recommendations for Practitioners: Universities and faculty should make proactive efforts to utilize the online tools available to them to facilitate improved communication and reduce isolation within online doctoral programs. Recommendation for Researchers: The implementation of online workspaces appears to mitigate some factors associated with student attrition, but the extent of these changes is unknown. Future research should continue to examine the factors of retention as a pathway to reducing attrition within the online learning environment. Impact on Society: The implementation of private online workspaces appears to lessen factors associated with student attrition, providing opportunities for improved utilization of personal and university resources, improved professional standing for graduates, and an enhanced reputation for online learning programs. Future Research: Further examination is needed to determine to what extent various communication methods affect a student’s experience and increase connectivity between the student and the institution, as well as research to better understand the phenomenon of students’ perceptions of isolation within online environments. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3958 online learning private workspaces retention attrition isolation communica-tion student engagement connectedness doctoral programs eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-02-20 13 109 138 3948 article Gabriel AB Marais gabriel.marais@univ-lyon1.fr Rebecca Shankland rebecca.shankland@iut2.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr Pascale Haag ph@ehess.fr Robin Fiault robin.fiault@gmail.com Bridget Juniper bridget.juniper@workandwellbeing.com Aim/Purpose: The present work focuses on French PhD students’ well-being: an understudied working population thus far, which impedes the development of evidence-based policies on this issue in France.The focus of this work is the well-being of French PhD students, on which almost nothing has been published thus far, impeding any evidence-based policy on this issue to be carried out in France. Background: Research studies from several countries have shown that carrying out a PhD can be a difficult experience resulting in high attrition rates with significant financial and human costs. Methodology: The two studies presented in this article focus on biology PhD students from University Lyon 1, a very large French university (~40,000 students). A first study aimed at measuring the mental health and well-being of PhD students using generalist and PhD-specific tools. In a second study, we carried out and assessed a positive psychology intervention (PPI) aimed at improving PhD students’ well-being. Contribution: Our work is one of the first characterizations of French PhD students’ mental health and well-being. As with other recent studies conducted in Western coun-tries, we found a high level of mental distress among PhD students. Our work also underlines the importance of taking many dimensions of the PhD (not only supervisor behaviour) in order to understand PhD student well-being. Cultural specificities are highlighted and can help inform the design of interventions adapted to each situation. The PPI showed pre-to-post positive changes on PhD students’ well-being. Further research is needed on a larger sample size in order to detect more subtle effects. However, these results are promising in terms of interventions that help reduce PhD student distress. Findings: Study 1 involved 136 participants and showed that a large fraction of the PhD students experiences abnormal levels of stress, depression, and anxiety. We found that career training and prospects, research experience, and the impact of carrying out a thesis on health and private life have more impact on PhD students’ mental health than the supervisors’ behaviour. French PhD students’ well-being is specifically affected by career uncertainty, perceived lack of progress in the PhD, and perceived lack of competence compared to UK PhD students well-being, which suggests cultural differences about the PhD experi-ence in France compared to other countries. In study 2, the scores of the test and control groups (N = 10 and N = 13, respectively) showed a clear effect of the intervention on reducing anxiety. Impact on Society: The high levels of mental health issues and reduced well-being in French PhD students reported in this study underline the importance of developing interventions in this field. Improving the supervisor-student relationship is one possibility but is not the only one. Interventions aimed at learning how to cope with the research experience and with the uncertainty with career pathways, and a good balance between PhD work and personal life present other promising possibilities http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3948 PhD students graduate students doctoral students well-being mental health positive psychology eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-03-15 13 139 154 3983 article Shannon Mason shannon.lee.mason@gmail.com Margaret K Merga margaret.at.curtin@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The aim of this study is to further our collective understanding of the practicalities and possibilities of the Thesis by Publication (TBP) in the disciplinary context of the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) in Australia. Background: Recent times have seen an increasing pressure for publication during candidature in Australian universities for a range of strategic goals that are responsive to the current academic environment. Completing a thesis by publication (TBP) can further these goals, and, while this approach is no longer new, relatively little is known about its application in the context of the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS). Methodology: We performed an analysis of recently conferred TBPs to gain insights into the prevalence of the model in HSS, and to identify the number and nature of publications typically included in this context. Contribution: Our findings can further our collective understanding of the practicalities and possibilities of the thesis by publication in this disciplinary context, providing valuable insights for current and prospective research candidates in this area. Findings: An average of 4.5 papers are included in TBPs, although there is wide range in the number and nature of papers. Of interest is the inclusion of scholarly works that are unpublished, or where the candidate is not the first author. There appears to be a heavy reliance on traditional types of scholarly publications, namely journal articles and conference proceedings. Recommendations for Practitioners: Among the recommendations made, we argue for increased visibility of the TBP model by institutions to provide structural insights to candidates to assist them in the development of their thesis. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers are encouraged to further contribute to the debates that arise from this paper, to help in the development of guidelines regarding what is appropriate for inclusion in the TBP, and how to best facilitate the development of research students. Impact on Society: This paper illustrates the current status of the relatively new TBP in the HSS context and makes a contribution to a range of pertinent contemporary academic debates such as authorship during candidature. Future Research: This paper presents a range of opportunities for further research, including investigating the characteristics of universities that effectively foster the inclusion of publications in the HSS doctoral thesis. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3983 thesis by publication publication during candidature thesis structure hu-manities social sciences eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-04-07 13 155 167 4004 article Rebecca Twinley rebecca.twinley@plymouth.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: Engagement in doctoral training is intended to lead to personal development, as well as – of course - the development of a person’s skills as a researcher. Having engaged in the occupation of doctoral training, I aim to reflect upon how my identity as researcher developed throughout this process; that is, through doing, being, becoming, and belonging. The aim of my doctoral research was to explore the impact of woman-to-woman rape and sexual assault. Hence, the foundational themes explored in this paper are sexual offending, auto/biography, and the significance of identity. Background: I commenced my doctoral training as someone who identified as an occupa-tional scientist and who, therefore, understood that occupation is a means through which people can develop, express themselves, and achieve some sense of belonging. Having completed my training, I reflect upon my becoming an auto/biographical researcher. Methodology: In this original paper, I use the sociologically-informed auto/biographical ap-proach, which affords me with the rationale for writing from the first-person perspective. Auto/biography concedes the combined inclusion of my own voice – as researcher - and the experiences of my respondents. Contribution: Little is known about the issue of woman-to-woman sexual offending, let alone the impact of researching this traumatic topic upon the researcher. Moreover, research has only relatively recently started to grow that explicitly uses an auto/biographical approach, in which researchers embrace their subjectivity and positionality within their work. Findings: Identifying as an auto/biographical researcher, I appreciate how my respond-ents – in terms of their identity and the stories they told me - were integral to my development. That is, I engaged in the process of developing and under-standing the Self through exploring the perceived impacts of woman-to-woman rape and sexual assault. Recommendations for Practitioners: I invite practitioners to share their awareness that woman-to-woman sexual offending is a very real phenomenon. Additionally, your engagement in or with research (which can include being the audience, or reader of research) is one way in which you can gain understanding of your Self. Recommendation for Researchers: I invite others to reflect upon how embodying the Self can lead you to gain self-knowledge through direct experience. Good, moral research practice does not have to involve the researcher remaining objective, neutral, and value-free. Your subjective and personal experiences as the researcher may well support the use of an auto/biographical approach. Impact on Society: Researching traumatic topics can have a varied emotional and professional impact upon researchers that warrants scrutiny. Use of an auto/biographical approach, in which the researcher’s insider status is made explicit - has enabled this researcher (me) to manage this impact, whilst also developing my knowledge, experience and Self. Future Research: Research that should follow on from this paper must continue to explore working auto/biographically when researching traumatic topics and biographical disruptions. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4004 woman-to-woman rape sexual assault identity occupation occupational science auto/biography eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-04-11 13 169 191 4003 article Amanda J Tonks tonksaj@cf.ac.uk Anwen S Williams WilliamsAS@cf.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: Understanding the educational needs of postgraduate research candidates (PGRs) is essential to facilitate development, support attainment, and maintain graduate quality. Background: The production and effective defence of the research thesis are the summative assessment tools used in postgraduate research education. Examiners’ reports provide a rich source of feedback and indicate the gap between the candidate’s level of performance and that expected for the award. This provides a lens through which to view the unmet training needs of PGR cohorts. Methodology: Following a review of all examiner reports for PGR assessments held over a 12 month period, we explored the quantitative and qualitative dimension data in context in order to identify common training needs for our PGR students. Utilising this theoretical framework and standard thematic analysis, we identified recurring themes and were able to determine key areas for future focus. Contribution: This study utilises independent comment from postgraduate research candidate thesis and oral examination assessment to identify unmet core research training needs. Findings: We recognised seven key areas identified by the examiners for improvement: i) quality of scientific writing, ii) general presentation of thesis, iii) statistics /data analysis, iv) understanding / critical appraisal, v) experimental design, vi) English language and vii) supervision. Academic literacy and numeracy stood out as key areas for future training focus. The results highlight areas for future focus in educational provision and targeted training for PGRs undertaking biomedical and life sciences research within our faculty. Recommendations for Practitioners: Evaluation of postgraduate research programmes should include feedback from a variety of sources and not rely solely on employability and completion rates as measures of success. The examination committees are an important source of feedback on the individual and the programme with regard to attainment of core research skills. Recommendation for Researchers: Regular and wide reaching evaluation of postgraduate research programmes and support available is required to ensure the sector can meet the changing needs of our PGR cohorts. Impact on Society: Doctoral graduates are entering increasingly diverse employment fields. Ensuring the quality of graduates and supporting their journey through candidature ensures the greatest value for society once in the work place. Future Research: This study highlights unmet training needs of PGRs as identified by an inde-pendent expert. The impact of engagement with training and the importance of prior experience are not explored in this study, nor is the student perspective on the process. These will reveal additional dimensions to the evaluation process. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4003 doctoral training education feedback learning needs assessment quality out-come quality graduates eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-04-16 13 193 210 4005 article Christina W. Yao cyao@unl.edu Louise Michelle Vital louisemichellevital@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: Learning to conduct research, including considerations for concepts such as reflexivity, is a key component of doctoral student preparation in higher education. Yet limited attention is given to doctoral student training for conducting international research, particularly in understanding researcher reflexivity within international contexts. Background: Incorporating reflexive practices in one’s scholarship is of particular importance because international research often includes U.S.-based researchers working with cultural groups and contexts that are very different from them. Thus, we examined the following: how do novice U.S. trained researchers understand the role of their reflexivity in qualitative international research? Methodology: We utilized qualitative inquiry to answer the study’s research question. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 participants representing 11 higher education doctoral programs in the United States. Contribution: This study provides insight on how U.S. doctoral students reflect on their researcher reflexivity as emerging international researchers utilizing three types of reflexivity as outlined by the conceptual perspectives that frame this study: introspection, social critique, and discursive deconstruction Findings: Most participants believed that self-reflection is a critical component of reflexivity in international research. Several participants demonstrated an awareness of the privilege and power they bring to their international research based on their identities as Western-trained researchers. Participants utilized different forms of self-reflection when collecting, analyzing, and interpreting their data in order to ensure that the voices of their participants were appropriately represented in their research Recommendations for Practitioners: Our recommendations for graduate preparation programs include helping doctoral students to understand reflexivity as both a research concept and an applied practice in international context. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend that novice researchers learn how to incorporate reflexive practices when conducting research because as emerging scholars they can have a better sense of how who they are and how they think about research influences their research activities. Impact on Society: Implications from this study affect Western-based education programs that seek to internationalize curriculum and research priorities. Future Research: In terms of next steps, we recommend research that explores how faculty train doctoral students to participate in the global contexts of educational research. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4005 doctoral education internationalization reflexivity research training higher education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-05-28 13 211 231 4044 article Reuven Katz reuvenk@technion.ac.il Aim/Purpose: To present quantitative results of an investigation that assessed crises reported by doctoral candidates while working toward their degree. Background: Crises that candidates encounter during their doctoral journey may lead to attrition from the doctoral program. A crisis in a doctoral project has several characteristics that must be understood in order to identify the crisis and, if possible, take corrective actions. Our study investigates various types of potential crises and the way candidates experience them. Methodology: We conducted a survey among enrolled doctoral candidates at five universities in Israel and three technological universities in Western Europe. We compared the answers of Israeli Social Sciences and Humanities candidates with those of Israeli Science and Engineering candidates; we also compared the answers of Israeli Science and Engineering students with their Western European peers. We applied statistical analysis to identify and compare significant patterns of reported crises among these three groups of candidates. In addition, we tried to find significant relationships between the reported crises and selected parameters that characterize the candidates’ background and learning habits. Contribution: The research presents quantitative results of typical crises patterns in a comparative study. It shows that while many candidates experience crises, few seek professional assistance. Findings:Our investigation showed that about 60% of enrolled doctoral candidates reported a crisis. Of the candidates who reported crises, about 70% did not seek professional assistance. Emotional crises were reported by a significantly higher percentage of Social Sciences and Humanities students than of Science and Engineering students. Conversely, expectation crises were reported by a significantly higher percentage of Science and Engineering students than of Social Sciences and Humanities students. Significantly, more Social Sciences and Humanities students reported economic crises than did Science and Engineering students. Students who experienced a crisis reported that it caused delays in the research and affected its quality. As a result of their crisis, over 25% of Science and Engineering students seriously considered terminating their studies. Recommendations for Practitioners :The results and discussion may be useful as a guide for advisers to better understand the formation of crises among their doctoral students. Recommendation for Researchers: The quantitative methodology presented in the paper may be applied to investigate additional phenomena in the field of doctoral studies. Impact on Society : The paper demonstrates that doctoral students are aware of potential crises due to the stressful environment they face. By reducing the number of crises, it may be possible to reduce the current rates of attrition, which have a significant impact on national economy. Future Research In future work we plan to expand the research to include the US in the comparative study. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4044 crisis in doctoral research adviser-candidate relationship doctoral education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-05-31 13 233 253 4064 article Carol A Rogers-Shaw car348@psu.edu Davin J Carr-Chellman djc194@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this research is to explore and describe the role of care and socio-emotional learning in the first year of doctoral study. In particular, understanding the nature of the caring relationships doctoral students experience and their development of effective socio-emotional capacity are the primary foci of this study. It may provide institutions with data necessary to add specific supports to graduate orientation programs and/or introductory doctoral courses that will mitigate problems these beginning students face and lead to greater success and quality of life. Background: This study examines the caring relationships of students in two education doctoral programs using the features of socio-emotional learning (SEL), the ethics of care, and learning care to understand the effects of caring relationships on first year doctoral students and to explore how their subsequent use of socio-emotional skills impacts success and quality of life. Methodology: The study used a phenomenological methodology focusing on the initial experiences of returning adult doctoral students in the field of education during the first semester of their studies. A total of seven students from two different cohorts of Ph. D. and Ed. D. programs were interviewed. A deductive process was subsequently pursued, applying the central concepts of care and socio-emotional learning to the data as categories, resulting in the findings of this study. Contribution: As the importance of care is often trivialized, particularly in the most advanced levels of education, it is important for doctoral programs to examine what can be done to enhance relationship-building in order to increase student success and quality of life. This study calls for more attention to care in doctoral study. Findings: Participant responses identified self-awareness as key to how they managed stress, maintained motivation and academic discipline, organized their time in order to accomplish tasks and meet responsibilities, and set goals. Participants attributed their academic discipline and ability to handle stress to perseverance, drive, and work ethic. These doctoral students were very conscious of the decisions they made and the reasons behind these decisions. In their discussion of the relationships that supported them throughout their study, they clearly identified emotions triggered by these relationships, and they discussed how those who cared for them helped them to recognize their own strengths and gain more self-confidence. The presence of caring was clear as participants’ reasons for engaging in doctoral study were often rooted in their care for others in their family and their caring about marginalized populations in society. Recommendations for Practitioners: Examining the nature of the care doctoral students receive and their development of effective socio-emotional abilities may provide institutions with data necessary to add specific supports to graduate orientation programs and/or introductory doctoral courses that will mitigate problems these beginning students face, leading to future success. Recommendation for Researchers: While most research and instruction involving socio-emotional learning has focused on K-12 learners, this study investigates how the experiences of doctoral students reflect the importance of addressing the emotional side of learning at all levels of education. Despite the plethora of extant literature concerning doctoral student experiences related to socialization, the significance of socio-emotional learning, and the importance of care as a facilitator of learning, there are gaps in the literature connecting doctoral students in the first stages of their studies to affective learning. This study will fill that gap and opens the door to future qualitative studies, elaborating the lived experiences of caring relationships and socio-emotional learning. Additionally, these initial qualitative studies provide direction to quantitative researchers looking for ways to measure these concepts. Impact on Society: Elements of care, especially as they relate to socio-emotional learning correlate strongly with successful outcomes in educational contexts. To the extent that doctoral students and doctoral programs experience greater success and increased satisfaction and quality of life, this research will have significant societal impact. Future Research: As a qualitative study using inductive and deductive approaches, it is important for future research to translate the themes and concepts of this study into measurable, quantifiable, and replicable units. This translation will facilitate the generalizability of our findings. The application of the concepts of care and socio-emotional learning to first year doctoral students opens the door to additional qualitative approaches as well, which will greatly increase our understanding of what these concepts mean as they are lived-out. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4064 doctoral study socio-emotional learning ethics of care learning care eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-07-14 13 255 272 4091 article Martin F Lynch mlynch@warner.rochester.edu Nailya R Salikhova Nailya.Salihova@kpfu.ru Albina Salikhova calixalbina@yandex.ru Aim/Purpose: The present quantitative, cross-sectional study aimed to investigate objective and subjective factors in the self-determination of doctoral students in their educational activities. Objective determinants included major discipline and forms of academic and scholarly activity (that is, attending classes and writing papers), and subjective determinants included personal characteristics of the doctoral students, including dispositional autonomy and perceptions of environmental supports for students’ basic psychological needs. Background: The quality of students’ motivation for learning has been linked with many different outcomes. Specifically, students who are more internally motivated (that is, who engage in learning activities for reasons that are personally important and freely chosen) demonstrate better performance outcomes and are more likely to choose and to persist in challenging tasks, to enjoy learning, to exhibit greater creativity, and in general to experience greater psychological well-being. Important questions remain, however, regarding the sources that affect student motivation, in particular at the level of graduate school. The present study expands on existing research by exploring contributions to students’ motivation both from the students, themselves, and from supports stemming from two interpersonal contexts: close relationships and the university environment. Methodology: Participating in the study were 112 doctoral students from various natural sciences departments of a major university in the Volga region of Russia. Self-report measures included dispositional autonomy, motivation for various types of academic and scholarly activity, and satisfaction of basic needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness in various interpersonal contexts. Analyses included descriptive statistics, comparison of mean differences, correlation, and structural equation modeling. Contribution: The present study goes beyond existing research by considering both dispositional and situational factors that influence the motivation of doctoral students for their scholarly and academic activities, and by comparing the impact on motivation of close personal relationships with that of various interpersonal contexts in the university setting. Findings: Doctoral students reported greater supports for their basic needs (for competence, autonomy, and relatedness) from their close personal relationships than in their university contexts. Students felt less support for their autonomy and competence with their research supervisor than in other university settings. The early stages of a scholarly activity, such as gathering sources and analyzing materials, were more likely to be characterized by external motivation, whereas the later stages, like the actual writing of a manuscript, were more likely to be internally motivated. When competing for variance, need supports from university-based but not from close personal relationships were significant contributors to students’ internal motivation for scholarly and academic activity; this effect, however, was fully mediated through students’ own dispositional autonomy. Recommendations for Practitioners: The present study underscores the importance of creating an environment in the university that supports doctoral students’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Educators, and in particular research supervisors, should attend to the ways in which their policies and practices support versus undermine these needs, which are shown to play an important role in promoting doctoral students’ own internal motivation for their scholarly and academic activities. Recommendation for Researchers: Although in this sample need supports from university-based interpersonal contexts outweighed the role of need supports from close personal relationships, in terms of doctoral students’ scholarly and academic motivation, it seems important to keep both contexts in mind, given the general importance of close relationships for motivation and other educational and well-being outcomes. As well, accounting for students’ own dispositional attributes, such as their own personal tendency toward autonomy, seems a critical counterpoint to looking at environmental contributions. Future Research: Future research should examine whether the mediational model tested in the present study applies to other samples of doctoral students, for example, to those from other disciplines, such as the humanities, and those in other cultural or geographic locations, where it is possible that close personal relationships may contribute more substantially to students’ motivation than was the case in the present sample. As well, future studies would do well to include other relevant outcomes, such as academic grades, successful degree completion, and measures of well-being, in order to confirm previous findings of the link between internal motivation and various educational outcomes. