Enhanced Synthesis Paper: Doctoral Identity

Please read everything about this assignment.  Majority of it has been done now you are just adding on to it and also correcting what the instructor advise.

Synthesis is the act of creating something new from multiple existing  entities. Synthesis of research, then, is creating a new idea from  existing ideas. Synthesis of research is not a single innate skill.  Rather, it is a process learned through time and practice. At the  doctoral level, writing is a continual process of revision as learners  improve skills and build subject matter expertise.

In Topic 5, you submitted a Synthesis Paper and received both  feedback from your instructor and a grade for your work. In this  assignment, you will expand upon your original paper with additional  research from outside sources, incorporate feedback from your  instructor, and provide a reflection section addressing your revision  process.

General Requirements:

• Locate the Synthesis Paper you completed in Topic 5.
• Locate and download “Enhanced Synthesis Paper Template” from the Course Materials for this topic.
• Locate and download “Enhanced Synthesis Paper Resources” from the Course Materials for this topic.
• Review the articles by Baker and Pifer (2011), Gardner (2009), and  Smith and Hatmaker (2014) located in the Course Materials for this  topic.
• This assignment uses a rubric. Review the rubric prior to beginning  the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful  completion.

Directions:

Select and read two articles from the Enhanced Synthesis Paper Resources list located in the Course Materials for this topic.

Locate the Synthesis Paper you completed in Topic 5. Using the  feedback provided by your instructor and information from the two  additional articles you selected, write an Enhanced Synthesis Paper with  Reflection (1,250-1,800 words). Include the following in your paper:

1. A Reflection (250-300 words) that discusses your revision process  and how you incorporated your instructor’s feedback into the revised  version. Similar to the format of an abstract, this section will receive  its own page following the title page and preceding the Introduction.
2. An introduction that includes a brief description of each article  and its purpose, identifies the three themes that emerged from your  reading, describes how they will be discussed in the paper, and presents  a clear thesis statement.
3. Support for your identified themes with evidence from each article.  Provide analysis of these findings to strengthen your narrative.
4. A discussion of the conclusions that can be drawn when the articles  are taken together as a single entity. What is the ov

   The role of relationships in the transition from doctoral student to independent scholar

   Vicki L. Bakera* and Meghan J. Piferb$

   aEconomics & Management, Albion College, Albion, USA; bHigher Education, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA

   (Received 9 January 2010; final version received 8 July 2010)

   Little research and practice has focused specifically on Stage 2 of the doctoral student experience � the critical transition from ‘dependence to independence’. In the United States, a student completes coursework, passes candidacy exams, and begins the dissertation proposal process during Stage 2. Given the distinct experiences associated with this stage, it is important for researchers, faculty and administrators to understand each stage fully. Our goal is to shed light on how students begin to enact the academic career during this critical transition by specifically exploring the role of relationships in the identity development process. We rely on a theoretical framework that brings together sociocultural perspectives of learning and developmental networks to reveal a connection between relationships and learning. This study highlights the effects of relationships and interactions on particular strategies and experiences associated with Stage 2 of doctoral education, and therefore students’ identity development and transition to independence.

   Keywords: doctoral education; identity development; developmental networks; learning

   Introduction

   Doctoral education is the first step towards a faculty career and the development of a

   professional scholarly identity (Austin and McDaniels 2006; Austin and Wulff 2004).

   Throughout this educational experience, students learn about the nature of the

   academic career, as well as the language, research, and teaching skills associated within

   a particular domain or discipline. In the United States, doctoral education is

   conceptualized as a series of three stages. Stage 1 occurs from admission through the

   first year of coursework. In Stage 2, the student typically completes coursework, passes

   candidacy exams, and begins the dissertation proposal process. In Stage 3, the student

   focuses on completing the dissertation (Tinto 1993). It is important to understand the

   distinct experiences of each stage fully to provide insights useful to students, faculty,

   and practitioners interested in successful preparation for academic practice. As

   McAlpine and colleagues (2009) noted, ‘We need to understand better the experiences

   of and related challenges faced by doctoral students in the process of coming to

   understand academic practice and establishing themselves as academics’ (97).

