The Road to Researcher: The Development of Research Self-Efficacy in Higher Education Scholars

Aim/Purpose: Understanding how students develop a sense of efficacy as researchers can pro-vide faculty members in higher education doctoral programs insight into how to be more effective teachers and mentors, necessitating discipline-specific research on how graduate programs are and can be fostering students’ research self-efficacy (RSE). Thus, the purpose of this study was to explore how doctoral pro-grams and early research experiences contribute to the development of RSE in higher education scholars. Background: Participants identified elements of the formal and “hidden” curriculumt pro-moted and inhibited RSE development. Methodology: We employed multiple case study analysis of 17 individual early career scholars in higher education and student affairs. Contribution: Findings indicate that the development of RSE is complex, but that Bandura’s four main sources of efficacy are a useful way to understand the types of experi-ences that students are and should be having to promote RSE. Our findings also highlight the importance of the research training environment in RSE develop-ment. Findings: We found that the formal curriculum of participants’ doctoral programs – their research methods coursework and the process of writing their dissertations – were important facilitators of their RSE development. However, we also found that the “hidden curriculum” – the availability of extracurricular research oppor-tunities, faculty and peer mentoring, and the overall research culture of the doctoral programs – were influential in participants’ development. Recommendations for Practitioners: Our findings point to a number of implications for higher education graduate programs seeking to improve students’ RSE. First, with regard to coursework, our findings point to the importance of recognizing the negative experiences students may bring with them to their doctoral programs, particularly related to quantita-tive methods, and of finding ways to help them see quantitative methods in dif-ferent ways than they have before. Second, our findings suggest important impli-cations for how faculty members as teachers, advisors, and mentors can think about providing feedback. Finally, our findings suggest the importance of under-standing the “hidden curriculum,” and how faculty members can influence stu-dents’ experiences outside of coursework and dissertations

Enacting Efficacy In Early Career: Narratives Of Agency, Growth, And Identity

Aim/Purpose: To explore how early career faculty in the field of higher education administration develop and enact their personal and professional identities. Background: Participants sought to understand themselves, to understand their environments and the “rules” of the academic “game,” and to reconcile conflicts between their own values and identities and the expectations and culture of their environments. Methodology: In-depth case studies of seventeen early career scholars in the field. Contribution: The participants’ experiences underscore important implications for mentoring and socialization that takes into consideration the unique motivation and identity development of aspiring and new faculty members. Findings: Identifies the early career period as one where new faculty are working to develop a strong internal foundation upon which they can manage the many challenges of their personal and professional lives. Recommendations: The findings point to implications for practice, both in graduate education and in departments hiring new faculty members

The Road to Researcher: The Development of Research Self-Efficacy in Higher Education Scholars

Aim/Purpose: Understanding how students develop a sense of efficacy as researchers can pro-vide faculty members in higher education doctoral programs insight into how to be more effective teachers and mentors, necessitating discipline-specific research on how graduate programs are and can be fostering students’ research self-efficacy (RSE). Thus, the purpose of this study was to explore how doctoral pro-grams and early research experiences contribute to the development of RSE in higher education scholars. Background: Participants identified elements of the formal and “hidden” curriculumt pro-moted and inhibited RSE development. Methodology: We employed multiple case study analysis of 17 individual early career scholars in higher education and student affairs. Contribution: Findings indicate that the development of RSE is complex, but that Bandura’s four main sources of efficacy are a useful way to understand the types of experi-ences that students are and should be having to promote RSE. Our findings also highlight the importance of the research training environment in RSE develop-ment. Findings: We found that the formal curriculum of participants’ doctoral programs – their research methods coursework and the process of writing their dissertations – were important facilitators of their RSE development. However, we also found that the “hidden curriculum” – the availability of extracurricular research oppor-tunities, faculty and peer mentoring, and the overall research culture of the doctoral programs – were influential in participants’ development. Recommendations for Practitioners: Our findings point to a number of implications for higher education graduate programs seeking to improve students’ RSE. First, with regard to coursework, our findings point to the importance of recognizing the negative experiences students may bring with them to their doctoral programs, particularly related to quantita-tive methods, and of finding ways to help them see quantitative methods in dif-ferent ways than they have before. Second, our findings suggest important impli-cations for how faculty members as teachers, advisors, and mentors can think about providing feedback. Finally, our findings suggest the importance of under-standing the “hidden curriculum,” and how faculty members can influence stu-dents’ experiences outside of coursework and dissertations

How Early Career Academic Women Make Decisions Surrounding the Use of Family Formation Policies: A Constructivist Grounded Theory

