A Qualitative Study on the Challenges in Doctoral Education Encountered by Full-time Working PhD Students

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a substantial increase in the number of students enrolling in higher education institutions worldwide. In this respect, full-time working PhD students emerged as a new trend. However, working at a job while studying for a doctorate degree can be challenging. In this context, this research aimed to investigate the difficulties full-time working PhD students face in doctoral education. A phenomenological approach was used in this study. This study used the criterion sampling method to select a sample of full-time PhD students. The data was collected through semi-structured interviews with 20 participants, consisting of open-ended questions. According to the analysis of research data, the challenges experienced by full-time working PhD students during their doctoral education are "time management problems", "workplace problems arising from high expectations and negative attitudes", "transportation and attendance problems", "problems performing and focusing" "problems getting support and help". Individuals who work in a related field to the one in which they study, as well as those currently employed in higher education institutions, reported fewer challenges during their doctoral education. It has been determined that the most common problem is time management. Psychoeducation programs can be helpful them to adapt to challenging time schedules.

Keywords

• Higher education
• PhD students
• interpretive phenomenology
• qualitative study

Tam Zamanlı İşte Çalışan Doktora Öğrencilerinin Doktora Eğitiminde Karşılaştıkları Zorluklar Üzerine Nitel Bir İnceleme

Öz

Yükseköğretime başlayan öğrenci sayısında son yıllarda büyük bir artış yaşanmaktadır. Bu anlamda, tam zamanlı bir işte çalışırken doktora öğrenimini sürdürmekte olan öğrenciler günümüzde yeni bir trend olarak ortaya çıkmıştır. Fakat bir işte çalışırken doktora eğitimini sürdürmek bireyler için oldukça yıpratıcı bir süreç olabilir. Dolayısıyla bu çalışma, en az bir yıldır aktif olarak doktora öğrenimini sürdürürken tam zamanlı bir işte çalışan öğrencilerin doktora eğitiminde karşılaştıkları güçlükleri incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu çalışma için fenomenoloji yaklaşımı kullanılmıştır. Örneklem seçiminde tam zamanlı bir işte çalışırken doktora eğitimini sürdürmekte olan bireylerin bulunması amacıyla ölçüt örneklem kullanılmıştır. 20 kişiyle gerçekleştirilmiş olan bu çalışmada verilerin elde edilmesi aşamasında açık uçlu sorulardan oluşan yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formu kullanılmıştır. Araştırmadan elde edilen verilere göre tam zamanlı işte çalışan doktora öğrencilerinin doktora eğitiminde yaşadıkları zorluklar "zaman yönetimi ile ilgili sorunlar", "iş yerinin yüksek beklentisi ve olumsuz tutumu sonucu ortaya çıkan sorunlar", "ulaşım ve devamsızlık konusunda yaşanan sorunlar", performans gösterme ve odaklanma ile ilgili sorunlar", "destek ve yardım alma konusunda yaşanan sorunlar" altında toplanmaktadır. Doktora eğitimi aldıkları alan ile paralel bir alanda çalışmakta olan bireyler ile halihazırda yükseköğretim kurumlarında çalışan bireyler, doktora eğitiminde daha az sorun durumu yaşadıklarını bildirmişlerdir. En fazla yaşanan sorun durumunun ise zaman yönetimi konusunda olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yükseköğretim
• doktora öğrencileri
• yorumlayıcı fenomenoloji
• nitel çalışma

Kaynakça

1. Billot, J., & Codling, A. (2013). Voicing the tensions of implementing research strategies: Implications for organizational leaders. Management in Education, 27(2), 75-80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020613476729
2. Carpenter, J. (2012). Researchers of Tomorrow: The research behaviour of Generation Y doctoral students. Information services & use, 32(1-2), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-2012-0637
3. Cilesiz, S. (2011). A phenomenological approach to experiences with technology: Current state, promise, and future directions for research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59, 487-510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9173-2
4. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Ed. Inc
5. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among fiveapproaches. Los Angeles, USA: Sage.
6. Daytner, K. M. (2006). Validity in Qualitative Research: Application of Safeguards. Online Submission. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED516416
7. Déri, C. E., & Tremblay-Wragg, É. (2022). Academic Writing Groups in Higher Education: History and State of Play. International Journal of Higher Education, 11(1), 85-99. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v11n1p85
8. Halse, C., & Mowbray, S. (2011). The impact of the doctorate. Studies in higher education, 36(5), 513-525. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.594590

9. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson (Trans.). New York: Harper and Row. Higher Education Information Management System (2024). Higher Education Statistics. Retrieved in 2024 January 27, from https://istatistik.yok.gov.tr/
10. Hunter, K. H., & Devine, K. (2016). Doctoral students’ emotional exhaustion and intentions to leave academia. International Journal of doctoral studies, 11(2), 35-61. https://www.ijds.org/Volume11/IJDSv11p035-061Hunter2198.pdf
11. Lopez, K.A., & Willis, D.G. (2004). Descriptive versus interpretitive phenomenology: Their contributions to nursing knowledge. Qualitative Health Research, 14(5), 726-735. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732304263638
12. Mackie, S. A., & Bates, G. W. (2019). Contribution of the doctoral education environment to PhD candidates’ mental health problems: A scoping review. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(3), 565-578. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1556620
13. Mawson, K., & Abbott, I. (2017). Supervising the professional doctoral student: Less process and progress, more peripheral participation and personal identity. Management in Education, 31(4), 187-193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020617738182
14. Mbonyiryivuze, A., Dorimana, A., Nsabayezu, E., & Nyirahabimana, P. (2023). Challenges Affecting Women PhD Candidates for Completion of Doctoral Educations: A Synthesis of the Literature. African Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics and Sciences, 19(1), 123-134.
15. McAlpine, L., Castello, M., & Pyhaltö, K. (2020). What influences PhD graduate trajectories during the degree: a research-based policy agenda. Higher Education, 80(6), 1011-1043. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00448-7
16. McGill, M. M., & Settle, A. (2012). Identifying effects of institutional resources and support on computing faculty research productivity, tenure, and promotion. International journal of doctoral studies, 7, 167. https://ijds.org/Volume7/IJDSv7p167-198McGill348.pdf
17. Merriam, S. B. (1995). What can you tell from an N of 1?: Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. PAACE Journal of lifelong learning, 4, 51-60. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ497233
18. Moriah, M. P. (2018). Giving voice to headteachers using interpretative phenomenological analysis-IPA: Learning from a Caribbean experience. Management in Education, 32(1), 6-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/089202061774814
19. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. London: Sage.
20. Munroe, K., Hammond, L., & Cole, S. (2016) The experiences of African immigrant mothers living in the United Kingdom with a child diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder: An interpretive phenomenological analysis. Disability & Society, 31(6), 798-819. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2016.1200015
21. Prosek, E. A., & Gibson, D. M. (2021). Promoting rigorous research by examining lived experiences: A review of four qualitative traditions. Journal of Counseling & Development, 99(2), 167-177. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12364
22. Pyhältö, K., Toom, A., Stubb, J., & Lonka, K. (2012). Challenges of Becoming a Scholar: A Study of Doctoral Students′ Problems and Well‐Being. International Scholarly Research Notices, 2012(1), 934941. https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/934941
23. Saban, A. & Ersoy, A. (2016). Eğitimde nitel araştırma desenleri. Anı Yayıncılık: Ankara
24. Seçer, B. (2021). Akademisyen olmayanlar açısından doktora eğitimi. İzmir İktisat Dergisi, 36(2), 295-313. https://doi.org/10.24988/ije.202136204
25. Skaniakos, T., Honkimäki, S., Kallio, E., Nissinen, K., & Tynjälä, P. (2018). Study guidance experiences, study progress, and perceived learning outcomes of Finnish university students. European Journal of Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2018.1475247
26. Smith, J. A., & Fieldsend, M. (2021). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In P. M. Camic (Ed.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp. 147–166). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000252-008
27. Solomon, B. B. (1987). Empowerment: Social work in oppressed communities. Journal of Social Work Practice, 2(4), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650538708414984
28. Sverdlik, A., Hall, N. C., McAlpine, L., & Hubbard, K. (2018). The PhD experience: A review of the factors influencing doctoral students’ completion, achievement, and well-being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 361-388. https://doi.org/10.28945/4113
29. Tekneci, P. D. (2016). Evolution of Turkish higher education system in the last decade. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, (3), 277-287. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2016.164
30. Temel, A. B., Toraman, A. U., Mermer, G., Konal, E., & Ateş, E. (2023). Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Instrument of the Quality of Nursing Doctoral Education. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 13(1), 32-39. https://doi.org/10.5961/higheredusci.1078501
31. Thune, T. (2009). Doctoral students on the university–industry interface: a review of the literature. Higher Education, 58, 637-651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9214-0
32. Tucker, M. P., Wilson, H., Hannibal, C., Lawless, A., & Qu, Z. (2021, March). Delivering professional doctorate education: challenges and experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. In SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 99). EDP Sciences. https://dx.doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20219901012
33. Tufford, L., & Newman, P. (2012). Bracketing in qualitative research. Qualitative social work, 11(1), 80-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325010368316
34. Tural, N. K. (1995). Yükseköğretimde Öğrenciye Yönelik Parasal Yardımlar. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 28(1), 69-79. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000345
35. Tutar, H., Altınöz, M., & Güler, S. (2021). An analysis of PhD students' views on the competencies of their supervisors. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 11(2 Pt 2), 508-520. https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.21.676801
36. Waight, E., & Giordano, A. (2018). Doctoral students’ access to non-academic support for mental health. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 40(4), 390-412. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2018.1478613
37. Whittington, K., & Barnes, S. (2021). The changing face of doctoral education. The future of doctoral research: Challenges and opportunities, 5-17.
38. Yavuzaslan, A., Barişçil, A., & Farkas, M. F. (2016). Stress and future career aspirations among university students in Turkey. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanity Studies, 8(1), 233-250.
39. Yılar, M. B. (2020a). Türk ve Amerikan Doktora Adaylarının Akademik Becerilerine İlişkin Öz-Değerlendirmeleri: Nitel Bir Çalışma. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Education Faculty, 39(2), 385-410. https://doi.org/10.7822/omuefd.824316
40. Yılar, M. B. (2020b). Academic self-efficacy beliefs of Turkish and American Ph. D students: A comparative study. International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 7(4), 180-194. https://doi.org/10.17220/ijpes.2020.04.017
41. Zhuang, L. (2007). Doctoral education in China. S. Powel & H. Green (Eds.). The doctorate worldwide in (ss. 155167), Maidenhead: McGraw Hill.