   *Corresponding author. Email: vbaker@albion.edu $Now at: Education and Human Services, Lock Haven University, Lock Haven, USA

   Studies in Continuing Education

   Vol. 33, No. 1, March 2011, 5�17

   ISSN 0158-037X print/ISSN 1470-126X online

   # 2011 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/0158037X.2010.515569

   http://www.informaworld.com

    

   http://www.informaworld.com

    

   While prior research has examined Stage 1 (Golde 1998; Baker Sweitzer 2007,

   2008, 2009) and Stage 3 (Sternberg 1981), little research and practice has focused

   specifically on Stage 2, the critical transition from ‘dependence to independence’ as

   described by Lovitts (2005). During Stage 2, students move away from the structure

   provided by course schedules and enter into a self-directed, often isolating, period.

   Students begin to develop their own academic identities, professional voices, and

   independence as scholars, yet they often struggle with how to effectively manage this

   stage without the guidance and structure that characterized Stage 1. As they apply

   the knowledge and insight gained through coursework, students can become lost in

   their efforts to become independent scholars.

   Although researchers consistently suggest that identity development is a crucial

   dimension of the doctoral student experience, few studies have empirically examined

   this process. Furthermore, few studies have explored the influence of students’

   relationships with others, beyond the academic advisor, on learning and identity

   development during graduate study (exceptions include Baker and Lattuca forth-

   coming; Baker Sweitzer 2009; McAlpine, Jazvac-Martek, and Hopwood 2009).

   Relying on data from our qualitative study of Stage 2 (Baker, Pifer, and Flemion

   2009), we examine the role of students’ relationships in the identity development

   process during this distinct stage of the transition to independent scholar.

   Developmental networks and sociocultural perspectives of learning

   The notion of identity development in the professions is not novel. For years,

   researchers have explored the changes that occur as a result of graduate training,

   particularly in medicine and K�12 education (e.g., Becker and Carper 1956). Very few studies, however, have empirically investigated identity development in the

   context of doctoral education. For example, Hall (1968) examined the professional

   identity development of doctoral students during the qualifying or candidacy exam

   (a necessary step towards achieving candidacy that typically requires students to

   demonstrate a certain level of content mastery) and found that graduate students

   were better able to envision themselves as future faculty members after completing

   the qualifying exam, regardless of whether they passed the exam. Little research has

   advanced the findings presented in Hall’s work, however, and more research is

   needed to understand the stages and processes of identity development in doctoral

   education.

   The transition to any new professional role, including that of doctoral student,

   requires the acquisition of new skills and competencies, and the development of new

   relationships while altering existing ones. Wortham (2006) points out that individuals

   have identities before entering a new domain or community and that these identities

   may interfere with learning as it is defined in the new domain. People adapt to new

   professional roles, Ibarra (1999) suggests, by experimenting with new identities or

   ‘provisional selves’. The nature of a person’s network of relationships can affect the

   creation, selection, and retention of these provisional identities. Ashforth (2001) and

   Goffman’s (1961) assertions that social identities are ascribed to people, rather than

   created by them, link sociocultural theories of learning with theories of develop-

   mental networks. Podolny and Baron (1997) argue that social networks socialize

   aspiring members, regulate inclusion, and convey expectations about roles. Similarly,

   6 V.L. Baker and M.J. Pifer

    

    

   Ibarra and Deshpande (2004) contend that social identities in work settings are co-

   created by those in the local setting; identities emerge through network processes.

   The breadth and interconnectedness of social influences on learning and identity

   development acknowledged in sociocultural and network theories illuminate a limitation of prior research on doctoral education, which generally accounts for the

   importance of interpersonal relationships in doctoral student success exclusively by

   examining the student-advisor dyad (Nettles and Millet 2006; Paglis, Green, and

   Bauer 2006). Recently, Austin and McDaniels (2006) argued for the development of

   broader professional networks in socialization to the professoriate. Yet, we must

   expand our understanding of the role of relationships and interactions even farther

   beyond this definition, as professional networks are not the only ones at play in

   doctoral socialization. Tinto (1993) and Weidman, Twale, and Stein (2001) provide evidence that students’ networks of relationships within and outside of the academic

   community are important to persistence and professional success. Additional

   research has confirmed their findings that a variety of relationships beyond the

   student-advisor dyad are important for persistence and success in doctoral

   education, such as relationships with family, friends, and former colleagues (Baker

   Sweitzer 2007, 2009; Hopwood and Sutherland 2009).

