“Most important is that they figure out how to solve the problem”: how do advisors conceptualize and develop research autonomy in chemistry doctoral students?
While the paths after graduate school are increasingly varied, the central goal of doctoral programs remains to develop independent researchers. Given the important role of doctoral advisors in the socialization and progress-making of doctoral students, we conducted semi-structured interviews with faculty advisors who regularly advise chemistry doctoral students from three chemistry departments with rotation programs for their first-year students. In contrast to existing studies documenting advisee perspectives of research autonomy, this work focuses particularly on the advisor perspective. After open coding these interviews, we found a breadth of ideas and approaches to developing research autonomy. The faculty advisors conceptualized research autonomy in their first-year doctoral students as enthusiasm or curiosity for their research or research area. The advisor’s approaches to developing and promoting autonomy in doctoral students varied widely, and some went so far as to not develop autonomy in new students but to “screen” for it. Finally, different subdisciplines in chemistry provide unique opportunities as well as constraints for advisors and students. We discuss the implications of these findings for doctoral students, advisors of doctoral students, administrators, and research advisors of undergraduate students.
KeywordsSocialization Graduate school Doctoral student Doctoral advisory Autonomy
- Austin, A. E. (2002). Preparing the Next Generation of Faculty: Graduate School as Socialization to the Academic Career. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 94–122. https://doi.org/10.2307/1558449.
- Barnes, B. J. (2005). Success in graduate school: how exemplary advisors guide their doctoral advisees (Ph.D.). Michigan State University, United States -- Michigan. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305461254/abstract/F2591A25DF4846C8PQ/1. Accessed 8 Jun 2018.
- Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L. (2008). Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: SAGE Retrieved from http://methods.sagepub.com/book/basics-of-qualitative-research. Accessed 12 Oct 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fairweather, J. S. (1996). Faculty work and public trust: restoring the value of teaching and public service in American academic life. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
- Gilmore, J., Vieyra, M., Timmerman, B., Feldon, D., & Maher, M. (2015). The relationship between undergraduate research participation and subsequent research performance of early career STEM Graduate students. The Journal of Higher Education, 86(6), 834–863. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2015.0031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Golde, C. (2010). Entering different worlds: socialization into disciplinary communities. In S. Gardner & P. Mendoza (Eds.), On becoming a scholar (pp. 79–95). Sterling: Stylus Publishing LLC.Google Scholar
- Katz, E. L. (1997). Key players in the dissertation process. In L. Goodchild, K. E. Green, E. Katz, & R. C. Kluever (Eds.), Rethinking the dissertation process: tackling personal and institutional obstacles (pp. 5–16). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers Retrieved from https://trove.nla.gov.au/version/8714948. Accessed 30 May 2018.Google Scholar
- Kehm, B. M. (2006). Doctoral education in Europe and North America: a comparative analysis. Wenner Gren International Series, 83, 67.Google Scholar
- National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2018). Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Universities: 2017. Special Report NSF 19-301. Alexandria, VA. Available at https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf19301/. Accessed 30 May 2018.
- Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publishing.Google Scholar
- Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Thinking styles. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Weidman, J. C., Twale, D. J., & Stein, E. L. (2001). Socialization of graduate and professional students in higher education: a perilous passage? ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, Volume 28, Number 3. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar