Doctoral Socialization, Identity, and Critical Thinking: A Review

Introduction and Overview of the Three Articles

In "The Socialization of Doctoral Students," authors John C. Weidman and Elizabeth L. Stein utilize a framework for graduate and professional socialization to explain how doctoral students are socialized into the academic rules of research and scholarship. The researchers reveal information about doctoral students' perceptions of social science and the foundations of education. They also present findings on student socialization with peers and with faculty members. The authors employed a multivariate analysis to support the framework, which helped to emphasize the social relationships between students and faculty. The main objectives of the study were to examine faculty structures in relation to student socialization and to identify ways to create a supportive environment that could assist graduate students — drawing on academic practices and institutional policies to help colleges develop professionals.

In the second article, "Developmental Networks and Learning: Toward an Interdisciplinary Perspective on Identity Development During Doctoral Study," authors Vicki Baker and Lisa Lattuca explore two theory families — developmental networks and sociocultural perspectives — to create an interdisciplinary approach to doctoral studies as an alternative pathway toward becoming a professor. Baker and Lattuca review the main points of each theory before discussing their assumptions and how the two frameworks can be combined. The study also involves a discussion of existing research and theory. According to the authors, doctoral education is undergoing significant changes expected to continue in the long term. One major change is the increasing number of students pursuing non-academic careers and the growth in professional doctorate programs. The framework used in the study helped address the concerns of scholars by linking academic development to identity formation among students undertaking doctoral studies with the aim of joining the faculty. The central objective was to explore students' relationships both within and outside of academia.

The third article, "Critical Thinking in Distance Education and Traditional Education," by Lyn Visser, Yusra Visser, and Charles Schlosser, differs from the first two in that it does not specifically investigate the perceptions of doctoral students. Instead, the authors focus on critical thinking. They begin by describing critical thinking as organized and rational thinking used by individuals to determine the validity of perceptions, thoughts, or opinions. The researchers further argue that certain behaviors and habits of mind are linked to critical thinking, namely: problem definition, analysis of assumptions and bias, posing questions, evidence analysis, avoidance of oversimplification, and countering confusion. Although the authors acknowledge that critical thinking requires an understanding of the issues under investigation, they also argue that it requires flexibility — defined as the willingness to change one's opinion upon re-examination of facts or evidence. The authors contend that critical thinking is an essential skill for students at every level of education, particularly at the graduate level. They argue that thinking critically exposes students to different perspectives, which may help them adapt to new environments. Critical thinking, in their view, can function both as a mediating mechanism and as a learning outcome.

In "The Socialization of Doctoral Students," the research questions are as follows: What are the different student experiences in various graduate courses? In what ways do socialization perspectives help in identifying changes that ought to be made to enhance graduate programs? What does a schematic depiction of the graduate and professional student socialization process look like? What is socialization among graduate students?

In "Developmental Networks and Learning," only one question is investigated: What roles do relationships play in the development of professional identity among doctoral students?

No research question was explicitly posed in "Critical Thinking in Distance Education and Traditional Education."

Research Questions

The common theme across all three articles is the investigation of behaviors and habits of mind — whether linked to critical thinking, developmental networks, or the socialization of students.

Weidman and Stein begin by reviewing various perspectives on scholarly practice as discussed by researchers including Weidman et al. (2001), Light (1974), Finkelstein (1984), and Bowen and Schuster (1986), among others. The authors then focus on the role of scholarship in the latter part of their review, ending with a discussion of the importance of research and teaching.

Organization of Literature Reviews and Key Themes

Baker and Lattuca use a broader set of authors and more recent publications in their literature review, including Roberts (2002), who discussed the training received by doctoral students; Bartels, de Weert, and Huisman (2002), who discussed the routinization of faculty members; Green (1991); Golde (2000); Tenenbaum, Crosby, and Gliner (2001); Boud and Lee (2005); and Paglis, Green, and Bauer (2006) — all of whom suggest that the majority of doctoral studies focus on the socialization of students.

The main theme of the third article was to investigate the factors that influence the integration of critical thinking in university education. A secondary theme examined obstacles to incorporating critical thinking in higher education. Key sources used in the literature review include Paul, Elder, and Bartell (1997); Bransford, Brown, and Cocking (2000); Scriven and Paul (2000); Fisher (2001); and ADEC (2001).

Conclusion

All three articles acknowledge the informal structures perceived by graduate students regarding social relations between themselves and members of faculty. Collectively, these articles deepen understanding of the link between identity and knowledge in the development of social relationships between students and faculty, and each contributes a distinct perspective — socialization, identity development, or critical thinking — to the broader study of the graduate education experience.