   To explore the connections among developmental relationships, learning, and

   identity development, we relied on the interdisciplinary framework developed by Baker and Lattuca (forthcoming) that brings together developmental network theory

   and sociocultural perspectives of learning. Our reliance on this interdisciplinary

   framework allowed us to explore whether and how students’ relationships within and

   outside of the academic community influence the development of their professional

   identities. In using this framework, we acknowledge and call attention to the social

   nature of identity development in doctoral education. The application of an

   integrated approach to the sociocultural influences of identity development during

   doctoral study allows us to link ontological changes in self-understanding to epistemological changes (alterations in domain knowledge, skills, and views of

   knowledge). We argue that consideration of interactions and relationships, and the

   learning that occurs through them, is critical to understanding the identity

   development process that occurs as students prepare for academic practice.

   Methods

   Valley University (pseudonym), a top-rated research institution, has nationally ranked undergraduate and graduate colleges of business and education (US News

   and World Report 2010). Valley’s College of Business offers the PhD in five

   disciplines: accounting, finance, marketing, management and organization, and

   supply chain and information systems and prepares students for faculty appoint-

   ments. Valley’s higher education doctoral program offers both PhD and DEd

   degrees, and prepares individuals for faculty and administrative appointments. We

   interviewed a total of 31 doctoral students in business and higher education. This

   included students who were currently engaged in Stage 2 at the time of the study, as well as those who had recently completed Stage 2.

   Of the 31 students, 14 were female (45%). One participant was African American

   (3%), three were Asian (10%), one was Asian American (3%), two were Indian (6%),

   and six were international students (19%). The remaining 18 participants were White

   Studies in Continuing Education 7

    

    

   (58%). A semi-structured interview protocol was used to guide our interviews. The

   interview protocol captured information on six areas related to Stage 2:

   (1) key experiences, (2) challenges,

   (3) goals for performance/advancement,

   (4) key relationships,

   (5) types of support present/absent, and

   (6) identity (personal and professional).

   Each author independently coded interview transcripts using these six themes as

   a guide. The authors also compiled interview excerpts that illustrated and supported these ideas.

   The role of relationships: purposes and outcomes

   In this paper, we highlight three themes related to the role of relationships in the

   identity development process and preparation for academic practice. The three

   themes are:

   (1) general support and advice,

   (2) identity development as student (e.g., scholar in training), and

   (3) identity development for academic practice (scholar).

   In the following section, we discuss these themes as they relate to the key

   characteristics of Stage 2 of doctoral education.

   General support and advice

   Given that Stage 2 is unlike any other professional or educational experience that

   doctoral students have faced, many students relied on relationships to help them

   navigate the basic challenges associated with this stage.

   Lack of structure

   Stage 1 is characterized by coursework, due dates, syllabi, and consistent interactions with faculty, peers, and administrators. Having recently completed this stage,

   participants struggled with the lack of structure that characterizes Stage 2.

   Relationships with academic advisors (or supervisors) and advanced students played

   a crucial role in helping students overcome this lack of structure. For example, many

   academic advisors/supervisors helped their students develop a writing schedule to

   help keep them on task. Advanced students shared their own strategies, such as daily

   or weekly writing goals, successful writing habits, and writing support groups. The

   anecdotal evidence and advice that these individuals offered to students dealing with the uncertainty of this stage was immeasurable in providing some understanding of

   how to avoid succumbing to what some participants called ‘the lost year’.

   In the absence of such relationships, some students struggled to have even a basic

   understanding of what to expect during this stage and how to deal with the dramatic

   8 V.L. Baker and M.J. Pifer

    

    

   change in structure during the transition to Stage 2. For example, several students

   confided in us that their advisors/supervisors were essentially non-existent, which

   resulted in no guidance, no sounding board with whom to share ideas or concerns,

   and no mentoring or advice. The students who did not have this key source of support struggled with the basic tasks of how to structure their daily schedules, and

   the larger goal of persisting through Stage 2.

   Isolation

   Because students were no longer in the classroom in Stage 2, their interactions with

   community members were greatly reduced or even non-existent. Students spoke of

   the drastic change from being in the classroom and office one day and working

   independent of those environments the next. Relationships both in and out of the

   academic community became paramount for helping students deal with the isolation

   associated with Stage 2. All of the students in our study spoke of the isolation they

   felt during this transition period, and found that relationships ‘helped keep [them] sane,’ ‘helped keep [them] on task,’ and ‘were vital to feeling like a normal person’.

   Relationships within the academic community, primarily one’s academic program

   or department, serve as conduits to the academic community and help keep students

   informed of events and professional development opportunities. Professional

   relationships also have the potential to serve as sources of friendship and personal

   support as students engage in the sometimes challenging parallel process of forming

   their identities as students and scholars. Personal relationships � those outside of students’ professional lives � were emphasized by participants as equally important sources of support during Stage 2. Family and friends who have known students well

   before their engagement in doctoral studies provided perspective and support that

   help students remain focused on their work, as well as their motivations for success,

   their prior accomplishments, their identities and roles outside of their profession,

   and other sources of encouragement.

