Mentorship has been established in the literature as being salient to degree completion for doctoral students. Mentoring primarily focuses on the extended academic development of a less experienced student by a more experienced faculty scholar. Federal governance policies have enabled greater participation in STEM by underrepresented populations, and as a result, enrollments in doctoral STEM programs by groups underrepresented in STEM have increased, but their success frequently hinges on support resources such as quality mentorship (Millett & Nettles, 2006). A substantial commitment to high-quality
mentoring is needed to best prepare doctoral students for high skilled careers requiring innovation. This paper explores the perceptions of STEM doctoral faculty from three institutions in the southeastern part of the United States to understand their knowledge of STEM doctoral mentoring. This work seeks to improve STEM doctoral education by focusing on the mentorship relationship, an experience that is vital to matriculation, degree completion, and career planning Millett & Nettles, 2006). Using a qualitative multiple embedded case study design, the researchers interviewed and surveyed STEM doctoral faculty
about their perceptions of STEM doctoral mentoring. This article focuses on five key findings from the qualitative interviews. STEM doctoral faculty: (a) have difficulty differentiating mentoring responsibilities from and in addition to advising; (b) have limited mentoring training opportunities; (c) see mentoring more exclusively as the development of scientific knowledge; (d) lack meaningful understanding of the role of culture in mentoring; and (e) lack deep understanding of the importance of relational connections with mentees.
more »
« less
Reimagining doctoral mentoring: Toward the development of culturally liberative STEM faculty doctoral mentors
Using anti-Black racism and critical capital theory, this paper highlights findings of a meta-analysis based on research products developed from a qualitative multiple embedded case study of STEM doctoral mentoring and argues for the development of culturally liberative doctoral mentorship.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1820536
- PAR ID:
- 10506437
- Publisher / Repository:
- New Prairie Press
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the Adult Education Research Conference
- ISSN:
- 2475-7713
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- STEM doctoral mentoring culturally liberative mentoring critical capital theory anti-black racism mentoring and adult education
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Objective: Identify the role(s) and support(s), if any, that family members provide to first-generation and historically marginalized doctoral students, including strengths and challenges of this support. Background: Nonfinancial family support is important for the success and retention of first-generation and historically marginalized graduate students. More empirical studies of the role(s) and support of family members of these doctoral students are needed. Method: During an intervention designed for firstgeneration and historically marginalized doctoral students and their families, we conducted four focus groups with doctoral students (n = 22) and three focus groups with the family members they chose to accompany them (n = 15). Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Two themes emerged from the data: support and connection. In addition to providing distinct types of support, families play both supportive and connective roles. There are challenges to family roles and support in areas such as communication, doctoral student stress, and different ways that family members and doctoral students think about and approach life. Conclusion: The study provided key insights to understanding the roles and support of family of doctoral students; more efforts are needed across graduate schools in the United States. Implications: Family science faculty and graduate schools may collaborate to provide meaningful interventions for graduate students and their families for the goal of promoting graduate student retention and success.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)High attrition rates have been a defining characteristic of doctoral education for decades, representing a loss of time, talent, and effort for departing students and their faculty. This qualitative study uses a biomedical science doctoral student sample to collect “real time” data on attrition within the first 2 years of doctoral training. Eighteen students, who represented 16 distinct universities, were interviewed as they engaged in the withdrawal process. Using the conceptual frames of socialization and social cognitive career theory, we explored experiences that preceded these students’ doctoral program withdrawals. Furthermore, we examined how expressed roles of students’ self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and professional goals contributed to the withdrawal process. Findings indicate that faculty advising (both positive and negative), laboratory rotation experiences, self-efficacy components, and changing professional goals all play a role in the early doctoral program attrition process.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Background Degree completion rates for doctoral engineering students remain stagnant at levels lower than necessary to meet national and global workforce needs. Increasing degree completion can improve opportunities for individuals and provide the human resources needed to address engineering challenges.
Purpose/Hypothesis In this work, we measure the association of engineering identity variables with degree completion intentions for students who have persisted in doctoral study. We add to existing literature that suggests the importance of advisor and peer relationships, and the number of years in the doctoral program.
Design/Method We use data collected via a national cross‐sectional survey of doctoral engineering students, which included measures of social and professional identities, graduate school experiences, and demographics. Surveys were collected from 1754 participants at 98 US universities between late 2017 and early 2018. The analyses reported here use multiple regression to measure associations with engineering doctoral degree completion intentions.
