English for specific playfulness? How doctoral students in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics manipulate genre

2020 ◽  
Vol 60 ◽  
pp. 26-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffaella Negretti ◽  
Lisa McGrath
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
And Mathematics

scholarly journals Doctoral Advisor-Advisee Pairing in STEM Fields: Selection Criteria and Impact of Faculty, Student and Departmental Factors

10.28945/2302 ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 343-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simy Joy ◽  
Xiang Fen Liang ◽  
Diana Bilimoria ◽  
Susan Perry
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Selection Criteria ◽  
Doctoral Programs ◽  
Career Stage ◽  
American University ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Time Of Admission

Unlike the doctoral programs in places where students are paired with advisors at the time of admission itself, most US programs require the students to choose their advisors, and the advisors to formally accept the students as advisees. Little research has been done to understand how students and faculty approach this mutual selection and pairing process. This paper examines this process in STEM departments (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics), with specific focus on factors influencing the decisions. Based on focus groups and interviews of doctoral students and faculty from STEM departments in an American university, we identify criteria applied by students and faculty in making their choices. Students were found to assess faculty on available funding, area of research, personality, ability to graduate students fast, and career prospects for students, and faculty to assess students on their qualifications/credentials and perceived ability to contribute to research. We also found that this mutual assessment was not objective, but influenced by perceptions associated with faculty gender and career stage, and student nationality. In the end, whether students and faculty were actually paired with persons of their choice depended on departmental factors including prevalent pairing practices, restrictions on student numbers per faculty, and reward structure. We discuss implications of the findings for research and practice.

scholarly journals Antecedents of overtime work: The case of junior academics

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-397
Author(s):  
Irina Frei ◽  
Christian Grund
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Working Hours ◽  
Longitudinal Survey ◽  
Family Responsibilities ◽  
Overtime Work ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Longitudinal Survey Data ◽  
Part Time ◽  
And Mathematics

Despite the ongoing public debate about precarious working conditions in academia, there is only little evidence on working hours and overtime work for the group of (non-tenured) junior academics. We make use of unique longitudinal survey data on the occupational situation and careers of doctoral students and doctorate holders in science, technology, engineering and mathematics fields in Germany. We find that overtime hours are less pronounced among firm employees holding a doctorate and among postdocs than they are among doctoral students. This result is prevalent both between individuals in the cross-section and with regard to individual fixed effects panel estimations. In contrast to firm employees, overtime hours are in a considerable way positively associated with part-time contracts for doctoral students. Furthermore, our results reveal that individuals’ career orientation is positively associated with extra hours. In contrast, individuals with family responsibilities spend significantly fewer hours at work.

Tipping Points

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 286-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Collin M. Ruud ◽  
Evthokia S. Saclarides ◽  
Casey E. George-Jackson ◽  
Sarah T. Lubienski
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Graduate Programs ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Career Preparation ◽  
University Administrators ◽  
Doctoral Study ◽  
Student Relationships ◽  
Stem Programs ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
And Mathematics

This exploratory mixed-methods study examines factors contributing to doctoral students’ consideration of departure from their graduate programs with comparisons made by sex and affiliation with Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) programs. Logistic regression and qualitative analyses point to the importance of strong relationships with advisors and faculty, collegiality, and preparation for students’ desired careers. Yet, results also suggest that women in STEM may be less satisfied than their male peers with the advising and career preparation received. The findings propose that university administrators and faculty should foster better faculty–student relationships and help students make more informed decisions prior to entering doctoral study.

scholarly journals Searching for Metacognitive Generalities: Areas of Convergence in Learning to Write for Publication Across Doctoral Students in Science and Engineering

2021 ◽  
pp. 074108832098479
Author(s):  
Raffaella Negretti
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Course Completion ◽  
Rhetorical Strategies ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Writing Course ◽  
Metacognitive Intervention ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
And Control ◽  
Dynamic Interplay