   Unfortunately, not all students had positive relationships to rely on during this

   time. In fact, a few students felt they had no sources of support, which made the

   transition even more difficult. One student, for example, was far from her family and personal support network. She expressed sadness and disappointment over not

   having close friendships, and wished she had such relationships to help her manage

   the negative emotions and challenges associated with Stage 2. When asked how she

   would like to improve her experience as a doctoral student, she replied simply,

   ‘I would like more friends. . . . I really hope I can establish friendships with other students.’

   Key experiences

   Because students in Stage 2 were no longer in the classroom, other experiences were

   crucial for helping them feel part of the academic community and engaged in the

   ongoing identity development process. This included experiences such as research assistantships, teaching assistantships, brown bag lunches, and student organization

   meetings. The transition to independent scholar includes understanding and

   engaging in the activities and experiences associated with the academic career.

   Opportunities for these experiences presented students with a realistic job preview of

   Studies in Continuing Education 9

    

    

   life as an academic and the interactions needed for embracing and enacting that role.

   Such opportunities also communicated a sense of being valued within the academic

   community. One student said, ‘I have an assistantship that folks want. [Because of]

   the people that I get to rub elbows with, people want that job. That tells me I’m valued in the community, at least by faculty.’ Faculty members, including academic

   advisors and research supervisors, were critical for helping students become aware of

   the importance of opportunities for continued learning and professional develop-

   ment, and the need to identify or create such opportunities. Advanced students were

   also important, as they shed light on the experiences (and related successes and

   failures) that they found to be most helpful in preparing for the later stages of the

   program.

   When students do not have connections with people who can serve as bridges, to use a networks term, in their ‘development networks’, they often miss out on

   opportunities for key experiences and question their sense of belonging. Bridges

   serve to connect students to valuable experiences directly, or to connect them to

   others who can provide such experiences. Bridges can also link students to other

   resources, such as personal support, knowledge, and effective behavioral strategies

   for mastering the parallel process of identity development in Stage 2. Students who

   do not have such relationships, or whose relationships do not provide this bridging

   function, subsequently do not have the key experiences and access to resources that their better-connected peers may receive.

   Identity development as student

   The role of student, or scholar-in-training, is one of the most central roles enacted

   during graduate education. Organizational newcomers must understand what others

   expect of them and must have the ability to achieve those expectations in order to

   perform a role adequately. This process is called role learning (Brim 1966).

   Researchers suggest that role learning is paramount to effective role entry (Ashforth 2001). Role learning not only focuses on acquiring the technical skills associated with

   a given role but also mastering the social, normative, organizational, and political

   information associated with the role and organization (Morrison 1995). As Walker

   and colleagues (2008) noted:

   Subject mastery is necessary but is not in itself sufficient to the formation of scholars. Learning to present oneself as a member of a discipline, to communicate with colleagues, and to apply ethical standards of conduct is part and parcel of formation (62).

   Critical to role learning is social support from and interaction with peers,

   mentors, family members, and friends.

   Awareness of transition

   Participants in our study were aware that they were transitioning from students to

   scholars, but struggled with self-doubt as they attempted to balance multiple roles

   simultaneously. The abrupt shift from the familiarity of the classroom and regular

   interactions with community members to isolation and self-doubt can be a challenge

   10 V.L. Baker and M.J. Pifer

    

    

   for doctoral students during Stage 2. Students felt confident in the abilities and

   knowledge they had gained during Stage 1; however, they relied on advanced

   members of the community to provide support and advice as they engaged in parallel

   identity development as both student and scholar. Interacting with faculty and advanced students who modeled behavior allowed students to feel more comfortable

   asking questions. One student told us, ‘I don’t know what I don’t know, so it’s not

   always easy to ask the ‘‘right’’ questions. Having a few close people you can trust and

   rely on is so important.’ Students’ peers, those also working through the transition to

   independent scholars, also served as important sources of support. As one student

   commented, ‘It’s nice to have folks that are in the trenches with you, to share stories

   and frustrations.’ Relationships outside of the academic community also helped

   students maintain balance and perspective on the experience as a whole. Many students described family members and close friends as ‘cheerleaders’ or their

   ‘biggest fans’. Such relationships helped students talk through the challenges they

   were facing in a non-threatening, low-stakes environment, allowing them to rely on

   comfortable, long-standing relationships for support.