Results Research interest and scientist performance/competence are individually associated with degree completion intentions in students who are persisting in doctoral study. Overall, graduate engineering identity explains significant portions of variation in degree completion intentions (9.5%) beyond advisor and peer relationship variables and the number of years in graduate programs.
Conclusions Researcher interest and scientist performance/competence may be key opportunities to engage doctoral student engineering identity to improve degree completion rates. Accordingly, institutions can foster students' interest in research and build their confidence in their scientific competence to support students as they complete the doctoral degree.
-
Background: Even though Historically Black College and Universities (HBCUs) make up only 3% of higher education's institutions, they play a pivotal role in producing Black scientists by virtue of the fact that many received either their undergraduate or doctorate degree from a HBCU. HBCUs are credited with providing a more supportive and nurturing environment that thrives on communal mindsets and practices, emphasizing the importance of relationships, offering opportunities for Black students to "see themselves" as part of the academic and social milieu whereas Historically White Institutions (HWIS) are characterized as being hostile and discriminatory. Mentoring is said to be pivotal in the attainment of the PhD. Mentorships have an inherent gatekeeping mechanism, better positioning those who receive effective mentorships while disadvantaging those who do not. It has potential to harm and marginalize when not engaged with deliberate care and a culturally liberative mindset. Mentoring, when not under the thumb of colonizing mindsets, can contribute to more equitable experiences and outcomes for students who hail from AGEP population groups. Literature has indicated that Black students are less likely to have a mentor or be engaged in effective mentorships. The HBCU narrative of supportive environment is consistently told but has scant empirical validation for Black students pursuing STEM doctoral degrees. In fact, the lure of having faculty and peers who look like you is something of an enigma given that even at HBCUs there are limited numbers of Black faculty in STEM. How are same race, same gender mentorships attained when, not unlike their HWIS counterparts, HBCU STEM faculties have a large number of White and Asian men? If the environment is indeed different at HBCUs, is it different for Black STEM doctoral students? Is STEM doctoral mentoring at HBCUs emblematic of anti-Blackness or is it yet another tool used to oppress marginalized students? Theoretical Framework: Anti-black racism and critical capital theory serve as critical theoretical frameworks and were selected because they highlight the ways violence is enacted through taken for granted colonized practices such as mentoring. Fanon understood that thoughts and mindsets are the progenitors of violence and dehumanization is the process through which violence is enacted. Anti-black racism and critical capital theory can be useful in unearthing the structural inequalities that uphold the current system in place for STEM doctoral learning. Research Design: An embedded multiple qualitative case study research project sought to understand the nature and quality of STEM doctoral mentorships at an HBCU. The analysis on the HBCU subcase asked, how are STEM doctoral mentorships understood by Black STEM doctoral students at HBCUs? Black STEM HBCU students were interviewed and completed a mentoring competency assessment survey. In addition STEM doctoral students from three universities also completed the survey. The qualitative data was analyzed using narrative analysis and the survey data was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. This project is part of a larger NSF AGEP sponsored research study. Research findings: The findings from this study expose that Black STEM doctoral students at HBCUs have not reached the proverbial Promise Land. In spite of being in a space that is more diverse, they manage to simultaneously be invisible and hypervisible. An unmerited sense of assumed cultural belonging was highlighted with students reporting a lack of selfethnic reflectors in their programs. In many ways the systemic and institutional structures on HBCUs with respect to STEM doctoral programming mirrored the colonial structures more often associated with HWIS. Their culture and cultural-based experiences as domestic students as well as their academic strengths were often not recognized by mentors while that of international students were. Three themes were supported by the data: Conspicuous Absence, Race Still Matters, and Invisibilized Hypervisibility. Implications: Better understanding how STEM doctoral mentoring is facilitated at HBCUs holds the promise of informing a mentoring practice that supports cultural liberation instead of cultural degradation and suppression. It becomes one avenue as the “The Call'' suggests to "confront our own complicity in the colonial enterprise" by holding STEM doctoral mentors and the institutions they represent accountable for socially just mentoring practices. Greater intentionality as well as mandated training informed by the study's results are recommended. HBCU faculty doctoral mentors are challenged to be scholar activists who engage mentoring from an advocacy and accomplice framework. The development of STEM scholar activists is the aspiration of more culturally liberative STEM doctoral mentorships. Black students need mentors who are willing and equipped to be advocates and accomplices in their success.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Proceeding:
- The DOI is not currently available.
