Student support Review - Overcome barrie

Impediments to the hours that students can dedicate to study

Part-time doctoral candidates

The causes and consequences of student employment

Writing interventions to assist graduate researchers

by Simon Moss

Introduction

Whether PhD candidates and other graduate researchers thrive in their studies is greatly dependent on their capacity to write effectively. Consequently, institutions often introduce a range of initiatives to develop this capacity, such as writing groups, writing retreats, writing programs, and supervision training.

To design interventions, practitioners need to consider the underlying pedagogies—that is, methods and practices that improve writing ability and the rationale that underpins these methods and practices. To assist these practitioners, Cotterall (2011) as well as Calle-Arango and Ávila Reyes (2022) have reviewed some of the pedagogies that researchers have uncovered and advocated. For example, the writing of graduate researchers tends to improve after they scrutinize the work of other authors. Accordingly, these candidates should

evaluate the drafts of peers and deliver feedback (Caffarella & Barnett, 2000)
scrutinize the writings of other authors, such as their supervisor or mentor, perhaps under the guidance of this person (Simpson & Matsuda 2008)
maintain an inventory of the phrases, syntax, or devices that other authors use (Kamler & Thomson, 2006)

In addition, collaboration with other researchers tend to enhance the writing of graduate researchers. That is, these candidates should

receive and embrace feedback from academics and peers on successive drafts (Caffarella & Barnett, 2000)
develop social networks of peers and academics in which they discuss their research and thus learn to communicate the nub of this work (Simpson & Matsuda 2008)
write in collaboration with other researchers (Kamler & Thomson, 2006)
engage in authentic writing experiences, such as proofreading a thesis (Simpson & Matsuda 2008)

Finally, graduate researchers should accrue a range of strategies to enhance their writing, such as

read guidelines and other resources that are designed to improve writing ability (Simpson & Matsuda 2008)
learn to represent the relationship between the topics they want to write graphically, like a conceptual map (Kamler & Thomson, 2006)
reflect upon their writing, such as the circumstances or strategies that tends to expedite or impede their progress

Case studies of writing interventions: The doctoral writing conversation

Tertiary education institutions have developed a range of writing programs to assist graduate researchers. Johnson (2018) delineated a comprehensive writing program that was launched at the at the University of Waikato.

The program originated from a previous initiative around thesis writing circles—in which, each week, graduate researchers could attend a writing and research discussion forum, lasting two hours. Specialists in student learning facilitated these discussions. Although the university organized a few workshops to impart writing skills, the writing circles were primarily opportunities that enabled candidates to work together to evaluate and to generate drafts. Candidates were also invited to organize their own, independent peer groups.

An evaluation of this program, however, revealed that few candidates attended the sessions, besides a few of the workshops that discussed particular skills. The evaluation, however, did uncover some useful insights. First, when candidates discussed their research with peers from other disciplines, their ideas crystalized. Second, the name—writing circles—implied that students were merely editing the work of one another rather than conversing and discussing writing. The program was thus renamed to doctoral writing conversations

Next, the coordinators of this program needed to address some concerns that supervisors expressed. For example, some supervisors felt that peers from other disciplines had contaminated the plans of their candidates. To override this skepticism, the coordinator invited between two and four supervisors to attend the first session each month. Supervisors shared their insights about a theme, such as interdisciplinary teams or engaging writing, and then answered questions—an experience they enjoyed.

Then, the coordinator also organized two writing retreats, each lasting a day. Candidates could write at their own pace, but breakout rooms were available to candidates who wanted to discuss their writing. The presence of other candidates, all working silently, inspired these individuals to write. Over time, in response to student feedback, these retreats lasted two days and were repeated four times a year. This extended duration enabled teams of candidates to set goals.

Eventually, the guest conversations were supplanted with active, reflective discussions on the particulars of thesis writing rather than research methods and practices. To illustrate, one discussion revolved around the underlying purpose of each chapter, such as the introduction and methodology, because appreciation of this purpose helps students write these sections. Next, students critically examine chapters the table of contents in past theses. Finally, students attempt to derive the common features of each chapter, irrespective of academic discipline, as well as variations across disciplines.

A second discussion revolved around how to manage and respond to the feedback of supervisors. In this discussion, graduate researchers carefully examine the feedback that another candidate received. They classify the feedback and discuss how they would have responded to this feedback. They also generate a grid in which they record supervisor comments, how they responded to these comments, and outstanding questions about these comments. This grid can then be utilized to guide conversations during their next meeting with their supervisor.

Case studies of writing interventions: Online writing groups

Because many PhD candidates and other graduate researchers study remotely, many institutions have developed online writing groups. Some research has been conducted to evaluate the benefits of this approach and the provisions that enhance these benefits—such as the impact of facilitation.

To illustrate, Kozar and Lum (2015) conducted a study in which ten doctoral candidates were assigned to one of three writing groups, depending on their field of research. Specifically

an academic, specializing in language, facilitated the sessions that science candidates attended.
this language specialist facilitated only the first three sessions that social science candidates attended
no academic facilitated the sessions that business candidates attended; instead, these candidates received a toolkit on how to manage online writing groups

During each session, the candidates would review and discuss a draft that was submitted by one candidate. The groups used Skype to communicate—except the science candidates who used email and thus communicated asynchronously.

Participants received a survey after each session, inviting comments about their experience and perspective of these opportunities. In general, most participants, especially the social science candidates, were satisfied with the experience and the feedback they received from their peers. The science students, in which the discussion was mainly asynchronous, were the least satisfied with the feedback. Admittedly, some of the differences across the online groups could be ascribed to disparities in the age, nationality, and discipline of the candidates. Regardless, in general, when asked to describe the experience of delivering feedback, they referred to this task as challenging, engaging, inspiration, worthwhile, and constructive rather than time consuming.

Case studies of writing interventions: Writing workshops to assist international doctoral students

Some workshops are primarily designed to assist international graduate researchers, especially candidates who learned English later in life. Mckenna and Kyser (2022), for example, designed and evaluated one example. Rather than merely transmit knowledge about writing, the workshops were designed to inspire candidates to develop their own skills gradually and collaboratively.

During the first 20 minutes of each session, facilitators imparted some advice to candidates, lasting about 20 minutes. The topic they discussed was guided by the concerns and issues that candidates had raised. The topics included how to write abstracts, to organize literature reviews, to submit manuscripts to journals, to locate and organize sources of literature, and so forth

During the next 40 minutes of each session, the candidates, in small teams, shared their drafts with one another and delivered feedback on these drafts. However, after initial feedback, this activity was abandoned. Instead, during the remaining 100 minutes or so, candidates were granted opportunities to write intensively, in quiet surroundings. If they chose, candidates could discuss their drafts with a language or research specialist

To evaluate these workshops, the researchers collected samples of writing and feedback across time, administered surveys before and after the workshops, organized focus groups, and gathered reflective journals in which they contemplated this experience. The analysis revealed that, after completing these sessions

participants felt more confident they could write effectively and could access other resources to assist their writing
but participants felt less confident in their capacity to review the draft of peers effectively
the coordinators of this program felt the participants were applying many of the principles they had taught; they seldom repeated previous errors they had committed in their drafts

Writing interventions: Writing groups

Perhaps the most common initiative to enhance the writing of graduate researchers are writing groups. As a typical example, a cohort of 5 to 20 candidates might assemble, perhaps once a fortnight, to write. During some of the time, they might set a goal, such as to write 1000 words, and then work silently to achieve this goal. During other times, they might review and discuss the draft of one candidate. These writing groups vary on many characteristics (see Haas, 2014). For example,

a specialist may facilitate and organize some groups, at least initially or the candidates may facilitate and organize the groups themselves (Kozar & Lum, 2015)
the groups could meet in person or online
the groups might discuss their drafts synchronously or asynchronously over email (Kozar & Lum, 2015)
the groups might review and discuss the drafts that candidates have prepared or collaborate on a draft
the groups could meet at the university or away from campus
the groups might comprise graduate researchers from one academic discipline or many academic disciplines
the groups might discuss only written drafts or also discuss academic guidelines on how to write more effectively
one person might assume a leadership role or this leadership role might be rotated across members
during the sessions, the candidates might set goals, organize intensive writing periods, discuss writing, deliver feedback, arrange breaks, attend workshops, and socialize

Some features of writing groups might be more beneficial than other features. After evaluating a writing group, Ferguson (2009) concluded that writing groups are most effective when

attendance is voluntary, provided the activities are sufficiently inspiring and relevant
the groups comprise fewer than 10—and preferably fewer than 6—individuals
the groups comprise individuals who study in diverse fields—partly to help candidates explain their research as simply as possible
the groups comprise individuals from multiple stages, such as first year and third year candidates
the groups are granted opportunities to identify a schedule and time that accommodates their needs
candidates are granted some activities to complete—but primarily activities that facilitate progress on their own thesis rather than merely evaluate other extracts and examples
candidates review the drafts of peers, but these drafts are limited in length

Writing interventions: Writing retreats

Many researchers have explored the benefits of writing retreats (e.g., Murray & Newton, 2009; Papen & Thériault, 2018; Vincent et al., 2021). To illustrate, Vincent et al. (2021) examined the effects of a writing retreat in Quebec. This retreat lasted three days. Specifically

up to 50 graduate researchers, such as PhD candidates, registered to attend this event about four months in advance
a week before the event, they set the goals they want to achieve and received some initial reading and resources to facilitate their writing and to prepare
during the first hour, two facilitators outlined the practices, such as Pomodoro and Kanban methods to foster the conditions that promote a supportive atmosphere
throughout the retreat, the candidates participated in nine Pomodoro sessions, writing intensive for 50 minutes and then resting, reflecting, or socializing for 10 minutes
during the last 30 minutes, candidates reflected on the key insights they learned

Before and after the retreat, participants completed questionnaires that assess their confidence in writing, called self-efficacy, and their capacity to motivate themselves to write, called self-regulation. Some of these participants were also interviewed. After attending the retreat, participants were more confident in their capacity to write, more adept at motivating themselves to write, and more likely to actually write. The Pomodoro technique and the specific, measurable, achieveable goals were especially likely to foster this motivation.

According to Kornhaber et al. (2016), the benefits of writing retreats can be ascribed to four key features. Specifically, after students or staff attend writing retreats

they experience a sense of community support that legitimizes their need to write
they appreciate the time and space they can dedicate to writing, devoid of distractions
they develop strategies on how to set goals to improve their motivation and capacity to write
the anxiety they associate with writing subsides—partly because their concerns are normalized and partly because they learn strategies to address this anxiety

Despite these benefits, Vincent et al. (2021) suggested that doctoral candidates are seldom granted opportunities to attend writing retreats, potentially because their workload is steep.

Writing interventions: Supervision support

Although institutions may arrange an array of initiatives to enhance the writing of graduate researchers, the role of supervisors remains crucial. Accordingly, Gonzalez Ocampo and Castelló (2018) conducted a study to explore how supervisors attempt to improve the writing skills of candidates. In this study, 61 research supervisors received a survey that comprised open-ended questions.

The main objective of many supervisors was merely to help the candidates generate proficient text, in the thesis or publications. Their emphasis revolved around suitable academic language and logical coherence in the arguments.

In contrast, about a quarter of supervisors referred to their task as to enhance the writing skills of candidates and, more importantly, help these candidates develop strategies to improve these skills themselves. These supervisors prioritized the practices, instead of the product, such as how to plan carefully, correct drafts, scrutinize other work, and seek feedback.

To achieve these goals, supervisors initiated a range of activities. First, supervisors imparted specific advice, such as how to write efficiently, how to comply with the standards and conventions of their discipline, and which books or theses they should read to improve their writing. Second, supervisors corrected drafts, sometimes rewriting words or sentences or sometimes writing a detailed report on the principles these candidates should consider. Third, supervisors would often discuss writing practices: They might encourage candidates to plan a draft as early as possible, to join a peer writing group, to identify shortcomings they might need to address, and so forth.

