Explore the vast range of titles available.

The presence of foreign doctoral degree holders has significantly been increasing in Pakistani public universities. Despite their increasing presence and significance in universities, they have been ignored in higher education literature, notably the absence of empirical studies exploring their research productivity. This study aimed to explore research productivity differences between foreign and local doctoral degree holders and determine the factors (demographic, individual, and institutional) that contribute to their research productivity. Data were collected from 14 Pakistani public universities through a self-administered questionnaire using a systematic random sampling method. A total of 241 questionnaires were returned, among which 232 well-filled and completed questionnaires (foreign (119) and local (113), respectively) were used for analysis. The findings showed that foreign doctoral degree holders were not more productive in terms of total refereed journal articles and book chapters than local doctoral degree holders. However, foreign doctoral degree holders had published statistically significant research articles in international journals with impact factors and published more research articles with international colleagues than their local doctoral counterparts. Moreover, the findings showed that unlike the institutional factors, demographic and individual factors had significantly contributed to faculty research productivity in Pakistani public universities. Further implications are discussed, and suggestions for future research are outlined.

Background There is a critical need for a diverse pool of academic leaders to increase the number and diversity of the medical workforce. Physician Assistant/Associate (PA) is a growing medical profession. Although the master’s degree is the terminal degree for PAs, a growing number of PAs obtain a variety of doctoral degrees. However, there is no standardized training for academic PA leaders. The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with PA academic leadership. Specifically, this study explored the following factors: doctoral degree credentials, gender and underrepresented minority status. Methods Using the 2019 Physician Assistant Education Association Faculty and Directors survey, we assessed the relationship between academic leadership groups [Program Director (PD), Academic Director (AD), and Clinical Director (CD)] doctoral degree, gender, and underrepresented minority in medicine (URIM) status. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine the predictors of being in a leadership role. Results with p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results Of the 956 participants, 71% were female, 4% Hispanic, 86% White, 4% Black, 2% Asian, and 1% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander/American Indian/Alaska Native. Overall, 9% were URIM. Mean age was 45.6 (SD = 10.2) years. Average time in PA education was 2.9 years (SD = 1.4). Approximately 50% (n = 472) had a leadership role (PD-24%, AD-10%, CD-16%). Of all leaders, 68% were female, 9% were URIM, and 19% had a doctoral degree. Having a doctoral degree increased the odds of being a PD [AOR 2.38, CI [1.57–3.59], p = < 0.0001, AD and CD = non-significant]. More time in PA education increased the odds of being a PD [AOR 1.10, CI [1.07–1.12, p = < 0.0001] and AD [AOR 1.06, CI [1.03–1.09], p = < 0.0001], but not a CD. Gender and URIM status were not significantly associated with leadership roles. URIMs had doctorate degrees at higher rates than non-URIMs. Conclusion PA academic leaders differ by doctoral degree attainment but not by gender and URIM status. URIM faculty are grossly underrepresented in the PA professorate, but disproportionately have doctoral degrees. Academic training opportunities for all PA academic leaders and strategies to increase URIM faculty are needed.

Background Most health professions in the United States have adopted clinical or practice doctorates, sparking an ongoing debate on whether physician assistants/associates (PAs) should transition from a master’s to a doctorate as the terminal degree for the profession. Although more studies are anticipated, there is no validated instrument assessing perceptions of various stakeholders regarding an entry-level PA doctoral degree. The objective of this study was to develop and evaluate a novel self-report measure to assess perceptions of an entry-level PA doctoral degree. Methods A multifaceted, mixed-methods approach was adopted. Based on a comprehensive literature review of the doctoral transition experiences in other health professions, an initial version of perceptions of an entry-level terminal PA doctoral degree scale (PEDDS) was generated. This scale was pilot tested with a group of PA faculty, students, and clinicians. Then, a cross-sectional survey consisting of 67 items was conducted with a national random sample of practicing PAs and PA students. Additionally, semi-structured interviews were conducted to ensure the validity of PEDDS. A principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted to reduce the number of items and reveal the underlying structure of PEDDS. Results The PCA confirmed 10 factors of PEDDS consisting of 53 items as the best-fit factor structure with adequate internal consistency of subscales. Those factors include a) expected positive impact on the PA profession, b) expected impact on prerequisites, (c) expected impact on the student preparedness as PA faculty and educators, (d) expected impact on the student preparedness as clinicians, (e) expected impact on accreditation and certification, (f) expected impact on curriculum, (g) expected impact on PA educators, (h) expected positive impact on diversity, (i) expected negative impact on the PA profession, and (j) expected impact on the student competency. Conclusions The present study highlights the need to develop valid and reliable measurements to assess perceptions regarding the transition to the entry-level doctorate across health professions. This study could be used to guide further discussion of the entry-level doctorates for PAs and other health professions by bridging the gap of existing literature related to valid, reliable, and standardized measures on this topic.