   Alternatively, a lack of close relationships to rely on during this time can cause

   fear and undue stress for students who are engaged in an already stressful process.

   When students do not have individuals to rely on, they can become unclear of the

   expectations associated with this stage, which can make the process of identity development as a student and scholar-in-training difficult to manage. As one student

   asked, ‘If [the faculty] aren’t going to invest in me, who will?’ Furthermore, when

   students see others getting support and guidance that they do not think they have

   received, resentment can often occur. Students’ feelings that they were not getting the

   same level or kinds of support as their peers were often a major source of tension for

   participants.

   Impression management

   Once students complete course work and pass comprehensive or qualifying exams,

   they often experience a sense of accomplishment. As one student noted, ‘I feel one

   step closer to achieving my goal, and I do feel I have learned a lot these past two

   years.’ While students noticed the increased knowledge and ability to ‘have real

   conversations with faculty’, issues of impression management also arose. Participants

   talked about not wanting to embarrass themselves in front of faculty, avoiding

   meetings with their advisors until they had clear ideas about their research, for example. Advanced students in the program helped participants manage faculty

   members’ impressions of their progress and abilities, providing advice about who to

   go to for particular issues, how to approach faculty, and who to avoid in some

   instances. The students who had relationships with advanced students relied on them

   for this type of advice, and were subsequently more comfortable interacting with

   faculty and presenting themselves as members of the academic community.

   We observed two negative outcomes related to a lack of relationships or

   ineffective relationships in terms of dealing with impression management issues. First, when students lacked colleagues to approach regarding how to interact with

   faculty, they rarely interacted with faculty to share ideas or create opportunities for

   intellectual discourse. Rather, students worked alone, often heightening their feelings

   of isolation, loneliness, and self doubt. Second, when relationships provided bad

   Studies in Continuing Education 11

    

    

   advice in terms of managing impressions, students’ reputations were damaged and

   their self-confidence and willingness to engage were negatively affected. One student

   in particular received misguided advice about priorities between the classroom and

   research. The advisor she spoke with encouraged the student to focus on research, while faculty members who taught seminars urged her to spend more time on her

   coursework. She followed the advice of her advisor, and she failed to gain the support

   of other departmental faculty as a result. She was later counseled out of the program.

   Networking and collaboration

   During Stage 2, students began to understand the importance of networking and

   building collaborations, mostly within their academic programs or departments, but

   also within the broader disciplinary community as well. Many of the students in our

   study were preparing to present their work at professional conferences and relied on

   their peers for advice about this important yet often intimidating experience.

   Participants said that these relationships, and the advice gleaned from them, further highlighted just how critical these relationships were and would continue to be. The

   students who were able to forge those connections with faculty, advanced students,

   and peers reaped the benefits. Students began working on new projects that resulted

   in co-authorship opportunities, important for developing one’s curriculum vitae.

   These opportunities, such as seeing a project through from inception to publication,

   also provided first-hand knowledge about the faculty career. The ability to network

   and be an effective collaborator is a skill that is necessary for academics in any field

   and institution type. When students are afforded the opportunity to begin honing these skills as part of the identity development process while enrolled in graduate

   study, they are likely to have increased confidence and success during their early

   career stages.

   The students in our study who did not realize the importance of networking and

   collaboration, or lacked the confidence to engage in these activities, suffered as a

   result, and had a more difficult time making that transition from student to scholar.

   They seemed to be waiting for someone else to assign them to a project or otherwise

   direct their efforts and progress. Efficacy and initiative are critical to making the transition from student to scholar, and engaging in collaborations with individuals in

   the community are key for making this transition effectively.

   Identity development as scholar

   The topic of identity development and preparation for academic practice during

   doctoral study is an important one that is gaining attention from researchers and

   practitioners. For example, sessions at the most recent annual meeting of the

   Association for the Study of Higher Education highlighted the issue as one that is

   paramount to understanding preparation for the professoriate. While students

   engaged in Stage 2 were aware of the transition and their own efforts to manage it

   successfully, it was the students who had recently completed Stage 2 who were able to reflect on their experiences and provide important insight into their preparation as

   scholars. Their ability to clearly articulate their own identity development in these

   ways revealed valuable insights into the process of becoming a scholar that occurs in

   Stage 2.