Benefits of writing interventions: Support and confidence

Some writing interventions not only enhance the writing of graduate researchers but can also enhance their network and confidence. Ferguson (2009), for example, explored the benefits of a thesis writing group that was convened at the University of Sheffield. In this study, groups comprising between 3 and 6 candidates met every 2 weeks, across 10 weeks, for 2 hours each time. The atmosphere was informal, supportive, and safe. During these sessions, candidates received some formal guidance around writing structure, style, and strategies, such as reflexivity, coupled with materials and chapters they could peruse at home. Next, candidates attempted some writing exercises, reviewed their drafts at home, and then discussed these reviews in person. After these sessions, the candidates completed evaluation forms to assess their perception of the experience and suggestions on how this format could be improved. As the findings showed, after the sessions

all participants indicated they would recommend these writing groups to peers
participants experience a sense of support and belonging with their peers
participants felt more confident about writing; they no longer regarded writing as frightening or mysterious
participants recognized their peers also experienced similar anxieties and concerns about writing; hence, these worries felt normalized rather than pathological
participants enjoyed the exposure to peers from other disciplines; they felt these peers imparted a unique and fresh perspective

Benefits of writing interventions: Wellbeing

Some writing interventions also improve the wellbeing of candidates. Peer writing groups, for example, can enhance the wellbeing of graduate researchers. To explain these benefits of peer writing groups, Beasy et al. (2020) invoked a framework called the spaces of wellbeing theory (Fleuret & Atkinson, 2007). This theory explains how the physical and social features of spaces and facilities may shape the wellbeing of individuals. Four dimensions of spaces can impinge on wellbeing. Specifically

first, spaces of capability refer to the degree to which spaces grant individuals the freedom, independence, and agency to pursue and to fulfill their valued aspirations
second, integrative spaces refer to the extent to which spaces enable individuals to establish social networks
third, spaces of security refer to the degree to which spaces afford individuals with a sense of security—a feeling that enables people to explore and to grow
finally, therapeutic spaces refer to the extent to which spaces replenish motivation and energy.

Beasy et al. (2020) explored whether a specific writing group, called a write-in program, shaped these dimensions of space to enhance wellbeing. The program lasted six months. The graduate researchers dedicated one day, usually a Saturday, every fortnight, to these sessions. A grant, provided by the student union, covered the costs of lunch. The room in which the individuals met was dignified, quiet, and large enough to enable the individuals to choose whether to work at a large central table, at smaller tables around the fringe of this room, or on one of two couches. During the sessions, the candidates wrote or read drafts, working individually or collectively.

During interviews, conducted by a subset of members after the program ended, participants were asked to depict their experience of these sessions and the effect of these sessions on their wellbeing. The data were coded deductively, although researchers also considered how the responses overlap with the four dimensions of space. As the results demonstrated

the program was undoubtedly a source of capability: participants often referred to the extensive number of words they could write, devoid of the usual distractions they would experience on Saturdays
the program was also a source of integration: participants enjoyed the sense of camaraderie, collaboration, and social conversation, diverging from the sense of isolation they often experienced at the institution
the program instilled a sense of security: participants often shared their experiences and thus felt accepted rather than isolated in their anxieties
the program was also therapeutic: the sense of progress and shared experienced invigorated and motivated the candidates.

Impediments to writing: Beliefs about writing

To develop suitable writing interventions, practitioners need to be sensitive to the beliefs or experiences that might impede writing. To inform practitioners, Lonka et al. (2019) attempted to uncover distinct constellations of candidates that differ on these beliefs, characteristics, or experiences. To achieve this goal, participants completed the writing process questionnaire that assesses six beliefs about writing or experiences of writing:

the extent to which candidates believe that writing is an entrenched skills that cannot be readily developed over time
the degree to which candidates exhibit signs of perfectionism when they write
the extent to which candidates tend to procrastinate and defer their writing
the degree to which candidates feel they write productively and fluently
the frequency with which candidates experience writing blocks
the extent to which individuals learn as they write

In addition, participants also completed a measure of stress, anxiety, exhaustion, and disinterest. Finally, they completed an instrument that assesses their perception of doctoral education, such as whether they feel the feedback is constructive, the workload is manageable, the ambience is supportive or detached, and their career path is satisfying. Latent profile analysis uncovered three clusters of candidates (for similar results, see Sala-Burbaré et al., 2018). Specifically

one cluster, called growth-transforming, perceived writing as a modifiable capability and tended to be productive, even if perfectionistic, rather than impeded by blocks
the second cluster, called fixed-blocking, perceived writing as an innate, immutable capability and tended to experience blocks rather than write productively or learn from writing. This cluster experienced highest levels of disinterest and felt they received the least feedback
the final cluster, called ambivalent, were moderate on most of these measures

References

Adamek, M. E. (2015). Building scholarly writers: Student perspectives on peer review in a doctoral writing seminar. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(1-2), 213-225.
Aitchison, C., Catterall, J., Ross, P., & Burgin, S. (2012). 'Tough love and tears': Learning doctoral writing in the sciences. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(4), 435-447.
Aitchison, C. & Lee, A. (2006). Research writing: problems and pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 265-278.
Beasy, K., Emery, S., Dyer, L., Coleman, B., Bywaters, D., Garrad, T., Crawford, J., Swarts, K., & Jahangiri, S. (2020). Writing together to foster wellbeing: doctoral writing groups as spaces of wellbeing. Higher Education Research and Development, 39(6), 1091-1105.
Bitchener, J. (2018). A guide to supervising non-native English writers of theses and dissertations: Focusing on the writing process. New York: Routledge.
Bitchener, J., Basturkmen, H., & East, M. (2010). The focus of supervisor written feedback to thesis/dissertation students. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 79–97.
Bitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 writing. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Calle-Arango, L., & Ávila Reyes, N. (2022). Obstacles, facilitators, and needs in doctoral writing: A systematic review. Studies in Continuing Education
Can, G., & Walker, A. (2011). A model for doctoral students’ perceptions and attitudes toward written feedback for academic writing. Research in Higher Education, 52(5), 508-536.
Can, G., & Walker, A. (2014). Social science doctoral students’ needs and preferences for written feedback. Higher Education, 68(2), 303-318.
Carter, S., & Kumar, V. (2017). 'Ignoring me is part of learning': Supervisory feedback on doctoral writing. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(1), 68-75.
Castelló, M., Iñesta, A., & Corcelles, M. (2013). Learning to write a research article: Ph.D. students’ transitions toward disciplinary writing regulation. Research in the Teaching of English, 47(4), 442–477.
Catterall, J., Ross, P., Aitchison, C., & Bergin, S. (2011). Pedagogical approaches that facilitate writing in postgraduate research candidature in science and technology. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 8(2).
Cennetkusu, N. G. (2017). International students’ challenges in academic writing: A case study from a prominent U.S. university. Journal of Language and Linguistic Statistics, 13(2), 309–323.
Chakraborty, D., Soyoof, A., Moharami, M., Utami, A. D., Zeng, S., Cong-Lem, N., ... & Pretorius, L. (2021). Feedback as a space for academic social practice in doctoral writing groups. Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 38(2), 238-248.
Ciampa, K., & Wolfe, Z. M. (2020). From isolation to collaboration: creating an intentional community of practice within the doctoral dissertation proposal writing process. Teaching in Higher Education.
Cotterall, S. (2011). Doctoral students writing: Where’ s the pedagogy? Teaching in Higher Education, 16(4), 413–425.
Cuthbert, D., Spark, C., & Burke, E. (2009). Disciplining writing: The case for multi‐disciplinary writing groups to support writing for publication by higher degree by research candidates in the humanities, arts and social sciences. Higher Education Research & Development, 28(2), 137-149.
Dai, K., & Hardy, I. (2022). Language for learning? International students' doctoral writing practices in China. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development.
Ferguson, T. (2009). The 'write' skills and more: A thesis writing group for doctoral students. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 33(2), 285-297.
Fleuret, S., & Atkinson, S. (2007). Wellbeing, health and geography: A critical review and research agenda. New Zealand Geographer, 63(2), 106–118.
Gardner, S., & Nesi, H. (2012). A classification of genre families in university student writing. Applied Linguistics, 34(1), 25–52.
Gonzalez Ocampo, G., & Castelló, M. (2018). Writing in doctoral programs: examining supervisors’ perspectives. Higher Education, 76(3), 387–401.
Haas, S. (2014). Pick-n-Mix: A typology of writers' groups in use. In Writing groups for doctoral education and beyond (pp. 30-48). Routledge.
Humphrey, R., & Simpson, B. (2012). Writes of passage: Writing up qualitative data as a threshold concept in doctoral research. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(6), 735-746.
Kamler, B. (2008). Rethinking doctoral publication practices: Writing from and beyond the thesis. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 283–294.
Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2014). Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision. New York: Routledge.
Inouye, K., & McAlpine, L. (2019). Developing academic identity: A review of the literature on doctoral writing and feedback. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14.
Inouye, K., & McAlpine, L. (2022). Writing across contexts: Relationships between doctoral writing and workplace writing beyond the academy. Innovations in Education and Teaching.
Johnson, E. M. (2018). The doctoral writing conversation: establishing a generic doctoral writing programme. Open Review of Educational Research, 5(1), 16-27.
Kornhaber, R., Cross, M., Betihavas, V., & Bridgman, H. (2016). The benefits and challenges of academic writing retreats: An integrative review. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(6), 1210-1227.
Kozar, O., & Lum, J. F. (2015). Online doctoral writing groups: Do facilitators or communication modes make a difference? Quality in Higher Education, 21(1), 38–51.
Kumar, V., & Stracke, E. (2007). An analysis of written feedback on a PhD thesis. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(4), 461–470.
Lee, A., & Murray, R. (2015). Supervising writing: Helping postgraduate students develop as researchers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52(5), 558–570.
Liu, F., Du, J., Zhou, D. Q., & Huang, B. (2021). Exploiting the potential of peer feedback: The combined use of face-to-face feedback and e-feedback in doctoral writing groups. Assessing Writing, 47, 100482.
Lonka, K., Ketonen, E., Vekkaila, J., Cerrato Lara, M., & Pyhältö, K. (2018). Doctoral students’ writing profiles and their relations to well-being and perceptions of the academic environment. Higher Education, 77(4), 587–602.
Maher, D., Seaton, L., McMullen, C., Fitzgerald, T., Otsuji, E., & Lee, A. (2008). 'Becoming and being writers': The experiences of doctoral students in writing groups. Studies in continuing education, 30(3), 263-275.
Mandell, D., Shalan, H., Stalker, C., & Caragata, L. (2015). Writing for publication: Assessment of a course for social work doctoral students. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(1-2), 197-212.
Mckenna, K., & Kyser, C. D. (2022). Beyond academic writing: The international doctoral student writing workshop. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 59(4), 375–386.
Murray, R. (2015). Writing in the social spaces: A social processes approach to academic writing. London: Routledge.
Murray, R., & Newton, M. (2009). Writing retreat as structured intervention: Margin or mainstream? Higher Education Research and Development, 28(5), 541–553.
Odena, O., & Burgess, H. (2017). How doctoral students and graduates describe facilitating experiences and strategies for their thesis writing learning process: A qualitative approach. Studies in Higher Education, 42(3), 572-590.
Papen, U., & Thériault, V. (2018). Writing retreats as a milestone in the development of PhD students’ sense of self as academic writers. Studies in Continuing Education, 40(2), 166-180.
Sala-Burbaré, A., Peltonen, J., Pyhältö, K., & Castelló, M. (2018). Doctoral candidates’ research writing perceptions: A cross-national study. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 327-345
Taylor, S., Kiley, M., & Humphrey, R. (2017). A handbook for doctoral supervisors (2nd ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.
Vincent, C., Tremblay-Wragg, É., Déri, C., Plante, I., & Mathieu Chartier, S. (2021). How writing retreats represent an ideal opportunity to enhance PhD candidates’ writing self-efficacy and self-regulation. Teaching in Higher Education.
Weatherall, R. (2019). Writing the doctoral thesis differently. Management Learning, 50(1), 100-113.
Wegener, C., Meier, N., & Ingerslev, K. (2016). Borrowing brainpower - sharing insecurities. Lessons learned from a doctoral peer writing group. Studies in Higher Education, 41(6), 1092-1105.

Return to top

Return to menu

Distant or online doctoral candidates

by Simon Moss

Introduction

Many doctoral candidates and other graduate researchers now complete most or all their course online, sometimes called distant or remote learning. To illustrate, in Australia, many universities now permit their candidates to complete their degrees in any nation or state. For example

at the University of Canberra, international doctoral candidates may study offshore, but first need to submit a plan to demonstrate they will receive the support they need.
similarly, at the same university, domestic doctoral candidates may also study anywhere, provided they either meet the minimum attendance requirements or seek an exception.
at Central Queensland University, international doctoral candidates may be permitted to study in their home nation—but will need to visit Australia during a short period
at Swinburne University, in Victoria, doctoral candidates may study offshore but must be co-supervised by a person at a partner university or industry partner
similarly, at RMIT in Victoria, doctoral candidates may study offshore

In America, increasingly more students are enrolled in professional doctoral degrees—degrees that comprise some coursework in a discipline with a significant research project. Many of these degrees are available to candidates online as well (Kung & Logan, 2014)

Challenges that online doctoral candidates experience: Supervision and isolation

Most doctoral candidates, as well as other graduate researchers, experience a range of challenges. However, as a systematic review, conducted by Gray and Crosta (2019) revealed, some of these challenges are primarily confined to online graduate researchers.

