skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: PhDepression: Examining How Graduate Research and Teaching Affect Depression in Life Sciences PhD Students
Graduate students are more than six times as likely to experience depression compared with the general population. However, few studies have examined how graduate school specifically affects depression. In this qualitative interview study of 50 life sciences PhD students from 28 institutions, we examined how research and teaching affect depression in PhD students and how depression in turn affects students’ experiences teaching and researching. Using inductive coding, we identified factors that either positively or negatively affected student depression. Graduate students more commonly mentioned factors related to research that negatively affected their depression and factors related to teaching that positively affected their depression. We identified four overarching aspects of graduate school that influenced student depression: the amount of structure in teaching and research, positive and negative reinforcement, success and failure, and social support and isolation. Graduate students reported that depression had an exclusively negative effect on their research, primarily hindering their motivation and self-confidence, but that it helped them to be more compassionate teachers. This work pinpoints specific aspects of graduate school that PhD programs can target to improve mental health among life sciences graduate students.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2143671
PAR ID:
10434331
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ;
Editor(s):
Gardner, Grant Ean
Date Published:
Journal Name:
CBE—Life Sciences Education
Volume:
20
Issue:
3
ISSN:
1931-7913
Page Range / eLocation ID:
ar41
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; (, Biomedical Engineering Education)
    Abstract Whether doctoral students are funded primarily by fellowships, research assistantships, or teaching assistantships impacts their degree completion, time to degree, learning outcomes, and short- and long-term career outcomes. Variations in funding patterns have been studied at the broad field level but not comparing engineering sub-disciplines. We addressed two research questions: How do PhD student funding mechanisms vary across engineering sub-disciplines? And how does variation in funding mechanisms across engineering sub-disciplines map onto the larger STEM disciplinary landscape? We analyzed 103,373 engineering and computing responses to the U.S. Survey of Earned Doctorates collected between 2007 and 2016. We conducted analysis of variance with Bonferroni post hoc comparisons to examine variation in funding across sub-disciplines. Then, we conducted a k-means cluster analysis on percentage variables for fellowship, research, and teaching assistantship funding mechanism with STEM sub-discipline as the unit of analysis. A statistically significantly greater percentage of biomedical/biological engineering doctoral students were funded via a fellowship, compared to every other engineering sub-discipline. Consequently, biomedical/biological engineering had significantly lower proportions of students supported via research and teaching assistantships than nearly all other engineering sub-disciplines. We identified five clusters. The majority of engineering sub-disciplines grouped together into a cluster with high research assistantships and low teaching assistantships. Biomedical/biological engineering clustered in the high fellowships grouping with most other biological sciences but no other engineering sub-disciplines. Biomedical/biological engineering behaves much more like biological and life sciences in utilizing fellowships to fund graduate students, far more than other engineering sub-disciplines. Our study provides further evidence of the prevalence of fellowships in life sciences and how it stretches into biomedical/biological engineering. The majority of engineering sub-disciplines relied more on research assistantships to fund graduate study. The lack of uniformity provides an opportunity to diversify student experiences during their graduate programs but also necessitates an awareness to the advantages and disadvantages that different funding portfolios can bestow on students. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; (, Frontiers in Psychology)
    The landscape of graduate science education is changing as efforts to diversify the professoriate have increased because academic faculty jobs at universities have grown scarce and more competitive. With this context as a backdrop, the present research examines the perceptions and career goals of advisors and advisees through surveys of PhD students (Study 1, N  = 195) and faculty mentors (Study 2, N  = 272) in science, technology, engineering, and math disciplines. Study 1 examined actual preferences and career goals of PhD students among three options: research careers, teaching careers, and non-academic careers in industry, and compared the actual preferences of students with what they perceived as being the normative preferences of faculty. Overall, students had mixed preferences but perceived that their advisors had a strong normative preference for research careers for them. Moreover, students who ranked research positions as most desirable felt the most belonging in their academic departments. Further analyses revealed no differences in career preferences as a function of underrepresented minority (URM) student status or first-generation (FG) status, but URM and FG students felt less belonging in their academic departments. Study 2 examined faculty preferences for different careers for their advisees, both in general and for current students in particular. While