scholarly journals The Manuscript Dissertation: A Means of Increasing Competitive Edge for Tenure-track Faculty Positions

10.28945/4093 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 273-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sydney Freeman Jr.
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Opportunity To Learn ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Tenure Track ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Competitive Edge ◽  
Tenure Track Faculty ◽  
Doctoral Candidate ◽  
Peer Reviewers ◽  
Academic Job Market

Aim/Purpose: The traditional doctoral dissertation is the first major research project that is led by doctoral students, but it does not necessarily prepare them to publish shorter articles in journals. The manuscript dissertation provides a way for doctoral students to establish themselves as researchers while gaining the experience of developing peer-reviewed manuscripts before graduation, thus enhancing career opportunities as tenure-track faculty. Background: This paper demonstrates how the manuscript dissertation can be employed to increase doctoral student publications before graduation. Methodology: This article uses autoethnography to describe the process and results of writing a manuscript dissertation. Contribution: This paper contrasts dissertation styles, explaining the benefits and challenges of the manuscript dissertation option in particular. Findings: I found that it was important to have an influential and established dissertation chair, develop credibility by displaying competence and clear goals, being curious about what you don’t know may be an asset and to be humble and comfortable with sharing what you don’t know. I also discuss the personal benefits I gained from developing a manuscript dissertation including producing refereed articles earlier, committee members serve as peer-reviewers of your chapters and gaining the opportunity to learn and master multiple methodological approaches. I also shared the challenges I encountered during my dissertation process which included, committee members not being familiar with and not being willing to invest the time to support me in developing the manuscript dissertation, the timeframe for completion of my dissertation was extended, and balancing my responsibilities as a doctoral candidate. I also discussed challenges that I had not experienced but still could be an issue for others utilizing this style of dissertation including, insuring the cohesion of publications and having the copyediting support. Recommendations for Practitioners: Dissertation advisors and chairs should consider recommending the manuscript dissertation to doctoral students interested in gaining the experience of developing peer-reviewed manuscripts and becoming tenure-track faculty. Recommendation for Researchers: Doctoral students interested in becoming tenure-track faculty should consider the manuscript dissertation option as a means of producing publications before graduation, thus increasing competitive edge in the academic job market. Impact on Society: Publication before graduation will help young scholars to produce high-quality research earlier in their academic careers. Future Research: Future research should examine the prevalence of the manuscript dissertation, allowing researchers to determine where and how commonly it is used.

Early careers of recent U.S. Social Science PhDs

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 6-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emory Morrison ◽  
Elizabeth Rudd ◽  
Maresi Nerad
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Labour Market ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Career Paths ◽  
Career Pathways ◽  
Transitional Period ◽  
Tenure Track ◽  
Comprehensive Survey ◽  
Tenure Track Position ◽  
Academic Job Market

In this article, we analyse findings of the largest, most comprehensive survey of the career paths of social science PhD graduates to date, Social Science PhDs - Five+Years Out (SS5). SS5 surveyed more than 3,000 graduates of U.S. PhD programmes in six social science fields six to ten years after earning their PhD. The survey collected data on family, career and graduate school experiences. Like previous studies in Australia, the U.K., the U.S.A. and Germany, SS5 found that graduates several years after completing their education had mostly positive labour market experiences, but only after undergoing a transitional period of insecurity and uncertainty. Most SS5 doctoral students wanted to become professors, despite the difficult academic job market and the existence of a non-academic market for PhD labour. Many respondents' career pathways included a delayed move into a faculty tenure-track position, but exceptionally few moved from a faculty tenure-track position into another labour market sector. Respondents reported that their PhD programmes had not trained them well in several skills important for academic and non-academic jobs. Men's and women's career paths were remarkably similar, but, we argue, women 'subsidised' gender equality in careers by paying higher personal costs than men. We conclude with recommendations.

scholarly journals The Doctoral Mentoring Relationship: The Phenomenology of Scholarly Leadership