For example, because online candidates do not interact in person with their supervisors or observe their supervisors casually in the campus, they might receive fewer subtle cues—such as whether the supervisor is enthusiastic about the project or satisfied with the progress on this project. Online candidates are thus often uncertain about their progress and unsure about how to proceed. Consequently, supervisors and candidates should discuss their expectations and perceptions about this project and their relationship more frequently.

Likewise, online candidates are not exposed to other cues in the environment that can facilitate their understanding of the research culture—such as incidental conversations with peers in the café or posters on walls. Because of this limited exposure to cues, not only if their knowledge about research practices and research culture might be limited, but these candidates are also more susceptible to a feeling of isolation rather than belonging. Therefore, these online candidates are especially reliant on information and guidance from supervisors, regularly delivered over videoconference.

In addition, supervisors may be more inclined to deliver feedback to online candidates as text and deliver feedback to other candidates as a blend of text and speech. As research indicates, this blend of text and speech tends to be more engaging, useful, and personalized to candidates rather than perceived as critical and generic (Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2012; see also Bengtsen & Jensen 2015; Könings et al., 2015). Accordingly, online candidates often receive feedback in a form that is not effective—a challenge that supervisors can readily prevent if they deliver this feedback in videoconference.

Nasiri and Mafakheri (2015) also reviewed the literature to identify the challenges that online doctoral candidates are especially likely to experience around supervision. For example, according to Nasiri and Mafakheri

supervisors and candidates are not as likely to develop personal knowledge about each other, sometimes diminishing a sense of familiarity; without this sense of familiarity, the individuals may not feel as motivated to engage with one another
when doctoral candidates study online, the workload of supervisors often increase—partly because these candidates are not as likely to acquire information from other sources
doctoral candidates and supervisors who live in separate regions are not as likely to share the same norms and values, sometimes culminating in cultural dissonance or misunderstandings

Challenges that online doctoral candidates experience: Priorities

Besides problems with supervision, online doctoral candidates also experience other challenges. To explore some of these challenges, Kumar and Coe (2017) interviewed online candidates, enrolled in a professional doctorate, to explore the challenges they experienced and the strategies they applied to manage these challenges.

These candidates did experience some pronounced challenges. For example, many participants could not readily organize enough time to dedicate to their research, because of their life events, work tasks, or family responsibilities, and also felt overwhelmed by the size of this dissertation. To address these concerns, some candidates formulated a precise schedule of when they will complete various sections or paragraphs as well as used templates, such as past dissertations, to facilitate these tasks. Other candidates, as encouraged by their supervisor, wrote at least a couple of paragraphs daily and organized the literature systematically. These strategies tended to be effective.

Practices that benefit doctoral candidates: Effective supervision

Effective supervision is especially vital to online doctoral candidates. Accordingly, Nasiri and Mafakheri (2015) proposed a range of strategies, derived from past research and literature, that supervisors should consider to address the challenges that online graduate researchers experience. For example

supervisors could arrange a time, each week, in which they will be available if their candidates want to converse online—like a virtual office hour. The time they choose should obviously accommodate the various time zones in which their candidates live
besides writing on drafts, supervisors should occasionally record digital audio monologues, in which they deliver extended feedback on the work the candidate has submitted
supervisors should, every few months, discuss and experiment with a range of meeting arrangements—such as vary the frequency and agenda of meetings as well as the activities within these meetings. These discussions not only help supervisors accommodate the evolving or dynamic needs of these candidates but also enable these individuals to learn about each other more effectively
supervisors should organize virtual lab meetings with several peers as well as annual research conferences, potentially inviting academic visitors, to embed these online candidates in a community.

Similarly, Gray and Crosta (2019) conducted a systematic review to unearth the supervisory practices that could facilitate the progress and satisfaction of online doctoral candidates. As this systematic review demonstrated, to help socialize online doctoral candidates into the realm of academia, the match between these candidates and their supervisors is especially vital. That is, to choose appropriate supervisors, many institutions consider only whether these individuals are specialists in the topic and research methodology that candidates want to explore. But candidates should also be granted opportunities to interact with several academics and choose a supervisor with whom they feel supported and understood.

Although invariably encouraging and supportive, supervisors should deliver constructive feedback sensitively and acknowledge their concerns about the project or their capacity to supervise the project. These honest relationships may overcome the miscommunication that is common if supervisors and candidates do not share the same cultural background

To further support the socialization of online doctoral candidates into the realm of academia, supervisors and candidates should candidly discuss expectations around the relationship. The individuals may discuss the level of autonomy candidates should be granted, the level of feedback they should receive, the frequency and formality, of conversations and so forth. A formal supervision agreement, although helpful, should not supplant an honest conversation.

In addition to socialization, supervisors must nurture and adjust the relationship continually and

flexibly, as the needs of candidates shift unpredictably during the doctoral journey. Occasionally, supervisors should acknowledge and discuss the power or rights of each party. To offset the power imbalance, supervisors should firstly discuss opportunities to empower the candidates—such as encourage the candidates to develop relationships with other academics. In addition, supervisors should underscore the power that candidates actually enjoy. For example, they could remind candidates of the avenues they can pursue if not satisfied with their circumstances. They could also remind candidates the project is generally the property and responsibility of students and not supervisors.

Finally, supervisors should foster the independence of candidates. That is, the goal of supervisors should be to progressively impart the information, knowledge, and skills candidates need to operate as independent, autonomous researchers. Hence, supervisors need to grant increasingly more autonomy as the research progresses and perceive the candidate as an informative and valued peer. The relationship should be friendly and respectful, but not so close to preclude honest or difficult feedback. Feedback should be regular but not excessive.

Nevertheless, few studies have examined which supervisory practices online doctoral candidates actually value. To address this shortfall, Kumar and Coe (2017) examined the support that online doctoral candidates, enrolled in a professional doctoral program, like to receive. This doctorate comprised two years of online coursework and a dissertation, also completed online. During the second year, candidates were assigned a supervisor, called a faculty mentor, to guide the research. Candidates participated in interviews, designed to characterize their experiences with supervision online as well as the practices they would have preferred.

The online doctoral candidates utilized a range of tools to communicate with supervisors—including email, phone, and videoconference software. During the individual meetings, these doctoral candidates appreciated whenever supervisors would communicate the tasks that candidates should complete, such as read a previous dissertation, and the schedule in which these tasks should be completed. The participants also valued the opportunities in which they could submit short drafts of work and receive almost immediate feedback—especially feedback that both communicated both specific guidance but also granted the individuals autonomy to explore.

These relationships were especially supportive of candidates and their supervisors shared an overlapping research passion. Furthermore, candidates felt most supported if, at least occasionally, contacted proactively by their supervisors. That is, they appreciated supervisors who would not merely wait to be contacted.

In addition, the participants attended lab meetings, with their supervisor and a few other peers, conducted online, every month or so, in which individuals could share slides, resources, literature, knowledge, and feedback. These meetings were valuable, especially if the interests of peers overlapped on some attribute, diminishing feelings of isolation.

Practices that benefit doctoral candidates: Learning communities and peer support

Rather than depend excessively on supervisors, online doctoral candidates were more likely to flourish if they were embedded in a learning community of supportive peers. Indeed, Berry (2017) explored how online doctoral candidates foster learning communities with peers. To achieve this goal, Berry analyzed 60 hours of video footage, derived from six online doctoral courses, message boards, and interviews.

The data revealed that doctoral candidates establish one of four kinds of learning communities. First, during their induction, candidates met peers and developed a cohort that would interact occasionally. These cohort communities were relatively large but fostered a sense of shared identity. Second, candidates tend to meet peers in specific workshops or classes. Over time, these candidates developed smaller communities, comprising about 15 individuals, in which they would support each other academically, such as share resources or review the drafts of one another. Third, candidates developed even smaller friendship circles, in which they were more likely to encourage and support each other emotionally. Finally, candidates developed study groups, in which they would collaborate on assignments or specific tasks, such as writing, with one or six other peers.

The study that Kumar and Coe (2017) conducted uncovered some of the provisions that program coordinators introduced to foster these communities. First, the coordinators of this online doctoral program organized a range of provisions to promote collaboration—such as monthly webinars, a residential week each year, inquiry groups, facilitated by a specialist on some topic, and a Facebook group. Second, the institution also arranged regular online webinars about library resources, information literacy, academic writing, and ethics—opportunities that candidates valued considerably and attended collectively. Third, the coordinators arranged opportunities to permit online candidates to seek advice from individuals who enrolled in the previous year.

Usually, peers support each other naturally and reciprocally. Occasionally, however, institutions will establish schemes in which particular doctoral candidates are paid or encouraged to support their peers. To illustrate, Fraenza and Rye (2021) delineated a program, developed at Walden University, that was designed to foster peer mentoring among online doctoral candidates. In this model, peer mentors are paid to foster social connections between online doctoral candidates as well as facilitate the development of personal, research, and career skills.

The center that coordinates this program, called the Academic Skills Centre, advertises these peer mentoring roles on the online job board. All peer mentors must have completed one or more years of their doctoral course, have accrued some experience in mentoring, coaching, or teaching, and be willing to commit 10 hours a week to this role. If selected, peer mentors watch online training modules about the role and receive other training—especially about the resources and services that are available to candidates. The also attend virtual meetings with the program coordinator, a member of the Academic Skills Centre, regularly to discuss best practices, share insights, and ask questions.

An administrator from the Academic Skills Centre, the program coordinator, allocates a mentor to each candidate who has recently been admitted and is interested in the mentoring service. The mentor and candidate usually share the same academic discipline or cultural background. To commence the arrangement, the peer mentor will email the candidate and share some information. Peer mentors also distribute weekly emails that include recommendations and relevant resources on various topics, such as how to manage imposter syndrome or diminish procrastination.

Besides this information, the program introduces many opportunities to enable peer mentors and their candidates to interact, such as individual online appointments, live virtual events, and Facebook groups. To illustrate, the peer mentors might host a live virtual event in which they share their experiences, present some recommendations, or answer questions that are posted before the session or during the session. The feedback that is garnered from these sessions—from polls and surveys—informs future sessions.

The program coordinators also encourage candidates to join the private Facebook group that is dedicated to this online doctoral program. Initially, staff from the Academic Skills Centre—but later the peer mentors—prompted the discussions on Facebook with questions, encouraging images, and helpful resources. Humor about the doctorate and inspiring quotes or images generated the most conversation.

Evaluations of this program suggest that peer mentoring was successful. Over 70% of the candidates agreed or strongly agreed they felt connected to Walden University and supported by their peer mentor. In surveys, participants often indicated they felt their mentor was supportive and helpful, especially when problems in the research unfolded.

Practices that benefit doctoral candidates: The Ewing model of sequential training

Online doctoral candidates distill key insights from their supervisors and peer communities. Yet, some formal training is necessary to complement these experiences as well as to impart the knowledge and skills that candidates might not choose to develop otherwise, such as expertise in research integrity. In most doctoral programs, this training is often limited to a few weeks in aggregate. More extensive training is hard to arrange, partly because candidates need to learn diverse skills.

Nevertheless, some researchers and educators believe that extensive formal training of research principles, if organized carefully, assessed systematically, and applied seamlessly to the research project, may especially benefit online doctoral candidates. To illustrate, the Ewing Model was designed to assist professional doctoral candidates, studying online, in the health sciences. The model comprises five courses, presented in sequence, in which students learn skills they also apply to their research projects concurrently. In contrast to a traditional PhD, however, the research is only 36% of the curriculum.

The Ewing model integrates four key features. First, students attended a formal and sequential training and development program to develop their research skills. Specifically, students learn about research, critical review, synthesis of literature, research proposals, sampling, data collection, data analysis, and research communication in sequence.

Second, each student is assigned a committee of three members. In addition to the principal supervisor, called a facilitator in this model, who guides the research project, a second member helps the student complete the research training and development—as well as apply the knowledge they acquire from this experience to the research project. The third member is external to the community and helps the student integrate knowledge of the sector with the research project.

