An official website of the United States government
Faculty advisors perform a vital role in doctoral students’ experiences in their programs, but they often lack training in how to provide essential psychosocial support to their doctoral advisees. This can result in negative graduate experiences, especially for underrepresented groups. While research into psychological safety in the corporate world has highlighted its importance, the importance of psychological safety is less understood in academia, particularly in the context of graduate engineering education. This study seeks to understand how engineering faculty advisors influence the psychological safety of doctoral students they advise and the impact of psychological safety on the student’s graduate experience. We use a mixed methods design and in-depth qualitative study to address the research aims. The mixed methods design uses a survey followed by exploratory interviews. Additional narrative interviews will be conducted to gather rich data on student experiences with psychological safety and how they evolve over time.
more »
« less
Work in Progress: Design and Preliminary Results of a Survey to Explore Relationships Between Faculty Mentoring, Engineering Doctoral Student Psychological Safety, and Work Outcomes
A psychologically safe environment is characterized by people who feel safe to voice ideas and concerns, willingly seek feedback, have positive intentions to one another, engage in constructive confrontation, and feel safe to take risks and experiment. Outside of academia, psychological safety has been shown to impact creativity, work performance, and work engagement. In academic research environments, faculty have a major leadership role in cultivating a psychologically safe environment amongst their academic research teams. Effective graduate student mentoring, which includes both career and psychosocial support, is critical to the development and retention of talented engineers in the US workforce. There is a need to better understand how engineering departments can cultivate more inclusive, psychologically safe environments in which graduate students feel safe to engage in interpersonal risk-taking, especially in research settings. Guided by the Conservation of Resources theory, this project aims to address the following research question: What are the relationships between faculty advisor mentoring, doctoral student psychological safety, and the subsequent positive and negative outcomes for doctoral students? This work in progress paper presents the first quantitative phase of an explanatory mixed methods research design within the overarching project. The quantitative phase will address the following research aims: 1) Identify relationships between mentorship, psychological safety, and engineering doctoral student mental health, 2) Identify mentoring competencies that are predictive of research group psychological safety, and 3) Identify how different demographics experience mentoring and psychological safety in their research groups. Researchers developed a survey consisting of five pre-existing scales, four open-ended questions, and demographics questions. The scales include dyadic and team psychological safety, mentoring competency, mental health and well-being, and job stress. The survey was reviewed by graduate students outside of the participant pool at multiple institutions as well as an external advisory board panel and revised to improve clarity and ensure the selection of appropriate subscales. The survey will be administered via Qualtrics. Graduate students who have been enrolled in their doctoral program for at least one year and currently have a doctoral research advisor will be recruited to participate in the survey at four public, research-intensive institutions. The planned target sample size is 200-300 graduate students. This paper will present the design of the survey and preliminary survey results. As the first part of a larger mixed-methods study, the survey responses provide insight into graduate level engineering education and how doctoral students can be better supported.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10580390
- Publisher / Repository:
- ASEE Conferences
- Date Published:
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Portland, Oregon
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
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
-
Research on psychological safety has been growing in recent years due to its role in promoting creativity and innovation, among other items. This is because teams with high levels of psychological safety feel safe to express ideas and opinions. While we are becoming more aware of the importance of psychological safety in teaming, there is limited evidence in how to facilitate or build it within teams, particularly in an educational context. This paper was developed to respond to this research void by identifying the impact of teaming interventions aimed at improving psychological safety in engineering design student teams. Specifically, we studied two cohorts of students in a cornerstone design class (N = 414 students), one who received a series of video interventions and introduced role playing (intervention) and one who did not (control). These role assignments — referred to as the Lenses of Psychologically Safety - were created to promote key leadership attributes that have been shown to be crucial in facilitating psychologically safe teams. To compare the utility of the intervention, Psychological Safety was gathered at 5 key time points of a multi-week design project. The results identified three key findings. First, the interventions were successful in increasing psychological safety in engineering teams. In addition, the results indicated the utility of the Lenses of Psychological Safety throughout the design process. Finally, the results identified that groups who used these lenses had higher perceptions of Psychological Safety in their teams. Overall, these results indicated that psychological safety can be improved in engineering education through the intervention methods described within.more » « less
-
One of the most important developmental relationships in the doctoral student experience is that of the faculty advisor, and yet we know little about whether and how advisor relationships vary between first-generation and continuing-generation doctoral students. Drawing on qualitative interviews with 83 late-stage doctoral students in biological sciences, we explore differences in student perceptions of their relationships with advisors. Narratives reveal a continuum of relationship types, including strained, evolving, supportive, and equal. In equal relationships, doctoral students feel more like collegial partners working alongside their advisors. While continuing-generation and first-generation students are similarly represented among strained and evolving relationships, first-generation students rarely attain equal relationship status. The presented findings offer implications for understanding how inequality shapes student–advisor relationships, the role of collegiality in doctoral education’s hidden curriculum, and the supports needed to foster equity for first-generation students in graduate programs.more » « less
-
This work in progress paper describes the development of an instrument to assess graduate student motivation towards doctoral degree completion. Doctoral attrition rates in the United States have been estimated to be around 40% over a 10 year completion period [8]. King [8] also found that less than 20% of students complete their doctoral programs in the expected timeframe of between 3 and 4 years. These results indicate the need to better understand factors that affect graduate students' experience during their doctoral program, particularly their choice to persist, so we can ensure equal opportunities for Ph.D completion. Spaulding and Rockinson-Szapkiw [12] talk about personal factors that contribute to doctoral students’ persistence. These factors include motivation, strategies for writing the dissertation, time management, and attributes such as credibility, commitment, and increased monetary compensation. As part of this research study, we have selected to focus upon student motivation as motivation theories have been found to provide explanations for factors that influence individuals choices and actions [3]. Specifically, we have selected the Expectancy-Value Theory (EVT) of motivation because it considers social, cultural, and psychological factors [1], making it beneficial for elements that could be relevant in a graduate studies program. This work seeks to create a motivational instrument specific to an engineering graduate studies program setting. Our instrument development process began with the Engineering Motivation Survey, developed by Brown & Matusovich [2]. This survey instrument was designed to measure motivation of undergraduate engineering students towards engineering education and career choices. Ultimately, the purpose was to measure motivational factors that contribute toward choices to pursue and complete engineering degrees. The 35 likert scale questions were rephrased to focus on a graduate student setting. After the rephrasing, the draft survey was used in a Think-aloud protocol with six engineering graduate students to determine what changes may be needed to better support its new area of implementation. Upon finalization of the graduate student engineering motivation survey we will apply it to measure civil and environmental engineering graduate students’ motivation towards their doctoral degree completion as part of their participation in a Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN) program.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--48345