10.28945/3882 ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 219-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason D Flora
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Lived Experiences ◽  
Doctoral Education ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Essential Elements ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Transformative Power ◽  
Doctoral Candidate

Aim/Purpose: Much has been written in academia about the meaningful relationship between doctoral students and their respective dissertation chairs. However, an often-overlooked benefit of the dissertation research process as a whole is its potential to professionally and personally transform the capacities of all concerned – the doctoral candidate, mentor/major professor, and committee. Background: From the exclusive perspective of the doctoral Chair/mentor, this qualitative study explores the potentially transformative power of the dissertation process as it relates to scholarly leadership. Methodology: In order to most accurately address the study’s research questions and to best capture the lived experiences of 4 purposefully selected doctoral chairs, each with varying degrees of dissertation guidance experience, the study was inten-tionally designed to leverage the phenomenological method. Data was collected through a series of in-person and phone interviews (each co-researcher was interviewed 3 times) and subsequently coded to determine emerging themes and categories relative to the co-researchers’ lived experiences as doctoral mentors. Contribution: Specific findings about what scholarly leadership means relative to doctoral student/mentor interactions, including how this pivotal relationship can be enhanced, support and contribute to current global higher education literature calling for increased understanding of and accountability within doctoral education as a whole. Such will further inform and enhance current mentoring best practices of graduate and undergraduate students alike. Findings: As a rich experiential education and learning opportunity, the essence of scholarly leadership features four essential elements: acting with authenticity, facilitating growth or change, holding vision, and acknowledging deficiency. Recommendations for Practitioners: It is recommended that practitioners of doctoral education, particularly at the dissertation Chair/mentor level, as well as institutionally, first genuinely value the results of this study, and, in turn, authentically and consistently implement such best practices in order to meaningfully enhance the quality of the overall doctoral experience. Recommendation for Researchers: Implicit below Impact on Society: Implementation of the study’s findings likewise has the potential to positively actualize the lives of doctoral mentors/major professors in their roles as educators, scholars, and life-long learners. Future Research: Further research is necessary to determine the relationship between scholarly research and each of its attendant essential elements: authenticity, facilitative behavior, vision, and deficiency.

scholarly journals Mind the Gap: Transitioning from Doctoral Graduates to Early Career Faculty

10.28945/4409 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 543-566
Author(s):  
Kate McCormick ◽  
Libba Willcox
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Identity Construction ◽  
Graduate Programs ◽  
Academic Identity ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Tenure Track ◽  
Doctoral Graduates ◽  
Early Career Faculty ◽  
Doctoral Socialization

Aim/Purpose: Graduate programs aim to prepare students for future professional roles, yet doctoral graduates often earn faculty positions at institutions that differ from those in which they were socialized. Navigating this “preparation gap” can produce feelings of uncertainty, tension, and, ultimately, dissonance. This collaborative autoethnographic study explores the gap as it was experienced by two early career faculty in a U.S. context. Background: The landscape of academia is rapidly changing, meaning graduate programs cannot prepare each graduate student for every potential professional role offered to them. Therefore, as doctoral graduates emerge from their respective graduate programs, an inevitable gap in preparation exists. This gap in preparation mirrors a gap in the graduate socialization literature, which is limited in describing how early career faculty are socialized into their first positions. Methodology: The paper discusses a year-long collaborative autoethnographic study conducted by two tenure-track early career faculty in Education & Arts fields at universities in the U.S. The study employs Clancy’s (2010) theory of Perpetual Identity Constructing as a theoretical framework to examine the perceived dissonance produced during the transition from doctoral graduates to early career faculty. Contribution: This collaborative autoethnographic account of two early career, tenure-track faculty members’ transition from doctoral graduate to assistant professors expands the literature on doctoral socialization, academic identities, and the potential of qualitative modes of inquiry. Specifically, it recognizes that doctoral graduates experience dissonance and undergo identity construction during the first year. Findings: Our findings revealed three categories repeated in our collaborative autoethnographic data that potentially serve as a window to illuminate the complexity of the dissonance across the gap: support, connection, and control. Each category includes varying levels of dissonance with the self, department, institution, and fields of which we were part. Using Perpetual Identity Constructing theory, each category was examined through the three-stages of academic identity construction. Recommendations for Practitioners: The study has implications for practitioners, specifically those who help to prepare doctoral students for positions at teaching-intensive universities. We recommend doctoral granting institutions expand formal and informal socialization programming to enhance students’ awareness and preparation for the contexts and tensions they may encounter. Recommendation for Researchers: Additional fine-grained studies, like ours, are warranted to further illuminate the complex interaction between the gap in socialization and the academic identity construction process as early career faculty. Impact on Society: Awareness that deconstruction and reconstruction of identity continues beyond doctoral socialization could better prepare future faculty for the perpetual identity work across a career; it has the potential to produce better adjusted early career faculty who improve student outcomes and conduct research that impacts society. Future Research: Based on the findings of this study, future areas of research should further investigate the experiences of early career faculty, in particular their socialization experiences during the transition from candidacy to first career positions.

The Disciplinary Differences in the Characteristics and Effects of Non-Tenure-Track Faculty

2021 ◽  
pp. 016237372110304
Author(s):  
Di Xu ◽  
Florence Xiaotao Ran
Keyword(s):  
Tenure Track ◽  
Subsequent Performance ◽  
State College ◽  
College System ◽  
Tenure Track Faculty ◽  
Engineering Mathematics ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Student Sorting ◽  
Using Data

Using data with detailed instructor employment information from a state college system, this study examines disciplinary variations in the characteristics and effects of non-tenure-track faculty hired through temporary and long-term employment. We identify substantial differences in demographic and employment characteristics between the two types of non-tenure-line faculty, where the differences are most pronounced in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and health-related fields (STEM) at 4-year colleges. Using an instrumental variables strategy to address student sorting, our analyses indicate that taking introductory courses with temporary adjuncts reduces subsequent interest, and the effects are particularly large in STEM fields at 4-year colleges. Long-term non-tenure faculty are generally comparable with tenure-track faculty in student subsequent interest, but tenure-track faculty are associated with better subsequent performance in a handful of fields.

scholarly journals There are Discipline-Based Differences in Authors’ Perceptions Towards Open Access Publishing

2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Shen
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
The United States ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Tenured Faculty ◽  
Tenure Track ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Tenure Track Faculty