Third, the institution fosters a collaborative learning environment, inspiring students to exchange knowledge and insights with each other and with educators. Indeed, the first training and development workshops are partly designed to foster this interaction. The students discuss, for example, how to apply the material they learned during the training and development program to their specific project—both asynchronously, on discussion boards for example, and synchronously, during live chats and online poster conferences. To illustrate, after learning about measurement, students might post the measures they plan to use, coupled with the reliability and validity of these tools, on a discussion board. Peers can then comment and review these tools. The facilitators also initiate discussions and clarify uncertainty.

Finally, the candidates must complete a sequence of assignments, each of which contribute to the research project. Besides common assignments, such as a research proposal and ethics submission, the candidates might need to design their data collection spreadsheet, detailed codebook, or R code, depending on the research design. A rubric is applied to grade these assignments and maintain accountability, and students receive extensive feedback on each assignment. Students must complete each research and development segment of the course before they can progress to the next segment.

Preliminary evaluations suggest this approach, characterized by more prescribed activities than most doctoral programs, is effective. To illustrate

about 84% of candidates tend to complete this doctoral course
about 90% of candidates believe this model is effective

Some students, however, felt they could not develop all the requisite skills within the tight deadlines. However, this model could be more effective with traditional, rather than professional, doctoral candidates when enrolled online, because time may not be constrained.

References

Andrew, M. (2012). Supervising doctorates at a distance: three trans‐Tasman stories. Quality Assurance in Education.
Bengtsen, S. S., & Jensen, G. S. (2015). Online supervision at the university-A comparative study of supervision on student assignments face-to-face and online. Tidsskriftet Læring og Medier (LOM), 8(13).
Berry, S. (2017). Student support networks in online doctoral programs: Exploring nested communities. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12
Conrad, D. (2022). From the trenches: Students’ reflections on their online doctoral programs. In Opening the Online Door to Academe (pp. 87-91). Brill.
Dowling, R., & Wilson, M. (2017). Digital doctorates? An exploratory study of PhD candidates’ use of online tools. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(1), 76-86.
Erichsen, E. A., Bolliger, D. U., & Halupa, C. (2014). Student satisfaction with graduate supervision in doctoral programs primarily delivered in distance education settings. Studies in Higher education, 39(2), 321-338.
Ewing, H., Mathieson, K., Alexander, J. L., & Leafman, J. (2012). Enhancing the acquisition of research skills in online doctoral programs: The Ewing model©. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 8(1), 34.
Fraenza, C., & Rye, T. (2021). Supporting the social integration of online doctoral students through peer mentoring. Learning Assistance Review, 26(1), 133-161.
Gray, M. A., & Crosta, L. (2019). New perspectives in online doctoral supervision: A systematic literature review. Studies in Continuing Education, 41(2), 173-190.
Kirkpatrick, K. J. (2019). Online doctoral students writing for scholarly publication. Computers and Composition, 52, 19-36.
Könings, K. D., Popa, D., Gerken, M., Giesbers, B., Rienties, B. C., van der Vleuten, C. P., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2016). Improving supervision for students at a distance: videoconferencing for group meetings. Innovations in education and teaching international, 53(4), 388-399.
Kumar, S., & Coe, C. (2017). Mentoring and student support in online doctoral programs. American Journal of Distance Education, 31(2), 128-142.
Kumar, S., Johnson, M., & Hardemon, T. (2013). Dissertations at a distance: Students’ perceptions of online mentoring in a doctoral program. Journal of Distance Education, 27(1).
Kung, M., & Logan, T. J. (2014). An overview of online and hybrid doctoral degree programs in educational technology. TechTrends, 58(4).
Mesquida, A. D., & Pérez, A. (2015). Online tutoring procedure for research project supervision: management, organization and key elements. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research (NAER Journal), 4(2), 123-132.
Miller, M. A. (2021). How webinar experiences influence selection of online doctoral programs: Aqualitative descriptive study. Doctoral dissertation, Grand Canyon University.
Nasiri, F., & Mafakheri, F. (2015). Postgraduate research supervision at a distance: A review of challenges and strategies. Studies in Higher Education, 40(10), 1962-1969.
Paliktzoglou, V., & Suhonen, J. (2011). Part-time online PhD reflection: Train of thoughts. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 149-154.
Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2012). Should online doctoral instructors adopt audio feedback as an instructional strategy? Preliminary evidence. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7.
Studebaker, B., & Curtis, H. (2021). Building community in an online doctoral program. Christian Higher Education, 20(1-2), 15-27.
Thompson, J., Ballenger, J. N., & Templeton, N. R. (2018). Examining quality elements in a high education fully online doctoral program: doctoral students' perceptions. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 13(1), 51-63.
Warr, M., & Sampson, C. (2020). Achieving critical dialogue in online doctoral programs: An exploration of student perceptions and experiences with multiple modalities. TechTrends, 64(6), 860-867.

Return to top

Return to menu

Sexual harassment in tertiary education

by Simon Moss

Introduction: Defining features of sexual harassment

Although legal definitions vary across the globe, sexual harassment typically entails conduct of a sexual nature—such as unwanted sexual advances—the impairs the employment, performance, or wellbeing of individuals. The Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (Fitzgerald et al., 1995), often administered to measure sexual harassment, measures three clusters of behaviors:

gender harassment, such as insulting, hostile, and degrading comments
unwanted sexual attention, such as offensive, unwanted, and unreciprocated sexual advances or touching
sexual coercion, such as instances in which someone feels compelled to engage in sexual behavior to receive some benefit in exchange

Introduction: Consequences of sexual harassment

Sexual harassment in tertiary education institutions is not only a distressing to the victim but may culminate in a range of ongoing problems. For example, sexual harassment increases the likelihood that

individuals will be subsequently diagnosed with affective disorders, such as depression (Martin-Storey & August 2016; Selkie et al. 2015), anxiety (Richman et al. 1999), and PTSD (Henning et al. 2017)
individuals will become more susceptible to substance abuse, such as alcohol use (Fedina et al., 2018)
individuals will experience physical pain (Chan et al. 2008)
Individuals may be afflicted with sexually transmitted diseases (Philpart et al. 2009)

Because of these effects, the productivity of these individuals at work and in their studies wanes significantly. Motivation, job satisfaction, engagement, and confidence all subside (e.g., Barling et al. 1996; Lapierre et al., 2005; Willness et al., 2007). Students who are victims of sexual harassment also tend to avoid classes, especially if the perpetrator may attend, switch to another course, or withdraw from the institution, compromising their development (Hill & Silva, 2005; Huerta et al., 2006).

Introduction: Experience of sexual harassment

Marshall et al. (2014) depicted the elongated challenges that many women experience after sexual harassment at a university. In this study, some women were initially uncertain of whether their experiences should be deemed as sexual harassment, despite the gravity of these incidents. This uncertainty was confusing and distressing. To illustrate

one friend indicated the behavior merely indicates the man she is tutoring is responding well to her appearance
one participant, familiar with discussions about power dynamics, was uncertain whether unpleasant behavior with a peer—an no power differential—still represents sexual harassment
another participants, after disclosing an incident of sexual harassment to a brother, was told these instances are typical—and so she internalized this power differential

In response to instances of sexual harassment, the women varied in how they responded. For example

one participant, after feeling uncomfortable about the sexualized comments of a professor, was told by a senior female colleague that a complaint could undermine her career
other women recognized that, after they felt their power had subsided, they needed to act to restore this sense of control and influence. For example, one participant would indicate, in social circles, when she felt a comment was inappropriate—such as comparisons between rape and business

Vohlídalová (2015) also revealed this bifurcation of responses, in which some women felt compelled to empower themselves and initiate a plan to respond, whereas other women felt parallelized by the implications of complaints on their careers. Fortunately, in the study that Marshall et al. (2014) reported, these women were exposed to some empowering messages that restored their sense of power. For example

strong colleagues and role models who had experienced similar events boosted the resolve of one participant
one participant felt that gender courses empower young women too

Yet, many of the women bemoaned the absence of initiatives to prevent sexual harassment. They felt that training on sexual harassment policies was either limited or was not complemented by other changes that challenge patriarchal ideologies.

Prevalence of sexual harassment in tertiary education

Many studies have explored the prevalence of sexual harassment in universities and other tertiary education institutions. These estimates vary appreciably across regions but also depend on parameters of the study, such as how sexual harassment is defined and the methodology that was applied (Henning et al., 2017)

The bulk of studies have been conducted in the US. In this nation, according to some large studies, about 20% to 25% female students acknowledge they have experienced sexual harassment that was perpetrated on campus or by colleagues or staff (Bondestam & Lundqvist, 2020). These figures, however, may underestimate the prevalence of sexual harassment, because some individuals may attempt to suppress or trivialize their experiences to regulate their emotions. Regardless, these figures certainly underestimate the prevalence of sexual harassment in people whose community is often marginalized. To illustrate, across the globe, research indicates that sexual harassment is more prevalent in women whose employment conditions are insecure as well as ethnic minorities and LGBTQI+ individuals (Bondestam & Lundqvist, 2020; Fedina et al., 2018; Vladutiu et al., 2011).

To illustrate a study on the determinants of sexual harassment at eight universities in America, Wood et al. (2021) analyzed data that was derived from a larger research project, conducted at universities in South-Western US. Students at these universities were invited to complete on online survey on violence related to sex and gender at universities. Over 16 700 students completed the questions on sexual harassment and relevant demographic questions.

Respondents were prompted to indicate the number of times, since enrolment at the university, they had experienced or observed a range of behaviors—such as a person who had “kept on asking you out although you had said no”, “treated you badly for refusing to have sex?”, “Touched you in a way that made you feel uncomfortable?”, “Whistled, called, or hooted at you in a sexual way?”, and “Put you down or was condescending to you because of your sex?”— derived from the sexual experiences questionnaire. The respondents answered the questions twice, indicating first whether a staff member had initiated these behaviors and then whether a student had initiated these behaviors. The findings revealed that

females and LGBTQI+ individuals were more likely to have been targets of sexual harassment from both staff and other students
younger students were more likely to have been targets of sexual harassment from both staff and other students
Latinx students were not as likely to have been targets of sexual harassment from staff than were non-Latinx white students

Some characteristics might diminish the incidence of sexual harassment but exacerbate the impact of sexual harassment. For example, one systematic review, reported by Klein and Martin (2021), revealed that

women who were not white were actually more likely to be targets of sexual harassment in tertiary education institutions
but women who were not were white experienced more severe and enduring consequences of these incidents.

Karami et al. (2020) applied a text mining procedure to unearth the range of sexual harassment experiences in tertiary education. Specifically, the researchers collated over 2000 descriptions of sexual harassment experiences, derived from a recent web survey, and then subjected these descriptions to text mining, such as Latent Dirichlet Allocation. This technique can extract words that tend to appear close together and, therefore, may correspond to the same topic. The research showed that

over 50% of the sexual harassment experiences revolve around unwanted sexual advances
about 14% of the experiences related to insulting, sexist, or degrading comments or behavior, typically directed towards women
about 5% of the experiences revolved around instances in which a perpetrator offered some benefit and received sexual favors in exchange
also disconcertingly, about 7% of the experiences were retaliations to victim who had reported sexual harassment.

According to Bondestam and Lundqvist (2020), no definitive evidence indicates these rates of sexual harassment are diminishing. Certainly, some changes in institutions and society, such as the advent of online study or the inclination of people to watch movies at home, can affect the prevalence of sexual harassment (Fnais et al., 2014). But, after potential exposure to harassment is controlled, the prevalence of these experiences seems relatively uniform (Fnais et al., 2014).

Initiatives and practices to stem or prevent sexual harassment: Policies

Most tertiary education institutions have developed policies on sexual harassment. Often, these policies are not specific to sexual harassment but also encompass discrimination, bullying, victimization, and vilification. Typically, according to Bondestam and Lundqvist (2020), these policies and procedures tend to revolve around

the bodies and procedures that have been developed to receive, investigate, and respond to complaints
the legal rights of individuals
the need to support marginalized communities and women

However, in many instances, these policies and procedures overlook some principles that past research has vindicated. For example, policies and procedures should, but often always

address the changes that should be implemented to foster a culture that diminishes the incidence of sexual harassment—a key determinant of prevalence (e.g., Marshall et al., 2014)
oblige institutions to employ or engage a minimum number of specialist case managers (Thomas, 2004)
empower leaders and staff within departments to exercise the initiative and judgment on how to foster a culture that prevents sexual harassment—rather than depend unduly on executive management or specialists from outside the department or institution (Bondestam & Lundqvist, 2020)
stipulate the obligations of bystanders and the training that institutions need to implement to encourage bystanders to respond appropriately (McDonald et al., 2016)
delineate many diverse examples of sexual harassment in detail (Klein et al., 2019)

Research on the impact of these policies is limited. That is, whether more stringent policies diminish the incidence of sexual harassment at tertiary education institutions warrants further research.