The study collected data from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database for years 2000 and 2015 in order to explore shifts in public affairs doctoral research. Results indicated a dramatic increase for online doctoral dissertations with 20% of all public administration and public policy dissertations produced from online, for-profit institutions by 2015. When public administration is examined in isolation, 36% of all public administration doctoral dissertations are from online institutions. Concomitantly, doctorate of public administration degrees dropped to 2% of total conferred public administration and public policy degrees. The dramatic rise of public policy as a subject, in comparison to declining self-identification of public administration, was noted. A thematic and comparative curriculum assessment for top producers of all degree types was conducted in order to gauge overlaps and dissimilarity between program types. The implications of the findings are discussed in broader context to understand the pedagogical significance of potential shifts for public affairs education.

Aim/Purpose: Limited research exists on the perceived value that a doctoral degree has on higher education administrators’ goals; therefore, this collective case study had two purposes. The first was to assess qualitatively the perceptions of four doctorate-holding higher education administrators to explore the potential value associated with their degrees, and the second was to determine whether they perceived that their degree attainments influenced the achievement of their professional goals, if at all. Background: Understanding goal attainment and the value associated with obtaining a doctoral degree is important to recognize the needs of doctoral students and to inform how to support degree-seeking professionals in achieving their professional goals. Building upon the conceptual model of doctoral value, as defined by Bryan and Guccione (2018), the researchers also utilized Becker’s (1964) human capital theory as the framework for understanding the perceptions of select administrative professionals who have completed their doctoral degrees in higher education. Methodology: Because this was a collective case study, four doctorate-holding higher education administrators were selected, through convenience sampling, to engage in a formal semi-structured face-to-face interview. Interview responses were evaluated using ethnographic analysis (i.e., domain analysis, taxonomic analysis, and componential analysis). Contribution: Findings from this research can be used to better understand the perceptions of graduates who earned a doctoral degree in education, particularly with an increase in the number of doctoral degrees in that field. The results from this study align with findings from previous studies. Findings: The ethnographic analysis of the data indicated that the administrators perceived their doctoral degree as a way to advance professionally (e.g., career opportunities and research publication) and as a way to improve personally (e.g., increased confidence and becoming a role model). Two domains emerged: attainment of goals and perceptions of doctoral degree value. The taxonomic analysis revealed that the attainment of goals included personal and professional goals. Lastly, the componential analysis led to the discovery of nine attributes associated with obtaining a doctoral degree. Recommendations for Practitioners: Administrators in higher education degree programs should understand the needs of their students while they are participating in doctoral studies. By knowing what doctoral students expect to gain after obtaining a doctoral degree, doctoral-program administrators might consider tailoring courses and support programs to meet doctoral student needs. Recommendation for Researchers: Additional longitudinal studies should be undertaken to understand better how doctoral graduates view the value of their degree many years later. Do their perceptions change over time, or are they solidified? Impact on Society: With an increasing number of individuals obtaining doctoral degrees in higher education, departments, colleges, and universities need to understand whether graduates find that their degree has been useful. Because there is a demand for agencies to emphasize skills and work-related training, the perceived value of the degree can inform policymakers on changes in curriculum and programming to increase the perceived value of the doctoral degree. Future Research: Future research should expand upon the number of students who are interviewed, and students in other academic programs may be interviewed to understand similarities and differences. Longitudinal studies should be conducted to understand if the perception of degree value changes over time.

