Positive and negative experiences related to doctoral study conditions

Corcelles, Mariona; Cano, Maribel Guerrero; Liesa, Eva; González-Ocampo, Gabriela; Castelló, Montserrat

doi:10.1080/07294360.2019.1602596

Cited by 36 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Breaches of beneficence took the form of a lack of support from the academic community, loneliness, and isolation in the research process and the community. Research has emphasized the crucial role of academic community support in successful doctoral studies (Corcelles et al, 2019;Pyhältö et al, 2012a;Peltonen et al, 2017;. The results of our study imply that, while the faculty may still consider supporting the development of doctoral students to be mainly the supervisors' responsibility, input and interventions from community members are needed when students struggle with their studies or encounter a lack of adequate supervision, as noted in prior research (Leijen et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 48%

“…Change of supervisors, unmet expectations for communication and guidance, as well as conflicts between supervisors, led to supervisor-related stress (Cornwall et al, 2019). Accordingly, the relationship with the supervisor was one of the main challenges for doctoral students (Corcelles et al, 2019).…”

Section: Challenges On Individual and Structural Level Of Doctoral Edmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Researchers have highlighted the importance of doctoral students' socialization into the research community (Cornwall et al, 2019;McAlpine et al, 2012; for the success of studies (Hlebec et al, 2011) as well as for the socio-psychological wellbeing of doctoral students (Cornér et al, 2017;Hlebec et al, 2011;Peltonen et al, 2017). Studies have pinpointed negative experiences related to the researchers in the nearest academic community (Corcelles et al, 2019) and a lack of departmental interest and support (McAlpine et al, 2012), as well as the importance of the sense of belonging and worth for doctoral students to connect with their institution (Teeuwsen et al, 2014). Consequently, identification with a scholarly community, loneliness, and a non-constructive atmosphere were the main challenges doctoral students experienced (Pyhältö et al, 2012b).…”

Section: Challenges On Individual and Structural Level Of Doctoral Edmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alongside, the organization of doctoral studies, including program structure, funding, and assessment directives, entailed challenges in doctoral experience in earlier research. Several studies reported that financial resources were crucial for a successful doctorate (Corcelles et al, 2019;Cornér et al, 2019;Cornwall et al, 2019;Leijen et al, 2016;Vassil & Solvak, 2012). For example, Corcelles et al (2019) found that negative experiences related to finances were most frequent for doctoral students in social sciences and those working outside the university.…”

Section: Challenges On Individual and Structural Level Of Doctoral Edmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Individual and Structural Challenges in Doctoral Education: An Ethical Perspective

Roos

Löfström

Remmik

2021

IJDS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: The study set out to understand the challenges doctoral students experience at different systemic levels of doctoral education through the perspective of ethical principles. Background: Doctoral students experience various challenges on their journey to the degree, and as high dropout rates indicate, these challenges become critical for many students. Several individual and structural level aspects, such as student characteristics, supervisory relationship, the academic community as well national policies and international trends, influence doctoral studies, and students’ experiences have been researched quite extensively. Although some of the challenges doctoral students experience may be ethical in nature, few studies have investigated these challenges specifically from an ethics perspective. Methodology: The study drew on qualitative descriptions of significant negative incidents from 90 doctoral students from an online survey. The data were first analyzed using a reflexive thematic analysis, and then the themes were located within different systemic levels of doctoral studies: individual (e.g., doctoral student, the individual relationship with supervisor) and structural (e.g., the institution, faculty, academic community). Finally, the ethical principles at stake were identified, applying the framework of five common ethical principles: respect for autonomy, benefiting others (beneficence), doing no harm (non-maleficence), being just (justice), and being faithful (fidelity). Contribution: Understanding doctoral students’ experiences from an ethical perspective and locating these among the systemic levels of doctoral studies contributes to a better understanding of the doctoral experience’s complexities. Ethical considerations should be integrated when creating and implementing procedures, rules, and policies for doctoral education. Making the ethical aspects visible will also allow universities to develop supervisor and faculty training by concretely targeting doctoral studies aspects highlighted as ethically challenging. Findings: In doctoral students’ experiences, structural level ethical challenges out-weighed breaches of common ethical principles at the individual level of doctoral studies. In the critical experiences, the principle of beneficence was at risk in the form of a lack of support by the academic community, a lack of financial support, and bureaucracy. Here, the system and the community were unsuccessful in contributing positively to doctoral students’ welfare and fostering their growth. At the individual level, supervision abandonment experiences, inadequate supervision, and students’ struggle to keep study-related commitments breached fidelity, which was another frequently compromised principle. Although located at the individual level of studies, these themes are rooted in the structural level. Additionally, the progress review reporting and assessment process was a recurrent topic in experiences in which the principles of non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice were at stake. Recommendations for Practitioners: Going beyond the dyadic student-supervisor relationship and applying the ethics of responsibility, where university, faculty, supervisors, and students share a mutual responsibility, could alleviate ethically problematic experiences. Recommendation for Researchers: We recommend that further research focus on experiences around the ethics in the progress reporting and assessment process through in-depth interviews with doctoral students and assessment committee members. Impact on Society: Dropout rates are high and time to degree completion is long. An ethical perspective may shed light on why doctoral studies fail in efficiency. Ethical aspects should be considered when defining the quality of doctoral education. Future Research: A follow-up study with supervisors and members of the academic community could contribute to developing a conceptual framework combining systemic levels and ethics in doctoral education.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 48%

Section: Challenges On Individual and Structural Level Of Doctoral Edmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges On Individual and Structural Level Of Doctoral Edmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges On Individual and Structural Level Of Doctoral Edmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Individual and Structural Challenges in Doctoral Education: An Ethical Perspective

Roos

Löfström

Remmik

2021

IJDS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Diferentes investigaciones señalan el papel fundamental de las relaciones dentro del entorno académico a la hora de condicionar la experiencia de los doctorandos (Corcelles et al 2019), siendo especialmente relevante el papel de los directores de tesis (Evans et al 2018; González-Ocampo y Castelló 2019; Liu et al 2019). Una buena dirección influye directamente en el bienestar de un doctorando y, por tanto, puede condicionar su permanencia o no dentro del sistema académico una vez acabada la tesis, por lo que es una variable importante a considerar en un estudio como el nuestro.…”

Section: Relaciones En El Entorno Académicounclassified

La carrera investigadora en arqueología y su impacto en la salud mental de los investigadores predoctorales

Canosa-Betés

Liaño

2020

Complutum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Presentamos los resultados de dos cuestionarios sobre la salud mental de estudiantes y doctorandos en arqueología y los ponemos en relación con el contexto de la carrera investigadora y las prácticas de profesionalización en la universidad española. Observamos una alta incidencia de problemas de salud mental entre investigadores predoctorales e identificamos el género, la carga de trabajo o la incertidumbre sobre el futuro como factores determinantes a la hora de experimentar este tipo de problemas, planteando la necesidad de dar visibilidad a estas cuestiones en el mundo de la investigación.

show abstract