2018
DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2018.1449080
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Normalizing Struggle: Dimensions of Faculty Support for Doctoral Students and Implications for Persistence and Well-Being

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
107
0
3

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(112 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
2
107
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…interest, incentives, ideas, initiative, integrity and interpersonal relationships), may be necessary for successful doctorates in medicine. Recently, Posselt (2018) explored the influence of faculty mentoring on doctoral students within STEM disciplines. In this US based study, Posselt found that academic progress at doctoral level is leveraged through a faculty support that was characterised by academic, psychosocial and cultural dimensions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…interest, incentives, ideas, initiative, integrity and interpersonal relationships), may be necessary for successful doctorates in medicine. Recently, Posselt (2018) explored the influence of faculty mentoring on doctoral students within STEM disciplines. In this US based study, Posselt found that academic progress at doctoral level is leveraged through a faculty support that was characterised by academic, psychosocial and cultural dimensions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Coupled with the unpredictable post-graduate labor market, it is urgent we attend to the challenges and risks doctoral students take. This is especially important given what we know about the oppressive structural and cultural hurdles faced by doctoral students from all backgrounds (Posselt, 2018) and Black and Latinx doctoral students in particular (Gildersleeve, Croom, & Vasquez, 2011), often in distinct ways by gender (Ingram, 2013; Winkle-Wagner, Johnson, Morelon-Quainoo, & Santiague, 2010). The stories presented here represent doctoral students at the apex of educational attainment navigating a stigmatized position and bravely revealing this to the field at large, to render it known.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their study identified sociocultural, socioeconomic, psychosocial, linguistic, gender, heterosexist, socio-physiological, and school structural borders. Due to the nature of doctoral study in STEM fields and the characteristics of Chinese students, this current study starts with a consideration of sociocultural (Hopwood, 2010), psychosocial (Posselt, 2018;Poyrazli, Arbona, Nora, McPherson, & Pisecco, 2002), socio-physiological (Winchester-Seeto et al, 2014, emotional (Gu, 2015), linguistic , gender (Dutta, 2015), and institutional borders (McAlpine, Jazvac-Martek, & Hopwood, 2009), but leaves the avenue open for further identification of differences through rigorous data analysis.…”
Section: Transitions Across and Borders In-betweenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The emergence, elevation, or decline of these borders are connected with individual situations over time, leading to different outcomes. While other studies have investigated particular borders or constraints, for example as mentioned in Chapter 2, sociocultural (Hopwood, 2010), psychosocial (Posselt, 2018;Poyrazli, Arbona, Nora, McPherson, & Pisecco, 2002), sociophysiological (Winchester-Seeto et al, 2014, emotional (Gu, 2015), linguistic , gender (Dutta, 2015), and institutional borders (McAlpine, Jazvac-Martek, & Hopwood, 2009), this present study used an approach to identify borders holistically for interpreting the experiences of international doctoral students. Future studies are highly encouraged to examine, criticise, and complement these concepts so that we may understand better how to facilitate international doctoral students for the sustainability of international doctoral education.…”
Section: Bordersmentioning
confidence: 99%