The Doctorate Journey: Mapping Perceptions of the Ph.D. Process
During a special session at the Frontiers in Education conference in 2013, presenters used an analogy to the fantasy book/movie series The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien framed by identity trajectory theory to explore the pathway to receiving a PhD. At the start of the session, participants were asked to create a map of the PhD process keeping the following questions in mind: Who are the players and how do they relate to each other? What are the milestones? and What are the events that impact the outcomes? Using the participant created maps as well as original analogy elements, this paper explores the elements of identity trajectory highlighted by the different participant group maps. Academic identity trajectory includes three primary elements: intellectual, institutional, and network. For the intellectual element, we explore the role of the overall field in the PhD process and how they were represented within the participant created maps. The institutional element helps explore the graduate school structure and resources that influence graduate students' development. Largely, the institutional elements are highlighted through the required milestones that must be overcome to complete the PhD process. Finally, the network element explores the relationships that influence graduate students and the role these different players influence a graduate student's success in receiving their PhD. Additionally, we highlight the challenges or events that can negatively impact a student's progress toward degree as identified by the special session participants. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate multiple perceptions of the PhD process to aid current and future graduate students in understanding common pathways and to help initiate conversations among graduate students and other players about what to expect from the PhD process. Good communication between an advisor/advisee, and among various graduate students, can help to negate some of the challenges students face in graduate school and encourage a successful experience for the students. Background Analogies and metaphors have been used to examine complex social interactions and processes as support mechanisms to establish relatedness and empathy of the intended context. At the 2013 IEEE/ASEE Frontiers in Education conference, The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien was paralleled to the graduate student experience. An adapted version of the handout provided at the session is included in Appendix A to offer an overview of The Lord of the Rings elements and characters used in the analogy and how they are situated in the original work as well as within the PhD process. The analogy allowed for a structured discussion about the different milestones, characters, and events that influence the PhD process. To help participants start thinking about the process, the session began with participant groups creating a road map for their journey through the PhD process. Within the United States, the completion rate for PhD students is between 45 65% There are a variety of causes that contribute to students leaving their programs, including unclear expectations of the process for completing a PhD. This paper, like the special session, will be framed around identity trajectory theory and will present multiple maps created by special session participants to catalyze a discussion of the institutional, intellectual, and networking elements that are present on many PhD journeys. The overall purpose of this paper is to present multiple pathways for successfully completing the PhD journey and to highlight some often overlooked elements of the process that can slow or even halt student progress. Additionally, this paper is meant to catalyze conversation among graduate students, undergraduate students, advising faculty members, and administrators about the specifics of the pathway to a PhD. The elements of the PhD process that are highlighted with the analogy presented at the special session are the interpretation of the facilitators. Our interpretation might not resonate with every PhD student or every reader, but discussing the differences and shortcomings of the analogy will still initiate more detailed conversations about the PhD process and the implications of the differences between our interpretations and that of others. Framework To help guide their exploration, participants were provided an overview of identity trajectory theory during the special session to support their reflection of their experience towards earning a PhD. Identitytrajectory was also used to help frame the analogy for the special session to support the analysis of the participant maps as well. Academic identity trajectory consists of three major strands: intellectual, network, and institutional. The intellectual strand refers to how a student becomes part of and contributes to their overall academic field. In this study, the intellectual element explores the role of the overall disciplinary field with respect to the PhD process. The institutional strand refers to the more specific elements of the student's department or university. In this study, the institutional elements will be represented by graduate school structural elements and resources that influence graduate student development. Largely, the institutional elements are highlighted through the required milestones that must be overcome to complete the PhD process. Finally, the network strand refers to the student's connection to different networks and collaborations. Here, the network strand explores the relationships that influence the graduate students and will be closely tied to the different players that influence a graduate student's success in receiving their PhD. Participants Approximately 25 30 participants were present at the FIE special session and were divided into five groups. No participant names or identifying information was collected. From facilitator observation, participants included current graduate students, recently graduated PhDs, and experienced faculty who had advised multiple PhD students throughout their careers. The disciplines of the participants were not identified, but, from the nature of the FIE conference, it is assumed that a majority of the participants were from engineering disciplines. The session leaders, as well as many of the session participants, hold PhDs in Engineering Education from Purdue or Virginia Tech. The session tried to maintain a focus that was not exclusively built around the PhD process in Engineering Education at those two institutions, though there was some natural gravitation toward that experience. Participants were asked to leave their process maps on the work tables if they agreed to allow us to use them as data for future research. Methodology During the FIE session, the groups were asked to create a map of the PhD process, keeping the following questions in mind: Who are the Players and how do they relate to each other? What are the Milestones? What are the Events that impact the outcomes? Each of the group created maps were photographed (included in Appendices B F) then each element on the map was transcribed for easier comparison across the different maps. The maps were compared by process (intellectual and institutional strand) identified characters (network strand) and the potential challenges. These were aligned with each other as well as the original analogy components from the special session (shown in Appendix A) to highlight the similarities and differences between the groups. This paper and analysis are limited in their generalizability due to the lack of identified professional characteristics of the groups that generated the maps and variability in participant experiences. However, each map still provides a group mediated description of the processes by the participants. These findings can be utilized as means to compare similar reflections in other contexts and graduate programs. Findings This section will be divided into three sections focused on the different strands of identity trajectory. Each section will present the elements of the participant maps as well as the elements that were developed for the special session. The challenges that were identified by the participants will be discussed in the respective sections as well. Institutional. The institutional elements that were identified focus around the specific milestones within the PhD process that are created by the institution/department that the student is part of. Table 1 shows the different process components identified by the special session facilitators as well as those identified by each of the participant groups. The components were aligned to help identify elements that were present for all groups and places there were gaps or differences between the groups. In general, all of the groups agreed on roughly the following pathway through the PhD process: 1. Apply and get into graduate school; 2. Complete coursework; 3. Pass Qualifying Exam; 4. Pass Competency/Preliminary Exam; 5. Write Dissertation; and 6. Defend. These are very common elements across most PhD programs as reflected by their presence on most, if not all, of the group maps. These are elements that you would likely find in a graduate school manual for the steps to completing a PhD and are typically the elements that require the completion of some sort of paperwork with the institution to verify that they have been completed. However, there are other implicit elements that are not as directly seen in a manual that are required to meet these steps. For example, choosing an advisor was only explicitly placed on one of the participant group (Group 4) maps. The advisor was included as a character throughout the process or tangential to the process, but the specific act of choosing an advisor was not included as a step in the process by many groups. Choosing your PhD advisor can be one of the most important and influential steps in the PhD pr