Objective – To determine reasons authors choose to publish in open access (OA) education journals, which provides readers with unrestricted free online access to published articles, and investigate ways in which publishing practices in the discipline of education affects authors’ willingness to publish in these journals. Design – Web-based survey questionnaire. Setting – The survey was conducted over the Internet through email invitations. Subjects – A total of 309 authors who published in OA journals in education participated in this survey for a response rate of 27.9%. Methods – Researchers surveyed authors who published in selected education journals from 2007 to 2008. The journal titles where generated from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). All chosen journals were peer-reviewed and published either original research or overviews of research results. In addition, all were in English and published in the United States. A total of 1,107 authors were invited to participate via email. The survey was delivered through commercial online survey tool SurveyMonkey and consisted of multiple choice and open-ended questions. It was open from early March to April 16, 2009. Main Results – The survey had a response rate of 27.9%. The majority of participants were tenured faculty (42.0%), tenure-track faculty (25.9%), and non-tenure track faculty (12.1%). The rest of participants (20%) consisted of adjunct instructors, graduate students, administrators, and individuals working in non-academic institutions such as government agencies. Most authors surveyed have published between 10 and 20 articles (20.6%), or over 20 articles (30.4%) in print and electronic journals (e-journals). The majority of authors also reported that one (23.3%) or between 2 to 5 (54%) of their articles was published in OA format. When choosing a journal for publications, authors surveyed ranked peer-review to be the most important determinant. Other important determinants included “good match” (ranked second most important) for authors’ manuscripts and reputation of the journal (third) and editorial board (fourth). Citation impact, such as the ISI impact factor (eighth), and copyright retention (tenth) were ranked as some of the least important factors. Researcher also noted a “surprisingly low” (p. 124) correlation between authors’ interest in copyright retention and practices of self-archiving. Thirty-seven percent of authors surveyed reported self-archiving at least one of their publications, but just over 35% of the same group considered copyright retention a determinant when choosing journals for publication. Overall, only 22% of the authors surveyed deemed e-journals to be “less desirable” than print journals. The majority of both tenured faculty (77.4%) and tenure-track faculty (72%) surveyed found e-journals “acceptable” or difference between print and electronic journal format “not an issue.” Only 16.8% of authors surveyed had published in journals that required author fees. Moreover, over 56% of authors indicated they would not publish in journals requiring such fees. Most authors reported they were either very aware (45.1%) or somewhat aware (38.9%) of the concept of OA publishing. However, their perceptions of OA publishing varied: • 47.7% believed OA journals have faster publication times, while 33.6% disagreed and 18.5% offered no opinion. • 57.3% of authors believed OA journals have larger readerships. However, when asked whether OA articles would be cited more frequently than others, only one third of authors agreed, while one third disagreed and one third offered no opinion. • Just under half of the authors (49.4%) thought OA journals are not less prestigious than subscription based journals, while 18.8% had no opinion. Lastly, it should be noted that only 7.1% of authors credited their institution’s library for making them aware of the OA publishing concept. Most credited their colleagues (42.1%), Google searches for publishing opportunities (40.4%), and professional societies (29.3%) for raising their awareness of OA. Moreover, based on voluntary general comments left at end of the survey, researchers observed that some authors viewed the terms open access and electronic “synonymously” and thought of OA publishing only as a “format change” (p.125). Conclusion – The study revealed some discipline-based differences in authors’ attitudes toward scholarly publishing and the concept of OA. The majority of authors publishing in education viewed author fees, a common OA publishing practice in life and medical sciences, as undesirable. On the other hand, citation impact, a major determinant for life and medical sciences publishing, was only a minor factor for authors in education. These findings provide useful insights for future research on discipline-based publication differences. The findings also indicated peer review is the primary determinant for authors publishing in education. Moreover, while the majority of authors surveyed considered both print and e-journal format to be equally acceptable, almost one third viewed OA journals as less prestigious than subscription-based publications. Some authors also seemed to confuse the concept between OA and electronic publishing. These findings could generate fresh discussion points between academic librarians and faculty members regarding OA publishing.

scholarly journals Perceptions of Hospital Pharmacists Concerning Clinical Research: A Survey Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Lee ◽  
Karen Dahri ◽  
Tim T Y Lau ◽  
Stephen Shalansky
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Research ◽  
Clinical Pharmacy ◽  
Opportunity To Learn ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Pharmacy Services ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Hospital Pharmacists ◽  
Conducting Research

<p><strong>ABSTRACT</strong></p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Few studies have attempted to determine the proportion of Canadian hospital pharmacists involved in clinical research, despite a general consensus that research should be an essential component of a pharmacist’s professional role.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective was to characterize the involvement in clinical pharmacy research of hospital pharmacists in the 4 health authorities of the Lower Mainland of British Columbia (collectively known as the Lower Mainland Pharmacy Services). The secondary objective was to identify perceived barriers to conducting research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Pharmacists employed within Lower Mainland Pharmacy Services were invited to participate in an online cross-sectional survey, for completion in August and September 2015. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the results. Groups of survey participants were compared to examine differences in measured outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 534 pharmacists were surveyed, with a response rate of 16% (85/534). Overall, 77% (55/71) of the respondents reported having participated in research, and 87% (62/71) expressed interest in conducting future research. Chart reviews (78%, 36/46) and surveys (41%, 19/46) were the most common study designs used in prior research. Participants self-identified their research-related strengths as literature evaluation (46%, 27/59) and hypothesis generation (44%, 26/59). Conversely, 81% (48/59) of respondents self-identified statistical analysis as a weakness. Most respondents stated that personal satisfaction (82%, 49/60) and the opportunity to learn about disease states (78%, 47/60) were the driving factors for conducting research. The most commonly cited barrier to conducting research was lack of time (92%, 55/60). Opportunities to join existing teams (73%, 44/60) and mentorship programs (70%, 42/60) were identified as the most popular arrangements for encouraging future research.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most of the pharmacists who responded to this survey reported having participated in clinical pharmacy research, but a lack of dedicated time appears to be a major hurdle to greater research participation. A targeted program increasing exposure to existing research teams and mentorship opportunities is recommended for promoting future research.</p><p><strong>RÉSUMÉ</strong></p><p><strong>Contexte : </strong>Peu d’études ont cherché à déterminer la proportion de “pharmaciens d’hôpitaux canadiens qui contribuent à la recherché clinique, et ce, malgré un consensus voulant que la recherche doive être un élément essentiel du rôle professionnel des pharmaciens.</p><p><strong>Objectifs : </strong>L’objectif principal était d’offrir un portrait de la contribution à la recherche sur la pharmacie clinique des pharmaciens d’hôpitaux des quatre régies régionales des basses-terres continentales de la Colombie-Britannique (appelées collectivement <em>Lower Mainland Pharmacy Services</em>, c.-à-d. services de pharmacie des basses-terres continentales). L’objectif secondaire était de recenser les éléments perçus comme des obstacles à la réalisation de recherches.</p><p><strong>Méthodes : </strong>Les pharmaciens employés au sein des services de pharmacie des basses-terres continentales ont été invités à participer par voie électronique à une enquête transversale qui devait être complétée en août et en septembre 2015. Des statistiques descriptives ont été employées pour analyser les résultats. On a aussi comparé des groupes de participants à l’enquête afin d’examiner les différences entre les résultats mesurés.</p><p><strong>Résultats : </strong>Au total, 534 pharmaciens ont été sondés et le taux de réponse était de 16 % (85/534). Dans l’ensemble, 77 % (55/71) des répondants indiquaient avoir participé à des recherches et 87 % (62/71) souhaitaient faire de la recherche dans l’avenir. L’analyse de dossiers médicaux (78 %, 36/46) et les sondages (41 %, 19/46) représentaient les plans d’étude les plus utilisés par les répondants au cours de recherches antérieures. Les participants ont indiqué que leurs forces en lien avec la recherche étaient leur capacité d’évaluer la littérature (46 %, 27/59) et de formuler des hypothèses (44 %, 26/59). En revanche, 81 % (48/59) ont signalé l’analyse statistique comme leur point faible. La plupart des répondants croyaient que la satisfaction personnelle (82 %, 49/60) et la perspective d’acquérir des connaissances sur les maladies (78 %, 47/60) représentaient les principaux facteurs les motivant à faire de la recherche. Ce qui était évoqué le plus souvent comme un obstacle à la recherche était le manqué de temps (92 %, 55/60). Les occasions de se joindre à des équipes en place (73 %, 44/60) et les programmes de mentorat (70 %, 42/60) ont été désignés comme les dispositions les plus attrayantes pour encourager à poursuivre de futures recherches.</p><strong>Conclusions : </strong>La plupart des pharmaciens ayant répondu au sondage ont indiqué avoir contribué à des recherches en pharmacie clinique, mais le manque de temps réservé pour la recherche semblait être un obstacle important à une plus grande participation aux activités de recherche. Un programme ciblé multipliant les possibilités de fréquenter des équipes de recherche déjà établies et offrant plus d’occasions de mentorat serait une façon de promouvoir de futures recherches.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document