This research presents a qualitative, constructivist grounded theory of how academic women make decisions regarding the use (or disuse) of family formation policies that are available to them. This study sought to answer the following two research questions: (1) What is the process by which early-career academic women consider and decide whether to use family formation policies? and (2) What influences the decision-making process of early-career academic women as they consider using family formation policies? Participants included nine academic women in varying disciplines and backgrounds at multiple research one institutions across the United States. Data collection included two semi-structured, in-depth interviews with each participant and an analysis of both publically available and privately held documents provided to the researcher by participants. Using the constant comparison method, a substantive grounded theory of how early career academic women make decisions around family formation policies emerged. The generated theory includes four core steps in the decision-making process and five contextual elements that influence it. Feelings were determined to serve as a bridge between the two core elements. Implications for this theory are an increased understanding of how these critical decisions occur for academic women, departments, and institutions. By more thoroughly understanding the complexities of this process, stakeholders may be able to keep more women in the academic pipeline and avoid the need to engage in costly searches to replace them. Further research should focus on how the decision-process differs for academic women in non-partnered relationships or for those academic women who have chosen not to have children

How Early Career Academic Women Make Decisions Surrounding the Use of Family Formation Policies: A Constructivist Grounded Theory

This research presents a qualitative, constructivist grounded theory of how academic women make decisions regarding the use (or disuse) of family formation policies that are available to them. This study sought to answer the following two research questions: (1) What is the process by which early-career academic women consider and decide whether to use family formation policies? and (2) What influences the decision-making process of early-career academic women as they consider using family formation policies? Participants included nine academic women in varying disciplines and backgrounds at multiple research one institutions across the United States. Data collection included two semi-structured, in-depth interviews with each participant and an analysis of both publically available and privately held documents provided to the researcher by participants. Using the constant comparison method, a substantive grounded theory of how early career academic women make decisions around family formation policies emerged. The generated theory includes four core steps in the decision-making process and five contextual elements that influence it. Feelings were determined to serve as a bridge between the two core elements. Implications for this theory are an increased understanding of how these critical decisions occur for academic women, departments, and institutions. By more thoroughly understanding the complexities of this process, stakeholders may be able to keep more women in the academic pipeline and avoid the need to engage in costly searches to replace them. Further research should focus on how the decision-process differs for academic women in non-partnered relationships or for those academic women who have chosen not to have children

Enacting Efficacy In Early Career: Narratives Of Agency, Growth, And Identity

Aim/Purpose: To explore how early career faculty in the field of higher education administration develop and enact their personal and professional identities. Background: Participants sought to understand themselves, to understand their environments and the “rules” of the academic “game,” and to reconcile conflicts between their own values and identities and the expectations and culture of their environments. Methodology: In-depth case studies of seventeen early career scholars in the field. Contribution: The participants’ experiences underscore important implications for mentoring and socialization that takes into consideration the unique motivation and identity development of aspiring and new faculty members. Findings: Identifies the early career period as one where new faculty are working to develop a strong internal foundation upon which they can manage the many challenges of their personal and professional lives. Recommendations: The findings point to implications for practice, both in graduate education and in departments hiring new faculty members

Faculty Engagement in Cultural Mentoring as Instructors of Short-Term Study Abroad Courses

The purpose of this study was to explore what cultural mentoring looks like in practice in shortterm study abroad courses, how frequently instructors engage in cultural mentoring, and what demographic and background variables might predict the extent to which faculty members engage in cultural mentoring. Using data from a survey of 473 faculty members from 72 U.S. colleges and universities who had recently taught short-term study abroad courses, we identified four types of cultural mentoring behaviours: Expectation Setting, Explaining the Host Culture, Exploring Self in Culture, and Facilitating Connections. We also identified key predictors of the frequency with which participants engaged in cultural mentoring, including rank, race/ethnicity, and discipline

Statement in Support of: “Virology under the Microscope—a Call for Rational Discourse”

[Extract] We, members of the Australasian Virology Society, agree with and support the statement entitled “Virology under the Microscope—a Call for Rational Discourse” (1). Like virologists everywhere, we have worked with scientist and clinician colleagues worldwide to develop knowledge, tests, and interventions which collectively have reduced the number of deaths due to COVID-19 and curtailed its economic impact. Such work adds to the extraordinary achievements resulting from virology research that have delivered vaccines and/or antivirals against a long list of diseases and global scourges, including AIDS, smallpox, and polio (1). We believe the question of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 should be approached with an open mind and in consideration of the best scientific evidence available. We concur with the view that the zoonosis hypothesis has the strongest supporting evidence (2–4), and this is a scenario that has been observed repeatedly in the past (5), including in Australia (6). Recent data strongly support the zoonosis hypothesis (7). We share the concern that emotive and fear-based dialogues in this area add to public confusion and can lead to ill-informed condemnation of virology research