Indeed, some research indicates that policies can elicit unintended and undesirable consequences. In one study, for example, conducted by Tinkler et al., (2007), some male undergraduate students were invited to read the university sexual harassment policy. Other students did not receive this policy to read. After the individuals read the sexual harassment policies of their company, they become, perhaps unconsciously, more likely to associate males with high status—as gauged by an implicit association test. Therefore, in one sense, these policies can ignite one unintended consequence: the belief that males are superior in status.

Presumably, these policies reinforce the notion that males are afforded greater power. Yet, individuals like to perceive the world as fair and just. Accordingly, to perceive this disparity in power as fair and just, individuals may assume that men are inherently superior.

Initiatives and practices to stem or prevent sexual harassment: Education and training

Many studies, including randomized control trials and program evaluations, have explored the effects of relevant education and training on sexual harassment. These studies have explored a range of formats, such as online workshops, and a range of participants, such as leaders, case managers, and students. This research has confirmed more immediate benefits of this education and training, but the more enduring impacts of these initiatives have not been established definitively (Bondestam & Lundqvist, 2020).

Several features of these initiatives affect the benefits of this education and training. For example, workshops are more effective when

they inspire participants to discuss and to reflect carefully on their own behaviors, biases, and experiences (Ramson 2006)
managers, at all levels, participate in these experiences (Blaxall et al., 1993)
they acknowledge and attempt to address the resistance of individuals to change—especially to perceptions about sexual harassment, violence, and vulnerability (Bainbridge et al., 2018)

Similarly, Nation et al. (2003) identified nine principles that all workshops and programs that are designed to prevent a problem, such as sexual harassment, should observe. Arguably, the education and training that institutions utilize to prevent sexual harassment should comply with these principles. That is, these workshops or programs should

be comprehensive, addressing the gamut of behaviors that can be deemed as sexual harassment
be guided by theory around the causes of sexual harassment and the interventions that address these causes
inspire supportive relationships
accommodate the particular sociocultural norms of this institution
apply a diversity of validated teaching methods
be sufficiently extensive
be implemented at a suitable time—perhaps soon after an event that increases the perceived significance of this matter but not when staff are inundated with work
be facilitated by trained individuals, specializing in this topic
be evaluated

Tinkler et al. (2015) explored how the gender of facilitators or instructors may also influence the impact of workshops around sexual harassment. In this study, undergraduate male students participated in this study, purportedly about decision making in diverse groups, communicating with various technologies. First, half the participants watched a slideshow about sexual harassment, lasting four minutes, in which a narrator defines various manifestations of sexual harassment and unwelcome behavior. The sex of this narrator was also manipulated. The other participants were not exposed to this slideshow.

Next, participants completed a cognitive task, actually the implicit association test. The individuals needed to press one button if either a female name appeared and another button if a male name appeared. In addition, they needed to press one of these buttons if a word synonymous with family appears and another button if a word synonymous with career appears. If participants espouse implicit stereotypes about gender, they tend to perform this task more effectively when the same button is assigned to both male names and words synonymous with career.

Then, participants completed a task with a partner, over a computer network. This task was merely designed to enable participants to interact with a female in a challenging situation. Finally, participants completed a questionnaire that assesses their actual beliefs about gender differences, to measure gender stereotypes more explicitly. The results were telling:

If participants observed a female narrator discuss sexual harassment, they were more likely to associate men with careers. The female narrator, therefore, somehow magnified implicit gender stereotypes in the participants
If participants observed a female narrator discuss sexual harassment, they become more inclined to explicitly rate women as high in competence and power relative to men

Taken together, these findings imply that a female instructor or presenter might elicit a defensive reaction in men, who then feel compelled to reinforce gender stereotypes. But the female instructor might also encourage men to depict themselves as unbiased rather than sexist. Taken together, these results indicate that perhaps

if the instructor or facilitator is female, senior and respected men should also demonstrate their support towards this training to potentially nullify defensive reactions in the audience
if the instructor or facilitator is male, perhaps senior women should also contribute to these workshops to inspire participants to at least depict themselves as unbiased.

Initiatives and practices to stem or prevent sexual harassment: Support services

In response to instances in which sexual harassment has been established, institutions will tend to implement a range of disciplinary actions. Several researchers, such as Koss et al. (2014), propose that institutions should instead consider restorative justice both to empower victims and to address the multiple consequences of this harassment.

Sexual harassment can affect many individuals, besides the victim and perpetrator, such as family and friends of the victims and perpetrators as well as community members who might feel unsafe. Perpetrators who accept responsibility might be willing and able to participate in various activities, such as dialogues, that can redress some of these consequences and support this array of individuals.

Koss et al. (2014) delineates how tertiary education institutions can integrate restorative justice in their actions to sexual harassment. This framework, although developed in the US, can be adapted to most nations. First, Koss et al. (2014) describes the services that institutions should offer, if possible, to support all the affected individuals. These services may include

counsellors with expertise in imparting emotional support to people who have experienced sexual violence
medical support to assess physical injury, disease, and unwanted pregnancy
arrangements to physically separate the victim and alleged perpetrator
academic support if the event could impair the progress of these individuals
procedural and legal support to help the individuals navigate the institutional policies or police sector
funding support if, for example, the victim wants to withdraw from a course

Second, the institution needs to complete a stage called routing, in which they enable victims to disclose the incident and then disseminate this information to the right bodies. After an incident, victims might be reluctant to disclose, disclose to friends or family only, or disclose to a representative of the institution, such as a lecturer or supervisor. Friends and family may disclose to the institution as well, although institutions are not always as obliged to respond to these disclosures.

Obviously, institutions need to introduce a range of measures to encourage students and staff to disclose sexual harassment. Individuals should be informed of how they will be supported after they disclose. These measures are vital because many individuals, especially students enrolled in the sciences, are reluctant to report these incidents (Aguilar & Baek, 2020).

The representative of the institution must then report this incident to the designated officers, such as the student services officer. The only exception are privileged staff, such as mental health professionals, physicians, sexual assault nurse examiners, and legal advisors, who can utilize their professional judgment to choose a suitable course of action.

Third, institutions need to complete a stage called review, in which they establish the facts around the incident and perceptions of the affected individuals. After the designated officer are informed about the incident, they may review or seek victim complaint forms, police reports, witness statements, psychologist reports, and so forth. Typically, the designated official would assess whether

immediate responses should be implemented to protect the students and the community
the behavior, if substantiated, may constitute sexual violence, sexual harassment, or nonactionable sexual behavior, in which disciplinary action would not be applied but education may be recommended

After a preliminary review, the designated officers may notify the alleged perpetrator. According to the tenets of restorative justice, the perpetrator should be granted an opportunity to accept or to deny responsibility, sometimes circumventing the need to initiate an investigation, hearing, or hybrid model. If a hybrid model is implemented, the designated officer may gather, analyze, and then outline all relevant information to a hearing board. During the hearing, the victims and perpetrators are also granted the opportunity to communicate their perspective of the events. The hearing board then decides whether the alleged perpetrator has or has not violated institutional policies or codes—subject to an appeal.

In some instances, especially if the alleged perpetrator accepts responsibility and the victim agrees, this investigation or hearing can be circumvented. Instead, restorative justice may be explored instead.

Restorative justice is central to the final stage, sometimes called repair. The objective of repair, according to proponents of restorative justice, is to

validate and redress the harm the victims and other affected people experienced
addressing the possible causes of sexual harassment in the perpetrator, such as substance abuse, impulse control, hostility towards women, or unsuitable social circles
diminish the risks of future sexual harassment more generally, such as introducing campus programs

Koss et al. (2014) recommends that institutions consider the principles of RESTORE, a restorative justice approach that has been applied in many communities. If they agree, victims, the perpetrator, as well as family and friends prepare to participate in a meeting or conference, facilitated by a trained specialist. While preparing, the individuals are informed about how the conference will proceed. For example, during the conference, the facilitator will

grant the perpetrator an opportunity to describe the acts and to accept responsibility
grant the victim to convey the impact of this incident on their lives
grant the other individuals, including family, friends, and the perpetrator, a similar opportunity
enable victims and other affected individuals to specify the goals they would like to achieve to redress these impacts
facilitate a conversation on which tangible actions the perpetrator could undertake to achieve these goals—such as contribution to a charity or rehabilitation services
conclude with a plan that comprises the actions as well as activities to redress the causes of this behavior, such as alcohol interventions or anger management.

To maintain accountability, this plan might include regular meetings with a case manager, community service, and orders to maintain a distance from the victim—depending on the severity of this incident. This plan is often monitored over a period of 12 or so months. If this conference does not proceed as planned—such as when the victim does not want to participate—standard disciplinary actions may apply, such as suspension.

As Koss et al. (2014) proposed, even if the investigation does not show the perpetrator violated a policy, a variant of RESTORE or similar conferences may be possible. Sometimes, the victim and alleged perpetrator will still agree to meeting, in a facilitated session. The conference may grant victims the opportunity to express the impact of this incident and grant the alleged perpetrators an opportunity to redress any harm and to restore their reputation, even if their behavior did not strictly violate institutional policies.

Initiatives and practices to stem or prevent sexual harassment: Bold leadership

Some authors, such as Clancy et al. (2020), argue that, to transform the institutional cultures that condone or permit sexual harassment, leadership must sometimes operate independently of the official reporting, investigation, and response. That is, the official procedures are often elongated and confined to specific incidents. These procedures do not address the tapestry of causes and dynamics that shape behaviors around sexual harassment. Instead, leaders need to act promptly, proactively, and broadly—attuned to these causes and dynamics. For example, these leaders can

redress some of the existing inequalities—such as the tendency of institutions to hang portraits and name buildings after white, male academics
identify and highlight subtle examples of inequality, such as instances in which a powerful man interrupts a woman—partly to entice people to reflect upon their biases and tendencies to accept dominance and aggression
warn alleged perpetrators, sometimes before investigations are complete or definitive, with frank, private conversations or even the suspension of discretionary rights

Initiatives and practices to stem or prevent sexual harassment: Cultural assumptions

Some of the assumptions and beliefs that promulgate tertiary education institutions, and indeed many organizations, could reinforce practices that elicit sexual harassment. For example, as Sundaram and Jackson (2018) argued, many institutions like to disseminate the belief that sexual harassment and sexual violence are scarce and that perpetrators tend to be men who are especially troubled or deviant. This assumption, however, grants institutions the right to disregard the pervasive behaviors that reinforce gender inequality and sanction or normalize abuses of power. The institution, therefore, will not address the inexorable perpetration of acts that foster a willingness of individuals to accept the pervasive inequality. Because of this inequality in power and status, acts that should be deemed as sexual harassment are perceived as normal behavior.

Dolamore and Richards (2020) proposed a model, called the Preventing and Addressing Sexual Misconduct Framework, that institutions could apply to foster a culture of empowerment, designed to prevent sexual harassment. In particular, according to this framework, institutions should consider the effect of seven instruments that could foster this culture: physical features, polices, socialization, leadership, rewards, discourse, and learning.

First, institutions should consider the physical features of their environment. Many institutions have prioritize emergency phones, suitable light, and other features to promote safety. Yet, many incidents of sexual harassment are perpetrated by acquaintances or friends, often in a private space. Instead, rather than prioritize safety features, institutions should consider physical objects that foster a culture of empowerment and empathy—such as posters or other tools that help bystanders report incidents.

Second, the policies and procedures should inspire empowerment of individuals, empathy towards victims, and prevention of sexual harassment as well. To illustrate, no set of policies or procedures will be suitable to all institutions. Consequently, the institution should seek the contributions of students, alumni, staff, and the public, coupled with past templates, validated theories, and established specialists, to develop these policies and procedures iteratively and continually. That is, the development of these policies should be a shared, empowering, and rewarding venture.

Third, institutions need to consider how to embed suitable messages about empowerment, empathy, and prevention in the communication and interactions between staff. That is, inductions, newsletters, and all other communication avenues should reinforce, sometimes explicitly but often subtly, opportunities about how to prevent sexual harassment. Similarly, the sixth instrument revolves around discourse—the notion that initiatives around sexual harassment should be perceived as significant and rewarding instead of obligations or mandatory. For example, to advertise training around sexual harassment, a message could refer to the “opportunity to support our commitment to a safe environment” rather than “mandatory to comply with our obligations”.