What aspects of writing are doctoral students metacognitive about when they write research articles for publication? Contributing to the recent conversation about metacognition in genre pedagogy, this study adopts a qualitative approach to illustrate what students have in common, across disciplines and levels of expertise, and the dynamic interplay of genre knowledge and metacognition in learning to write for research. 24 doctoral students in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) were recruited from subsequent runs of a genre-based writing course and were interviewed within a 2-year period when they submitted an article for publication, 3 to 11 months after course completion. Over time and across disciplines, doctoral students’ metacognition converges on four main themes: genre analysis as a “tool” to read and write, audience and the readers’ mind, rhetorical strategies, and the writing process. Furthermore, these themes are extensively combined in the students’ thinking, confirming conceptualizations of expertise as an integration of knowledge types. Metacognition of these themes invoked increased perceived confidence and control over writing, suggesting key areas where metacognitive intervention may be promising.

scholarly journals We need to address ableism in science

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (7) ◽  
pp. 507-510
Author(s):  
Raven J. Peterson
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
The United States ◽  
Academic Science ◽  
Stem Fields ◽  
Disabled People ◽  
Unique Problem ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
And Mathematics

In science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, disabled people remain a significantly underrepresented part of the workforce. Recent data suggests that about 20% of undergraduates in the United States have disabilities, but representation in STEM fields is consistently lower than in the general population. Of those earning STEM degrees, only about 10% of undergraduates, 6% of graduate students, and 2% of doctoral students identify as disabled. This suggests that STEM fields have difficulty recruiting and retaining disabled students, which ultimately hurts the field, because disabled scientists bring unique problem-solving perspectives and input. This essay briefly explores the ways in which ableism—prejudice against disabled people based on the assumption that they are “less than” their nondisabled peers—in research contributes to the exclusion of disabled scientists and suggests ways in which the scientific community can improve accessibility and promote the inclusion of disabled scientists in academic science.

scholarly journals Transitions Across Multi-Worlds: Experiences of Chinese International Doctoral Students in STEM Fields

2021 ◽  
pp. 102831532110162
Author(s):  
Yibo Yang ◽  
Judith MacCallum
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Social Worlds ◽  
Doctoral Study ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
International Doctoral Students ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Practical Implications

In the context of internationalization, this longitudinal qualitative study explores the diverse and challenging experiences of Chinese international doctoral students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. The endeavor is to identify factors that facilitate or constrain their successful completion of a PhD abroad over time. By incorporating a three-dimensional multi-world conceptual framework that highlights the relationship between an individual’s research, personal, and social worlds, this study identified six patterns of congruence or difference across the worlds and the corresponding transitions, illustrated with narratives for each pattern. Evidence shows that congruence of an individual’s multi-worlds facilitates, but difference does not necessarily mean constraint when differences are respected, understood, and accommodated. Rather, it is how the transitions are negotiated that is important for the success of transnational and transcultural PhD study. This article contributes a conceptual framework, empirical evidence, and practical implications to the understanding of doctoral study abroad experiences.

To Pursue or Not to Pursue STEM? Faculty Behavior Enhances Student Involvement in STEM Roles by Signaling Role-Specific Support

2021 ◽  
pp. 194855062110350
Author(s):  
Jasmine B. Norman ◽  
Melissa A. Fuesting ◽  
Danielle M. Geerling ◽  
Jacqueline M. Chen ◽  
Shelly L. Gable ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Student Involvement ◽  
Stem Fields ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Faculty Behavior ◽  
Specific Support ◽  
Stem Students ◽  
Stem Faculty ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Student Relationship

Four studies examine the faculty–student relationship as a mechanism through which students ascertain their place in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Studies 1 and 2 use experimental methods to demonstrate STEM faculty who behave communally, relative to independently, increase undergraduates’ belonging and interest in STEM roles through anticipation of greater role-specific support (i.e., support that emphasizes guiding students through structures and activities of field-specific roles). Study 3 then examined the consequences of role-specific support for undergraduates’ belonging and interest in STEM. Students anticipated more belonging and interest in STEM roles when faculty provided high levels of role-specific support. Finally, STEM doctoral students’ perception of role-specific support from faculty related to their belonging and future identification in STEM fields (Study 4). Taken together, these studies demonstrate the importance of students’ construals of role-specific support from faculty, and how faculty behavior signals role-specific support, with benefits for student involvement in STEM.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document