Annotated Bibliography in Education

Annotated Bibliography
Gardner, S. K. (2009). Conceptualizing success in doctoral education: Perspectives of faculty in seven disciplines. The Review of Higher Education, 32(3), 383-406. doi: 10.1353/rhe.0.0075
This study was carried out to understand the concept of success in the context of doctoral education. According to the author, the conceptualisation of success in doctoral education remains elusive. Does is it mean achieving a high grade point average or completing the degree? Does it mean perseverance from year to year? Is it dependent on discipline? What is the difference between a successful student and an unsuccessful one? Through in-depth interviews with 38 members of faculty drawn from seven disciplines at a research university in southern United States, the author sought to answer these questions. The study particularly sought to understand how the conceptualisation of success in doctoral education is influenced by the culture and context of discipline. The findings of the study established that disciplinary context and culture significantly shaped how members of faculty understood doctoral student success. More specifically, there were marked differences in conceptualisations of success between departments with the highest and lowest rates of doctoral degree completion. In departments with high completion rates, faculty members described high self-direction among students, research dissemination, as well as a culture of caring, cohesion, and mutual respect as important for success in doctoral education. On the other hand, faculty members in departments with low completion rates associated success with hard work. For all departments, employment prospects and institutional support were described as important drivers of doctoral student success. A major strength of this study is its qualitative nature. It provides an in-depth understanding of doctoral student success conceptualisation amongst faculty members. The insights of the study could be valuable in addressing the problem of attrition amongst doctoral students. Even so, generalising the findings beyond the setting of the study may be difficult due to the size of the sample used.
Smith, A. E., & Hatmaker, D. M. (2014). Knowing, doing, and becoming: Professional identity construction among public affairs doctoral students. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 20(4), 545-564.
Smith & Hatmaker sought to examine how socialisation and professional identity development occurs among doctoral students pursuing research in public affairs. Based on semi-structured phone interviews with 27 public affairs doctoral students in diverse disciplines, the authors sought to develop a model of individual, organisational, and relational socialisation efforts that influence how public affairs doctoral students become researchers. The participants were drawn from 25 universities spread across different countries in the Americas and Europe. The research found that mentorship relationships between faculty and students were important for socialisation and professional identity construction. In addition to faculty mentoring, the study also established that institutional initiatives (e.g. research methods courses and formal advising) and student initiatives (e.g. reaching out to faculty and starting research projects) play a crucial role in socialisation and professional identity development. They do so by enhancing research skills and expertise, area knowledge, visibility, reputation, independence, self-confidence, and ethical behaviour. These are crucial hallmarks of professional identity. Similar to Gardner’s (2009) study, this study provides detailed understanding of the research problem. Understanding the process of professional identity development is vital for helping students become more productive researchers. Faculty members and administrators of doctoral programs can use the findings to improve the training and preparation of doctoral students. Nonetheless, some shortcomings are worth mentioning. First, the interviews were phone-based as opposed to face-to-face. The choice of telephone interviews was mainly informed by the geographical dispersion of the respondents. Telephone interviews may limit the extent to which the researcher conducts in-depth interrogation. Nonetheless, the fairly small sample used may not be representative of the larger population. Furthermore, the study relied on self-selected participants. This group is likely to be more motivated to achieve professional development compared to the overall population of public affairs doctoral students.
Baker, V. L., & Pifer, M. J. (2011). The role of relationships in the transition from doctor to independent scholar. Studies in Continuing Education, 33(1), 5-17. doi: 10.1080/0158037X.2010.515569
This aim of this study was to explore the role of students’ relationships in identity development – the process of transitioning from doctoral student to independent scholar. Transition to independence occurs in the second stage of doctoral education, which essentially involves coursework completion, passing candidacy exams, and beginning the dissertation process. Nevertheless, little research efforts have been directed to this critical stage. This study sought to fill this gap in research. Using a semi-structured protocol, the researchers interviewed 31 doctoral students from a renowned research institution. The selected participants had either completed Stage 2 or were currently in Stage 2 of the doctoral education process. The results of the study indicate that students’ relationships (interactions and networks) constitute valuable sources of support during Stage 2. These relationships include not only regular interactions such as involvement in research projects, but also informal interactions such as peer-to-peer conversations. Students’ relationships influence learning, role enactment, self-efficacy, and motivation, ultimately contributing to identity development. For faculty and educational practitioners, this knowledge is crucial for successful preparation for academic practice. The second stage of doctoral education is without a doubt a critical stage. Students transition from dependence on faculty to independence – they become self-directed. Without the right behaviours and orientation, succeeding in this stage can be quite difficult. It is, however, important to note that identity development may be influenced by other factors such as institutional factors. Furthermore, similar to Gardner’s (2009) and Smith & Hatmaker’s (2014) studies, the qualitative nature of this study limits the generalisability of the findings to the larger population. Another limitation is that the study does not consider the possible negative consequences of students’ relationships on identity development.