Search for: All records

Abstract BackgroundGraduate‐level education is gaining attention in engineering education scholarship. While “socialization” is a key term in doctoral literature, little is known about how socialization occurs over time. One common assumption asserts that socialization increases over time, encompassing factors such as belongingness, research ability, and advisor relationship as students acclimate to the norms and values of their advisors, departments, universities, and disciplines. We investigate engineering doctoral student socialization trends: students likely to complete their degrees and those who have questioned whether to persist in their programs. Understanding these trends is essential, as many students consider leaving their programs. Purpose/HypothesisThis paper aims to understand how socialization processes occur over several years in engineering students who questioned leaving their PhD programs. Design/MethodWe present longitudinal survey data collected from two cohorts (N_A = 113 andN_B = 355) of engineering doctoral students at R1 universities in the United States. Data were collected over 2 years through SMS surveys with participants receiving text messages three times per week. We analyzed data using descriptive and time series analysis methods. ResultsBoth cohorts showed lower levels of belongingness over time, reported declining advisor relationships, and experienced higher levels of stress. Students later in their programs also reported deteriorating overall social relationships. These findings contradict canonical socialization theory, which expects socialization to naturally improve over time. ConclusionWhile many assume socialization occurs passively and students acculturate into their department and research team over time, our results show students who question whether to persist are de‐socializing from graduate school. 

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. 

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.