   12 V.L. Baker and M.J. Pifer

    

    

   Long-term vs. short-term planning

   As students described their experiences in Stage 1, they often focused on short-term

   goals. They scheduled their life based on assignment due dates and exam dates, the

   beginning and end of semesters, and the timing and completion of program

   milestones. Once students entered Stage 2, however, the remaining program

   milestones were the dissertation proposal and dissertation, which have no due dates

   (candidacy exams were completed during Stage 1 for the programs we explored). In the process of working on these milestones, students began shifting from a short-

   term focus to thinking long-term (e.g., graduation and academic employment).

   Students began to develop the requisite skills as they transitioned from student to

   scholar during Stage 2 and prepared for the realities of the academic career. They

   noticed this shift in thinking within themselves, as well as the role of relationships in

   facilitating this shift. Faculty, for example, helped students develop and hone

   dissertation ideas that would establish clear research agendas. Collaborations with

   faculty, advanced students, and peers led to publications and working papers that were crucial to participants’ marketability and future success in their pursuit of

   tenure. Relationships outside of the community, particularly those including family

   responsibilities, were also key to influencing this shift in thinking. Many participants

   in our study expressed feeling pressure to think beyond their doctoral studies and

   seriously plan for life after graduation.

   Strategic relationship choices

   While all students discussed the importance of networking and engaging in

   collaborations, the students who had recently completed Stage 2 spoke of a particular need to be strategic in terms of relationship choices. This strategic focus

   connected to the shift from short-term to long-term thinking as students dealt with

   job placement and publication concerns. In order to develop solid research agendas,

   students discussed the need to network with leaders in their respective fields and

   forge collaborations with scholars who conducted research in their areas of interest.

   Similarly, a few students also told us that collaborating with assistant professors was

   a good strategy in that they were ‘[more] motivated to get published than senior

   faculty’ given the pressures for promotion and tenure. Many students also discussed strategic approaches to selecting dissertation committee members. One student

   selected a committee member not because of her reputation for being supportive or

   developmental with students (in fact, she had the opposite reputation), but because

   symbolically her lack of involvement (e.g., membership on the committee) could be a

   negative signal as the student entered the job market.

   Realistic previews of faculty career

   ‘Besides the pay, I am doing exactly what I will be expected to do once I become a faculty member.’ This quote expresses a statement we heard from several students

   who had recently completed Stage 2. Reflecting upon that stage, participants

   emphasized their identities as scholars. Faculty relationships were particularly

   important at this stage in terms of providing honest assessments of the academic

   career. As one student noted, ‘My advisor told me the good, the bad, and the ugly

   Studies in Continuing Education 13

    

    

   about this profession. . .and despite that, I still think I am interested in becoming a faculty member.’ Students were able to observe junior faculty on the tenure clock and

   could see the similarities to life as a graduate student and the associated expectations.

   Senior faculty members offered perspective and shared ‘war stories’ of the trials and

   tribulations they faced while working through promotion and tenure. Personal

   relationships were also important in terms of ensuring balance; in some cases, such

   relationships forced balance and a recommitment to life beyond the academy. For

   example, one participant described how her relationships with both her advisor and

   her husband influenced her goals in Stage 2. She said:

   Professionally, as well as personally, [my advisor] knew that my husband and I would like to leave sooner rather than later if possible, you know, for him as well. And so she was really responsive to paying attention to me wanting to leave earlier.

   Discussion

   We embarked on this line of research to better understand the key relationships and

   their influence on the identity development process during Stage 2. Learning, which

   we define as knowledge acquisition and identity development (Baker and Lattuca

   forthcoming), is critical to this transitional stage in doctoral education.

   We investigated the interplay of developmental networks, learning, and identity

   change that are necessary to successfully transition from student to independent

   scholar. We argue that students are undergoing a parallel identity development

   process that requires them to master the student role and corresponding identity,

   while simultaneously beginning to accept and enact the identity of scholar and

   academic. This research highlights the importance of relationships during this stage,

   including the potential positive and negative effects they can have in doctoral

   students’ transitions into independent scholars.

   We explored the role of relationships as critical to the doctoral student experience

   and professional preparation, while illuminating the key challenges and issues

   students face during Stage 2. Given that Stage 2 is unlike any other prior academic or

   professional experience, students’ relationships are critical sources of support and

   behavioral modeling during this time. These relationships inform learning and role

   enactment, contribute to self-efficacy and motivation, and affect the subsequent

   identity changes and development that occur. Students engage in various relational

   strategies and rely on many different relationships for guidance, opportunities, and

   support during Stage 2 of their doctoral programs. We argue that understanding relationships as part and parcel of doctoral

   education can help all involved with doctoral education acknowledge the necessity of

   attending to this critical component of the doctoral student experience. While

   components such as program structure and climate are important, our research

   shows that relationships are an equally legitimate component of doctoral education,

   socialization, and preparation for the professoriate and academic career.

