Search for: All records

Community college transfer students represent a diverse and talented group to recruit to PhD and other graduate programs. Yet, little is known about practical strategies to support community college transfer students’ access to graduate training. Focusing specifically on transfer students in computer science and guided by social cognitive career theory, this manuscript draws on survey data from over 200 community college transfer students and utilizes a staged innovation design to examine a new intervention designed to pique transfer students’ interests in PhD study. Findings suggest that brief targeted interventions can significantly predict transfer students’ perceptions about PhD study, but that more sustained efforts will likely be necessary to influence transfer students’ more tangible degree plans. In addition to highlighting implications for future research, we identify strategies for faculty and staff seeking to support community college transfer students and build access to graduate training. 

Research Questions: While community college transfer (i.e., upward transfer) represents an important mechanism for advancing equity across STEM fields, existing studies of gender and women’s participation within computer science have largely excluded the perspectives of upward transfer students. We address this gap in the literature by exploring transfer receptivity and gender discrimination within computer science, guided by the following questions: (1) How do upward transfer computer science students report their receptivity experiences, and how might this differ by gender? (2) How do upward transfer computer science students make meaning of receptivity experiences, and how might that meaning making be shaped by gender? Methods: We use a sequential mixed methods design, relying on longitudinal survey and interview data from upward transfer computer science majors, collected throughout students’ first year at the receiving university. Results: Findings reveal that, relative to men, upward transfer women report greater experiences of transfer stigma and challenges accessing resources at the receiving university. Qualitative findings document additional nuances in how upward transfer students—especially women—describe resilience as they navigate the university campus, encounter navigation challenges at the university, and make meaning of various manifestations of transfer stigma on campus. Contributions: In addition to implications for research and theory, we discuss what universities can do to foster a more receptive environment for upward transfer women. Specific recommendations focus on ensuring that spaces for women in computing are inclusive of transfer students and, likewise, creating supportive transfer cohort communities that are inclusive of women. 

In the laboratory-based disciplines, selection of a principal investigator (PI) and research laboratory (lab) indelibly shapes doctoral students’ experiences and educational outcomes. Framed by the theoretical concept of person–environment fit from within a socialization model, we use an inductive, qualitative approach to explore how a sample of 42 early-stage doctoral students enrolled in biological sciences programs made decisions about fitting with a PI and within a lab. Results illuminated a complex array of factors that students considered in selecting a PI, including PI relationship, mentoring style, and professional stability. Further, with regard to students’ lab selection, peers and research projects played an important role. Students actively conceptualized trade-offs among various dimensions of fit. Our findings also revealed cases in which students did not secure a position in their first (or second) choice labs and had to consider their potential fit with suboptimal placements (in terms of their initial assessments). Thus, these students weighted different factors of fit against the reality of needing to secure financial support to continue in their doctoral programs. We conclude by presenting and framing implications for students, PIs, and doctoral programs, and recommend providing transparency and candor around the PI and lab selection processes. 

Purpose This study aims to examine how science, technology, engineering, and mathematics doctoral students interact with postdocs within the research laboratory, identifying the nature and potential impacts of student–postdoc mentoring relationships. Design/methodology/approach Using a sample of 53 doctoral students in the biological sciences, this study uses a sequential mixed-methods design. More specifically, a phenomenological approach enabled the authors to identify how doctoral students make meaning of their interactions with postdocs and other research staff. Descriptive statistics are used to examine how emergent themes might differ as a product of gender and race/ethnicity and the extent to which emergent themes may relate to key doctoral student socialization outcomes. Findings This study reveals six emergent themes, which primarily focus on how doctoral students receive instrumental and psychosocial support from postdocs in their labs. The most frequent emergent theme captures the unique ways in which postdocs provide ongoing, hands-on support and troubleshooting at the lab bench. When examining how this theme plays a role in socialization outcomes, the results suggest that doctoral students who described this type of support from postdocs had more positive mental health outcomes than those who did not describe this type of hands-on support. Originality/value Literature on graduate student mentorship has focused primarily on the impact of advisors, despite recent empirical evidence of a “cascading mentorship” model, in which senior students and staff also play a key mentoring role. This study provides new insights into the unique mentoring role of postdocs, focusing on the nature and potential impacts of student–postdoc interactions. 

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.