faculty advisors preferred students to go into research in general, when focusing on specific students, they saw their preferences as being closely aligned with the career preference of each PhD student. Faculty advisors did not perceive any difference in belonging between their students as a function of their URM status. Discrepancies between student and faculty perceptions may occur, in part, because faculty and students do not engage in sufficient discussions about the wider range of career options beyond academic research. Supporting this possibility, PhD students and faculty advisors reported feeling more comfortable discussing research careers with each other than either non-academic industry positions or teaching positions. Discussion centers on the implications of these findings for interpersonal and institutional efforts to foster diversity in the professoriate and to create open communication about career development. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; (, Journal of Engineering Education)
    Abstract BackgroundIn addition to the benefits of a diverse faculty, many institutions are under pressure from students and administrators to increase the number of faculty from historically excluded backgrounds. Despite increases in the numbers of engineering PhD earners from these groups, the percentages of Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino tenure‐track faculty have not increased, and the percentage of women remains low. PurposeThe purpose of this study is to identify how experiences in graduate school encourage or deter PhD earners from historically excluded groups in pursuing an engineering academic career. MethodWe conducted 20 semi‐structured interviews with engineering PhD students and recent graduates, with half of participants interested and half disinterested in pursuing an academic career after graduation. ResultsThree key factors emerged as strongly influential on participants' desire to pursue an academic career: their relationship with their advisor, their perception of their advisor's work–life balance, and their perception of the culture of academia. Participants extrapolated their experiences in graduate school to their imagined lives as faculty. The results illuminate the reasons why engineering PhD earners from historically underrepresented groups remain in or leave the academic career pathway after graduate school. ConclusionsThe findings of this study have important implications for how graduate students' and postdoc's relationships with their advisors as well as perceptions of their advisors' work–life balances and the culture of academia affect future faculty. We make recommendations on what students, faculty, and administrators can do to create a more inclusive environment to encourage students from historically excluded groups to consider academic careers. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; (, American Society for Engineering Education 2024 Annual Conference and Exposition)
    This paper examined the role of climate (e.g., interactions with others) in the skill development of engineering and physical science doctoral students. Skill development in graduate school often is connected to students’ primary funding mechanism, which enables students to interact with a research group or teaching team. Advisors also play a pivotal role in the engineering doctoral student experience; however, less is known about how positive mentoring influences specific skill development for engineering doctoral students. Analyzing data from the Graduate Student Funding Survey (n = 615), we focused analyses on three climate Factors (Advising climate; Faculty and staff climate; Peer climate) and specific skill development variables (research, teamwork and project management, peer training and mentoring, and communication). We found that advising climate was statistically significant for all four career-related skills, faculty and staff climate for peer training and mentoring skills only, and peer climate for both peer training and mentoring and communication skills. Our findings highlight the importance of climate from a variety of sources within engineering doctoral programs for the development of career-related skills. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Education Sciences)
    STEM integration has become a national and international priority, but our understanding of student learning experiences in integrated STEM courses, especially those that integrate life sciences and engineering design, is limited. Our team has designed a new high school curriculum unit that focuses on neural engineering, an emerging interdisciplinary field that brings together neuroscience, technology, and engineering. Through the implementation of the unit in a high school engineering design course, we asked how incorporating life sciences into an engineering course supported student learning and what challenges were experienced by the students and their teacher. To address these questions, we conducted an exploratory case study consisting of a student focus group, an interview with the teacher, and analysis of student journals. Our analysis suggests that students were highly engaged by the authentic and collaborative engineering design process, helping solidify their self-efficacy and interest in engineering design. We also identified some challenges, such as students’ lower interest in life sciences compared to engineering design and the teacher lacking a life sciences background. These preliminary findings suggest that neural engineering can provide an effective context to the integration of life sciences and engineering design but more scaffolding and teacher support is needed for full integration. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email