Evolution by Sarah Diaz-Bastin

CID Summer 2005 Convening: Developing Researchers and Scholars

Topic 4: Developing a Professional Identity as a Researcher and Scholar

CID-Survey Data

This Snapshot presents data on the Carnegie Foundation surveys of graduate students and faculty about how students learn to become a researcher and scholar.

Making the shift from considering oneself a student to seeing oneself as an active and contributing member of the discipline is an important change in professional identity. Self-identifying as a chemist or an historian implies active participation in a broad disciplinary community of researchers and scholars. It means embracing the identity of a steward of the discipline, responsible for the future of the field and the next generations of scholars.



Survey Results

We asked facutly about how often they solicit input from their advisees on matters of research. It varied strongly by discipline, with chemistry and neuroscience reporting the highest weekly solicitation. GIven the frequent opportunities to interact in lab, these responses are not entirely surprising. Education faculty also solicited feedback from their students often. This response may be due in part to the fact that many education students enter doctoral programs with extensive professional experience. The remaining disciplines all peaked in the middle. The range of responses prompts several questions: What are opportunities for feedback in each discipline? Facutly: at what point, if any, do students become colleagues? Students: Do you feel confident offering critical feedback to your advisor? Why?

Chart: Faculty Solicitation of Advisee Input


We asked students about their involvement in different communities, each of which can help shape professional identity. The majority of students have joined a professional association. Although not depicted here, students at the dissertation stage report greater activity in the professional organizations, likely due to job opportunities. Education and neuroscience students report the greatest level of activity in the professional associations, which may reflect some of the interdisciplinary nature of the fields. Math students report the least involvement in the professional groups and the other communities they were asked about. When asked about intellectual networks, English and history students report the greatest activity. Is this response reflective of the longer time-to-degree? When asked about giving feedback to others, history students again were the highest, followed closely by English and neuroscience. Like the facutly responses, neuroscientists tend to have more opportunities to interact. That does not explain, however, why chemistry -- also a lab science -- is lower.

Chart: Students' Membership in Intellectual Communities


Students were asked whether their advisors helped them develop professional relationships with others in the field. The assumption here is that part of becoming a steward of the discipline requires developing colleagues both within and across institutions. Historians report the greatest help, and the education students also report strong support in this area, though they also "bunch" the tightest in their responses (i.e., they also have the highest response for "not at all"). Does the nature of professional relationships differ by discipline? Are networks more important in some fields than others? Many chemistry students do not stay in academe; are those connections different?

Chart: Advisor Help with Professional Network

Summary Description

As part of the research strand of the Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate (CID), two surveys -- one each to graduate students and faculty -- were administered by Carnegie staff to doctoral students and graduate faculty in the participating departments of the CID (84 departments and programs at 44 universities).

Graduate Student Survey

The Carnegie Graduate Student Survey was administered to all doctoral students in participating departments. In all, 2,176 students from 76 departments at 40 universities responded.

Graduate Faculty Survey

The Carnegie Graduate Faculty survey was administered to faculty in participating departments. In all, 668 faculty members in 63 departments at 32 universities completed the survey.

Overview of surveys
Summary of survey goals and overview of tables and graphs.

Snapshot of Survey Data
This snapshot includes several graphs and tables of data from the CID faculty and student surveys.


Contact Information

Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate

[email protected] 650/566-5107


This electronic portfolio was created using the KML Snapshot Tool™, a part of the KEEP Toolkit™,
developed at the Knowledge Media Lab of The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Terms of Use - Privacy Policy