   We emphasize relationships and interactions as key resources that help make the

   transition to independent scholar as smooth as possible. Significant relationships

   include not just long-term regular interactions, such as participation on research

   projects, but also incidental and infrequent interactions, such as informal conversa-

   tions with peers. Key relationships within academic programs are not limited to

   14 V.L. Baker and M.J. Pifer

    

    

   persons with formal authority such as supervisors and advisors, but also peers, senior

   students, and other scholars. Key relationships at this stage also extend beyond the

   academic community to include family members, friends, and role models.

   Our data support the notion that learning and identity development are

   interconnected social processes, occurring simultaneously and informing each other.

   Building on our prior research of Stage 2, we found an important theme: the importance of relationships in the parallel process of mastering both the student role

   and the scholar role. One participant revealed these parallel processes when she

   spoke of her experiences in Stage 2. She recalled, ‘I was adopting so fully the role of

   graduate student in a prestigious program that required all this work.’ Yet, she later

   described this time by saying, ‘I was trying to really be a colleague in the profession,

   not just a student. So in some ways my identity shifted from just being a student to

   trying to be a real legitimate, professional person who’s a part of that community.’

   The interdisciplinary framework developed by Baker and Lattuca (forthcoming)

   helps us understand that learning and identity development are mediated through

   students’ relationships. Merging the sociocultural perspective of learning with the

   notion of developmental networks helps us isolate the role of relationships and their

   influence on learning and the educational experience. The relationships and

   interactions that create the sociocultural context and developmental networks in

   which doctoral student learning is situated provide meaning, efficacy, and identity

   development. The interactions, and subsequent sense-making, that students engage in, help students determine if and how they can successfully make the transition

   through Stage 2 and into their roles as independent scholars.

   As we close, we recommend additional research that further explores the

   connection among developmental networks (e.g., relationships), identity develop-

   ment, and learning in successfully navigating the critical transition points in doctoral

   education. One area in particular is the intergenerational (cross-cohort) effects of

   relationships on the behavioral modeling and sociocultural learning on doctoral

   student development and preparation for an academic career. Many students in our

   study benefitted from the support, advice, and guidance provided by advanced

   students throughout their experiences. In turn, they offered support to students in

   the earlier years of their programs as well. We refer to this as the ‘family tree effect’,

   whereby knowledge extends beyond the most immediate dyadic relationship or

   exchange. Although not explored in this research, we encourage future research that

   considers the interaction of individual student characteristics and structural, or

   program, characteristics and the effects of those interactions on doctoral student

   development. Similarly, research is needed that explores the diversity of student experiences, including similarities and differences among students’ relationships,

   learning, and identity development based on characteristics such as (but not limited

   to) race, gender, age, career goals, and family status.

   More research is also needed to explore the role of negative relationships on

   identity development during the transition to independence. For example, does bad

   mentoring have a more negative effect on student identity development and success

   than no mentoring? Furthermore, if students fail to get the support needed to make

   this transition, how does that affect their future academic careers? In other words,

   are academic programs failing to help students develop the skills needed to be

   successful beyond life in graduate school? Such research might include an

   exploration of the behavioral strategies students employ in response to negative or

   Studies in Continuing Education 15

    

    

   nonexistent relationships. Finally, examining disciplinary differences might provide

   some interesting insights given we chose not to do so for the purposes of this

   exploratory study.

   As we continue to engage in efforts to improve our collective understanding of

   doctoral education and preparation for the professoriate, we emphasize the

   importance of theory and research that provide all stakeholders invested in

   preparation for academic practice with the knowledge of how to better understand

   and support the next generation of scholars, both in the classroom and outside of the

   classroom. We advocate for strategies that acknowledge students’ varying needs and

   concerns as they transition through the stages of doctoral education and identity

   development and emerge as independent scholars.

   Acknowledgements

   This research was supported by a grant from the Hewlett-Mellon Fund for Faculty Development at Albion College in Albion, Michigan.

   References

   Ashforth, B.E. 2001. Role transitions in organizational life: An identity-based perspective. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

   Austin, A.E., and M. McDaniels. 2006. Preparing the professoriate of the future: Graduate student socialization for faculty roles. In Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, ed. J.C. Smart, 397�456. Bronx, NY: Agathon Press.