Aim/Purpose: Research on students in higher education contexts to date has focused primarily on the experiences undergraduates, largely overlooking topics relevant to doctoral students’ mental, physiological, motivational, and social experiences. Existing research on doctoral students has consistently found mental and physical health concerns and high attrition rates among these students, but a comprehensive understanding of these students’ experiences is still lacking. Background: The present review paper aims to offer deep insight into the issues affecting doctoral students by reviewing and critically analyzing recent literature on the doctoral experience. An extensive review of recent literature uncovered factors that can be readily categorized as external and internal to the doctoral student; external factors include supervision, personal/social lives, the department and socialization, and financial support opportunities, while internal factors motivation, writing skills, self-regulatory strategies, and academic identity. Methodology: 163 empirical articles on the topic of doctoral education are reviewed and analyzed in the present paper. Contribution: The present paper represents a comprehensive review of the factors found to influence the experiences (e.g., success, satisfaction, well-being) of doctoral students in their programs. It represents a unique contribution to the field of doctoral education as it attempt to bring together all the factors found to date to shape the lived experiences of doctoral students, as well as evidence-based ways to facilitate students’ success and well-being through these factors. More specifically, the present paper aims to inform students, faculty, and practitioners (e.g., student support staff) of the optimal practices and structures uncovered to date, as most beneficial to doctoral students in terms of both academic success and well-being. Impact on Society: Decreases to doctoral students’ well-being as they progress in their programs, financial struggles, and the notable difficulty in maintaining a social life/family responsibilities have been widely discussed in popular culture. The present paper aims to highlight these, and other, issues affecting the doctoral experience in an attempt to contribute to the conversation with comprehensive empirical evidence. By facilitating discussions on the issues that play a role in the attribution and dissatisfaction of existing doctoral students, and perhaps deter potential doctoral students from ever entering doctoral education system, we hope to contribute to a student-cantered focus in which departments are concerned with the academic success of doctoral students, but also equally concerned with maximizing students’ well-being in the process of attaining a doctoral degree. This, we hope, will enhance the societal perception of doctoral education as a challenging, yet worthwhile and rewarding process. Future Research: Future research in which the confluence of the factors discussed in this review, particularly with respect to the cross-cutting impact of socialization variables, is recommended to provide a sufficiently in-depth examination of the salient predictors of doctoral student development and persistence. Future research efforts that steer away from single-factor foci to explore interactive or redundant relationships between factors are thus recommended, as are analyses of the potential effects that changes to one aspect of the doctoral experience (e.g., motivational interventions) can have on other factors. Finally, studies employing various alternative methodologies and analytical methods (e.g., observational, questionnaire, experimental, experience sampling) are similarly expected to yield valuable knowledge as to the nature and extent of the afore-mentioned and novel contributing factors, as well as the utility of student intervention programs aimed at improving both the personal and professional lives of doctoral students internationally

Doctorate level attainment has increased significantly in developed economies. In 2019, the average share of 25–64-year-olds with a doctorate across the OECD was around 1%. However, if current trends continue, 2.3% of today’s young adults will enter doctoral studies at some point in their life. This essay starts by describing the expansion of doctoral education. It then reflects on the causes of this growth and the consequences for the nature and purpose of the doctorate. This reflection is mostly based on published research in Higher Education in the last 50 years and the author’s work on policy analysis for the OECD on this topic. The paper finishes with a research agenda on doctoral education and the career of doctorate holders.

Takhona Hlatshwako, a senior at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, is a new Rhodes Scholar from the Kingdom of Eswatini in Southern Africa (formerly Swaziland). Hlatshwako is the 52nd Rhodes Scholar from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Many Black, Latinx, multiracial and ethnically diverse, first-generation college students turned PhDs--tie their academic success, achievements, and ability to navigate the difficult terrain of higher education back to the critical experiences and lessons learned in their home lives and through their cultural backgrounds.For them, culture matters.

A central trend in qualitative studies investigating doctoral students' dropout is to stress the importance of students' integration and socialisation in their working environment. Yet, few of these studies actually compared the experiences of doctoral students who completed or quit their PhD. In order to overcome this limitation and identify the factors that differentiate these two groups, the present study interviewed 21 former doctoral students: 8 completers and 13 non-completers. The results show that what best differentiates these two groups of participants is the extent to which they feel that they are moving forward, without experiencing too much distress, on a research project that makes sense to them. We assume that this set of factors is central in the dropout process. Support from doctoral peers was found to play a positive role overall but did not contribute to differentiating the two groups, presumably because peers have a limited impact on dissertation progress. Supervisors' support was central to the participants' stories; it is thus assumed to play a role in the process, but this role is complex and needs further investigation. These results call for a stronger consideration of the doctoral task itself when investigating the process of persistence and attrition and for a more integrated framework that considers jointly both task- and environment-related aspects.