Fourth, leaders of these institutions are central to cultural change. Leaders need to be aware of how subtle behaviors can signal their interest in this topic. Leaders who attend training programs or allocate resources to personnel who can support victims demonstrate this commitment to prevention of sexual harassment. Therefore, leaders should consider how their decisions could be interpreted, and whether these decisions signify their empathy towards victims and motivation to prevent sexual harassment.

Fifth, institutions need to consider how rewards and recognition shape the culture. For example, advocates of victims and other staff who provide support should be granted due respect and time to devote to this task.

Finally, institutions need to actively collect data about the causes and prevalence of sexual harassment as well as address the issues these surveys raise promptly. That is, surveys around sexual harassment should be regarded as captivating and creative research rather than routine quality assurance.

Initiatives and practices to stem or prevent sexual harassment: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2018) recommendations

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2018) identified a series of recommendations, designed to prevent the five main conditions that promote sexual harassment. These conditions that promote sexual harassment include

a perceived inclination to tolerate behavior that is sexually inappropriate
a setting in which leadership is dominated by males
a setting that is hierarchical—in which most staff are not granted opportunities to contribute to decisions
an emphasis on compliance to diminish liability rather than genuine interest in the welfare of individuals
inadequate motivation of leaders to prevent inappropriate sexual behavior.

To prevent these five conditions, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recommended a range of strategies and practices (see also Colaninno et al., 2020). To illustrate, the institution should

reward and support initiatives that enhance inclusivity and equality, perhaps with an award scheme
listen carefully to the perspective, experiences, and recommendations of individuals who have been the targets of sexual harassment
grant leaders more opportunities to develop advanced skills on how to prevent sexual harassment; that is, this training should be perceived as an opportunity to specialize and not as a mandatory errand
enable people who report sexual harassment to access the support services they need; these individuals should be granted access to ongoing support, over an extended period
diminish the power of specific hierarchies; for example, individuals who are not experienced should be granted opportunities to contribute to more committees and receive mentoring to facilitate these contributions

Theories that explain some determinants of sexual harassment: Social role theory

According to social role theory, men are expected to assume roles that demand agency and dominance, whereas women are expected to assume roles that demand cooperation and submissiveness (Eagly, 1987). When women violate these social roles, other individuals, especially men, may experience a sense of uncertainty or dissonance. To diminish this aversive state, they may feel compelled to shift the behavior of this person, manifesting as hostility, aggression, and even sexual harassment. That is, some men may attempt to compensate by reasserting their power, culminating in sexual harassment. Accordingly, female supervisors, especially if they manage many rather than few employees, are more likely to be victims of such harassment.

McLaughlin, Uggen, and Blackstone (2013) vindicated this possibility. In this study, individuals reported whether they supervise as well as answered questions that gauge the degree to which they were subjected to behaviors that constitute sexual harassment as well as whether they feel they were the victims of sexual harassment. These questions assessed both objective indices of sexual harassment—that is, actual behaviors—as well as subjective harassment—that is, whether the person conceptualized these behaviors as harassment. Finally, many demographic and work variables were assessed and included as control variables, such as sex, race, level of masculinity or femininity, percentage of females in the industry, job satisfaction, job security, education, number of children, income, and work hours.

The analyses showed that female supervisors were more likely to be the victims of sexual harassment, as gauged by both more objectives and subjective indices, than female non-supervisors. Presumably, these women violate their social roles.

Alternatively, because they violate their social roles, female supervisors may often be socially isolated and, once socially isolated, they are more likely to be objectified and harassed. Indeed, consistent with this possibility, qualitative interviews revealed that social isolation was a theme that many of these women broached. Regardless of the precise cause, these findings emphasize that victims are not always the most vulnerable people in society.

References

Aguilar, S. J., & Baek, C. (2020). Sexual harassment in academe is underreported, especially by students in the life and physical sciences. PloS one, 15(3).
Bagley, C. E., Natarajan, P., Vayzman, L., Wexler, L., & McCarthy, S. (2012). Implementing Yale's sexual misconduct policy: the process of institutional change. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 44(2), 7-15.
Bainbridge, H. T., Perry, E. L., & Kulik, C. T. (2018). Sexual harassment training: Explaining differences in Australian and US approaches. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 56(1), 124-147.
Bennett, J. (2009). Policies and sexual harassment in higher education: Two steps forward and three steps somewhere else. Agenda, 23(80), 7-21.
Blaxall, M. C., Parsonsona, B. S., & Robertson, N. R. (1993). The development and evaluation of a sexual harassment contact person training package. Behavior modification, 17(2), 148-163.
Bondestam, F., & Lundqvist, M. (2020). Sexual harassment in higher education: A systematic review. European Journal of Higher Education, 10(4), 397–419.
Chan, D. K., Chow, S. Y., Lam, C. B., & Cheung, S. F. (2008). Examining the job-related, psychological, and physical outcomes of workplace sexual harassment: A meta-analytic review. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32(4), 362-376.
Clancy, K. B., Cortina, L. M., & Kirkland, A. R. (2020). Use science to stop sexual harassment in higher education. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(37), 22614-22618.
Colaninno, C. E., Lambert, S. P., Beahm, E. L., & Drexler, C. G. (2020). Creating and supporting a harassment-and assault-free field school. Advances in Archaeological Practice, 8(2), 111-122.
Dolamore, S., & Richards, T. N. (2020). Assessing the organizational culture of higher education institutions in an era of# MeToo. Public Administration Review, 80(6), 1133-1137.
Eagly, A. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fedina, L., Holmes, J. L., & Backes, B. L. (2018). Campus sexual assault: A systematic review of prevalence research from 2000 to 2015. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 19(1), 76-93.
Fitzgerald, L. F., Gelfand, M. J., & Drasgow, F. (1995). Measuring sexual harassment: Theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 425–445.
Fnais, N., Soobiah, C., Chen, M. H., Lillie, E., Perrier, L., Tashkhandi, M., ... & Tricco, A. C. (2014). Harassment and discrimination in medical training: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Academic Medicine, 89(5), 817-827.
Henning, M. A., Zhou, C., Adams, P., Moir, F., Hobson, J., Hallett, C., & Webster, C. S. (2017). Workplace harassment among staff in higher education: a systematic review. Asia Pacific Education Review, 18(4), 521-539.
Huerta, M., Cortina, L. M., Pang, J. S., Torges, C. M., & Magley, V. J. (2006). Sex and power in the academy: Modeling sexual harassment in the lives of college women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 616-628.
Hill, C., & Silva, E. (2005). Drawing the line: Sexual harassment on campus. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women Educational Foundation.
Karami, A., White, C. N., Ford, K., Swan, S., & Spinel, M. Y. (2020). Unwanted advances in higher education: Uncovering sexual harassment experiences in academia with text mining. Information Processing & Management, 57(2).
Klein, L. B., & Martin, S. L. (2021). Sexual harassment of college and university students: A systematic review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 22(4), 777-792.
Koss, M. P., Wilgus, J. K., & Williamsen, K. M. (2014). Campus sexual misconduct: Restorative justice approaches to enhance compliance with Title IX guidance. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 15(3), 242-257.
Lapierre, L. M., Spector, P. E., & Leck, J. D. (2005). Sexual versus nonsexual workplace aggression and victims' overall job satisfaction: a meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10(2).
Marshall, C., Dalyot, K., & Galloway, S. (2014). Sexual harassment in higher education: Re-framing the puzzle of its persistence. Journal of Policy Practice, 13(4), 276-299.
Martin-Storey, A., & August, E. G. (2016). Harassment due to gender nonconformity mediates the association between sexual minority identity and depressive symptoms. The Journal of Sex Research, 53(1), 85-97.
McDonald, P. (2012). Workplace sexual harassment 30 years on: A review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(1), 1-17.
McDonald, P., Charlesworth, S., & Graham, T. (2016). Action or inaction: Bystander intervention in workplace sexual harassment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(5), 548-566.
McLaughlin, H., Uggen, C., & Blackstone, A. (2013). Sexual harassment, workplace authority, and the paradox of power. American Sociological Review, 77, 625-647.
Nation, M., Crusto, C., Wandersman, A., Kumpfer, K. L., Seybolt, D., Morrissey-Kane, E., & Davino, K. (2003). What works in prevention: Principles of effective prevention programs. American psychologist, 58(6-7), 449.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). Sexual harassment of women: climate, culture, and consequences in academic sciences, engineering, and medicine
Philpart, M., Goshu, M., Gelaye, B., Williams, M. A., & Berhane, Y. (2009). Prevalence and risk factors of gender-based violence committed by male college students in Awassa, Ethiopia. Violence and Victims, 24(1), 122-136.
Ramson, A. (2006). Editor's choice: Sexual harassment education on campus: Communication using media. Community College Review, 33(3-4), 38-54.
Richman, J. A., Rospenda, K. M., Nawyn, S. J., Flaherty, J. A., Fendrich, M., Drum, M. L., & Johnson, T. P. (1999). Sexual harassment and generalized workplace abuse among university employees: prevalence and mental health correlates. American Journal of Public Health, 89(3), 358-363.
Selkie, E. M., Kota, R., Chan, Y. F., & Moreno, M. (2015). Cyberbullying, depression, and problem alcohol use in female college students: a multisite study. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(2), 79-86.
Sinha, A., & Bondestam, F. (2021). Moving beyond bureaucratic grey zones. Managing sexual harassment in Indian higher education. Higher Education.
Sundaram, V., & Jackson, C. (2018). ‘Monstrous men’and ‘sex scandals’: the myth of exceptional deviance in sexual harassment and violence in education. Palgrave Communications, 4(1), 1-5.
Tampah-Naah, C. (2020). Beyond the Rhetoric of Sexual Harassment Policy to Good Leadership in Higher Education Institutions: Case Study, University for Development Studies. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(4), 1-13.
Thomas, A. M. (2004). Politics, policies and practice: assessing the impact of sexual harassment policies in UK universities. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 25(2), 143-160.
Tinkler, J., Gremillion, S., & Arthurs, K. (2015). Perceptions of legitimacy: The sex of the legal messenger and reactions to sexual harassment training. Law & Social Inquiry, 40(1), 152-174.
Tinkler, J. E., Li, Y. E., & Mollborn, S. (2007). Can legal interventions change beliefs? The effect of exposure to sexual harassment policy on men's gender beliefs. Social Psychology Quarterly, 70, 480-494
Vladutiu, C. J., Martin, S. L., & Macy, R. J. (2011). College-or university-based sexual assault prevention programs: A review of program outcomes, characteristics, and recommendations. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 12(2), 67-86.
Vohlídalová, M. (2015). Coping strategies for sexual harassment in higher education:“An official action may harm you in the end more than if someone slaps your butt.”. Sociológia, 47(3), 297-316.
Voth Schrag, R. J. (2017). Campus based sexual assault and dating violence: A review of study contexts and participants. Affilia, 32(1), 67-80.
Willness, C. R., Steel, P., & Lee, K. (2007). A meta‐analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment. Personnel Psychology, 60(1), 127-162.
Wood, L., Hoefer, S., Kammer-Kerwick, M., Parra-Cardona, J. R., & Busch-Armendariz, N. (2021). Sexual harassment at institutions of higher education: Prevalence, risk, and extent. Journal of interpersonal violence, 36(9-10), 4520-4544.

Return to top

Return to menu

Part-time doctoral candidates

by Simon Moss

Introduction

To complete a graduate research degree, such as a PhD, some candidates need to enroll part-time. These individuals may need to fulfill work or family responsibilities while they complete their research.

The percentage of candidates who study part-time is uncertain. Although some researchers have reported that about 12% of US candidates, 38% to 47% of Australian candidates, and up to 63% of UK candidates study part-time (Gardner & Gopaul, 2012), several caveats diminish the credibility of these findings. First, these percentages are seldom official or university figures, but often estimates of specialists in the field. For example, although Hall et al. (2006) indicated that 47% of PhD candidates study part-time, the authors merely cited personal communication rather than official statistics. Second, the definition of part-time may vary across nations and institutions. Part-time, for example, might refer to candidates who study all, most, or merely some of their degree at a load that is less than full-time.

If doctoral candidates study part-time, they may experience a distinct set of challenges. They often feel isolated from the institution. They may not be able to maintain their enthusiasm over time, especially because their research may seem increasingly unimportant as time progresses. They are more likely to be distracted by other work or family responsibilities. Yet, despite these challenges, few studies have been explored the experience of part-time doctoral candidates or validated initiatives and provisions that enhance this experience.