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4091 education doctoral students internal motivation academic-scholarly activity self-determination psychological needs eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-07-23 13 273 292 4093 article Sydney Freeman Jr. hefseditor@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The traditional doctoral dissertation is the first major research project that is led by doctoral students, but it does not necessarily prepare them to publish shorter articles in journals. The manuscript dissertation provides a way for doctoral students to establish themselves as researchers while gaining the experience of developing peer-reviewed manuscripts before graduation, thus enhancing career opportunities as tenure-track faculty. Background: This paper demonstrates how the manuscript dissertation can be employed to increase doctoral student publications before graduation. Methodology: This article uses autoethnography to describe the process and results of writing a manuscript dissertation. Contribution: This paper contrasts dissertation styles, explaining the benefits and challenges of the manuscript dissertation option in particular. Findings: I found that it was important to have an influential and established dissertation chair, develop credibility by displaying competence and clear goals, being curious about what you don’t know may be an asset and to be humble and comfortable with sharing what you don’t know. I also discuss the personal benefits I gained from developing a manuscript dissertation including producing refereed articles earlier, committee members serve as peer-reviewers of your chapters and gaining the opportunity to learn and master multiple methodological approaches. I also shared the challenges I encountered during my dissertation process which included, committee members not being familiar with and not being willing to invest the time to support me in developing the manuscript dissertation, the timeframe for completion of my dissertation was extended, and balancing my responsibilities as a doctoral candidate. I also discussed challenges that I had not experienced but still could be an issue for others utilizing this style of dissertation including, insuring the cohesion of publications and having the copyediting support. Recommendations for Practitioners: Dissertation advisors and chairs should consider recommending the manuscript dissertation to doctoral students interested in gaining the experience of developing peer-reviewed manuscripts and becoming tenure-track faculty. Recommendation for Researchers: Doctoral students interested in becoming tenure-track faculty should consider the manuscript dissertation option as a means of producing publications before graduation, thus increasing competitive edge in the academic job market. Impact on Society: Publication before graduation will help young scholars to produce high-quality research earlier in their academic careers. Future Research: Future research should examine the prevalence of the manuscript dissertation, allowing researchers to determine where and how commonly it is used. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4093 manuscript dissertation doctoral dissertation publication tenure-track faculty doctoral advisors eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-07-23 13 293 311 4078 article Kathryn A Wolfe kwolfe6@fau.edu Christina L Seamster clamber7@fau.edu Allison Berger Nelson allisonbnelson20@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the creation and organization of an organic collaborative doctoral cohort, in order to better understand what makes doctoral cohorts successful. The participant-researchers explore their experience as creators and members of this unique group. Background: Although adults often prefer to work on their own, cohorts provide opportunities for collaboration as well as academic and professional support. The authors explore the purposeful, knowledgeable, and relational collective learning environment created by these adult students. Methodology: Through the use of a collaborative autoethnography, the authors are able to examine the individual and collective purpose of this student-led group. This methodology allowed each participant-researcher the opportunity to reflect on their rationale for participating in an organic cohort. Contribution: While traditional cohorts match students with similar areas of focus, this study found value in the cohort’s diversity. The differing subjects and individual areas of expertise of each cohort member continuously provided a great benefit for each member of the cohort. Findings: This study found that doctoral cohorts may be more successful if students are allowed to form them on their own. When cohorts are organically created by the members involved, the group can solidify when the timing is right for each member and for the group as a whole. Recommendations for Practitioners: Directors of doctoral programs should encourage the formation of naturally emerging cohorts by supporting and encouraging relationships among their emerging leader-scholars. Recommendation for Researchers: This study examined the creation of one organic collaborative cohort; consequently, more research is needed to understand when and how other cohorts form and what the members of other cohorts view as advantageous. Impact on Society: While this cohort was created during a doctoral program, the practicality of organically created cohorts can be applied to training, group building, or educational programs across varying environments. Future Research: Because cohorts vary throughout universities and programs, more research is needed on why driven and dedicated individuals choose to create and dedicate themselves to cohorts, rather than working on their own. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4078 collaborative autoethnographies doctoral students cohort collaboration higher education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-08-26 13 313 326 4109 article Alena Prikhidko a1978@ufl.edu Cliff Haynes cliffh@ufl.edu Aim/Purpose: Multiple emotional and cognitive resources are needed for graduate students to overcome stress associated with balancing studies and personal life. This research aimed to explore the difficulties, which graduate student-mothers face while balancing school and parenting, and describe mechanisms of the balancing process. Background: Graduate student-mothers need to structure their time so that they can equally distribute their energy between their children and graduate school work. Mothers face challenges in balancing graduate school and parenting, making choices between school and family responsibilities. This paper addresses the perceptions and experiences of graduate student-mothers who navigate coping with multiple role responsibilities. Methodology: Researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with eight graduate student-mothers who studied at a research-intensive university. Thematic analysis was used to explore the process of balancing graduate school and mothering. Contribution: In this paper we describe the mechanisms of the balancing process among graduate student-mothers and lay a foundation for the future research on coping strategies utilized by this population. Findings: Student-mothers may perceive balancing graduate school and mothering as a challenge, feeling guilty for not spending enough time at school and with their children, and experiencing stress choosing between school and mothering responsibilities. The coping mechanisms for balancing graduate school and parenting roles are compartmentalization, changing behavior, and changing thoughts. Recommendations for Practitioners : Graduate student-mothers could benefit from specific psychotherapeutic services within their institutions, learning to deal with the stress of balancing graduate school and mothering. Compartmentalization is a balancing mechanism that mothers may learn to use in counseling, separating life experiences of school and family in their mind and preventing feelings from one area of life – graduate school – to intervene with emotions related to mothering. Impact on Society: Current research highlights the necessity of counseling services tailored specifically for graduate student-mothers, who may have increased levels of stress due to multiple responsibilities. Future Research: The research on the effectiveness of suggested counseling strategies should follow. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4109 graduate school student-mothers intensive mothering eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-09-03 13 327 345 4103 article Jouni A Peltonen jouni.peltonen@oulu.fi Kirsi Pyhältö kirsi.pyhalto@helsinki.fi Montserrat Castelló montserratcb@blanquerna.url.edu Anna Sala-Bubaré annasb4@blanquerna.url.edu Aim/Purpose: This study aimed to explore individual variation in doctoral candidates’ perceptions about research writing and themselves as writers (research writing perceptions) across three countries (Spain, Finland, and the UK) and the relationship with doctoral candidates’ research conditions and social support. Background: The present study employed a person-centered approach to identify profiles among doctoral candidates’ in relation to their research writing perceptions and the association between these profiles and research conditions and experiences (e.g., thesis format, thesis language, enrollment modality, phase of the doctorate, number of publications, and drop-out intentions) and perceived social support from supervisors and research community. Methodology: 1,463 doctoral candidates responded to the Doctoral Experience survey. EFA and CFA were used to corroborate the factor structure of the research writing scale. Research writing profiles were identified by employing cluster analysis and compared regarding research conditions and experience and both types of social support. Contribution: This study contributes to the literature on doctoral development by providing evidence on the social nature of doctoral candidates’ writing development. It is argued that doctoral candidates’ perceptions of writing are related to transversal factors, such as doctoral candidates’ researcher identity and genre knowledge. It also shows that most candidates still lack opportunities to write and learn to write with and from other researchers. Findings: Three writing profiles were identified: Productive, Reduced productivity, and Struggler profiles. Participants in the Productive profile experienced more researcher community and supervisory support and had more publications, Struggler writers reported drop-out intentions more often than participants in the other profiles, and Reduced productivity writers were more likely to not know the format of the thesis. The three profiles presented similar distribution in relation to participants’ country, the language in which they were writing their dissertation, and whether they were participating in a research team. Recommendations for Practitioners: Supervisors and doctoral schools need to be aware of difficulties involved in writing at the PhD level for all doctoral candidates, not only for those writing in a second language, and support them in developing transformative research writing perceptions and establishing collaboration with other researchers. Research teams need to reflect on the writing support and opportunities they offer to doctoral candidates in promoting their writing development. Recommendation for Researchers: Further studies should take into account that the development of research writing perceptions is a complex process that might be affected by many and diverse factors and vary along the doctoral trajectory]. Future Research: Future research could explore the influence of factors such as engagement or research interest on doctoral candidates’ research writing perceptions. The field could also benefit from longitudinal studies exploring changes in doctoral candidates’ research writing perceptions. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4103 doctoral candidates; doctoral writing; writing perceptions; social support; re-search writing; cross-national study eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-09-05 13 347 359 4114 article Mervi Kaukko mervi.kaukko@monash.edu Aim/Purpose: The aim of this article is to discuss a PhD student’s experience of working with unaccompanied asylum-seeking minors, amidst a rapidly changing global situation. The focus is on how the research process influenced the novice PhD student, and how the student’s subject position influenced the research. Background: The incentive for this article comes from an examiner’s comment, which argued that the student’s thesis did not clarify her subject position, or allow her voice to be heard. Paulo Freire’s (2005) concept of “pedagogical love” is used in unpacking these dimensions. Methodology: The paper adopts an autoethnographic approach. The data, consisting of 48 pages of field notes written during the doctoral study, are analyzed abductively (Timmermans & Tavory, 2012), in dialogue with theory. Contribution: The paper brings to the fore the ways in which the doctoral research processes may influence students, especially those working closely and intensively with participants in emotionally challenging situations and within a research field in flux. This knowledge is rarely included in doctoral training, but is relevant in today’s world where migration and refugees have become a popular theme. Secondly, the paper contributes to the already well-established body of literature about how doctoral student’s positionality influences the research. Findings: The article utilises the ideas of storytelling (Weir & Clarke, 2018) and communicates findings in the form of three intertwined journeys: that of the author through her PhD process; the journey of her research participants from their countries of origin to Finland; and the journey of the PhD research within the historical turbulence of 2015 in global refugee situation. The findings show that acknowledging and reflecting one’s own emotional stance is required for the wellbeing of the student, as well as for an ethical research process resulting in a trustworthy outcome. The findings also suggest that although the love-rhetoric may sit awkwardly within our current academic perspectives, a focus on emotions does not diminish rigor in research. Instead, it enables ethical relationships and processes that are meaningful for all participants. Recommendations for Practitioners: The paper recommends that practitioners in academia (including doctoral supervisors) encourage doctoral students to “know with [their] entire body, with feelings, with passion and also with reason” (Freire 1997, p. 30), and to reflect on their positionality, as well as map their doctoral journeys in the intersection of others. Recommendation for Researchers: The paper highlights that researchers working with people in challenging situations must continuously question their biases, show interest in the research participants as individuals, and create trust through long involvement in the research field. Impact on Society: By highlighting the complexities encountered in this research project, the paper aims to disrupt the simplistic, often deficit-focused assumptions about people from refugee and asylum-seeking backgrounds. Future Research: The scope of the findings leaves open a discussion on critical moments during the shared journeys: how to enter the research field ethically, and how to exit after creating trust and building relationships? http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4114 autoethnography Finland PAR pedagogical love unaccompanied minors eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-09-16 13 361 388 4113 article Anna Sverdlik anna.sverdlik@mail.mcgill.ca Nathan C. Hall nathan.c.hall@mcgill.ca Lynn McAlpine lynn.mcalpine@learning.ox.ac.uk Kyle Hubbard kyle.hubbard@mail.mcgill.ca Aim/Purpose: Research on students in higher education contexts to date has focused primarily on the experiences undergraduates, largely overlooking topics relevant to doctoral students’ mental, physiological, motivational, and social experiences. Existing research on doctoral students has consistently found mental and physical health concerns and high attrition rates among these students, but a comprehensive understanding of these students’ experiences is still lacking. Background: The present review paper aims to offer deep insight into the issues affecting doctoral students by reviewing and critically analyzing recent literature on the doctoral experience. An extensive review of recent literature uncovered factors that can be readily categorized as external and internal to the doctoral student; external factors include supervision, personal/social lives, the department and socialization, and financial support opportunities, while internal factors motivation, writing skills, self-regulatory strategies, and academic identity. Methodology: 163 empirical articles on the topic of doctoral education are reviewed and analyzed in the present paper. Contribution: The present paper represents a comprehensive review of the factors found to influence the experiences (e.g., success, satisfaction, well-being) of doctoral students in their programs. It represents a unique contribution to the field of doctoral education as it attempt to bring together all the factors found to date to shape the lived experiences of doctoral students, as well as evidence-based ways to facilitate students’ success and well-being through these factors. More specifically, the present paper aims to inform students, faculty, and practitioners (e.g., student support staff) of the optimal practices and structures uncovered to date, as most beneficial to doctoral students in terms of both academic success and well-being. Impact on Society: Decreases to doctoral students’ well-being as they progress in their programs, financial struggles, and the notable difficulty in maintaining a social life/family responsibilities have been widely discussed in popular culture. The present paper aims to highlight these, and other, issues affecting the doctoral experience in an attempt to contribute to the conversation with comprehensive empirical evidence. By facilitating discussions on the issues that play a role in the attribution and dissatisfaction of existing doctoral students, and perhaps deter potential doctoral students from ever entering doctoral education system, we hope to contribute to a student-cantered focus in which departments are concerned with the academic success of doctoral students, but also equally concerned with maximizing students’ well-being in the process of attaining a doctoral degree. This, we hope, will enhance the societal perception of doctoral education as a challenging, yet worthwhile and rewarding process. Future Research: Future research in which the confluence of the factors discussed in this review, particularly with respect to the cross-cutting impact of socialization variables, is recommended to provide a sufficiently in-depth examination of the salient predictors of doctoral student development and persistence. Future research efforts that steer away from single-factor foci to explore interactive or redundant relationships between factors are thus recommended, as are analyses of the potential effects that changes to one aspect of the doctoral experience (e.g., motivational interventions) can have on other factors. Finally, studies employing various alternative methodologies and analytical methods (e.g., observational, questionnaire, experimental, experience sampling) are similarly expected to yield valuable knowledge as to the nature and extent of the afore-mentioned and novel contributing factors, as well as the utility of student intervention programs aimed at improving both the personal and professional lives of doctoral students internationally http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4113 doctoral education; doctoral well-being; higher education; graduate education; doctoral achievement eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-10-22 13 389 411 4135 article Africa Hands asheri@rocketmail.com Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine how the basic psychological needs of self-determination theory are reflected in doctoral students’ motivation to earn the PhD. Background: As isolating as the doctoral experience seems, it is one that occurs in a social-cultural environment that can either support or hinder the student. This research highlights the motivational influences of library and information science doctoral students regarding experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Methodology: Qualitative data were collected from seven (7) enrolled doctoral students at library and information science programs in the United States and Canada. Transcripts from semi-structured interviews and students’ personal admission statements were subjected to deductive content analysis for emphasis on three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Contribution: Findings illustrate the role faculty play in student motivation and satisfaction with the doctoral experience. There are implications for faculty, mentors, and advisors working with current and former graduate students who may be considering a PhD. The findings have implications for doctoral recruitment, advising, and student services of interest to faculty and administrators across disciplines. It also shows the applicability of self-determination theory in the examination of the doctoral student experience and overall motivation. Findings: Deductive analysis based on self-determination theory (SDT) demonstrates factors related to self-determination theory’s basic psychological needs – autonomy, competence, and relatedness – as relevant to participants’ motivation to pursue a doctoral degree and to the examination of doctoral student initial motivation. Doctoral students are motivated by multiple factors including their interactions with and encouragement received from current and former faculty. Students report experiences related to autonomy, competence, and relatedness that energized them to pursue a doctoral degree and that have positively influenced their doctoral experience thus far. Recommendations for Practitioners: Faculty and program administrators may use this data to inform their understanding of the expectations of today’s doctoral students and motivational drivers of prospective students and to tailor support services accordingly. Recommendation for Researchers: This is a preliminary investigation of doctoral student motivation in relation to the basic psychological needs. More research is needed on a larger sample of students to more fully understand the influence of autonomy, competence, and relatedness on doctoral student initial and ongoing motivation. Impact on Society: This research is an important step in bridging faculty and student perceptions of what is important to their initial and ongoing enrollment in a doctoral program. By improving students’ experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, it may be possible to improve the overall doctoral experience leading to completion of the PhD. Future Research: Future research will expand to include doctoral students farther along in their doctoral programs, the administration of the Basic Psychological Needs Scale, and may examine faculty perceptions of the three basic psychological needs. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4135 basic psychological needs theory doctoral student motivation library and infor-mation science self-determination theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-10-22 13 413 439 4138 article Juliann S McBrayer jmcbrayer@georgiasouthern.edu Teri Denlea Melton tamelton@georgiasouthern.edu Daniel W Calhoun dwcalhoun@georgiasouthern.edu Matthew Dunbar mdunbar@georgiasouthern.edu Steven Tolman steventolman@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This study examined an Ed.D. program redesign to address time to degree completion. The aim was to emphasize the need to improve students’ academic writing and embody a scholarly practitioner approach to research. Background: Doctoral programs have the highest attrition of graduate programs, with almost half of the students taking six to seven years to complete. Methodology: An ex-post-facto correlational research design examined self-efficacy and educational leadership doctoral students perceived versus actual program progression. This was statistically determined through Pearson’s correlation coefficients and a t-test analysis. Contribution: This study provides other doctoral programs who are struggling with time to degree completion a model to consider as they contemplate a program redesign. Findings: Ed.D. students in the 2014 and 2015 cohorts reported high self-efficacy (3.62 and 3.57 respectively, out of 4.00). There was a statistically significant difference in the number of defenses completed per semester based on the program redesign. Recommendations for Practitioners: Ed.D. programs should consider using a scholarly practitioner approach. This focus may lead to faster rates of degree completion and better prepare students to solve problems of practice in their practitioner setting. Recommendation for Researchers: While the results are promising as to expediting time to degree completion, like most doctoral programs it does not seem to impact overall completion rates of the program as a whole, thus, warranting further research. Impact on Society: Expediting time-to-completion enables students to graduate sooner. This will yield cost savings to the student, free up faculty resources, and most importantly prepare students to sooner serve as scholarly practitioners. Future Research: Future research should continue to examine time to degree completion, as well as students’ lived experiences and examine how those shape doctoral students’ efforts and abilities in their Ed.D. work from start to program completion. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4138 degree completion educational leadership leadership preparation problem of practice scholarly practitioners eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-11-23 13 441 456 4140 article Sigrid M. Gjøtterud Sigrid.gjotterud@nmbu.no Athman K. Ahmad kibudi2000@yahoo.com Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore the rich potential for transformative learning, for both supervisees and supervisors, that is embedded in cross-cultural supervision. Background: Our example is an analysis of experiences from a five-year long cross-cultural supervisory relationship between a Tanzanian PhD student and a Norwegian supervisor. Methodology: In the research, we followed an action research approach, informed by the following question: “How can we account for and improve our supervising–supervised practice?” We analyzed our supervision experiences with the aim to explore the transformative power of cross-cultural supervision. Contribution: Studies on supervision collaboration between Scandinavia and Southern Africa are scarce; hence, our study adds insight into the value of collaboration across continents and economic divides. Furthermore, we argue for greater research into the impact of cross-cultural supervision on supervisors as well as supervisees. Findings: We have identified seven factors as central to mutual transformative learning in cross-cultural supervision: shared unhomeliness, shared uncertainty and trust building, otherness, shared second language, cultural differences relating to hierarchy, being in context together, and finally, flourishing. For the mutual transformative processes to unfold, building trust in openness to differences seems to be a crucial foundation. Hence, we believe that the qualities in the cross-cultural supervision relationship that we highlight can serve as a reminder to become aware of differences as a valuable source for mutual learning and expanded horizons. Recommendations for Practitioners: Our recommendation to practitioners is that they are receptive to and welcoming of differences, find common ground, and explore the value of learning from and with each other in supervisory relationships. Recommendation for Researchers: Equally, we recommend that researchers inquire into how differences in gender, race, religion, and professional fields in supervisory and collaborative relationships can hold potential for valuable knowledge creation. Impact on Society: Academic’s awareness of the value of otherness as addressed in this paper might foster new ideas for dealing with challenges in our turbulent time through transculturation. Future Research: More studies are needed on the potential for growth and the impact of mutual knowledge creation arising from cross-cultural doctoral supervision. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4140 PhD supervision cross-cultural supervision transformative learning trans-culturation action research eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-11-23 13 457 469 4141 article Alexis R Abramson alexis.abramson@case.edu Emily M Welsh emw82@case.edu Aim/Purpose: This article presents an analysis of female faculty representation on dissertation committees in comparison to the percentage of women faculty in departments of engineering in 2013 and 2014. Background: Collaboration is an indication of a robust research program, and the consequences of collaboration may benefit one’s academic career in numerous ways. Gender bias, however, may impede the development of intra-university collaborations, thereby inhibiting professional success. Methodology: Nine universities were examined (Carnegie Mellon University, Case Western Reserve University, Cornell University, Duke University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Northwestern University, Rice University, University of Pittsburgh, and Vanderbilt University) across six different engineering departments (civil, chemical, mechanical, materials, biomedical, and electrical). Contribution: This paper reveals how an analysis of gender balance of faculty representation on doctoral committees can help advance an institution's understanding of the level to which collaboration with female colleagues may be occurring, thereby providing insight to the climate for women. Findings: A potential gender imbalance does exist in select cases. In aggregate, the percentage of female engineering faculty on dissertation committees compared to within each university revealed a disparity of less than 6% points. Recommendations for Practitioners: Examining how well represented female engineering faculty are on dissertation committees can be an important measure of levels of collaboration within an institution and of how well women are being integrated into the existing culture. Recommendation for Researchers: More in-depth research, including a study of correlation with other relevant indicators, may reveal additional insight to why gender bias exists on doctoral committees and how to lessen its occurrence. Impact on Society: The results of this study may increase awareness of gender bias and encourage faculty to be more inclusive and collaborative, particularly with their female colleagues, and as a result may help improve the climate for women faculty in engineering. Future Research: This study opens a discussion about the potential for gender imbalance and bias within an institution, particularly with respect to collaboration and inclusion. Future work may explore other indicators beyond doctoral committee representation. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4141 gender bias gender imbalance doctoral committee collaboration eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-11-23 13 471 495 4148 article Rachel L Geesa rlgeesa@bsu.edu Kendra Lowery kplowery@bsu.edu Kat McConnell krmcconnell@bsu.edu Aim/Purpose: In this paper, we examine how first-year education doctoral (EdD) students in a peer mentoring program may be supported in the academic and psychosocial domains to increase timely degree completion, decrease attrition, and improve the EdD program for students and faculty. Background: EdD students often face unique trials based on academic, social, professional, and personal challenges that arise during their degree program. The paper addresses how peer mentoring programs may help students overcome these challenges while completing their EdD program. Methodology: To investigate the effectiveness of a peer mentoring program for students, we focused on a single case study of an EdD peer mentoring program with 11 first-year EdD students who participated in the program. Using mixed methods, we collected and analyzed data from pre- and post-surveys, individual interviews, and a focus group. Contribution: Few studies about peer mentoring programs for EdD students exist. This study is unique because it focuses on first-year EdD students’ perspectives and, unlike other studies on peer mentoring programs, peer mentors are defined as graduates of the EdD program or current EdD students who are further along in the program. Whilst many studies of peer mentoring recommend peer mentoring for new students, our findings suggest that in the case of EdD students, extended or later peer mentoring may be more beneficial. Findings: From the quantitative and qualitative data results, five themes related to mentee perspectives of the benefits of EdD peer mentoring program emerged: 1) receiving academic advice and program support; 2) focusing on the future; 3) receiving emotional support and work-life balance advice; 4) having an experienced and relatable mentor; and 5) needing more mentoring to derive benefits. While mentees reported positive feelings about the mentoring program, many expressed that they did not yet have a need for mentoring. Considering that most mentoring studies focus on early program mentees, these results present the possibility of a need for extended or later-program mentoring. Based on the data, we identified a need for additional research which focuses on determining the correct timing for EdD students to begin peer mentoring program since students take coursework during their first year and have not begun work in the dissertation phase of the program. Recommendations for Practitioners: Sustainability of peer mentoring programs can present challenges based on the time and needs of mentees, mentors, and faculty. Doctoral faculty should evaluate the benefits of an EdD peer mentoring program for mentees on a regular basis to ensure that the program effectively supports and guides mentees to degree completion. Recommendation for Researchers: Literature and research on the evaluation, impact, and value of peer mentoring programs for EdD students and first-year doctoral students are limited. Researchers could study further the perspectives of mentees in an EdD peer mentoring program throughout their degree program from taking coursework to writing a dissertation. The benefits of early-program mentoring in comparison to later-program mentoring could be investigated further. Impact on Society: Providing mentoring opportunities to EdD students may help them overcome academic, social, and emotional challenges, and in turn, allow more education leaders to successfully complete their EdD and use their education to improve their school communities. Future Research: Future studies should examine other options of mentoring programs for first-year EdD students and EdD students who completed their EdD coursework and are working on their dissertation. Longitudinal studies are also needed to track mentees’ progression throughout the program. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4148 doctoral program EdD education doctorate mentee mentor peer mentoring program evaluation eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-12-11 13 497 515 4157 article Amanda Rockinson-Szapkiw aszapkiw@liberty.edu Lisa Sosin lssosin@liberty.edu Lucinda S. Spaulding lsspaulding@liberty.edu Aim/Purpose: The qualitative study aims to examine the lived experiences of women persisting in the distance; professional doctoral degrees as they seek to integrate and balance their family of origin and current family system with their development as scholars. Background: A vital reason many women choose not to drop out of their doctoral programs is that they experience conflict between their identities as women and scholars – a conflict between “the enduring sense of who they are and whom they want to become” (Cobb, 2004, p. 336). A supportive family is a salient theme that arises in studies on doctoral persistence, with many researchers noting that the family is essential in helping women navigate the doctoral journey (e.g., Lott, Gardner, & Powers, 2009; Tinto, 1993). Methodology: This qualitative study employed Moustakas’ (1994) transcendental phenomenological approach through a purposive sampling of eleven women who are enrolled in distance education, professional doctoral programs at two universities in the southern United States. Contribution: This study furthers the existing research by demonstrating that family is intimately tied to the scholarly identity development and persistence of women enrolled in distance education, professional doctorate programs. While previous research has shown that family support is a factor promoting doctoral persistence, previous studies have not examined how women integrate and balance their family of origin and current family system with their development as scholars while persisting in a doctoral degree. Findings: Findings highlighted that the doctoral journey is marked by personal fulfillment and struggle. Women’s development and persistence are influenced by familial support, choosing to continue or discontinue family of origin patterns, and differentiation from the family. Recommendations for Practitioners: To support women’s persistence and scholar identity development, the university can facilitate discussions and provide opportunities that explicitly orient families to the rigors of doctoral training. The university can host family webinars, create family orientations, offer family counseling, and develop family social media groups. Recommendation for Researchers: This study is an essential step toward understanding the role of the family in the doctoral persistence of women. The study provides a foundation for further research with women who are divorced, never married, or identify as LGBTQIA (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning, intersex, and asexual). Further study should focus on women enrolled in various disciplines and residential programs. Impact on Society: If women are to succeed in doctoral programs, the academic institution cannot ignore the role of the family in persistence. Future Research: The role of the family in doctoral persistence for men and residential students needs to be explored. Experience of women in distance education and residential programs should be compared to highlight differences and similarities. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4157 distance education women doctoral education work-family balance work-family borders persistence family of origin family system eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-12-15 13 517 537 4158 article Catherine W Gillespie catherinewilsongillespie@gmail.com Ellie M. Burns ellie.burns@gmail.com Aim/Purpose: This study examined why Ed.D students discontinued their doctoral programs during the dissertation phase as well as how a student’s needs of autonomy, relatedness, and competence were met during different stages of the program. Background: Time to complete the doctoral degree continues to increase. Between 40-60% of doctoral students are making the decision to discontinue work toward a degree they have already invested significant amounts of time, money, and energy into earning. Methodology: This phenomenological study utilized the lens of Self-Determination Theory. Seven participants (three women and four men) with between nine and sixteen years of post-secondary education, were interviewed three times each to gain a better understanding of the factors that impacted their attrition. Contribution: Past research has suggested using a cohort model to encourage retention of doctoral students. All seven participants were enrolled in cohort programs. This study incorporated suggestions from prior research such as a cohort model of learning and ensuring the students’ needs of autonomy, relatedness, and competence are met. The study investigates the experience of students in cohort programs who did not finish their dissertations. Findings: This study found that the doctoral students who did not complete their dissertations experienced changes in feelings of autonomy and relatedness between their coursework and their dissertations. This made it difficult for them to persist through the dissertation stage of the program. Changes in autonomy and relatedness, when coupled with changes in advisors, career, or family responsibilities resulted in students reprioritizing their goals and thus leaving the dissertation incomplete. Recommendations for Practitioners: Evaluate students’ autonomy needs as they progress through the program and attempt to pair students with advisors based on needs. Offer opportunities for students to gather and work on the dissertation after they finish the coursework stage of the program. Recommendation for Researchers: Understand the importance of advocating for one’s own needs as one moves through the doctoral program. Attempt to finish the dissertation as quickly as possible after the coursework stage of the doctoral program. Do not to allow the dissertation to move to the back burner. Impact on Society: Attrition at any level of post-secondary education is costly to both students and institutions. Doctoral students are often funding their own education while balancing careers and families. There is great potential financial impact on society if more students’ complete programs that they have already invested in heavily. Future Research: Examine the needs of autonomy in people who complete the doctoral program. Assess student needs and compare the results with advisor behaviors. Conduct a study with participants who have not earned a specialist degree. Conduct a study to determine the degree to which finances played a role in a students’ decision to discontinue working toward the doctoral degree. Study the impact of taking time off after completing the coursework and comprehensive exam stage of the program. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4158 retention attrition doctoral program cohort self-determination theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2018-12-29 13 539 557 4159 article Maximus Monaheng Sefotho Maximus.sefotho@up.ac.za Aim/Purpose: This article demonstrates how experiences of a supervisee can become foundational in carving a career identity of PhD supervisors. The purpose of the article is to analyze how South African emerging supervisors could carve a career identity as PhD supervisors. Background: This article uses an autoethnographic case study to address the problem of experiences of poverty, marginalization and scarcity towards resilience in academia. Methodology: The article followed a qualitative methodology anchored on the constructivist-interpretive paradigm. The design of the study was a single ethnographic case study. This was an autoethnographic non-traditional inquiry of the author’s PhD journey. For a period of six years, the author used autoethnography to inquire about personal experience of PhD supervision. Central to the methods used were reflexive critical and narrative analysis, and observation as action research of the culture of PhD supervision. Contribution: This article contributes insight into PhD supervision and carving a career by using real time experiences of a PhD Supervision journey as a student, as a supervisor and trainee in a formalized supervision program. Findings: The article’s major actual findings were: Need for training in philosophy and educational research and in-service PhD supervision training. Recommendations for Practitioners: The study indicates that universities could examine whether they should intensify their efforts to train PhD supervisors towards developing supervision as a career. Emerging supervisors could be encouraged to consider engaging in training and carving careers out of PhD supervision. Recommendation for Researchers: Autoethnographic research could be intensified as it is positioned to provide first-hand information and provide dialogic spaces for silenced voices in less transformed universities. Impact on Society: PhD supervision is recommended to be geared towards developing home-grown models and theories for resolving teaching and learning problems as well as making in-roads into socio-economic development. Future Research: This study demonstrates the usefulness of individual experiences in selecting benchmarks for context appropriate models. The study suggests that future research could rely more on qualitative methods in addition to the widely used quantitative ones. A mixed methods approach seems to be a promising direction. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/4159 autoethnography career identity PhD supervision philosophy reflexivity eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-01-24 12 i iii 3646 article Michael Jones editor@ijds.org Table of Contents for the International Journal of Doctoral Studies, Volume 12, 2017 http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3646 IJDS International Journal of Doctoral Studies PhD eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-01-24 12 001 016 3641 article Jan Gube jcgube@hkcc-polyu.edu.hk Seyum Getenet Seyum.Getenet@usq.edu.au Adnan Satariyan Adnan.Satariyan@utas.edu.au Yaar Muhammad Yaar.Muhammad@utas.edu.au Aim/Purpose: This paper considers the role of supervisors’ discipline expertise in doctoral learning from a student perspective. Background: Doctoral students need to develop expertise in a particular field of study. In this context, developing expertise requires doctoral students to master disciplinary knowledge, conventions and scholarship under the guidance of supervisors. Methodology : The study draws on a mixed-method approach, using an online survey and semi-structured interviews conducted with doctoral students. Contribution: The paper brings to the fore the role of supervisors’ discipline expertise on doctoral students’ research progress. Findings: The survey data suggest that doctoral students nominate their supervisors on the basis of their discipline expertise. They also view supervisors’ expertise as key to the development of ‘insider’ knowledge of their doctoral research. Recommendations for Practitioners: Supervisors play a pivotal role in helping doctoral students overcome intellectual barriers by imparting their discipline knowledge as well as balancing satisfactory doctoral completion rate and high quality student experience. Impact on Society : Doctoral supervision equips doctoral students with the right arsenal to be able to competently operate within their field and prepares them for their future research or professional career that demands a high level of discipline expertise. Future Research: The scope of the findings leaves open a discussion about the experiences of doctoral students matched with non-discipline expert supervisory teams; for example, the extent of the mismatch and its ramifications. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3641 discipline expertise research expertise doctoral students PhD students supervisors doctoral learning support student-supervisor fit eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-03-28 12 017 032 3689 article James Burford jburford@tu.ac.th Aim/Purpose: This article offers a conceptual summary and critique of existing literature on doctoral writing and emotion. The article seeks to intervene in current debates about doctoral writing by re-positioning it as an affective-political practice Background: Over recent decades public interest in the doctorate has expanded as it has become re-framed as a key component of national success in the global knowledge economy. It is within this context that the practice of doctoral writing has crystallised as an object of interest. While researchers have examined the increased regulation, surveillance, and intensification of doctoral writing, often this work is motivated to develop pedagogies that support students to meet these new expectations. At this point, there has been limited attention to what broad changes to the meanings and practices of doctoral writing feel like for students. Methodology: The paper offers a conceptual review that examines the ways in which doctoral writing tends to be understood. A review of literature in the areas of doctoral writing, doctoral emotion, and critical studies of academic labour was undertaken in order to produce a more comprehensive understanding of the political and emotional dynamics of doctoral writing. Contribution: It is intended that this conceptual research paper help researchers attend to the emotional context of doctoral writing in the current university context. Critical studies of academic work and life are identified as a possible platform for the development of future doctoral education research, and the conceptual tool of “affective-politics” is advanced as a novel frame for approaching doctoral writing research. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3689 affect affective-politics doctoral writing doctoral education emotion neoliberalism eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-04-03 12 033 048 3676 article Sharla Berry sharlabe@usc.edu Aim/Purpose: Enrollment in online doctoral programs has grown over the past decade. A sense of community, defined as feelings of closeness within a social group, is vital to retention, but few studies have explored how online doctoral students create community. Background: In this qualitative case study, I explore how students in one online doctoral program created a learning community. Methodology: Data for the study was drawn from 60 hours of video footage from six online courses, the message boards from the six courses, and twenty interviews with first and second-year students. Contribution: Findings from this study indicate that the structure of the social network in an online doctoral program is significantly different from the structure of learning communities in face-to-face programs. In the online program, the doctoral community was more insular, more peer-centered, and less reliant on faculty support than in in-person programs. Findings: Utilizing a nested communities theoretical framework, I identified four subgroups that informed online doctoral students’ sense of community: cohort, class groups, small peer groups, and study groups. Students interacted frequently with members of each of the aforementioned social groups and drew academic, social, and emotional support from their interactions. Recommendations for Practitioners: Data from this study suggests that online doctoral students are interested in making social and academic connections. Practitioners should leverage technology and on-campus supports to promote extracurricular interactions for online students. Recommendation for Researchers: Rather than focus on professional socialization, students in the online doctoral community were interested in providing social and academic support to peers. Researchers should consider how socialization in online doctoral programs differs from traditional, face-to-face programs. Impact on Society: As universities increase online offerings, it is important to consider the issues that impact retention in online programs. By identifying the social structures that support online community, this study helps build knowledge around retention and engagement of online students. Future Research: Future research should continue to explore the unique social networks that support online students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3676 community online learning virtual classrooms cohort social network socialization eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-04-04 12 049 072 3671 article Amanda Rockinson-Szapkiw aszapkiw@liberty.edu Lucinda S. Spaulding lsspaulding@liberty.edu Rebecca Lunde rmfitch@liberty.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explain how Distance Education women EdD students who are mothers balanced and integrated their multiple identities (e.g., mother, student, professional) to persist. Background: It is well documented that parenting students experience higher levels of stress and pressure during their degree pursuit than their non-parenting counterparts. It is also well documented that doctoral attrition is a persistent problem across decades and disciplines, and examination of specific populations was necessary to better understand how to foster doctoral persistence. Methodology : Data were collected from 17 women via questionnaires, life maps, and interviews and were analyzed in accordance with grounded theory procedures. Contribution: This study generated a novel theoretical model to explain women EdD students’ academic identity progression from students to scholars and its intersection with other salient identities, especially mother, and the core sense of self in alignment with other identity theories. Findings: Academic identity development from student to research scholar is complex and challenging, but follows a unique progression that begins with gaining competence in research, followed by a confidence to conduct research. This positive attitude toward research is often shaped by an influential advisor or mentor, a relationship that enables a student mother to envision herself as a scholar and mother. However, it is a woman’s social conditions (e.g., supportive spouse, friends, or employer) that provide her the confidence and space to differentiate, develop, and intersect multiple identities, a process that allows for successful negotiation and integration of identities, and ultimately, persistence and attainment of the doctorate. Recommendations for Practitioners : Findings highlight the need for more women faculty role models in higher education. To increase the number of women faculty mentors in academia, program administrators can recruit, retain, and support and encourage parental visibility through developing structures and supports for faculty with families. Given the women candidates’ emphasis on stewardship, faculty should design coursework to allow students to intersect assignments with professional goals and practices, and support empirically and theoretically grounded dissertations aimed at not only solving problems of practice but also aimed at advocacy. Recommendation for Researchers: Research is needed with women doctoral candidates in other disciplines from other institutions and regions of the country, including those without children and individuals in non-heterosexual relationships. Impact on Society: This study is an important first step in better understanding female identity development through the doctoral process. Future Research: Themes uncovered in this research need further investigation. Ruptures in relationships were uncovered but not fully explored or saturated. More research is needed to understand the specific contexts and factors leading to both relationship fractures and the disruption in the academic identity trajectory. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3671 doctoral education persistence female identity academic identity distance education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-04-30 12 073 090 3727 article Esma Emmioglu Sarikaya esma.emmioglu@gmail.com Lynn McAlpine lynn.mcalpine@learning.ox.ac.uk Cheryl Amundsen camundsa@sfu.ca Aim/Purpose: This paper examined the balance and meaning of two types of experiences in the day-to-day activity of doctoral students that draw them into academia and that move them away from academia: ‘feeling like an academic and belonging to an academic community;’ and ‘not feeling like an academic and feeling excluded from an academic community.’ Background: As students navigate doctoral work, they are learning what is entailed in being an academic by engaging with their peers and more experienced academics within their community. They are also personally and directly experiencing the rewards as well as the challenges related to doing academic work. Methodology : This study used a qualitative methodology; and daily activity logs as a data collection method. The data was collected from 57 PhD students in the social sciences and STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) fields at two universities in the UK and two in Canada. Contribution: The current study moves beyond the earlier studies by elaborating on how academic activities contribute/hinder doctoral students’ sense of being an academic. Findings: The participants of the study generally focused on disciplinary/scholarly rather than institutional/service aspects of academic work, aside from teaching, and regarded a wide range of activities as having more positive than negative meanings. The findings related to both extrinsic and intrinsic factors that play important roles in students’ experiences of feeling (or not) like academics are elaborated in the study. Recommendations for Practitioners: Supervisors should encourage their students to develop their own support networks and to participate in a wide range of academic activities as much as possible. Supervisors should encourage students to self-assess and to state the activities they feel they need to develop proficiency in. Future Research: More research is needed to examine the role of teaching in doctoral students’ lives and to examine the cross cultural and cross disciplinary differences in doctoral students’ experiences. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3727 doctoral education academic culture workplace learning doctoral students’ academic activities eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-06-01 12 091 106 3754 article Solveig Cornér solveig.corner@helsinki.fi Erika Löfström erika.lofstrom@helsinki.fi Kirsi Pyhältö kirsi.pyhalto@helsinki.fi Aim/Purpose: Both the quality and the quantity of doctoral supervision have been identified as central determinants of the doctoral journey. However, there is a gap in our understanding of how supervision activities are associated with lack of wellbeing, such as burnout, and also to completion of the studies among doctoral students. Background: The study explored doctoral students’ perceptions of different aspects of supervision including the primary sources, frequency, expressed satisfaction and their interrelation with experienced stress, exhaustion and cynicism. Methodology: Altogether 248 doctoral students from three Finnish universities representing social sciences, arts and humanities, and natural and life sciences responded to an adapted version of a Doctoral Experience Survey. A combination of several measures was used to investigate the students’ experiences of supervision and burnout. Contribution: The results showed that students benefit from having several and different kinds of supervision activities. Various sources contribute not only to experiences of the doctoral journey and burnout, but also to the completion of the studies. Findings: Experienced lack of satisfaction with supervision and equality within the researcher community and a low frequency of supervision were related to experiences of burnout. Experiences of burnout were connected to students’ attrition intentions. Attrition intentions were related to source of supervision, the form of thesis, and inadequate supervision frequency. Frequency was related to both experience of burnout and likelihood of attrition. Recommendations for Practitioners: A recommendation developed from this research is to assist doctoral students with sufficient support, especially equality within the scholarly community and frequency of supervision. Further, greater emphasis could be put on group supervision and other collective forms of supervision. It is important that doctoral students develop networks both nationally and internationally. Recommendation for Researchers: A recommendation emanating from this research is to put greater emphasis on further investigation of the role of other predictors in burnout in order to enhance doctoral students’ well-being. Impact on Society: A better understanding of factors that promote lower attrition rates and enhance well-being for doctoral students is likely to lead to more efficient use of finacial and intellectual resources in academia and society more broadly. Future Research: Given the results of this study, qualitative interviews might be helpful in mapping out the dynamics that lead to attrition and to identify the mechanisms in the researcher community that support the doctoral students and enhance well-being in their doctoral journey. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3754 doctoral education supervision supervisory activities burnout eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-06-19 12 107 121 3761 article Seyum Getenet Seyum.Getenet@usq.edu.au Wendy M Goff wgoff@swin.edu.au Aim/Purpose: We show a new dimension to the process of using design-based research approach in doctoral dissertations. Background: Design-based research is a long-term and concentrated approach to educational inquiry. It is often a recommendation that doctoral students should not attempt to adopt this approach for their doctoral dissertations. In this paper, we document two doctoral dissertations that used a design-based research approach in two different contexts. Methodology : The study draws on a qualitative analysis of the methodological approaches of two doctoral dissertations through the lenses of Herrington, McKenney, Reeves and Oliver principles of design-based research approach. Contribution: The findings of this study add a new dimension to using design-based research approach in doctoral dissertations in shorter-term and less intensive contexts. Findings: The results of this study indicate that design-based research is not only an effective methodological approach in doctoral dissertations, but it also has the potential to guide future research direction beyond examination. Recommendations for Practitioners : The findings of this study demonstrate that the design based research approach could bring researchers and practitioners together regarding a common purpose to design context-based solutions to educational problems. Impact on Society: We show an alternative view and application of design-based research in doctoral dissertations. Also, we identify the benefits of this type of research for doctoral students after completing their dissertations. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3761 design based research doctoral study doctoral dissertation eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-07-11 12 123 135 3781 article Susi Peacock speacock@qmu.ac.uk Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this work is to develop more nuanced understandings of the PhD by publication, particularly raising awareness of the retrospective PhD by publication. The article aims to contribute to contemporary debates about the differing pathways to the attainment of doctoral study completion and the artifacts submitted for that purpose. It also seeks to support prospective graduate students and supervisors who are embarking upon alternative routes to doctoral accreditation. Background: The PhD is considered the pinnacle of academic study – highly cherished, and replete with deeply held beliefs. In response to changes in job markets, developments in the disciplines, and more varied student cohorts, diverse pathways to completion of this award have emerged, such as the PhD by publication (PhDP). A PhDP may either be prospective or retrospective. For the former, publications are planned and created with their contributions to the PhDP in mind. The retrospective PhD is assembled after some, or most, of the publications have been completed. The artifact submitted for examination in this case consists of a series of peer-reviewed academic papers, books, chapters, or equivalents that have been published or accepted for publication, accompanied by an over-arching narrative. The retrospective route is particularly attractive for professionals who are research-active but lack formal academic accreditation at the highest level. Methodology: This article calls upon a literature review pertaining to the award of PhDP combined with the work of authors who offer their personal experiences of the award. The author also refers to her candidature as a Scottish doctoral student whilst studying for the award of PhD by publication. Contribution: This work raises awareness of the PhDP as a credible and comparable pathway for graduate students. The article focuses upon the retrospective PhDP which, as with all routes to doctoral accreditation, has both benefits and issues for the candidate, discipline, and institution. Findings: The literature review identifies a lack of critical research into the PhDP, which mirrors the embryonic stage of the award’s development. Two specific anxieties are noted throughout the literature pertaining to the retrospective PhDP: first, issues for the candidate when creating and presenting an artifact submitted for examination; and, second, the diverse, and sometimes conflicting, advantages and challenges for the candidate, the subject specialism, and the institution of this pathway to doctoral accreditation. Recommendations for Practitioners: The advantages and challenges of the retrospective PhDP, for candidates, disciplines, and institutions are summarized especially pertaining to the artifact for submission, to guide conversations between supervisors and potential doctoral candidates. Impact on Society: It is hoped that this work will inform on-going conversations about pathways to PhD accreditation. Future Research: The article closes by proposing an emergent typology of the PhDP and by posing questions for those working in the area of doctoral study. Both seek to progress conversations about routes to doctoral accreditation. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3781 PhD by publication doctoral studies PhD by published works PhD by pub-lished papers eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-07-25 12 137 156 3789 article Sarah L Ferguson fergusons@rowan.edu Katrina A Hovey Katrina.A.Hovey@gmail.com Robin K Henson Robin.Henson@unt.edu Aim/Purpose: The purpose of the current study is to explore student perceptions of their own doctoral-level education and quantitative proficiency. Background: The challenges of preparing doctoral students in education have been discussed in the literature, but largely from the perspective of university faculty and program administrators. The current study directly explores the student voice on this issue. Methodology: Utilizing a sequential explanatory mixed-methods research design, the present study seeks to better understand doctoral-level education students’ perceptions of their quantitative methods training at a large public university in the southwestern United States. Findings: Results from both phases present the need for more application and consistency in doctoral-level quantitative courses. Additionally, there was a consistent theme of internal motivation in the responses, suggesting students perceive their quantitative training to be valuable beyond their personal interest in the topic. Recommendations for Practitioners: Quantitative methods instructors should emphasize practice in their quantitative courses and consider providing additional support for students through the inclusion of lab sections, tutoring, and/or differentiation. Pre-testing statistical ability at the start of a course is also suggested to better meet student needs. Impact on Society: The ultimate goal of quantitative methods in doctoral education is to produce high-quality educational researchers who are prepared to apply their knowledge to problems and research in education. Results of the present study can inform faculty and administrator decisions in doctoral education to best support this goal. Future Research: Using the student perspectives presented in the present study, future researchers should continue to explore effective instructional strategies and curriculum design within education doctoral programs. The inclusion of student voice can strengthen and guide future work in this area. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3789 quantitative proficiency doctoral education exploratory mixed-methods eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-08-09 12 157 173 3792 article Jouni A Peltonen jouni.peltonen@oulu.fi Jenna Vekkaila jenna.vekkaila@helsinki.fi Pauliina Rautio pauliina.rautio@oulu.fi Kaisa Haverinen kaisa.haverinen@iki.fi Kirsi Pyhältö kirsi.pyhalto@helsinki.fi Aim/Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to better understand the individual variations in supervisory and researcher community support among doctoral students by analyzing the social support profiles of Finnish doctoral students. The differences among the profiles, in terms of satisfaction with supervision, experienced burnout, time to candidacy and disciplinary background were also examined. Background: This study explores social support profiles and their association with the experienced burnout, satisfaction with supervision, drop-out intentions, disciplinary background, and form of dissertation among doctoral students by employing a person-oriented approach. Methodology: In total, 402 doctoral students from a Finnish university completed a Doctoral Experience survey. Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) was used to group doctoral students according to social support from supervisors and the researcher community. Contribution: The present study is among the first quantitative studies to explore doctoral student social support profiles and their association with burnout, drop-out intentions, and time to candidacy. It brings into focus the importance of supervisory and researcher community support as one of the most crucial assets of doctoral education in researcher communities. Findings: Two social support profiles, a) sufficient support from supervisor and researched community, and b) insufficient support from both of these, were identified. Further investigation suggested that the doctoral students who received sufficient support were less likely to suffer from burnout and were less likely to develop drop-out intentions than students who received insufficient support from their supervisor and the researcher community. Recommendations for Practitioners: A recommendation deriving from this research is to identify students at risk as early as possible and assist them with sufficient support. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3792 doctoral education supervision burnout satisfaction drop-out intentions eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-08-17 12 175 195 3790 article Annabella Sok Kuan Fung annabella.fung@monash.edu Jane Southcott jane.southcott@monash.edu Felix L. C. Siu flcsiu@hku.hk Aim/Purpose: It aimed at investigating the motives and challenges of 15 mature-aged doctoral students at two education faculties in Australian and Asian contexts. Background: This cross-border research collaboration investigated the first international higher-research forum between two education faculties in Hong Kong and Australia. Methodology: Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was used to explore partic-ipants’ self-reported experiences concerning the motivations and challeng-es of 15 mature-aged doctoral students. Contribution: The findings have important implications for global doctoral program de-velopment, international exchange forum organizations, intercultural capaci-ty building, academic enhancement and cross-border research collabora-tion. Findings: From interview data four overarching themes emerged: Taking calculated risks, Determination to succeed, Financial stress, and Balancing life and research. Recommendations for Practitioners: Recommendations include mentoring schemes, greater support for isolated students, and more opportunities for students to complete their PhD by publication. Recommendation for Researchers: More research is needed to investigate mature-aged students’ motives for embarking on study in diverse cultural contexts among different ethnic groups. Impact on Society: This study recognized the merits and potentials of mature students whose research contributes to their societies. Future Research: Future research directions include using multiple case study design, thus exploring diverse aspects of the existing sample in greater depth, as well as tapping into a new sample of students at risk of attrition at both faculties. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3790 mature-aged doctoral students motivation doctoral program design cross border research collaboration Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-09-27 12 197 217 3862 article Stefanie Benjamin sbenjam1@utk.edu James Williams jwill316@utk.edu Michelle A Maher mahermi@umkc.edu Aim/Purpose: This study explores PhD students’ transition into graduate school, which can be a challenging experience for many. Background: Using photographs and in-depth interviews, this study provides nuanced insight into influences on first-year PhD students’ lived experiences, with a specific focus on these students’ perceptions of doctoral student well-being. Methodology: Twenty-nine first-year biomedical science PhD students from 15 research institutions were asked to take photographs (Participant Produced Images) to illuminate significant influences on their research skill acquisition. The participant-produced photographs were discussed within in-depth phone interviews allowing for a deeper understanding of their lived experiences. Contribution: While students were asked to identify factors influencing their research skill acquisition, unexpectedly, what emerged from these data was students’ clear focus on their concern for their physical and mental well-being. The researchers posit that students’ ability to create a “work-life balance” is the foundation of doctoral student success, especially in the early years of doctoral training. Findings: Findings suggest that it is essential to create a PhD culture in which students feel valued, supported, and nourished, both physically and mentally, for them to develop into successful researchers, teachers, and mentors. Recommendations for Practitioners: Findings suggest that doctoral programs must support a more collaborative work environment for students and help novice students create a work life balance, perhaps by encouraging them to pursue stimulating or fun activities outside their school environment. It is imperative for doctoral students to be confident during their doctoral studies, as a lack of confidence tends to breathe life into poor work habits that stymie well-being and happiness. Recommendation for Researchers: If doctoral programs support a culture that facilitates student well-being, those programs will likely produce happier researchers and teachers who see scholarship and learning as fun. This positive mindset is likely to cascade down within their learning environments and foster positive and productive scholarship and instruction. This mindset and paradigm shift will set a significant precedence for future doctoral learners. Impact on Society: This study encourages and advances timely and “actionable” dialogue around how to better support doctoral students’ sense of well-being, especially in science disciplines. Future Research: Given study results, exploring mental health and well-being issues with faculty can help elevate mental health awareness in academia. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3862 PhD students well-being volunteer employed photography eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-11-20 12 219 249 3882 article Jason D Flora jasonflora1@email.phoenix.edu Aim/Purpose: Much has been written in academia about the meaningful relationship between doctoral students and their respective dissertation chairs. However, an often-overlooked benefit of the dissertation research process as a whole is its potential to professionally and personally transform the capacities of all concerned – the doctoral candidate, mentor/major professor, and committee. Background: From the exclusive perspective of the doctoral Chair/mentor, this qualitative study explores the potentially transformative power of the dissertation process as it relates to scholarly leadership. Methodology: In order to most accurately address the study’s research questions and to best capture the lived experiences of 4 purposefully selected doctoral chairs, each with varying degrees of dissertation guidance experience, the study was inten-tionally designed to leverage the phenomenological method. Data was collected through a series of in-person and phone interviews (each co-researcher was interviewed 3 times) and subsequently coded to determine emerging themes and categories relative to the co-researchers’ lived experiences as doctoral mentors. Contribution: Specific findings about what scholarly leadership means relative to doctoral student/mentor interactions, including how this pivotal relationship can be enhanced, support and contribute to current global higher education literature calling for increased understanding of and accountability within doctoral education as a whole. Such will further inform and enhance current mentoring best practices of graduate and undergraduate students alike. Findings: As a rich experiential education and learning opportunity, the essence of scholarly leadership features four essential elements: acting with authenticity, facilitating growth or change, holding vision, and acknowledging deficiency. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is recommended that practitioners of doctoral education, particularly at the dissertation Chair/mentor level, as well as institutionally, first genuinely value the results of this study, and, in turn, authentically and consistently implement such best practices in order to meaningfully enhance the quality of the overall doctoral experience. Recommendation for Researchers: Implicit below Impact on Society: Implementation of the study’s findings likewise has the potential to positively actualize the lives of doctoral mentors/major professors in their roles as educators, scholars, and life-long learners. Future Research: Further research is necessary to determine the relationship between scholarly research and each of its attendant essential elements: authenticity, facilitative behavior, vision, and deficiency. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3882 doctoral education PhD supervision scholarly leadership mentorship experi-ential learning eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2017-12-16 12 251 279 3903 article Gudrun Nyunt ghaider@umd.edu KerryAnn O'Meara komeara@umd.edu Kimberly A. Griffin kgriff29@umd.edu Alexandra Kuvaeva akuvaeva@umd.edu Tykeia N Robinson robinson@aacu.org Aim/Purpose: The purpose of our study was to gain a better understanding of the factors that contribute to graduate student sense of belonging and gain insights into differences in sense of belonging for different groups of students. Background: Sense of belonging, or the feeling that a person is connected to and matters to others in an organization, has been found to influence college student retention and success. Literature on sense of belonging has, however, focused primarily on undergraduate students and little is known about graduate students’ sense of belonging. Methodology: We conducted an exploratory, cross-sectional survey study of graduate students at four public doctoral and comprehensive universities in Maryland, USA. All four institutions were participating in the NSF-funded PROMISE program, which strives to support the retention and academic success of women and underrepresented minority (URM) graduate students. A total of 1,533 graduate students from these four institutions completed the survey. To analyze our data, we used Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to test direct and indirect effects of multiple latent variables (i.e., gender, race/ethnicity, STEM affiliation, critical mass of women, participation in the PROMISE program, sense of belonging) on each other. Contribution: Research found that sense of belonging influences graduate student retention and success. Thus, gaining a better understanding of the factors that influence graduate student sense of belonging can help improve retention and completion rates, an important issue as national seven-year completion rates have hovered around 44% in the United States. Completion rates have been even lower for women and URM students (i.e., African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians or other Pacific Islanders) compared to White students, making sense of belonging an important topic to study for these populations. Findings: We found that professional relationships matter most to graduate student sense of belonging. Professional relationships influenced graduate student sense of belonging more than reported microaggressions and microaffirmations, though they also played a role. We also found differences based on students’ identity or group membership. Overall, microaffirmations played a bigger role in female graduate student sense of belonging and the eco-system of non-STEM programs seemed to have more facilitators of sense of belonging than the ecosystem of STEM programs. Recommendations for Practitioners: We recommend that graduate programs think strategically about enhancing sense of belonging in ways appropriate to the distinct culture and nature of graduate education. For example, departments can make efforts to support sense of belonging through creating community-oriented peer networks of students, transparent policies, and access to information about resources and opportunities. Programs such as PROMISE can support the retention and success of women and URM graduate students, but aspects of these programs also need to be incorporated into graduate programs and departments. Impact on Society: Because graduate student sense of belonging has been found to impact stu-dents’ interest in careers in academia, fostering graduate student sense of be-longing could be a tool for improving pathways to the professoriate for groups that are typically underrepresented in academia such as women and racial or ethnic minorities. Increasing the number of women and URM faculty could, in turn, positively impact the support available to future URM students, which could positively influence future URM students’ sense of belonging. Future Research: Sense of belonging is an important area for future graduate education research and should be studied through survey research with a larger sample of U.S. students than the current study. Sense of belonging is relevant to graduate education worldwide. Future studies might explore graduate student sense of belonging in different national contexts and the role culture plays in shaping it. Moreover, changes in graduate student sense of belonging over the course of their program should be assessed. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3903 sense of belonging graduate education underrepresented minority students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-01-26 11 i iii 3400 article Michael Jones editor@ijds.org Printable Table of Contents for IJDS Volume 11, 2016 http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3400 IJDS Table of Contents International Journal of Doctoral Studies eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-01-26 11 001 014 3397 article Jennifer M Phelps jenny.phelps@ubc.ca This article draws on findings from a broad study on the influences of globalization on the experiences of international doctoral students at a large, research intensive Canadian university. It focuses specifically on these students’ lived experiences of change in their national identities and senses of belonging in a globalizing world. Using a qualitative, multiple case narrative approach, students’ experiences were collected via in-depth interview and analyzed through a theoretical lens of transnational social fields. The study found that international doctoral students experienced multiplicity, ambiguity, and flux in their senses of self, belonging, and educational purposes as they engaged in the transnational academic and social spaces of the university. Their narratives are revealing of the ways that international doctoral students consciously construct identities that traverse national affiliations as they engage in higher levels of mobility and interact with highly internationalized environments and networks. The study contributes insight into the transformative nature of international doctoral study and identifies specific ways in which processes of globalization influence the international doctoral student experience. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3397 international doctoral students transnationalism graduate education globalization identity belonging eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-01-26 11 015 034 2347 article Meghan J. Pifer mjpifer@widener.edu Vicki L. Baker vbaker@albion.edu Studies of doctoral education have included an interest not only in processes, structures, and outcomes, but also in students’ experiences. There are often useful recommendations for practice within individual examinations of the doctoral experience, yet there remains a need to strengthen the application of lessons from research to the behaviors of students and others engaged in the doctoral process. This paper is the first to synthesize research about doctoral education with the particular aim of informing practical strategies for multiple stakeholders. In this article, we summarize findings from a literature review of the scholarship about doctoral education from the past 15 years in a stage-based overview of the challenges of doctoral education. Our aim is to apply theory to practice through the systematic consideration of how research about doctoral education can best inform students and those who support them in the doctoral journey. We first present an overview of the major stages of doctoral education and related challenges identified in the research. We then consider key findings of that research to offer recommendations for doctoral students, faculty members, and administrators within and across stages. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2347 doctoral education doctoral student experiences faculty members administrators challenges strategies for success eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-01-27 11 035 061 3396 article Kay Devine kayd@athabascau.ca Karen Hunter karen.hunter@ualberta.ca The primary aim of this study was to better understand the antecedents of doctoral students’ emotional well-being, and their plans to leave academia. Based on past research, antecedents included departmental support, the quality of the supervisory relationship, and characteristics of the supervisory relationship. We used a mixed-methods study, and surveyed 186 doctoral students from nine countries. We found that supportive relationships, at the departmental and advisor level, reduced emotional exhaustion and intentions to leave academia, and that emotional exhaustion was positively related to doctoral students’ intentions to leave academia. Findings also indicated that advisor experience and frequency of meetings reduced students’ emotional exhaustion but did not affect their intentions to leave academia. Recommendations to reduce emotional exhaustion and to temper doctoral student attrition before and after degree completion are offered. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3396 doctoral students emotional exhaustion attrition support supervision eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-02-06 11 063 085 3403 article Guanglun Michael Mu michael_mu_0404@hotmail.com Ning Jia 37622847@qq.com Yongbin Hu huyb@mail.bnu.edu.cn Hilary Hughes h.hughes@qut.edu.au Xiaobo Shi 872270532@qq.com Muchu zhang 15201123779@139.com Jennifer Alford jh.alford@qut.edu.au Merilyn G Carter merilyn.carter@qut.edu.au Jillian Fox jillian.fox@acu.edu.au Matthew Flynn matt@wellgrounded.com.au Huanhuan Xia xhh@bnu.edu.cn Jennifer Duke jk.duke@qut.edu.au Workshops and seminars are widely-used forms of doctoral training. However, research with a particular focus on these forms of doctoral training is sporadic in the literature. There is little, if any, such research concerning the international context and participants’ own voices. Mindful of these lacunae in the literature, we write the current paper as a group of participants in one of a series of doctoral forums co-organised annually by Beijing Normal University, China and Queensland University of Technology, Australia. The paper voices our own experiences of participation in the doctoral forum. Data were drawn from reflections, journals, and group discussions of all 12 student and academic participants. These qualitative data were organised and analysed through Bourdieu’s notions of capital and field. Findings indicate that the doctoral forum created enabling and challenging social fields where participants accrued and exchanged various forms of capital and negotiated transient and complex power relations. In this respect, the sociological framework used provides a distinctive theoretical tool to conceptualise and analyse the benefits and tensions of participation in the doctoral forum. Knowledge built and lessons learned through our paper will provide implications and recommendations for future planning of, and participation in, the doctoral forum series and similar activities elsewhere. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3403 International doctoral forum Bourdieu capital field power relations autobiography eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-02-15 11 087 103 3404 article Antònia Darder antonia.darder@uib.es Martha L. Orellana morellana@unab.edu.co Adolfina Pérez fina.perez@uib.es Jesús Salinas jesus.salinas@uib.es A key aspect of the effective supervision of PhD research is the supervisor-student relationship. This interaction is affected by the characteristics and needs of students and institutional conditions, as well as the skills, attitudes, and roles of supervisors and their supervisory styles. When supervision is carried out at a distance, it entails an additional challenge, mainly concerning interaction. The purpose of this study is to improve the research process, supervision, and design of virtual environments in order to support this supervision. The study identifies the supervisory relationships that affect doctoral research conducted at a distance from the student’s academic institution. It also describes how students and their supervisors perceived the characteristics of supervision and the skills and attitudes students perceived in and expected from their supervisors. For data collection, semistructured interviews were used. The results indicate important differences between supervisors’ perceptions concerning their own role and students’ needs regarding supervision, and they demonstrate the importance of attending to student needs and, on the part of supervisors, exercising responsibility in the development of research competencies in students, as is the case of independence of criteria and autonomy. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3404 postgraduate research supervision distance supervision PhD supervision supervisory styles supervisor attitudes and roles supervisor-student relationship eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-03-19 11 105 125 3419 article Reuven Katz reuvenk@technion.ac.il This paper presents quantitative results of a comparative study evaluating the management skills of doctoral candidates working toward a PhD and additional information related to their lifestyles. We conducted a survey among enrolled doctoral candidates at five universities in Israel and three technological universities in Western Europe. 1013 Israeli candidates and 457 Western European candidates replied to our survey. In our analysis, we compared the answers of Israeli Science and Engineering candidates to those of Social Sciences and Humanities candidates; in addition, we compared the answers of Israeli Science and Engineering students to their Western European peers. Our analysis focused on finding significant patterns by comparing these groups of students. In order to identify such patterns, we analyzed each question using the Pearson chi-square test. The current study’s main finding is that the majority of candidates, regardless of their chosen academic field or the region where they study, have no training or expertise in managing a doctoral research project. Based on these findings, we suggest that all doctoral candidates be taught basic research-project management. We believe that such training will provide them with a powerful tool for better managing their research as they advance towards successful completion of their doctorate. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3419 Doctoral research management Adviser-candidate relationship Doctoral education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-03-22 11 127 146 3409 article Sydney Freeman Jr. hefseditor@gmail.com Crystal R Chambers chambersc@ecu.edu Karen Card Karen.card@usd.edu Currently the study of higher education has been referred to as a multidisciplinary field. Consensus is continuing to evolve regarding both what is considered the appropriate coursework and the foundational knowledgebase of this field. The study of higher education is maturing and has the potential to transition from being seen as a field to being respected as an academic discipline. The purpose of the present study is to investigate the status of the core curriculum in higher education doctoral programs from the perspective of program directors with programs that required the completion of standardized coursework prior to beginning a dissertation. We used online survey analytic techniques to query program directors about their EdD and PhD programs in higher education, credit hours, and curricular content. Our study confirms previous work finding that there is common agreement in the subject matter areas of organization, leadership, administration, and history. What our work adds is that there is a growing consensus among higher education doctoral programs about the position of higher education law and finance in the curricular core. In addition, we find there is a growing interest in public policy and community colleges over time, with a majority of EdD programs including instruction in these areas. Nevertheless, majoritarian agreement does not meet at a level wherein consensus can be inferred, especially within PhD programs where requirements are more varied across programs. In addition, while there is an increasing trend in the inclusion of multiculturalism in higher education doctoral programming, multiculturalism is not currently part of higher education’s core. We conclude with research and practice implications for doctoral programs in higher education as a field of study. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3409 Academic Curriculum Doctoral Education Higher Education as a Field of Study eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-03-28 11 147 162 3413 article Monica R Kerrigan kerriganm@rowan.edu Kimberly Walker Hayes kmwalker85@gmail.com Today’s educational practitioners are expected to know how to gather, analyze, and report on data for accountability purposes and to use that information to improve student outcomes. However, there is little understanding of how to support practitioners’ learning of and engagement with research and few studies on the research experiences of students enrolled in Doctorate of Education (EdD) programs. The success of students enrolled in Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) programs in conducting research has been found to be related to students’ self-efficacy and interest, but these concepts have not been explored with EdD students who are more likely to engage in applied research in their workplace than to create a research-focused career. This study sought to understand the self-efficacy and interest that EdD students enrolled in an Educational Leadership program have in research skills and tasks in order to improve research course offerings. Our findings with EdD students are consistent with existing research on PhD students regarding research self-efficacy but we did not observe significant changes in students’ interest over time. We suggest avenues for future study in light of current accountability reporting requirements for practitioners. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3413 Doctoral students practitioner-researcher research skills self-efficacy eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-05-03 11 163 183 3453 article Armand A Buzzelli buzzelli@rmu.edu Jason Draper draper@rmu.edu E. Gregory Holdan holdan@rmu.edu An Instructional Management and Leadership doctoral program (IML) incorporated the use of Twitter to examine what this looked like in practice. Did students actually use Twitter, and if so, how frequently, for what purpose(s), and were there differences between students on the pattern of use? Additionally, we sought to determine if Twitter is a legitimate instructional tool and if the use of Twitter can help mitigate feelings of isolation. Utilizing a descriptive case study design we implemented a survey methodology by distributing a modified version of the First Year Engagement Questionnaire to five IML cohorts. Active use of Twitter was infrequent. IML students used Twitter to gather news, follow experts, and find stimulating interactions. Active users and students who previously had a Twitter account were more positive about using Twitter. On average however, IML students were infrequent, passive Twitter users, aggregating information to supplement instruction. They did not use Twitter to reduce feelings of isolation. Female and male students used Twitter similarly. Younger students were more active than older students. Familiarity with the platform potentially moderates Twitter activity. Twitter has utility as a supplemental instructional tool but expanded use requires active student engagement. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3453 Higher Education Case Study Social Media Twitter Doctoral Cohort Accelerated program eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-06-04 11 185 203 3505 article Lucy Johnston lucy.johnston@canterbury.ac.nz Kaylene Sampson kaylene.sampson@canterbury.ac.nz Keith Comer keith.comer@vuw.ac.nz Erik Brogt erik.brogt@canterbury.ac.nz Provision of both high standards of thesis supervision and high quality research environments are required for doctoral candidates to flourish. An important component of ensuring quality provision of research resources is the soliciting of feedback from research students and the provision from research supervisors and institutions of timely and constructive responses to such feedback. In this manuscript we describe the use of locally developed survey instruments to elicit student feedback. We then demonstrate how actions taken in response to this student feedback can help establish a virtuous circle that enhances doctoral students’ research experiences. We provide examples of changes to supervisory practice and resource allocation based on feedback and show the positive impact on subsequent student evaluations. While the examples included here are local, the issues considered and the methods and interventions developed are applicable to all institutions offering research degrees. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3505 supervision; surveys; feedback; resource allocation; student evaluation eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-06-07 11 205 216 3486 article Samantha J Charlick samantha.charlick@mymail.unisa.edu.au Jan Pincombe jan.pincombe@unisa.edu.au Lois McKellar lois.mckellar@unisa.edu.au Andrea Fielder Andrea.Fielder@unisa.edu.au Selecting the most appropriate methodology for research as a doctoral student is one of the most important yet difficult decisions. Not only should the methodology suit the research question, it is important that it resonates with the philosophy of one’s discipline and produces needed results that will contribute to knowledge. Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) is an approach to qualitative enquiry. IPA seeks to explore how individuals make sense of their major life experiences and is committed to the detailed study of each particular case before moving to broader claims. In the field of midwifery, midwives work with women throughout pregnancy, childbirth and the early postnatal period, offering individualized care based on the unique needs of each woman. IPA aligns with this women-centered philosophy as it offers a methodological approach that considers the individual in a local context. By capturing context specific situations, IPA allows broad-based knowledge to be contextualized within a social and cultural context, producing relevant findings. Thus the access to IPA studies will enable midwives to better care for women and their families through understanding the experiences and perceptions of those in their scope of practice. This paper presents the theoretical framework leading to practical guidelines on how to con-duct a doctoral-level IPA study, as experienced by the first author. It also addresses the advantages and challenges around utilizing IPA, illustrated through examples from the doc-toral student’s study on the journey of exclusive breastfeeding in Australia. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3486 Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) doctoral studies qualitative research midwifery individualized care exclusive breastfeeding eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-06-30 11 217 226 3529 article Anthony A Pina apina@sullivan.edu Helen L MacLennan Helen.Maclennan@saintleo.edu Kenneth A Moran kmoran@sullivan.edu Patrick F Hafford haffordp@wit.edu Is the Doctor of Business Administration (D.B.A) a viable degree option for those wishing a career in academe? The D.B.A. degree is often considered to be a professional degree, in-tended for business practitioners, while the Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degree is por-trayed as the degree for preparing college or university faculty. Conversely, many academic programs market their D.B.A. programs to future academicians. In this study, we investigat-ed whether the D.B.A. is, in fact, a viable faculty credential by gathering data from univer-sity catalogs and doctoral program websites and handbooks from 427 graduate business and management programs to analyze the terminal degrees held by 6159 faculty. The analysis indicated that 173 institutions (just over 40% of the total) employed 372 faculty whose ter-minal degree was the D.B.A. This constituted just over 6% of the total number of faculty. Additionally, the program and faculty qualification standards of the six regional accrediting agencies and the three programmatic accrediting agencies for business programs (AACSB, IACBE, and ACBSP) were analyzed. Results indicated that all these accrediting agencies treated the D.B.A. and Ph.D. in business identically and that the D.B.A. was universally considered to be a valid credential for teaching business at the university level. Suggestions for future research are also offered. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3529 Doctor of Business Administration doctoral degrees faculty credentials regional accredita-tion programmatic accreditation teaching eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-07-23 11 227 241 3541 article Parveen Ali parveen.ali@sheffield.ac.uk Roger Watson r.watson@hull.ac.uk Katie Dhingra K.J.Dhingra@leedsbeckett.ac.uk There is a need for research exploring postgraduate research students’ expectations from research supervisors, the characteristics of effective student-supervisor relationships, and the opinions of students and supervisors about research supervision. We also need instruments to explore the student-supervisor relationship. The present study investigated postgraduate research students’ and research supervisors’ views about postgraduate research supervision and the student supervisor relationship. It also reports on factor analysis conducted to identify the underlying dimensions in their views about postgraduate research supervision and the student supervisor relationship. Such information can be used to develop strategies to promote student-supervisor relationships and enhance the student experience. Data were collected using an online questionnaire with 30 Likert-scale statements from 131 postgraduate research students and 77 supervisors. Following exploratory factor analysis, a three factor model consisting of leaderhip, knowledge, and support was extracted. Results indicate that students and supervisors agree about the attributes of effective supervision. Both supervisors and students consider that a supervisor should have an interest in the student’s research. The supervisor must provide timely and constructive feedback and should help the student to manage time effectively. Students and supervisors believe a supervisor should help the students where limitations and learning needs are identified. Students believe supervisors must encourage students to work independently and use opportunities to present their work. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3541 supervision; effective supervisor; research students’ expectation; supervisors’ expectation; PhD supervision; opinion eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-08-11 11 243 267 3542 article Adeola Bamgboje Adeola.Bamgboje@utas.edu.au Michelle Ye Yaqian.Ye@utas.edu.au Helen Almond Helen.Almond@utas.edu.au Songlak Sakulwichitsintu Songlak.Sakulwichitsintu@utas.edu.au This is a report on a qualitative investigation into the challenges and solutions for Information Systems PhD candidature in Australia by conducting a three-phase research process. Information Systems doctoral theses approved within the past 10 years in Australia were identified in three areas of research, using structured evidence-based search and review methods. This was followed by two focus groups. The first focus group provided a forum where participants engaged and contributed by sharing and reflecting on experiences during their candidature. The data generated was thematically analyzed. The second focus group provided a forum to compare, contrast, and combine findings from the first focus group and the theses review. This was then conceptually organized into a SWOT framework for discussion. The findings imply that there is a need, not only for an inclusive candidature research pathway now provided by most Australian universities, but also an integrated research and personal support pathway. The investigation resulted in defining a conceptual framework of value in Australia and internationally, which acknowledges and bridges the academic-practice gap, offering a considerable step for future PhD candidature investment. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3542 PhD candidature doctoral students research pathway information systems SWOT analysis eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-08-28 11 269 284 3545 article Floralba Arbelo Marrero farbelo@albizu.edu Doctoral student retention remains a challenge in higher education with an average attrition rate of 50%. This study focuses on analyzing pre-entry variables of admission for 81 doctoral students admitted to a doctoral program in psychology to determine whether significant associations existed between specific variables in the graduated and withdrawn groups in this cohort with over 48% Hispanic doctoral student representation. Using various quantitative analyses, findings demonstrate that the variables of GPA, ranking of ability, marital status, employment, and pre-requisites completed prior to entry into the doctoral program are each indicators of success for doctoral students. Specifically, a higher GPA, a higher ranking of ability, single marital status, part-time versus full-time employment, and the more pre-requisites completed before entering a doctoral program indicate a higher likelihood of doctoral program completion. Findings can be used as markers in the admission process to develop support and curricular interventions that will sustain doctoral students throughout the course of their doctoral studies. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3545 Doctoral Student Retention Hispanic Doctoral Students Retention Hispanic Serving Institutions Attrition Doctoral Completion Quantitative Pre-Entry Variables eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-09-01 11 285 304 3544 article Veronika Paksi paksi.veronika@tk.mta.hu Beata Nagy beata.nagy@uni-corvinus.hu Gábor Király kiraly.gabor@pszfb.bgf.hu In spite of tremendous efforts, women are still under-represented in the field of science. Post-graduate education and early tenure track employment are part of the academic career establishment in research and development during periods that usually overlap with family formation. Though women tend to leave science mainly after obtaining their PhD, and the timing of motherhood plays a vital role in a successful research career, qualitative data on this life period are scarce. Our paper focuses on how the normative and institutional contexts shape female PhD engineering students’ family plans. The research was based on intersections of life course and risk and uncertainty theories. Using qualitative interviews we explored how contradicting social norms of childbearing cause tensions in postgraduate students’ lives, and how the different uncertainties and risks permeate young researchers’ decisions on early life events. We concluded that, despite the general pattern of delaying motherhood among higher educated women, these students struggle against this postponement, and they hardly have any good options to avoid risk stemming from uncertainties and from some characteristics of studying and working in engineering. Find-ings of this research may call the attention of stakeholders to possible intervention points. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3544 PhD timing of motherhood childbearing women uncertainty life course engineering eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-09-11 11 305 321 3561 article Jay R Avella JayAvella@email.Phoenix.edu Among the typical dissertation research designs, one particular design that is slowly gaining acceptance is that of the Delphi Method. Using a panel of experts to achieve consensus in solving a problem, deciding the most appropriate course of action, or establishing causation where none previously existed, particularly in areas of business or education research, are uniquely ideal to employment of the design. This article reviews the origins of the method, provides detail on assembling the panel and executing the process, gives examples of conventional and modified Delphi designs, and summarizes the inherent advantages and disadvantages that the design brings. The article closes with some advice for those contemplating its use in their dissertations. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3561 Delphi consensus dissertation research problem-solving expert panel critique eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-09-26 11 323 339 3564 article Suzanne Franco suzanne.franco@wright.edu New qualitative research methods continue to emerge in response to factors such as renewed interest in mixed methods, better understanding of the importance of a researcher’s philosophical stance, as well as the increased use of technology in data collection and analysis, to name a few. As a result, those facilitating research methods courses must revisit content and instructional strategies in order to prepare well-informed researchers. Approaches range from paradigm to pragmatic emphasis. This descriptive case study of a doctoral seminar for novice qualitative researchers describes the intricacies of the syllabus of a pragmatic approach in a constructivist/social constructionist learning environment. The purpose was to document the delivery and faculty/student interactions and reactions. Noteworthy were the contradictions and frustrations in the delivery as well as in student experiences. In the end, student input led to seminal learning experiences. The confirmation of the effectiveness of a constructivist/social constructivist learning environment is applicable to higher education pedagogy in general. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3564 qualitative research methods pragmatism researcher worldviews conceptual frameworks research model eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-10-30 11 341 365 3586 article Shan Simmonds shan.simmonds@nwu.ac.za Petro Du Preez petro.dupreez@nwu.ac.za In South Africa four key policy discourses underpin doctoral education: growth, capacity, efficiency, and quality discourses. This article contributes to the discourse on quality by engaging with quality assurance from the perspective of the decision makers and implementers of macro policy (national), meso (institutional), and micro (faculty/departmental) levels. We explore the perceptions that members of higher degree committees in the field of Education have of the quality assurance of doctoral education. Our data are drawn from a national survey questionnaire completed by these respondents at all public South African institutions that offer a doctorate in Education. The insights gained reside within four categories: positionality, policy, programmes, and people (stakeholders). Thereafter, we problematised the main results using academic freedom in a mode 3 knowledge production environment as a lens, which revealed thought provoking directions for future research about doctoral education. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3586 higher degree committee members quality assurance doctoral education academic freedom mode 3 knowledge production higher education South Africa eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-11-01 11 367 382 3590 article Lucy Johnston lucy.johnston@newcastle.edu.au Alexander MacKenzie alexander.mackenzie@canterbury.ac.nz Thomas M Wilson thomas.wilson@canterbury.ac.nz This article describes the experiences and outcomes for 761 doctoral students enrolled at the University of Canterbury who had their research disrupted by a magnitude 6.2 earthquake on 22nd February 2011. We describe the measures that were put in place to assist the students to continue their studies through continued disruption from aftershocks, dislocation, building demolition and remediation, equipment failure, and limited access to resources. We used data from a number of University databases and student surveys to assess the impact of the disruption on student outcomes, considering measures such as completion rates and times, attrition rates, and student satisfaction. Overall the findings showed little impact of the disruption on completion rates or student satisfaction and only a slight increase in completion times. We consider the impact of additional factors, such as temporary relocation, and draw attention to key lessons learned that may assist those confronted with similar situations in the future. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3590 doctoral studies doctoral completion attrition disasters supervision eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-11-20 11 383 402 3603 article Sarah R Booth s.booth@ecu.edu.au Margaret K Merga M.Merga@murdoch.edu.au Saiyidi Mat Roni saiyidi@yahoo.com Many PhD candidates bring with them a wealth of knowledge and skills; however, these may not sufficiently prepare candidates to work with high autonomy on a project with often limited interaction with the wider research community. A peer-mentor program model, in which a mentor delivers dyadic and group support to higher degree by research students from different disciplines and backgrounds, has the potential to enhance candidates’ knowledge and skills. However, the mentors themselves can experience significant advantages, as peer-mentoring can also have a positive effect on the mentors’ research experience. In order to further understanding of the potential benefits of peer-mentoring for mentors, three researchers explore their experiences as peer-mentors through an autoethnographic framework. Through discussing their personal experiences as peer-mentors, the researchers identified a range of benefits for themselves. These benefits in-volved finding that peer- mentoring enhanced their own learning, fostered reflective practice, and provided current tertiary teaching and research support experience. Peer mentoring also gave them broad exposure to a breadth of disciplines, theories, and methods; provided project management insights; created opportunities for professional networking; supported their social needs; and gave them invaluable insight into other candidate/supervisor relationships. Their role in a peer-mentor model has shaped their experiences as PhD candidates and also informed their decisions after graduation. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3603 autoethnography peer-mentor reflective practice teaching as learning HDR experience eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-11-26 11 403 417 3609 article Ethan J Allen eallen@fau.edu Roberta K. Weber rweberfau@gmail.com American society faces complex educational issues which impact many facets of its national interests. Institutions of higher education are granting doctoral degrees to educational leaders, but it is not known to what extent their dissertation topics are aligned with both longstanding and critical issues in education. Using a theoretical framework synthesizing Paul and Elder’s critical thinking model and Kuhlthau’s information seeking process, this study examines a set of education doctoral dissertation topical selections and categorizes them by general themes in relationship to many of the recognized educational issues in the United States. Investigators categorized dissertations from four departments within the College of Education of their home institution. The dataset, retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, consisted of 231 documents published between 2005 and 2014. Through an inter-rater process examining dissertation titles, abstracts, and keywords, the dissertations were assigned critical issue themes culled from nine editions of a college text, and then categorized under a broader topical scheme situated within a well-used educational research website. Findings indicated that most dissertations concentrated in studies that researched problems and issues within schools. Further, some of the issues considered longstanding were not studied by dissertation authors within the sample. For example, privatization of schools and classroom discipline and justice were not selected for study. Findings also suggest new directions for those responsible for dissertation supervision and topic selection. The study adds to the literature on dissertation topic selection that addresses existing educational issues. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3609 dissertation topics EdD and PhD dissertations critical issues in education doctoral supervision selection of dissertation topics eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-12-09 11 419 439 3618 article Joanna A Gilmore joanna.gilmore1981@gmail.com Annie M Wofford wofforda@umkc.edu Michelle A Maher mahermi@umkc.edu Doctoral attrition consistently hovers around 50% with relevant literature identifying several mediating factors, including departmental culture, student demographics, and funding. To advance this literature, we interviewed 38 graduate faculty advisors in science, engineering, or mathematics disciplines at a research-extensive university to capture their perceptions of factors supporting graduate student success. Using a constant-comparison method, we found that faculty perceptions aligned within three major categories, termed: motivated student behaviors, formative student learning experiences, and essential student knowledge and skills. Student motivation was most prominently represented in findings. This aligns with prior studies showing that faculty tend to identify the cause of graduate student failure as lying within the students themselves and rarely discuss their role or the department’s contribution to attrition. Thus findings offer an opportunity to reflect and improve upon practice. The study also highlights actions graduate students can take to increase success, such as developing collegial relationships and early involvement in research and scholarly writing. We encourage graduate faculty advisors and others to identify ways to help graduate students overcome common obstacles to enduring and succeeding within graduate programs. Faculty perceptions are also examined by discipline and faculty rank, and directions for future research are offered. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3618 faculty mentorship graduate student development graduate student motivation eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-12-12 11 441 465 3620 article Laurie Stevahn stevahnl@seattleu.edu Jeffrey B Anderson janderso@seattleu.edu Tana L Hasart hasartt@seattleu.edu Community-based research (CBR) is an advanced form of academic service-learning through which university students, faculty, and community organizations collaborate to conduct inquiry projects aimed at producing social change. Despite its potential for advancing learning in graduate studies, little research exists on CBR implementations or outcomes in doctoral programs. This study examined the effectiveness of integrating CBR into an educational leadership doctorate across three consecutive cohorts in which students worked in teams to conduct CBR projects, each in partnership with a community organization pursuing a social justice initiative. A mixed-methods developmental case study design produced quantitative and qualitative data on students’ perceived effectiveness of cooperative/collaborative interaction and team decision making in CBR, experience with and learning from CBR in the education doctorate, and development of CBR competencies. Triangulated results overall revealed students’ (a) positive attitudes toward CBR, (b) enhanced understanding of and commitment to CBR and how to conduct it, (c) expanded understanding and application of technical research skills, (d) growth in coopera-tive/collaborative and conflict resolution skills, and (e) development of leadership project management skills. These findings may assist faculty in planning innovative, authentic, applied, professional training in the education doctorate capable of advancing students’ graduate inquiry skills while also enhancing competencies for successful leadership in the field. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3620 community-based research academic service-learning doctoral student development education doctorate educational leadership cooperative learning experiential learning pro-ject-based learning eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2016-12-12 11 467 486 3621 article Christelle Devos christelle.devos@uclouvain.be Gentiane Boudrenghien gentiane.boudrenghien@uclouvain.be Nicolas Van der Linden nivdlind@ulb.ac.be Mariane Frenay mariane.frenay@uclouvain.be Assaad Azzi aazzi@ulb.ac.be Benoit Galand benoit.galand@uclouvain.be Olivier Klein oklein@ulb.ac.be The purpose of the present study is to explore the “misfits” occurring between doctoral students and their supervisors. More precisely, we investigate the types of incongruences that occur, whether and how they are regulated and their consequences on students’ outcomes. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 21 former PhD students (8 completers and 13 non-completers). Results show that, when facing a misfit, PhD students either (1) learn to live with it and/or turn to alternate resources, (2) suffer from it without being able to address the problem with their supervisor, (3) address the issue with their supervisor and try to solve it in various ways, or (4) are unable to address the issue because it reached a point of no return. Further, types of misfit regulation are likely to have an influence on students’ motivation and engagement. These results are discussed in the light of person-environment fit, coping, emotional regulation, and conflict management frameworks. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3621 PhD students doctoral attrition supervisor support fit coping eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-01-03 10 i iii 2090 article Michael Jones editor@ijds.org Printable table of contents for the International Journal of Doctoral Studies, Volume 10, 2015 http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2090 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-01-03 10 001 017 2089 article Tianlan Wei ewei@colled.msstate.edu Alime N Sadikova alime.sadikova@ttu.edu Lucy Barnard-Brak lucy.barnard-brak@ttu.edu Eugene W. Wang eugene.wang@ttu.edu Dilshod Sodikov denis.sodikov87@gmail.com This study explores the attitudinal and motivational factors underlying graduate students’ attitudes towards team research. Guided by the Theory of Planned Behavior, we hypothesize that attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control are three major determinants of graduate students’ intentions to conduct team research. An instrument was developed to measure the influences of these factors on students’ intentions and relevant scholarly productivity. A total of 281 graduate students from a large, comprehensive university in the southwest United States participated in the survey. Descriptive statistics reveal that around two-thirds of graduate students have no co-authored manuscripts submitted for publication since they started graduate school. Factor analyses validated the factor structure of the instrument, and the results of Structural Equation Modeling show that (a) graduate students’ attitudes towards team research have a positive correlation with their attitudes towards individual research; (b) attitude towards team research, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control, along with students’ discipline/major areas and classification, account for 58% of the variance in the intention to conduct team research; and (c) subjective norm appears to be the most influential factor in the model, followed by attitude; while perceived behavioral control is not of much importance. These findings provide implications for academic departments and programs to promote graduate students’ team research. Specifically, creating a climate for collaborative research in academic programs/disciplines/universities may work jointly with enhancing students’ appraisals of such collaborations. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2089 graduate student team research scholarly productivity the theory of planned behavior attitude subjective norm perceived behavioral control intention eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-01-12 10 019 037 2095 article Doug Stenstrom dstenst@calstatela.edu Mathew Curtis mcurtis@usc.edu Ravi Iyer raviiyer@usc.edu What predicts academic success during graduate school? What are the experiences of graduate students in terms of happiness, stress level, relationships in the program, and feelings of autonomy/competence? Responses from 3,311 graduate students from all psychological disciplines in the US and Canada were collected to answer questions involving (1) the relationship between student-level variables and department/school rankings (US News & World Report, Carnegie Foundation, National Research Council), (2) the determinants of important student-level variables such as number of publications, posters, and life satisfaction, and (3) examining the variables year-by-year in the program to explain changes over time at different points in the graduate career. Results reveal the degree to which certain aspects of higher ranked departments/schools impact student achievements such as number of publications and teaching experience. The results also reveal a unique year-by-year progression including a consistent decrease of happiness for every year in graduate school. While the findings were collected in psychology, the answers to these questions may resonate with graduate students across disciplines that are experiencing similar forces that characterize the graduate school experience. The results can also inform current conversations about the direction of higher education and the value of the graduate school experience. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2095 department rankings students publications happiness life satisfaction eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-01-19 10 039 055 2096 article Pia Bøgelund pb@plan.aau.dk In many Western countries, higher education has experienced a cultural change as a result of increased budgetary constraints, calls for greater accountability, and the greater competition for students. This development has had a profound influence on the working conditions of academic staff and on knowledge production in general at universities. The education of PhD students is no exception. However, little research has been carried out in regard to the implications of these changes. In particular, the way the supervisors think and react has not been explored. What do supervisors think about educating PhD students in today’s university context? And how and to what extent do they modify their practice based on that understanding? This article seeks to qualify, illustrate, and discuss these questions based on an interview study among twelve experienced supervisors at the Faculty of Engineering and Science at Aalborg University in Denmark. The data show that it has become more complex to be a PhD supervisor. Three knowledge production perspectives are identified, each embracing a specific university agenda: (1) High quality research; (2) Economically viable and efficient research; and (3) Internationally adapted research. Currently, the second perspective is dominant in the understanding and practice of supervisors – to some extent at the expense of the two other agendas. Finally, the consequences of this are discussed. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2096 PhD supervision Practice of PhD supervisors Knowledge production Doctoral student education Working conditions for academic staff eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-01-22 10 057 077 2102 article Patricia L. Hardre hardre@ou.edu Shannon Hackett shannonhackett@ou.edu Gaps between expectations and actual educational experience may influence motivation, learning and performance. The graduate college experience (GCE) is shrouded in myth and legend that may create unrealistic expectations, while its reality includes elements of politics, economics and organizational psychology. This study examined 1,629 present and former graduate students’ perceptions of what their graduate school experiences should and did include. The sample was analyzed as a whole and also divided and tested for subgroup differences by: degree types (masters and doctorate); at four different points along their degree paths (entrance, midpoint, exit, alumni); and by disciplinary subgroups (hard sciences, social sciences, arts, interdisciplinary). Statistically significant differences were found between subgroups on perceptions of what the GCE “should” and “does” include separately. Further, within-groups comparison of what the graduate college experience “should” and “does” include showed significant differences for the whole group and all subgroups. In addition, the differences between graduate students’ expected and actual experience (should - does) negatively predicted overall satisfaction with their graduate experience. These contrasts of students’ actual and expected graduate experiences present potential to explain some of graduate students’ dissatisfaction and non-completion, and offer information to support program improvement and retention of graduate students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2102 Graduate education graduate school expectations attrition graduate student satisfaction program improvement eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-01-26 10 079 092 2104 article Chandra Bowden chbowden@ufl.edu Sebastian Galindo-Gonzalez sgalindo@ufl.edu As Internet usage becomes more commonplace, researchers are beginning to explore the use of email interviews. Email interviews have a unique set of tools, advantages, and limitations, and are not meant to be blind reproductions of traditional face-to-face interview techniques. Email interviews should be implemented when: 1) researchers can justify email interviews are useful to a research project; 2) there is evidence that the target population will be open to email interviewing as a form of data collection; and 3) the justification of the email interview supports the researchers’ theoretical perspective. The objective of this study was to develop an email interviewing methodology. As with other forms of qualitative interviewing, it is important that the researcher: 1) identifies constraints; 2) adequately prepares for the interview; 3) establishes rapport; 4) asks appropriate questions; 5) actively listens; and 6) ends the email interview appropriately. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2104 Millennials email interviewing Gadamerian Hermeneutical Phenomenology mixed-use communities eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-02-16 10 093 110 2111 article Nancy Leech nancy.leech@ucdenver.edu Carolyn A. Haug carolyn.haug@ucdenver.edu Instruction in research methods, particularly statistical training, is an essential requirement for most higher education advanced-degree students. However, results from the institutional survey reported here demonstrate that many faculty in schools of education still do not require or offer a variety of research and analysis courses to provide this training. This article will explore graduate-level requirements for research methods and data analysis courses in schools of education across the United States. Two surveys, one asking questions about research methods courses and one about statistics courses, were distributed through listservs to faculty at institutions of higher education. Twenty-eight responses, representing 28 institutions, were collected for the research course survey and 19 responses, representing 19 institutions, were collected for the statistics course survey. The number of courses offered and required and the number of credit hours for them are presented for Master’s, Ed.D., and Ph.D. students. From this study, it is evident that several universities do not offer or require many research methods or statistics courses for education graduate students. The authors intend that this information will assist faculty in rethinking what coursework is necessary to educate successful graduate students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2111 research courses; statistics courses; requirements in doctoral programs; requirements in Master’s programs eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-02-16 10 111 128 2112 article Lynn McAlpine research@learning.ox.ac.uk Mahima Mitra Mahima.Mitra@spi.ox.ac.uk Doctoral students have often been described as apprentices engaged in workplace learning. Further, assumptions are frequently made in the literature about the common nature of such learning experiences, e.g., in the sciences, research-related practices are learned in a lab within the supervisor’s program and team. A few recent studies of the science doctoral experience have challenged this view arguing such assumptions may overlook considerable variation. This longitudinal study, using frequently completed activity logs and an interview, reports on the research-related practices of twelve UK science doctoral students. The analysis, particularly of the logs, challenged some of the literature-based assumptions: students often chose to work in institutional offices, non-institutional sites and their homes rather than in labs; they did not necessarily engage regularly with a research team, nor were they necessarily engaged in a project directly linked to their supervisors’. That students chose not to work in traditionally assumed places suggests the importance of attending to: a) student agency, b) how research-related practices may be changing, and c) how sites of doctoral learning might need to be reconceived. As well, the findings suggest the value of non-traditional data collection methods in capturing variation in experience. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2112 Science doctoral experience research-related practices workplace learning PhD workplaces eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-02-16 10 129 142 2113 article Cathy M. Littlefield clittlefield@peirce.edu Laura M. Taddei taddeil@neumann.edu Meghan E. Radosh meradosh@widener.edu With doctoral completion rates hovering around 50%, students, faculty and institutions are seeking methods for improvement. This narrative inquiry examined the impact of collaboration and peer to peer experiences on doctoral completion of three peers in a part-time doctoral program. Prior to this inquiry, minimal research existed on the impact of peer to peer support and collaboration on doctoral completion; therefore, the three peer authors defined, described, and recommended ways to encourage organic collaboration. The authors’ defined organic collaboration as a naturally-formed dynamic peer to peer support group, built on individual strengths and differences, while focused on a common goal. Themes found during the narrative inquiry included the identification of a common goal, amicable group dynamics, peer to peer support, and intentional relational learning. The peer authors provided practical knowledge on ways students, faculty and higher education institutions can benefit from encouraging and supporting organic collaboration. This narrative inquiry demonstrated the long-term benefits of peer to peer support and collaboration that led to scholarly, professional, and personal support. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2113 Peer to peer support part-time doctoral completion organic collaboration intentional relational learning narrative inquiry group dynamics eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-05-22 10 143 166 2251 article Mark Boadu mark.boadu2012@gmail.com Mohamed Karim Sorour karim.sorour@northumbria.ac.uk Grounded theory is a powerful and rigorous theory building methodology that has attracted considerable interest in business research; however, it is a challenging endeavour especially for novice researchers and in particular at the doctoral level. Although several researchers have attempted to clarify the cannons of various grounded theory approaches, still there is a shortage in guidance for doctoral students who wish to apply grounded theory for their studies. Using an example from a grounded theory business doctoral thesis, this paper provides a guide on the research design and utilisation of the Straussian grounded theory at doctoral level. In doing so, the paper discusses the rationale, features, and benefits of grounded theory. Using an example from corporate governance research, the paper illustrates how the procedures of data analysis (coding), theoretical memoing, and theoretical sampling are applied to systematically generate a grounded theory. Finally, the paper discusses major challenges to utilising grounded theory and how these can be addressed by doctoral researchers. This paper provides a clear and pragmatic exposition that can be useful to guide doctoral researchers who are interested in utilizing the Straussian approach of grounded theory in their studies. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2251 Research methodology Qualitative Research Grounded Theory corporate governance Doctoral research eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-05-29 10 167 185 2256 article rohan nethsinghe rohan.nethsinghe@rmit.edu.au Jane Southcott jane.southcott@monash.edu Increasingly doctoral candidates are attempting to complete a thesis by publication. This format varies between universities but there are common issues particularly in terms of progression, planning and timing. There are both advantages and difficulties involved in undertaking a thesis in this format. Our discussion of the supervisor/candidate partnership is framed within the requirements of a tight journal publishing agenda. Different universities have different requirements about the number of published papers to be included, the extent of candidate’s contribution as sole or joint author, the framing of the research as a unified thesis, presentation, and examination. The decision to attempt a thesis by publication must be taken early and data collection may need to be completed early. Articles then need to be written, polished, submitted, reviewed, revised and, hopefully, accepted. The thesis by publication is a juggling act between maintaining coherence and focusing on publishable segments. It is also a dialogue between supervisor and candidate involving the resolution of sometimes conflicting demands. Employing Cognitive Apprenticeship theory we present a shared autophenomenography that chronicles our doctoral journey that led to a successful thesis by publication. The findings are discussed under thematic headings: Logistics, Cognitive Apprenticeship in Action, and Building Trust. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2256 Doctoral supervision thesis with publication cognitive apprenticeship mentoring building trust shared autophenomenography eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-06-09 10 187 198 2267 article Suzanne Painter suzanne.painter@asu.edu Christopher M Clark cmclark8@gmail.com There are relentless calls for innovation in higher education programs in response to media and policy-makers attention to such concerns as instructional quality, relevance to employment, costs, and time-to-degree. At the same time, the individual course remains the primary unit of instruction and there is little evidence of faculty development strategies to assist with changing core instructional practices. We faced that dilemma when we led an innovative doctoral program in educational leadership. Soon after beginning, we implemented a regular meeting of all faculty members teaching and advising in the program to address upcoming events and review student progress. Our retrospective analysis indicates that these meetings evolved as a practical and sustainable framework for faculty development in support of deep change for instructional practices. Here we describe the challenge of faculty development for change and draw lessons learned from our four years of leadership centered on experiential learning and community sense-making. We hope that program leaders who aspire to promote faculty development in conjunction with graduate program implementation will find these lessons useful. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2267 Faculty development doctoral programs reform innovation leadership eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-07-11 10 199 216 2275 article Kimberly A. Griffin kgriff29@umd.edu Marcela Muniz marcela.muniz@gmail.com While researchers, institutional leaders, and policymakers have made significant progress towards increasing undergraduate student diversity in the United States, diversity in graduate education has been less often studied and a more challenging goal on which to make progress. This qualitative study explores the roles and work of graduate diversity officers (GDOs) in student recruitment activities with a focus on how race and issues of diversity manifest and influence this process. Interviews with fourteen GDOs at 11 different research universities in the United States highlight the phases in the graduate recruitment process, the manner in which diversity is considered at each stage, and GDOs’ perceptions of their ability to shape this process. Findings suggest that GDOs are important institutional agents in diversification efforts; however, faculty engagement and broad institutional commitment are required to increase diversity in graduate education due to GDOs’ often limited involvement in the admissions stage of the recruitment process, where race becomes the most salient in decision making. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2275 diversity recruitment administration graduate education United States eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-07-11 10 217 235 2276 article Marla Woolderink m.woolderink@maastrichtuniversity.nl Katarina Putnik k.putnik@maastrichtuniversity.nl Hannerieke van der Boom h.vanderboom@maastrichtuniversity.nl Gonnie Klabbers gklabbers@hotmail.com PhD trajectories are important to universities, as these contribute to the increase in knowledge and output. Therefore, they aim to decrease the completion time and dropout. This article reports on our survey amongst PhD candidates and supervisors of the Graduate School CAPHRI, Maastricht University, The Netherlands. We investigated interpersonal aspects of coaching and (implicit) assumptions on skills and competences. Both groups consider personality, knowledge, skills, communication and coaching the major factors contributing to a successful PhD trajectory. PhD candidates consider responsiveness and respectful, good-quality feedback by supervisors important and suggest regular assessment of their performance. Supervisors consider flexibility, openness for feedback, taking initiative and being a team-player as good qualities for PhDs. Supervisors indicate struggling with offering support versus independence during different stages of the PhD trajectory. The study shows that a good match between PhDs and supervisors is essential for a successful PhD trajectory, and we advise that both discuss and formally agree upon mutual expectations and responsibilities within the project. We advocate that Graduate Schools foster an open and safe learning environment, organise meetings where supervisors can share experiences to learn from one another, provide contacts for advice and support and involvement of HR during the selection process. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2276 Quality of PhD supervision Hurdles and success factors related to PhD supervision Supervision of PhD candidates Exploratory qualitative study Communication in PhD supervision eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-07-15 10 237 256 2280 article Heather Thiry heather.thiry@colorado.edu Sandra L Laursen sandra.laursen@colorado.edu Heidi G. Loshbaugh heidi.loshbaugh@ccd.edu Drawing on developmental networks theory, this qualitative research study explores the professional preparation and career decision-making processes of doctoral students in the sciences. The study is based on 95 semi-structured interviews with informants at three research universities in the United States. Though many students were interested in non-academic career tracks, they were largely unaware of the breadth of their choices or how to best prepare for these careers. Unable to cultivate networks in non-academic careers, many students turned to peers to fill the career development gap. Due to their lack of knowledge about career options, among other factors, students often delayed selecting and preparing for careers until the end of their graduate studies. Implications for doctoral education practice are discussed. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2280 Ph.D. students career preparation decision-making processes doctoral students science students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-08-17 10 257 278 2295 article Louis J. Grabowski ljgrabski@gmail.com Jeanette Miller jeanettekaymiller@gmail.com The emerging body of research on business professional doctoral programs has focused primarily on the programs’ composition and management, offering limited insight into students’ motivations and the impact the degree has on graduates and their careers. However, understanding these student motivations and career impacts is valuable for several reasons. In addition to helping future candidates assess various programs and the business professional doctoral degree itself, it can help enrolled students maximize their academic experience and help administrators improve these programs so that they better meet students’ personal and professional expectations. To bridge this research gap, this study pursued a mixed-methods approach to glean insights into why people pursue professional doctorates in business, the ultimate personal and professional outcomes of students, and the educational process producing those outcomes. The study revealed that most students entered these programs with a desire for personal or professional transformation, including the possibility of entering academia or a new industry. Moreover, the vast majority of program graduates believed they had experienced such a transformation, often in both professional and personal ways. Further, while important to personal growth, alumni perceived that certain program elements—such as the student networks they created and non-research related coursework—had little to no effect upon their career and viewed their research and the research process as far more important to their professional development. Based upon these findings, the researchers propose a comprehensive process model to explain the personal and professional factors and outcomes for graduates of business professional doctoral programs. They also suggest practical steps that students and administrators can take to improve the business professional doctoral educational experience. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2295 Professional doctorates careers of professional doctoral graduates motivations of professional doctoral students doctoral education process eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-08-18 10 279 299 2296 article Gary Dusek dusek@nova.edu Yuilya Yurova yy21@nova.edu Cynthia P. Ruppel ruppel@nova.edu Response rates to the academic surveys used in quantitative research are decreasing and have been for several decades among both individuals and organizations. Given this trend, providing doctoral students an opportunity to complete their dissertations in a timely and cost effective manner may necessitate identifying more innovative and relevant ways to collect data while maintaining appropriate research standards and rigor. The case of a research study is presented which describes the data collection process used to survey a hard-to-reach population. It details the use of social media, in this case LinkedIn, to facilitate the distribution of the web-based survey. A roadmap to illustrate how this data collection process unfolded is presented, as well as several “lessons learned” during this journey. An explanation of the considerations that impacted the sampling design is provided. The goal of this case study is to provide researchers, including doctoral students, with realistic expectations and an awareness of the benefits and risks associated with the use of this method of data collection. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2296 sampling hard-to-reach populations snowball sampling sampling from social media response rate LinkedIn eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-08-20 10 301 321 2297 article Sarah Zahl szahl@marian.edu This study examines the ways that part-time Ph.D. students develop community within the academic department and how a sense of community is related to persistence. This study included 12 participants (ten students and two program chairs) in two academic departments at one urban research institution. This qualitative study followed a descriptive case study design and provided three levels of data: the institution is the bounded system; the academic departments are the cases; and the participants are embedded cases. Positive relationships with peers and faculty served as a source of encouragement and supported persistence, particularly during challenging semesters and later phases of the doctoral program. However, it was often difficult for the participants to develop and/or maintain relationships, due to limited proximity, limited access to faculty, and changing cohorts. Participants did not consider full-time doctoral students to be part of their community, due to perceived differences between part-time and full-time students. The participants also perceived that faculty catered to full-time students and preferred to conduct research with them rather than part-time students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2297 doctoral education part-time Ph.D. students community graduate study persistence eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-09-19 10 323 342 2291 article Joshua Gisemba Bagaka's j.bagakas@csuohio.edu Irina Bransteter bransteter@aol.com Sarah Rispinto michalosscm@gmail.com Natale Badillo n.badillo@vikes.csuohio.edu The study explored features of an educational doctoral program that enhances doctoral student success. Doctoral student success is defined broadly to include not only completion and retention rates, but also the ability of the program to produce effective scholars in the field. The study utilized a mixed-method approach, incorporating quantitative and qualitative data from both alumni and current doctoral students. A total of 113 students participated in the survey and another 20 students participated in two parallel focus group discussions. A factor analysis of the 31-item-survey identified six dimensions representing different aspects of the doctoral program with an internal consistency measure of reliability ranging from 0.76 to 0.97. Quantitative and qualitative findings converged in highlighting the importance of Program Support/Program Structure, Advisor Support/Faculty Mentorship, and Research Engagement/Formation of Scholars on doctoral students’ success. These features incorporate effective socialization activities within the program. The study recommends that doctoral programs incorporate research engagement and effective mentorship activities into the program’s structure for sustainable scholarship. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2291 mentorship doctoral programs research engagement doctoral student success formation of scholars retention rates eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-09-19 10 343 363 2302 article Simy Joy simy.joy@uea.ac.uk Xiang Fen Liang xiangfen.liang@gmail.com Diana Bilimoria diana.bilimoria@case.edu Susan Perry susan.perry@case.edu Unlike the doctoral programs in places where students are paired with advisors at the time of admission itself, most US programs require the students to choose their advisors, and the advisors to formally accept the students as advisees. Little research has been done to understand how students and faculty approach this mutual selection and pairing process. This paper examines this process in STEM departments (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics), with specific focus on factors influencing the decisions. Based on focus groups and interviews of doctoral students and faculty from STEM departments in an American university, we identify criteria applied by students and faculty in making their choices. Students were found to assess faculty on available funding, area of research, personality, ability to graduate students fast, and career prospects for students, and faculty to assess students on their qualifications/credentials and perceived ability to contribute to research. We also found that this mutual assessment was not objective, but influenced by perceptions associated with faculty gender and career stage, and student nationality. In the end, whether students and faculty were actually paired with persons of their choice depended on departmental factors including prevalent pairing practices, restrictions on student numbers per faculty, and reward structure. We discuss implications of the findings for research and practice. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2302 Doctoral education advisor/advisee selection gender nationality career stage eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-09-21 10 365 383 2300 article Daniel A Nagel dnage084@uottawa.ca Victoria F Burns victoria.burns@mail.mcgill.ca Carla Tilley tilleyc@uvic.ca Diane Aubin dianaubin@gmail.com Graduate students considering constructivist grounded theory as a qualitative methodological approach may benefit from recognizing the many challenges they could face when embarking in thesis work. These challenges include great diversity in approaches to grounded theory, lack of congruity in how grounded theory methodology is described and understood within the literature, and a dearth of expertise and/or support within academic committees and institutions for both grounded theory and constructivist approaches to qualitative research. In this article, we describe why we selected constructivist grounded theory for our PhD work and the common challenges we encountered. Drawing on the analogy of preparing for a journey, we offer strategies for future graduate students including locating one’s ontological and epistemological worldview, finding grounded theory mentors, and facilitating a methodological fit with academic stakeholders. Our recommendations focus on how to navigate the challenging terrain of conducting a qualitative research project within a predominantly post-positivist landscape. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2300 qualitative research constructivist grounded theory graduate students methodology grounded theory eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-09-28 10 385 398 2303 article Tuure Tammi tuure.tammi@helsinki.fi Anna Kouhia anna.kouhia@helsinki.fi This article examines the questions of professional identity formulation and the possibilities of young scholars to reflect on these processes. Relying on insights of collaborative autoethnography, this article is based on a four year long process of exploring our ways of participating in the community of academic practice. This process is studied through discussing various metaphors related to academic life. In this article, metaphors are used as methodological tools to characterize and reflect on young scholars’ being and becoming in the academic world. First, we consider how different metaphors may help us to communicate with others, and then continue reflecting on the acquisition and participation in the communities within which we become scholars. Finally, we elaborate on two metaphors—methodological mess and endless scholarly immaturity—to navigate in the research community as (young) researchers. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2303 professional identity metaphors collaborative autoethnography participation young re-searchers doctoral students eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-10-05 10 399 418 2310 article Steven Chesnut steven.chesnut@usm.edu Kamau Oginga Siwatu kamau.siwatu@ttu.edu Haeni Young alecia.young@ttu.edu Yi Tong tongyizuguo@hotmail.com This study examined the relationship between graduate students’ research training environment, course experience, and research self-efficacy beliefs. The findings of the descriptive and regression analyses suggest that graduate students’ (n = 161) general research, quantitative, and qualitative research self-efficacy beliefs varied and that these beliefs were related to different aspects of the research training environment and course experiences, including their own personal research experiences. While course experience variables were significant predictors of quantitative and qualitative research self-efficacy, they were not predictive of general research methods self-efficacy. Also, while mentorship was a significant predictor of general research methods self-efficacy, it was not a significant predictor of quantitative and qualitative research self-efficacy. The implications of this study for research and graduate education are discussed. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2310 graduate student professional development research self-efficacy training eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-10-08 10 419 438 2312 article Matthew Flynn matt@wellgrounded.com.au Merilyn G Carter merilyn.carter@qut.edu.au Jennifer Alford jh.alford@qut.edu.au Hilary Hughes h.hughes@qut.edu.au Jillian Fox jillian.fox@acu.edu.au Jennifer Duke jk.duke@qut.edu.au International forums for doctoral students offer a fertile context for developing strategic partnerships between higher education institutions, as well as for building the intercultural capacity of early career academics. However, there is limited research investigating the benefits of international doctoral forum partnerships. This paper presents learnings from a recent international doctoral forum held in Beijing, China and attended by doctoral students and academics from Beijing Normal University (China) and Queensland University of Technology (Australia). Drawing on qualitative case study method and a model of boundary crossing mechanisms, we identify the beneficial outcomes of the forum. We describe how the forum arose from a strong ongoing partnership between the Education Faculties of Beijing Normal University and Queensland University of Technology. We then identify how, at the institutional and individual level, international doctoral forum participants can be challenged and benefit in four areas: collaboration, intercultural capacity, academic enhancement and program development. Implications for engaging successfully in international doctoral forum partnerships are also discussed. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2312 Australia China international doctoral forum boundary crossing collaboration university case study eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-10-15 10 439 464 2308 article Christelle Devos christelle.devos@uclouvain.be Nicolas Van der Linden nivdlind@ulb.ac.be Gentiane Boudrenghien gentiane.boudrenghien@uclouvain.be Assaad Azzi aazzi@ulb.ac.be Mariane Frenay mariane.frenay@uclouvain.be Benoit Galand benoit.galand@uclouvain.be Olivier Klein oklein@ulb.ac.be The purpose of the present study was twofold. First, we used the three types of support depicted in Self-Determination Theory (SDT) (structure, involvement and autonomy support) to examine supervision practices in the doctoral context. Conversely, we used this material to discuss the theory and suggest new developments to it. To this end, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 former PhD students (8 completers and 13 non-completers). The data were analyzed using deductive content analysis. The first aim led us to illustrate how supervisors offer structure, involvement, and autonomy support to the doctoral students, and to support the relevance of this theoretical framework in this particular context. The second aim led us to provide three avenues for reflection on SDT. First, a set of practices belongs both to structure and involvement and are therefore at risk of being overlooked in research. Second, there is a thin line between structure and control (and between autonomy support and chaos) and intentions to offer the first may easily turn into providing the second in practice. Finally, we developed the hypothesis that a necessary condition for supervisors to be able to offer positive support to their doctoral students is to consider them as trustworthy. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2308 Doctoral students PhD supervision supervisor self-determination theory qualitative eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-10-15 10 465 482 2306 article Candice Satchwell csatchwell@uclan.ac.uk Lynne Barnes lbarnes@uclan.ac.uk Ridwanah Gurjee RGurjee@uclan.ac.uk Hazel Partington HPartington@uclan.ac.uk Susan Ramsdale SLRamsdale@uclan.ac.uk Jacqueline D Dodding JDDodding@uclan.ac.uk Kathryn Drury Kathryn.Drury@edgehill.ac.uk This article explores the value of attending to the emotional side of the doctoral journey by focusing on the use of a ‘secret’ Facebook group amongst a cohort of EdD (Professional Doctorate in Education) students at one English university. Presented as a piece of action research in which the participants created an intervention to address a perceived problem and then reflected on its effectiveness, it is co-authored by the cohort of six students and their tutor. The stresses and loneliness of the doctoral journey have been well documented and constitute the ‘problem’ addressed by this cohort of students. Their inception and use of a Facebook group was a response to challenges experienced in their studies, with the expectation of facilitating peer support. As will be shown this aim was successfully met with enhancements in academic, social, and emotional support. However, unexpected benefits arose from the interactions within the group including a normalization of the challenges of the doctoral quest and the advantage of being able to follow the ‘breadcrumb trail’ found in the group postings as group journal and aid to reflection. Further, both tutors and students have noted the development of a strong sense of ‘cohortness’ and inclination to work collaboratively. Through a process of individual and group reflection on experiences of the intervention, combined with analysis of the content of the postings, this article examines the characteristics of the Facebook intervention and considers some ethical implications. We suggest that key characteristics that have contributed to its success include the student ownership, the protection of the secret format, and the combination of emotionally supportive, academic, and irreverent exchanges between group members. It is hoped that these insights may be useful to future doctoral candidates and their tutors as they negotiate their own way through the doctoral woods. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2306 Reflection cohort emotion social Facebook support secret professional doctorate education eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-11-01 10 483 499 2305 article Tamara Bertrand Jones tbertrand@fsu.edu La'Tara Osborne-Lampkin losbornelampkin@fsu.edu Danielle Joy Davis djdavis@slu.edu Shawna M. Patterson shawnap@upenn.edu Formal structures that support doctoral student socialization are limited, while formal programs for Black women doctoral students specifically are even more scarce. The purpose of this research was to examine an early career professional development program for Black women doctoral students and its influence on the mentoring relationships developed by participants. We conducted individual interviews with six Black women who participated in the Research BootCamp®, an early career professional development program, as doctoral students. Two salient features of the program were identified, including its structure and intentional focus on intersectionality. Our findings also indicate that early career professional development provided opportunities for participants to develop sustainable mentoring relationships. The formal structure of the Research BootCamp® facilitated Black women doctoral students in developing mentoring networks through continued engagement with senior scholars and peers, provided social support, created outlets for professional development, built research capacity, and contributed to Black women’s overall socialization to the academy. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2305 doctoral student socialization Black women mentoring professional development eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-11-19 10 501 518 2327 article Melanie Greene melaniejg@mun.ca While a lack of support has been identified as a contributing factor to non-persistence in graduate studies, there is an absence of literature that matches the provision of specific types of support services with outcomes at the doctoral level. The following questions were addressed in this study: (1) What is the role of institutional support in the persistence and success of graduate students? (2) What do students feel are some of the biggest barriers to graduate student persistence? (3) What do students feel are some of the factors that have a positive influence on persistence? Qualitative methods were employed; eleven interviews were conducted with current and former students who were currently or had previously been enrolled in a doctoral degree program in the social sciences and humanities disciplines. The study was undertaken at a large comprehensive university in Atlantic Canada. Overall findings point to the need to make transparent to doctoral students the role of institutional units and the support services they provide and the need to promote and raise awareness of these services. Five key themes emerged from this study with regards to doctoral student persistence and the role of support services: (1) the unclear role of institutional support; (2) financial considerations; (3) the culture and structure of academia; (4) individual characteristics; (5) support of others. Recommendations for policy, practice, and further research are presented. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2327 doctoral students student development persistence student services eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-11-19 10 519 533 2325 article Pia Bøgelund pb@plan.aau.dk Erik de Graaff degraaff@plan.aau.dk The purpose of the doctoral education process is to create and legitimize scholarly researchers. This transformation, from student to scholar, is widely discussed in the literature. However, recent rapid changes in university culture have resulted in less time for supervision, stricter completion deadlines, and a greater focus on efficiency and productivity. This has had an impact on this transition process, and this impact has not been widely studied. The aim of this article is to understand the consequences of the current trends for PhD students and the education of PhD students in general. The article is based on interviews with 14 international students from two different research programs at the Faculty of Engineering and Science at Aalborg University in Denmark. The case of international PhD students in a western setting is singled out as a challenging case for becoming a legitimate scholar, since they face the additional challenge of becoming socialised into their new foreign setting. Overall, the study concludes that the transition process of doctoral students is affected by the way different supervisors deal with current university trends and how PhD students fit or do not fit into their knowledge production practices. The study identifies matches or mismatches in a knowledge production perspective, quality of contact, and degree of independence of the PhD student as factors that influence whether a transition process can be marked as sound, troublesome, or lacking. Finally, the study identifies an overall risk of neglecting the more interdependent types of international PhD students. Suggestions are given as how to address this risk. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2325 Legitimate scholar independence interdependence international PhD students knowledge production eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2015-12-18 10 535 550 2339 article Shana R. Ponelis ponelis@uwm.edu The use of the case study method has gained mainstream acceptance in both entrepreneurship and information systems research to develop conceptual and theoretical models that are novel, yet grounded in the literature. In spite of many texts on the case study method and the growing acceptance and use of thereof, there are relatively few examples that discuss how to apply the case study method. The purpose of this paper is to provide such an example by drawing upon the author’s research for her doctoral dissertation in the discipline of information systems and entrepreneurship research. First, the use of qualitative case studies as research method is motivated, then the importance of the research paradigm is discussed and the interpretivist research paradigm justified followed by a detailed discussion of the research design. The paper concludes with a discussion of lessons learned and recommendations based on the author’s experience with using the case study method. The practical yet theoretically founded approach of this paper may be useful to doctoral students who are considering or using the case study method. Equally, supervisors and others involved in research training may find this paper useful as an illustrative example of the case study method for their students. http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2339 case study method qualitative methods interpretive research paradigm exploratory research theory building semi-structured interviews information systems IS entrepreneurship small and medium enterprises SMEs eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 i iii 1940 article http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1940 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 001 020 1941 article Krishna Bista bista@ulm.edu David W Cox dwcox@astate.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1941 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 021 042 1947 article Pamela Petrease Felder pamela.felder@gmail.com Howard C. Stevenson howards@gse.upenn.edu Marybeth Gasman mgasman@upenn.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1947 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 043 060 1952 article Kevin Grant kevin.grant@lsbu.ac.uk Ray Hackney ray.hackney@gmail.com David Edgar d.a.edgar@gcu.ac.uk http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1952 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 061 071 1973 article Paige Alfonzo palfonzo@umhb.edu Jennifer Batson jennifergalebatson@gmail.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1973 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 073 083 2027 article Caroline Khene c.khene@ru.ac.za http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2027 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 085 107 2031 article Anthony Olalere aolaler@clemson.edu Edward De lulio edeiuli@clemson.edu Amin Marei Aldarbag ammmz71@gmail.com Mehmet Akif Erdener erdener@balikesir.edu.tr http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2031 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 109 136 2034 article Valerie Tharp Byers vtbyers@gmail.com Rachel N. Smith rachel_smith2012@yahoo.com Eunjin Hwang ejloveu@gmail.com Kay E. Angrove kxa014@shsu.edu Jason I. Chandler jichandl@odu.edu Kelsey M. Christian kmc041@shsu.edu Shirley H. Dickerson sdickerson@sfasu.edu Leah McAlister-Shields lym004@shsu.edu Stephen P. Thompson stepatson@gmail.com Magdalena A. Denham MXM002@shsu.edu Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie tonyonwuegbuzie@aol.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2034 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 137 154 2041 article Vicki L. Baker vbaker@albion.edu Meghan J. Pifer mjpifer@widener.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2041 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 155 179 2048 article KerryAnn O'Meara komeara@umd.edu Audrey Jaeger ajjaeger@ncsu.edu Jennifer Eliason jeliasonumd@gmail.com Ashley Grantham aegranth@ncsu.edu Kelly Cowdery kcowdery@umd.edu Allison Mitchall ammitcha@ncsu.edu Kate Jingjing Zhang jzhang22@ncsu.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2048 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 181 203 2049 article Amanda Rockinson-Szapkiw aszapkiw@liberty.edu Lucinda S. Spaulding lsspaulding@liberty.edu James Swezey jaswezey@liberty.edu Carolyn Wicks cwicks3@liberty.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2049 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 205 227 2050 article Jeremi London jslondon@purdue.edu Monica Farmer Cox mfc@purdue.edu Benjamin Ahn bahn@purdue.edu Sara Branch sbranch@psych.purdue.edu Tasha Zephirin tkzeph@purdue.edu Ana Torres-Ayala ana.t.torres@gmail.com Jiabin Zhu jiabin.emily.zhu@gmail.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2050 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 229 247 2058 article Amanda E. Cravens acravens@stanford.edu Nicola Ulibarri ulibarri@stanford.edu Marilyn Cornelius marilyn.cornelius@gmail.com Adam Royalty adam@dschool.stanford.edu Anja Svetina Nabergoj ANJA.SVETINA@GMAIL.COM http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2058 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 249 270 2062 article Nicola Ulibarri ulibarri@stanford.edu Amanda E. Cravens acravens@stanford.edu Marilyn Cornelius marilyn.cornelius@gmail.com Adam Royalty adam@dschool.stanford.edu Anja Svetina Nabergoj ANJA.SVETINA@GMAIL.COM http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2062 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 271 291 2063 article Sydney Freeman Jr. sfreemanjr@mytu.tuskegee.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2063 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 293 308 2072 article Amanda Rockinson-Szapkiw aszapkiw@liberty.edu Lucinda S. Spaulding lsspaulding@liberty.edu Bob Bade rbade@liberty.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2072 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 309 327 2075 article Joellen Coryell coryell@txstate.edu Kayon Murray-Johnson kkm56@txstate.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2075 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 329 346 2078 article Allyson Holbrook Allyson.Holbrook@newcastle.edu.au Kylie Shaw Kylie.Shaw@newcastle.edu.au Jill Scevak Jill.Scevak@newcastle.edu.au Sid Bourke Sid.Bourke@newcastle.edu.au Robert Cantwell Robert.Cantwell@newcastle.edu.au Janene Budd Janene.Budd@newcastle.edu.au http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2078 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2014-01-01 9 347 360 2079 article Allyson Kelley kelleyallyson@gmail.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/2079 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 i iii 1753 article http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1753 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 001 020 1754 article Pamela Petrease Felder pamela.felder@gmail.com Marco Barker barker@unc.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1754 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 021 037 1763 article Gina Wisker ginwskr@aol.com Silwa Claesson silwa.claesson@ped.gu.se http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1763 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 039 059 1765 article Edna Martinez edna@clemson.edu Chinasa Ordu cordu@clemson.edu Matthew R. Della Sala mdella@clemson.edu Adam McFarlane armcfar@clemson.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1765 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 061 081 1870 article Jenna Vekkaila jenna.vekkaila@helsinki.fi Kirsi Pyhältö kirsi.pyhalto@helsinki.fi Kirsti Lonka kirsti.lonka@helsinki.fi http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1870 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 083 104 1871 article Michael Jones mjones.michael@gmail.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1871 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 105 120 1893 article Matthew Kemp matthew.kemp@uwa.edu.au Marina Pajic m.pajic@garvan.org.au Timothy Molloy t.molloy@garvan.org.au Elaine Chapman elaine.chapman@uwa.edu.au http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1893 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 121 136 1895 article Elizabeth Newnham elizabeth.newnham@unisa.edu.au Jan Pincombe jan.pincombe@unisa.edu.au Lois McKellar lois.mckellar@unisa.edu.au http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1895 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 137 150 1897 article Cally Guerin cally.guerin@adelaide.edu.au http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1897 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 151 172 1901 article Valerie Lundy-Wagner lundy@tc.columbia.edu Julie Vultaggio julie_vultaggio@gse.harvard.edu Marybeth Gasman mgasman@upenn.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1901 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 173 193 1921 article James A. Bernauer bernauer@rmu.edu George Semich semich@rmu.edu Jacqueline Courtney Klentzin klentzin@rmu.edu E. Gregory Holdan holdan@rmu.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1921 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2013-01-01 8 195 215 1923 article Baaska Anderson baaska.anderson@gmail.com Marc Cutright marc.cutright@unt.edu Stoerm Anderson Stoerm.anderson@waldenu.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1923 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 i iv 1554 article http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1554 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 v vi 1746 article Michael Jones mjones.michael@gmail.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1746 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 001 017 1555 article Cliff Haynes cliffh@ufl.edu Marievic Bulosan m.bulosan@gmail.com Jeff Citty JCITT@eng.ufl.edu Michelle Grant-Harris mgharris@ufl.edu JoCynda Hudson jocyndah@housing.ufl.edu Mirka Koro-Ljungberg mirka@ufl.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1555 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 019 037 1558 article Nancy Leech nancy.leech@ucdenver.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1558 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 039 062 1559 article Shirlee-Ann Knight s.knight@ecu.edu.au Donna Cross dcross@ichr.uwa.edu.au http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1559 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 063 078 1561 article Susan K. Gardner susan.k.gardner@maine.edu Bryan Gopaul bryan.gopaul@utoronto.ca http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1561 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 079 092 1564 article Laura Casey Amo lccasey@buffalo.edu Serkan Ada ada13126@gmail.com Raj Sharman rsharman@buffalo.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1564 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 093 124 1567 article Sydney Freeman Jr. sfreemanjr@mytu.tuskegee.edu Frances K. Kochan kochafr@auburn.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1567 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 125 142 1571 article Joretta Joseph jbjoseph@usc.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1571 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 143 152 1572 article Andy Luse andyluse@iastate.edu Brian Mennecke mennecke@iastate.edu Anthony Townsend amt@iastate.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1572 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 153 166 1573 article Mara Yerkes M.A.Yerkes@uu.nl Rens van de Schoot a.g.j.vandeschoot@uu.nl Hans Sonneveld sonneveld.j.f.m@gmail.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1573 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 167 198 1581 article Monica M. McGill mmcgill@bradley.edu Amber Settle asettle@cdm.depaul.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1581 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 199 219 1589 article Lucinda S. Spaulding lsspaulding@liberty.edu Amanda Rockinson-Szapkiw aszapkiw@liberty.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1589 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 221 234 1590 article Dara Gale Schniederjans dara.schniederjans@ttu.edu Marc Schniederjans Mschniederjans1@unl.edu Yair Levy levyy@nova.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1590 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 235 244 1591 article Lynette L. Ralph lralph@xula.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1591 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 245 258 1595 article Amanda Rockinson-Szapkiw aszapkiw@liberty.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1595 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 259 277 1596 article Michelle M. Mason michellemason@troy.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1596 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 279 309 1693 article Monika R. Anderson bookwormwithglasses@gmail.com Jacqueline M. Ingram ingramjackie7@gmail.com Brandie J. Buford bjb027@shsu.edu Roslinda Rosli lindarosli76@neo.tamu.edu Michelle L. Bledsoe Michelle@kfnow.com Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie tonyonwuegbuzie@aol.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1693 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 311 329 1700 article Dharmananda Jairam duj11@psu.edu David H. Kahl Jr. dhk10@psu.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1700 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 331 348 1718 article Rens van de Schoot a.g.j.vandeschoot@uu.nl Mara Yerkes M.A.Yerkes@uu.nl Hans Sonneveld sonneveld.j.f.m@gmail.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1718 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 349 375 1742 article Julie P. Combs jc@evalresearch.com Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie tonyonwuegbuzie@aol.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1742 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 377 394 1743 article Susan K. Gardner susan.k.gardner@maine.edu Jessica Jansujwicz jessica.jansujwicz@umit.maine.edu Karen Hutchins karen.hutchins@umit.maine.edu Brittany Cline brittany.cline@maine.edu Vanessa Levesque vanessa.r.levesque@maine.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1743 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2012-01-01 7 395 414 1745 article Kirsi Pyhältö kirsi.pyhalto@helsinki.fi Jenna Vekkaila jenna.vekkaila@helsinki.fi Jenni Keskinen jenni.keskinen@helsinki.fi http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1745 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2011-01-01 6 1352 article http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1352 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2011-01-01 6 v vii 1536 article http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1536 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2011-01-01 6 001 017 1353 article Benita Barnes barnesbj@educ.umass.edu Linda A. Chard Linda.Chard@Yahoo.com Edward W. Wolfe Ed.Wolfe@Pearson.com Martha L.A. Stassen MStassen@acad.umass.edu Elizabeth A. Williams williams@educ.umass.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1353 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2011-01-01 6 019 032 1354 article Liora Nutov Lorano@bezeqint.net Orit Hazzan OritHa@techunix.technion.ac.il http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1354 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2011-01-01 6 033 049 1378 article Naomi Dreher n.dreher@curtin.edu.au Heinz Dreher heinz.dreher@gmail.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1378 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2011-01-01 6 051 077 1428 article Veronica Castro castrov@utpa.edu Elda E. Garcia eegarcia@ccisd.edu Javier Cavazos Jr. javier.cavazos@tamucc.edu Alma Y. Castro aycastro@soc.umass.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1428 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2011-01-01 6 079 094 1430 article Karri A. Holley kholley@bamaed.ua.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1430 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2011-01-01 6 095 114 1429 article Irit Alony iritalony@gmail.com Michael Jones editor@ijds.org http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1429 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2011-01-01 6 115 134 1505 article Hesborn O. Wao wao@mail.usf.edu Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie tonyonwuegbuzie@aol.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1505 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2010-01-01 5 708 article http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/708 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2010-01-01 5 v vii 1335 article Yair Levy levyy@nova.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1335 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2010-01-01 5 001 013 709 article Vladimir Jiranek vladimir.jiranek@adelaide.edu.au http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/709 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2010-01-01 5 015 027 710 article Ian Brailsford i.brailsford@auckland.ac.nz http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/710 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2010-01-01 5 029 037 1288 article Robert Samuel robert.samuel@ieee.org Frederick Gregg Kohun Kohun@rmu.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1288 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2010-01-01 5 039 053 1310 article Susan K. Gardner susan.k.gardner@maine.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1310 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2010-01-01 5 055 077 1331 article Cindy L. Benge cbenge@aldine.k12.tx.us Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie tonyonwuegbuzie@aol.com Marla H. Mallette mallette@siu.edu Melissa L. Burgess melissa.burgess2010@gmail.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1331 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2010-01-01 5 079 092 1333 article Dorian Stoilescu dorian.stoilescu@utoronto.ca Douglas McDougall doug.mcdougall@utoronto.ca http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1333 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2010-01-01 5 093 095 1334 article Dorian Stoilescu dorian.stoilescu@utoronto.ca http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1334 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2009-01-01 4 633 article http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/633 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2009-01-01 4 iii v 702 article Yair Levy levyy@nova.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/702 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2009-01-01 4 001 011 42 article Harvey J. Brightman hbrightman@mindspring.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/42 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2009-01-01 4 013 025 43 article Susan Carter s.carter@auckland.ac.nz http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/43 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2009-01-01 4 027 057 44 article Grandon Gill grandon@grandon.com Uwe Hoppe uwe.hoppe@hoppeprivat.de http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/44 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2009-01-01 4 059 075 45 article Carolyn J. Lee carolyn.lee@utoledo.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/45 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2009-01-01 4 077 096 46 article Benita Barnes barnesbj@educ.umass.edu Craig S. Wells cswells@educ.umass.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/46 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2009-01-01 4 097 106 695 article Karen Francis Karen.Francis@med.monash.edu.au Jane Mills Jane.mills@jcu.edu.au Ysanne Chapman Ysanne.Chapman@med.monash.edu.au Melanie Birks Melanie.Birks@med.monash.edu.au http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/695 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2008-01-01 3 631 article http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/631 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2008-01-01 3 iii iv 632 article Yair Levy levyy@nova.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/632 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2008-01-01 3 001 018 47 article Louisa Buckingham bucklj@gmail.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/47 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2008-01-01 3 019 030 48 article Mary Jo Dondlinger mjdondlinger@gmail.com James G. Jones wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/48 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2008-01-01 3 031 042 49 article Bernd Carsten Stahl bstahl@dmu.ac.uk Jehad Al-Amri Suad Almullah Muneeb Dawood Christine Fidler Mohanad Halaweh Osita Ibekwe Raed Kareem Kanaan Mick Phythian Abdullah Al-Shery Khaled Swesi Sarai Tangai http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/49 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2008-01-01 3 043 058 50 article Edward Sek Wong edwardwong@graduate.uwa.edu.au http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/50 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2008-01-01 3 059 079 51 article Linda V. Knight lindaharvey@fastmail.us Theresa A. Steinbach tsteinbach@cdm.depaul.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/51 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2008-01-01 3 081 083 52 article Victoria Wise victoria.wise@deakin.edu.au http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/52 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2007-01-01 2 629 article http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/629 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2007-01-01 2 ii iii 630 article Yair Levy levyy@nova.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/630 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2007-01-01 2 001 008 53 article Marc Schniederjans Mschniederjans1@unl.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/53 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2007-01-01 2 009 021 54 article Varun Grover vgrover@clemson.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/54 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2007-01-01 2 023 032 55 article Subhajyoti Ray subhajyoti@ximb.ac.in http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/55 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2007-01-01 2 033 049 56 article Azad Ali Azad.Ali@IUP.edu Frederick Gregg Kohun Kohun@rmu.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/56 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2006-01-01 1 627 article http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/627 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2006-01-01 1 ii iii 628 article Yair Levy levyy@nova.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/628 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2006-01-01 1 001 019 57 article Alison Atwell alison.atwell@centrin.net.id http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/57 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2006-01-01 1 021 033 58 article Azad Ali Azad.Ali@IUP.edu Frederick Gregg Kohun Kohun@rmu.edu http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/58 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2006-01-01 1 035 044 59 article Dieter Fink d.fink@ecu.edu.au http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/59 eng Informing Science Institute International Journal of Doctoral Studies (IJDS) 1556-8881 1556-8873 2006-01-01 1 045 057 60 article Sarah Earl-Novell sarahearlnovell@icloud.com http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/60