   Austin, A.E., and D.H. Wulff. 2004. The challenge to prepare the next generation of faculty. In Paths to the professoriate: Strategies for enriching the preparation of future faculty, ed. D. Wulff and A. Austin, 3�16. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

   Baker, V. L., and L.R. Lattuca. Forthcoming. Developmental networks and learning: Toward an interdisciplinary perspective on identity development during doctoral study. Studies in Higher Education.

   Baker V.L., M.J. Pifer, and B. Flemion. 2009. ‘The lost year’: Exploring Stage 2 of the doctoral student experience. Research paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, November 4�7, in Vancouver, British Columbia.

   Baker Sweitzer, V. 2007. Professional identity development among business doctoral students: A social networks perspective. Doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University 2007. Proquest Dissertation & Theses � AAT 3266209.

   Baker Sweitzer, V. 2008. Networking to develop a professional identity: A look at the first- semester experience of doctoral students in business. In Educating Integrated Professionals: Theory and Practice on Preparation of the Professoriate, ed. C. Colbeck, K. O’Meara, and A. Austin, 43�56. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

   Baker Sweitzer, V. 2009. Towards a theory of doctoral student professional identity development: A developmental networks approach. Journal of Higher Education 80, no. 1: 1�33.

   Becker, H.S., and J. Carper. 1956. The elements of identification with an occupation. American Sociological Review 21: 341�7.

   Brim, O.G. 1966. Socialization through the life cycle. In Socialization After Childhood, ed. O.G. Brim and S. Wheeler. New York: Wiley.

   Goffman, E. 1961. Encounters: Two studies in the sociology of interaction. 3�49, Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.

   Golde, C.M. 1998. Beginning graduate school: Explaining first-year doctoral attrition. In New Directions for Higher Education, ed. M.S. Anderson, 55�64. Walden, MA: Wiley.

   Hall, D.T. 1968. Identity changes during the transition from student to professor. School Review 76: 445�69.

   16 V.L. Baker and M.J. Pifer

    

    

   Hopwood, N. and K. Sutherland. 2009. Relationships and agency in doctoral and early career academic experience. In Research and Development in Higher Education, vol. 32: The student experience, ed. H. Wozniak and S. Bartoluzzi, 210�8. Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia.

   Ibarra, H. 1999. Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional adaptation. Administrative Science Quarterly 44, no. 4: 764�91.

   Ibarra, H., and P. Deshpande. 2004. Networks and identities: Reciprocal influences on career processes and outcomes. Working Paper Series � INSEAD (2004/85/OB).

   Lovitts, B.E. 2005. Being a good course-taker is not enough: A theoretical perspective on the transition to independent researcher. Studies in Higher Education 30, no. 2: 137�54.

   McAlpine, L., M. Jazvac-Martek, and N. Hopwood. 2009. Doctoral student experience: Activities and difficulties influencing identity development. International Journal for Researcher Development 1, no. 1: 97�112.

   Morrison, E.W. 1995. Information usefulness and acquisition during organizational encoun- ter. Management Communication Quarterly 9: 131�55.

   Nettles, M.T., and C.M. Millett. 2006. Three magic letters: Getting to PhD. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

   Paglis, L.L., S.G. Green, and T.N. Bauer. 2006. Does advisor mentoring add value? A longitudinal study of mentoring and doctoral student outcomes. Research in Higher Education 47, no. 4: 451�76.

   Podolny, J.M., and J.N. Baron. 1997. Relationships and resources: Social networks and mobility in the workplace. American Sociological Review 16: 18�21.

   Sternberg, D. 1981. How to complete and survive a doctoral dissertation. New York: Macmillan Publishers.

   Tinto, V. 1993. Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

   US News and World Report. 2010. www.usnews.com. (May 1, 2010). Walker, G.E., C.M. Golde, L. Jones, A.C. Bueschel, and P. Hutchings. 2008. The formation of

   scholars: Rethinking doctoral education for the twenty-first century. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Weidman, J.C., D.J. Twale, and E.L. Stein. 2001. Socialization of graduate and professional

   students in higher education: A perilous passage. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report 28, no. 3, Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education.

   Wortham, S. 2006. Learning and identity: The joint emergence of social identification and academic learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

   Studies in Continuing Education 17

    

   http://www.usnews.com

    

   Copyright of Studies in Continuing Education is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or

   emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission.

   However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.