Concerns that part-time doctoral candidates experience

Compared to their full-time counterparts, part-time doctoral candidates tend to experience more pronounced challenges (e.g., Bates & Goff, 2012). One key concern is that part-time candidates are unable to interact frequently with peers, academics, or other staff (Murakami-Ramalho et al., 2013). Consequently

they are not as likely to learn about the culture, norms, and practices of their institution; indeed, their perceptions of the research culture are not as favorable (Neumann & Rodwell, 2009)
they are not as satisfied with their access to infrastructure (e.g., Neumann & Rodwell, 2009)
they are not as likely to learn about a range of practices that could benefit their research or careers
they are more likely to feel isolated rather than supported
they feel uncertain of how to proceed, partly because they differ from other PhD candidates, researchers, and professionals in their life and responsibilities (Teeuwsen et al., 2014)

Because of these differences, not only do part-time candidates feel uncertain about their identity and goals, they seldom receive the support they need. That is, institutions tend to introduce training, support, and other provisions to suit the prototype of a doctoral candidate (Bendix Petersen, 2014). They might, for example, restrict workshops to office hours, clashing with the professional responsibilities of part-time candidates.

A second key concern is that part-time candidates must complete their research over a longer period (Biegel et al., 2006). Because their research is conducted over an extended period—often 8 to 10 years—a variety of problems are more likely to unfold. For example

the research question might not be as relevant or important by the time the thesis is submitted
the candidate is more likely to experience disruptions to their continuity, such as changes to their supervision panel (Evans, 2010).

Nevertheless, the challenges that part-time doctoral candidates experience depend on their life circumstances. For example, a sizeable proportion of part-time candidates are also staff at the university or institution. These dual roles may culminate in a range of complications. For example, other PhD candidates might conceptualize these individuals as staff and not as peers. These individuals, therefore, may feel excluded from peer networks (Teeuwsen et al., 2014), such as writing groups.

Similarly, a sizeable proportion of part-time candidates need to fulfill many other responsibilities. They may be full time employees, parents, or carers, for example (Massyn, 2021; Teeuwsen et al., 2014) and not as likely to receive a stipend from their university. These responsibilities tend to be prioritized over their studies (Evans, 2010). Because individuals tend to underestimate the duration they need to complete tasks, called the planning fallacy (Buehler et al., 1994), these other responsibilities often consume more time than anticipated. Candidates thus cannot dedicate enough time to complete their thesis as planned. Indeed, as Massyn (2021) revealed, in a cohort of South African doctoral candidates who study part-time

almost a quarter study less than 5 hours a week
another quarter study less than 10 hours a week—even though candidates are expected to study 21 hours a week

Finally, many of the graduate researchers who complete their studies online or remotely also enroll part-time. Lee (2020) conducted a phenomenological study to characterize the experience of candidates who complete their PhD online, while also distracted with other professional responsibilities, family responsibilities, or both. This study revealed how many of these candidates often develop the capacity to work independently and to become better practitioners, often diverging from the experience of strong cohorts and the emphasis on research careers, often typical of peers who study on campus full-time.

Despite these challenges, part-time graduate researchers might experience some benefits as well. At least in some circumstances, part-time candidates tend to complete their degree is fewer working days than full-time candidates (Neumann & Rodwell, 2009). Perhaps, because they enroll part-time, they may be exposed to more opportunities time and opportunity to uncover helpful insights or resources. Furthermore, as Booth and Satchell (1995) revealed, after they conducted hazard analyses, in female graduate researchers, whether they enroll part-time or full-time does not affect the likelihood they will withdraw. However, in men, part-time candidates were more likely to withdraw before they submitted their thesis than were full-time candidates.

Initiatives to address challenges: Sense of community

As studies have shown, part time graduate researchers sometimes cultivate a sense of community—and this sense of community helps these individuals persist in their pursuit, despite the challenges and impediments they might experience. Accordingly, Zahl (2015) conducted a study to explore how part-time PhD candidates tend to cultivate this sense of community. Specifically, 10 candidates, from one institution but two departments, participated in interviews, each lasting between 60 and 90 minutes. During the interviews, participants were prompted to discuss how they define and foster a sense of community and the impact of this community. The head of each department also participated in interviews to discuss the culture, norms, and values of these departments.

To experience a sense of community, the part-time PhD candidates discussed their attempts to experience a connection not only with peers and academics but also with the culture of their academic institution as well. This connection with culture was equated to a general feeling the environment is supportive rather than necessarily close relationships with individual people. To experience a sense of belonging, part-time PhD candidates also wanted to feel valued and appreciated by other individuals in this community—manifesting as reciprocal trust, mutual encouragement, and the feeling that other people understand their challenges and struggles.

According to the participants, this sense of community and belonging emanated from collaboration around research and scholarship. That is, despite the barriers that part-time candidates might experience, especially if they study remotely, some of the individuals uncovered opportunities to meet with peers to share ideas and concerns and to uncover opportunities to assist one another. Most of these candidates perceived their peers as a source of encouragement during challenging times and a source of information and knowledge during all times. If this sense of community disintegrated, perhaps because peers left, these candidates often felt very isolated. Interestingly, individuals who cultivated a community with peers, rather than other academics, were more likely to feel this sense of community was consistent across their tenure rather than sporadic over time. The participants who did not experience any sense of community believed this feeling applies only to full-time PhD candidates.

Several obstacles impeded the capacity of some part-time PhD candidates to develop relationships with peers. Because some of these individuals worked full-time, they were seldom granted opportunities to meet a peer incidentally. In addition, the cohort of peers shifted appreciably over time, because students progressed at different rates. Finally, part-time PhD candidates, who were often older and experienced in the workforce, preferred to interact with similar individuals. Yet, many of their full-time counterparts were younger, inexperienced, and thus may have exhibited different values—such as the motivation to progress efficiently rather than to explore theoretical nuances.

Littlefield et al. (2015) also explored the features of environments that facilitated the formation of these communities. As the researchers showed, when candidates felt they shared a common goal, these communities, in which the individuals assist and support one another, were more likely to develop naturally. These individuals become more likely to offer encouragement, insights, accountability, and practical support, reciprocally and voluntarily.

Initiatives to address challenges: Social media usage

To foster this sense of community, some part-time graduate researchers depend heavily on social media. Vigurs (2016) thus explored the role of social media, especially Twitter, can support the experience of PhD candidates enrolled part-time. Participants received a survey that primarily comprised open-ended questions, prompting these individuals to write about the benefits and challenges of Twitter to fulfill academic goals; 61 individuals completed this survey.

As the results showed, some cohorts of candidates often used Twitter to share their experiences and ideas, especially if relevant tutors or supervisors also used Twitter. Participants also felt that Twitter could enable candidates to develop academic networks, and to enhance their reputation, outside their university. Participants who used Twitter to support their academic pursuits felt more informed and supported, sometimes offsetting the detrimental effects of inadequate supervision. After reading tweets about the struggles of peers, their sense of isolation subsides. Yet, after reading tweets about the success of some peers, they often felt buoyed and excited.

The participants also broached some of the limitations and challenges of Twitter. According to some PhD candidates, the time they need to dedicate to Twitter overrides the benefits of this platform. Other PhD candidates perceived the Twitter community as too supportive, because they would have preferred honest, critical, and challenging conversations. Conversely, some participants were unwilling to post tweets, because they doubted their research skills or research project and were concerned they might be scorned.

Initiatives to address challenges: Summer programs

At many universities or research institutions, graduate researchers must complement their research with coursework. The coursework may include classes on research design, qualitative research, multivariate statistics, philosophy of science, and research integrity.

Conceivably, in some instances, especially in doctoral programs that revolve around a specific discipline, this coursework could be condensed into summer schools. For example, Biegel et al. (2006) delineated a program in which part-time doctoral candidates, completing research in social work, needed to attend an intensive, lasting 6 weeks, and comprising three sequences of classes and a colloquia series. Each of the three sequences of classes lasted 36 hours across the 6 weeks and revolved around one topic, such as advanced data analysis. During this program, the part-time candidates often lived on campus during this time. Full-time candidates also participated in this coursework. The schedule was designed to facilitate interaction between candidates outside the classes as well.

Several other provisions complemented this program. The individuals could apply to participate in a mentoring program as well as attend classes to develop their teaching skills.

A variety of metrics suggest the program was successful. The likelihood that candidates would graduate increased—comparable to the rates observed in full-time candidates. Many individuals enrolled in this program because the summer intensive suited their work responsibilities. They were able to organize leave during this time. Admittedly, in some nations, shorter intensives may be more appropriate.

Initiatives to address challenges: Tailored supervision

Some researchers and scholars recommend that supervisors need to learn how to customize and to adapt their supervision practices to accommodate part-time candidates. For example, according to Watts (2010), supervisors of part-time candidates should

discuss with the candidate how often to arrange meetings—because frequent contact helps maintain a sense of community, progress, and momentum but might impinge on the other responsibilities of these individuals
encourage these candidates to complete short writing tasks and other confined activities throughout their candidature—because the time these individuals dedicate to their studies might be sporadic and unpredictable
listen to the challenges and problems of candidates, including work or family matters; supervisors should not assume the role of counsellors, but should demonstrate they understand these concerns, brainstorm a couple of possible solutions and, if appropriate, refer candidates to appropriate services.

Evans (2010) observes that part-time candidates are often more experienced than are their full-time counterparts—and thus may have developed a diversity of skills they could apply to their research. Supervisors, therefore, should be attuned to opportunities in which these individuals can apply these experiences to their research—or can apply their research to their professional lives. For example, these candidates might be able to access resources, infrastructure, and networks that are valuable to their research. However, the candidates might overlook the value of these resources, infrastructure, and networks because many of their peers may have developed comparable provisions. Despite these benefits that part-time candidates might enjoy, supervisors should, according to Evans (2010)

in the first meeting, clarify the degree to which the research is likely to impinge on the lives of these individuals
encourage these candidates to arrange the support they need to dedicate time to this endeavor—support from family, friends, and managers
establish a schedule or plan that candidates should follow, such as the tasks they plan to complete each month
gauge whether these candidates can fulfill this schedule; although supervisors might need to recognize that some deviation from this schedule is inevitable, they should consult with candidates on how to maintain enough accountability to mobilize the effort that is necessary to complete the degree

References

Bates, P., & Goff, L. (2012). The invisible student: Benefits and challenges of part-time doctoral studies. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 58(3), 368-380.
Bendix Petersen, E. (2014). Re-signifying subjectivity? A narrative exploration of ‘non-traditional’ doctoral students' lived experience of subject formation through two Australian cases. Studies in Higher Education, 39(5), 823-834.
Biegel, D. E., Hokenstad, M. C., Singer, M. I., & Guo, S. (2006). One school’s experience in reconceptualizing part-time doctoral education in social work. Journal of Social Work Education, 42(2), 231–247.
Bircher, L. S. (2012). Part-time doctoral student socialization through peer mentorship. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Booth, L. L., & Satchell, S. E. (1995). The hazards of doing a PhD: an analysis of completion and withdrawal rates of British PhD students in the 1980s. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 158(2), 297-318.
Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the "planning fallacy": Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 366-381.
Cervini, E. (2007). Part-time PhDs don’t fit the bill. Australian Financial Review, Monday 30 April: 33.
Evans, T. (2010). Supervising part-time doctoral students. In The Routledge Doctoral Supervisor's Companion. Routledge.
Gardner, S. K., & Gopaul, B. (2012). The part-time doctoral student experience. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 63–78.
Hall, F. L., Evans, B., & Nerad, M. (2006). Feasibility of international comparisons of PhD program times-to-degree and completion rates. Paper presented at the Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference, Adelaide, Australia.
Leach, E. (2021). The fractured “I”: An autoethnographic account of a part-time doctoral student’s experience with scholarly identity formation. Qualitative Inquiry, 27(3-4), 381-384.
Lee, K. (2020). A phenomenological exploration of the student experience of online PhD studies. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 15, 575–593.
Littlefield, C. M., Taddei, L. M., & Radosh, M. E. (2015). Organic collaborative teams: The role of collaboration and peer to peer support for part-time doctoral completion. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, 129.
Massyn, L. (2021). Persistence in doctoral education: A part-time research student perspective in a developing context. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice.
Mouton J. (2016). The doctorate in SA: Trends, challenges and constraints. In Fourie-Malherbe M., Albertyn R., Aitchison C., Bitzer E. (Eds.), Postgraduate supervision—Future foci for the knowledge society (pp. 51–82). Sun Press.
Murakami-Ramalho, E., Militello, M., & Piert, J. (2013). A view from within: How doctoral students in educational administration develop research knowledge and identity. Studies in Higher Education, 38(2), 256-271.
Nettles, M. T., & Millett, C. M. (2006). Three magic letters: Getting to Ph.D. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Neumann, R., & Rodwell, J. (2009). The ‘invisible’ part-time research students: A case study of satisfaction and completion. Studies in Higher Education, 34, 55-68
Teeuwsen, P., Ratkovic, S., & Tilley, S. A. (2014). Becoming academics: experiencing peripheral participation in part-time doctoral studies. Studies in Higher Education, 39, 680-694.
Vigurs, K. (2016). Using Twitter to tackle peripherality? Facilitating networked scholarship for part-time doctoral students within and beyond the university. Fusion Journal, 8, 1–22.
Watts, J. H. (2010). Supervising part-time doctoral students Issues and challenges. In The Routledge Doctoral Supervisor's Companion. Routledge.
Zahl, S. (2015). The impact of community for part-time doctoral students: How relationships in the academic department affect student persistence. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, 301–321.
Zhang, S., Li, C., Carroll, M., & G. Schrader, P. (2020). Doctoral program design based on technology-based situated learning and mentoring: a comparison of part-time and full-time doctoral students. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 15, 393–414.

