An official website of the United States government
This research full paper explores interview data with N=36 engineering graduate students to understand the factors and characteristics of graduate socialization, with the effort of better preparing students to succeed in doctoral programs. This research is motivated by the alarming fact that nearly one-third of engineering doctoral students will not finish their PhD programs; however, little research has been conducted on the various factors that can lead to attrition or enhance persistence in graduate engineering programs. This paper presents the results from the interview phase of a larger study investigating doctoral engineering socialization, attrition, persistence, and career trajectories. The participants for this study come from large research-intensive universities across the United States, and were sampled for maximum variation in a number of different categories, including stage in their doctoral program, gender, and race. Upon collecting and analyzing interview data from our participants through constant comparative and content analysis methods, several themes arose including concerns for mental health in engineering graduate students and uncertainties with joining the culture of academia in their future careers. Further, although the participants for this study are currently graduate students who anticipate completing their PhDs, nearly half of the participants discussed strongly considered leaving at some point. This study adds to the body of literature surrounding engineering attrition and the underlying issues driving engineering PhDs away from academic engineering careers.
more »
« less
Elements of disenchantment: Exploring the development of academic disenchantment among US engineering graduate students
Abstract BackgroundGiven high attrition rates and lack of interest in faculty careers, it is crucial to understand how doctoral engineering students conceptualize academia and academic careers. Purpose/HypothesisThis study aims to characterize the development of academic disenchantment among engineering students who have considered departure from their doctoral programs. Schema theory was used to explore how students develop and evolve in their conceptualizations of academia through their lived experiences. Design/MethodData were collected from 42 graduate students from research‐intensive universities across the United States who participated in qualitative, semi‐structured interviews investigating expectations for graduate school, experiences, attrition and persistence considerations, and career trajectories. The transcripts were thematically analyzed through open and axial coding to understand how students constructed their schemas of the academy. FindingsExperiences and quotations of four participants are presented to describe the results of the transcripts. Participants' misaligned expectations of their graduate program's values and practices, coupled with a lack of agency and support, led them to see their graduate programs as antagonistic to their short‐ and long‐term career success. Even for students who may likely persist through to PhD degree completion, the development of disenchantment dissuades students—even those who once desired a faculty career—from interest in the academy. ConclusionsBy understanding how disenchantment arose in our participants' experiences, we better understand how to equip students with resources that will help them navigate graduate programs. This research advances the literature by identifying underutilized opportunities to prepare students to cope with the challenges of engineering doctoral education.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1844878
- PAR ID:
- 10568912
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Engineering Education
- Volume:
- 114
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 1069-4730
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract BackgroundAlthough most engineering graduate students are funded and usually complete their degrees faster than other disciplines, attrition remains a problem in engineering. Existing research has explored the psychological and sociological factors contributing to attrition but not the structural factors impacting attrition. Purpose/HypothesisUsing systems theory, this study seeks to understand nuance in how underlying structural causes affect engineering graduate students' attrition experiences in ways that may differ from their official reasons for departure. Design/MethodsData were collected through semi‐structured interviews with seven departing or already departed engineering doctoral students from R1 graduate programs across the United States. Using thematic analysis, root cause analyses were conducted to understand participants' attrition experiences to explore how structures influence causes of departure. ResultsThe ways participants discuss root causes of their departure indicate differences in formal reasons for departure and underlying causes of departure. We highlight the role of informal and formal policy as root causes of a different attrition rationale often passed off as interpersonal issues. When interpreted as evidence of structural issues, the causes of departure show ways in which action–inaction, policy–“null” policy serve as structural features governing student attrition decision processes. We also highlight a form of benign neglect toward struggling graduate students. ConclusionThis study reveals important nuances underlying face‐value reasons of attrition indicating foundational structural issues contributing to engineering graduate student attrition. Coaching faculty in team management and encouraging close revision of departmental policies could help mitigate students' negative graduate experiences and decrease unnecessary attrition.more » « less
-
Abstract BackgroundGraduate education literature tends to focus on faculty careers with little attention to industry careers. However, more than one‐third of U.S. engineering doctorates enter industry. PurposeOur purpose is to understand engineering graduate students' interest in industry, academia, and government careers as it relates to their graduate engineering identities. Design/MethodA total of 249 engineering thesis master's and doctoral students completed a survey about their graduate engineering identities and career preferences. We created regression models to predict students' likelihood of pursuing careers in industry, academia, and government. Then, we used cluster analysis to understand the extent to which students are considering multiple options and used chi‐squared and ANOVA tests to compare the clusters. ResultsIn the regression model predicting an academic career, research recognition and research performance/competence were positive predictors and engineering performance/competence was a negative predictor. Regression models of industry and government described less than 10% of the variance. Four clusters emerged, which collectively demonstrate that engineering graduate students are considering careers in multiple sectors. Students with internships during graduate study were more likely to pursue industry careers. Master's students were underrepresented in the cluster with highest likelihood of an academic career. International students were keeping more options open than some domestic students. There were also differences by engineering discipline. ConclusionsEngineering graduate students are considering multiple career sectors. Advisors and education researchers should focus not only on academic career preparation but also on industry and government career preparation, particularly on preparing for multiple options simultaneously.more » « less
-
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
-
Current structures of STEM graduate programs raise questions about addressing graduates’ interest in multiple career paths, and how programs prepare graduates for positions increasingly available in varied occupations. This problem is addressed through an innovative doctoral program in engineering, Pathways to Entrepreneurship (PAtENT), which works to develop a scalable alternative student-centered framework. This research explores how this program responds to calls for graduate STEM education to address changes in science and engineering, the nature of the workforce, career goals, and how program components build an entrepreneurial mindset. A mixed-methods design includes a curriculum analysis showing alignment of program components to recommendations for Ph.D. STEM programs from the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Direct measures include surveys and interviews developed for current doctoral students and faculty to describe students’ and faculty perspectives about program components, particularly entrepreneurship and the patent process. The curriculum analysis shows strong alignment of the PAtENT program components and activities to the ten elements of the National Academies’ recommendations. A survey of graduate students in engineering, computing, and business show strong measures in engineering and entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Interviews of program participants and faculty demonstrate strong interest in patents and developing entrepreneurship. This innovative program in engineering focusing on obtaining a patent as a capstone shows potential to reform doctoral studies, so candidates are prepared not only for academic careers but a range of industry and government work environments. This work will lead to development of a model for other graduate STEM programs.more » « less