Return to top

Return to menu

The causes and consequences of student employment

by Simon Moss

Introduction

Many students are employed. Indeed, some students, even if enrolled full time, are employed full time as well. Some research has explored the causes or the consequences of this employment.

According to one perspective, called deleterious effects, employment will tend to compromise the progress and performance of students because of several reasons. For example, the time that students dedicate to work often diminishes the time that is available to study. Similarly, commitment to a job might diminish commitment to studies. That is, the job might distract attention from studies (Kocsis et al., 2022).

In addition, and consistent with deleterious effects, as Greenberger and Steinberg (1986) proposed, when young students, about 18 years of age, are exposed to work, they often emulate older individuals, because they feel a sense of belonging with this cohort yet have not developed the maturity. Consequently, they gravitate to activities that perhaps they do not regulate well, such as alcohol. They may become even more susceptible to problem alcohol use. Admittedly, this theory was first applied to high school students and may not generalize to university students.

However, not all research vindicates this account. According to another perspective, called selection-to-work, the students who tend to work generally differ from the students who do not tend to work—and these differences could explain the observed association between employment and progress. For example, students who are especially motivated and capable may be both more inclined to work and more likely to thrive at university (Entwisle et al., 2000; Warren et al. ,2000). Because of this possibility, student employment, even if detrimental, might be positively associated with student progress and performance, unless statistically controlled.

Nevertheless, many scholars assume these accounts overlook many of the nuances and moderators of this association between student employment and student progress. Accordingly, many researchers now subscribe to a third perspective, called heterogeneous effects. As this perspective implies, the impact of student should depend on characteristics of the work or individual. For example, this perspective assumes the job, work hours, location, and other features of the job could influence the effect of employment on student progress. In addition, characteristics of the individual, such as gender (D’Amico 1984), ethnicity (Johnson, 2004), socioeconomic status (Entwisle et al., 2005), and living arrangements (Bozick, 2007) may all influence the impact of employment. Although some of these findings and theories evolved to explain the effect of employment on high school students, these perspectives also apply to tertiary education as well.

Indeed, in some instances, employment might facilitate studies. The knowledge, qualities, or motivations that students derive from some work could benefit their studies, sometimes called the horizontal integration of work and studies (Kocsis et al., 2022).

These theories, however, tend to overlook the benefits of employment to the personal development of students and to society more broadly. As Darolia (2014) argued, employment can help students develop vital qualities, such as the capacity to manage their time effectively and assume personal responsibility—qualities they might not even derive from other authentic programs, such as work-integrated learning. Furthermore, student employment might diminish the costs of education to society more broadly, because less public spending needs to be directed to these students.

Characteristics that affect the relationship between student work and progress: Number of work hours

According to some researchers, each hour that students dedicate to work diminishes the number of hours they dedicate to study. However, when the number of work hours is limited, and thus individuals can still access enough hours to engage in discretionary activities, this assumption might be misleading. Consequently, if the number of work hours is not too extensive, student employment might not impair student progress.

Some research has vindicated this possibility. In their survey of almost 2500 Estonian university students, Beerkens et al. (2011) explored whether employment influenced academic progress. The effects of employment were modest: relative to students who were not employed, students who were employed were only 5% less likely to graduate on time. And moderate levels of work did not impair academic progress at all. Only extensive hours, such as more than 25 hours of work a week, diminished the hours that students dedicated to their studies.

Other studies have uncovered similar patterns. Body et al (2014) distilled some data from a survey on 823 students, all of whom were enrolled at the University of Poitiers. The survey explored the number of hours these students worked, the sector in which they worked, and other features of their employment. The analysis then ascertained how these features of employment are related to the completion of courses. As these analyses revealed

when individuals worked fewer than eight hours, work did not compromise the likelihood of course completion
however, when the number of work hours exceeded 8, the number of work hours was inversely associated with the likelihood of completion
nevertheless, the impact of work hours varied across sectors; for example, employment in the public sector was not as likely to impede completion

Characteristics that affect the relationship between student work and progress: Overlapping fields

The relationship between student employment and student progress might depend on the degree to which the job and course overlap. Arguably, if the job of students and the course they study revolve around the same field or topics, employment might even facilitate progress, because of several reasons.

For example, consistent with the selection-to-work account, individuals who feel passionate about a specific field might be more likely both to work in this field and study in this field. This passion might enhance their motivation both at work and in their studies. Alternatively, the insights that students derived from their job could be applied to their studies. These student can apply the materials they learn during their course to actual work situations.

Thies (2022) explored whether the degree to which the work overlaps with the content of courses affects the performance of international students. Specifically, the participants were 1625 international students, studying to Germany, who completed surveys, four times during their first four semesters. The survey invited participants to indicate

whether they work and study at the same time
whether the paid employment is related to the subject they study
the number of hours they devote to paid employment
the grade point average in the semester
the credit points they earned, relative to the maximum
control variables, such as their language skills, field of study, satisfaction with the degree, how they are financed, entrance GPA, and demographics

As Thies (2022) revealed, paid student employment did influence academic grades and performance. As hypothesized, the effect of student employment depended on various features of the employment. Specifically

generally, when students worked in a field that was relevant to their studies, the grade point average they received each semester tended to be higher—regardless of how many hours they were employed
however, when students did increase their work hours in jobs that are relevant to their studies, they tended earn fewer credit points—and, thus, enroll in fewer classes
this observation that hours at work can impede progress was more pronounced in students enrolled in a Masters and students from developing nations.

Taken together, student employment seems to affect decisions around study load but does not seem to impair, and can even boost, student performance. As these findings imply, if employment is optional, international students could perhaps be encouraged to dedicate a modest, rather than extensive, number of hours to employment that is relevant to their studies. This modest number of hours is not as likely to compromise progress in the course and may even enhance grade point average.

Other studies have uncovered similar conclusions. In a study that Darolia (2014) published, employment did not compromise performance in either part-time students or full-time students. However, employed students enrolled in fewer courses, delaying completion. This pattern was observed regardless of whether student fixed effects were included in the model or whether a dynamic model was applied to control changes over time.

Characteristics that affect the relationship between student work and progress: Field of study

The association between employment and student progress or performance may also vary across fields. Indeed, in the study that Thies (2022) published, work hours were more likely to impede progress in the students enrolled in mathematics, natural sciences, or engineering.

Kocsis et al. (2022) also explored the impact of discipline or field of education. These researchers extracted data from a survey of over 1000 Hungarian undergraduate students. The survey included questions that assessed the number of hours that students worked and whether the work is relevant to their studies. The survey also included questions that measure persistence, such as “I am very determined to complete my studies” and “I want to achieve the best possible academic achievement”. To measure the progress of students, the researchers also accessed the rate at which these individuals completed their courses each semester.

Whether employment impeded persistence or progress varied across the fields of study. For instance, if students were enrolled in informatics, employment was unrelated to persistence or progress overall. However, student employment in a job that overlapped with their studies was more likely to impede progress than student employment in a job that did not overlap with their studies. Presumably, jobs that overlapped with the studies of students might have been more attractive to these individuals. Consequently, commitment to the job might have diminished commitment to studies. Indeed, students might have perceived their job as fulfilling but their course or studies as obsolete and oblivious to the challenges of industry.

If students were enrolled in the sciences, employment was positively associated with progress. Many of these employed students worked in jobs that were relevant to their studies. The knowledge or commitment they derived from these jobs might have benefited their studies.

If students were enrolled in engineering, however, employment was negatively associated with persistence and progress. Arguably, if students had not earned a degree, roles in engineering may not be especially rewarding. Consequently, these students might not be as likely to enjoy their jobs or feel committed to engineering, compromising their motivation at university.

Finally, if students were not enrolled in STEM, employment was inversely associated with persistence or progress. This employment might have distracted time from studies without facilitate the acquisition of skills that are relevant to their studies. Taken together, these findings imply that employment may benefit persistence and progress only in specific circumstances, such as when

students develop skills in the job that are relevant to their studies
the work environment is supportive
the course imparts skills that enable students to thrive in these roles

Characteristics that affect the relationship between student work and progress: Location of employment

The impact of employment on student progress and satisfaction may also depend on whether these students are employed on campus. Many students, especially PhD candidates, may be employed at their institution. As Bekova (2021) revealed, in Russia, students who are employed as research assistants on campus are more likely to complete and defend their thesis than are other students—especially students who work outside the university.

To generate these findings, Bekova (2021) collected longitudinal data from a leading Russian university. The data were distilled from two sources. First, some of the data were derived from a survey of doctoral candidates, conducted in 2012, 2015, and 2016, that includes questions about the current employment of students as well as their previous education and satisfaction with the program. Second, these data were matched to administrative records that specify when the candidates graduated as well as other information about their thesis, such as the dates of their public defense. A series of regression models reveals that

63% of candidates who were employed as research assistants completed and defended their thesis, whereas only 27% of candidates who were employed outside the university fulfilled this goal
just over 40% of other candidates—candidates who were not employed or employed at the university, but not as a research assistant, completed and defended their thesis
candidates who were employed, but not at the university, were more likely to complete and defend their thesis if they were also motivated to pursue an academic career.

Some of these results could be specific to the circumstances and challenges that Russian individuals experience. For example, some male candidates might pursue a PhD to circumvent the draft.

Nevertheless, these results seem to accord with a selection-to-work account. Students who are passionate about research or academia may be both more likely to work—especially as research assistants—and more likely to flourish in their studies. Work as a research assistant, however, may have also imparted skills that could have benefited the study of these students.

The causes of student employment

To appreciate the consequences of student employment, researchers also need to explore the causes of student employment: the reasons that students feel the need to work. These motivations could explain some of the effects or ramifications of student employment. Insight into these motivations could also inform programs or initiatives that are designed to stem, or to encourage, student employment.

Accordingly, Beerkens et al. (2011) conducted a study of almost 2500 Estonian students, enrolled in public and private universities, to investigate the causes of student employment. The data were derived from a survey about the socioeconomic status of students, conducted in 2008. The survey explored the employment of students as well as their funding, living conditions, enrolment, and background. The participants were enrolled, full time, in Bachelor or Masters courses.

Interestingly, over 60% of students, although enrolled full time, also worked. Students who were older than 23 were especially likely to work, sometimes even full time. Older students may be more attractive to employers as well less inclined to relinquish their jobs when they enroll. Even after controlling language, students were also more likely to work if

they were enrolled in a Masters degree rather than a Bachelor degree
they have not received funding to study but instead must pay a tuition fee

However, the financial status of families did not affect the likelihood these students work, suggesting that financial imperatives may not be a powerful determinant of employment. If families were affluent, students often worked to gain work experience, to earn some extra income, and sometimes to occupy free time. If families were relatively impoverished, students tended to work to support their living expenses. Hence, the financial status of families affected the primary motivation to work but not the likelihood of work.

Other studies have also examined the determinants of student employment. Simón et al (2017), for example, surveyed 464 Spanish university students. Students who were older, citizens of other nations, and ambitious in their careers were more likely to work.

Initiatives to address the effects of high levels of employment

To limit the deleterious effects of excessive work hours, some institutions, especially in the US, restrict the number hours that students can work a week. As Beerkens et al. (2011) underscored, however, this directive is not suitable when excessive work hours are a consequence, not a cause, of other challenges in society. Other institutions offer financial aid to diminish the need to work.

Rather than introduce programs and schemes to regulate work hours, some researchers believe the design of courses might affect employment. For example, according to Beerkens et al. (2011), higher university standards might inspire students to dedicate more time to their studies than to work. In nations in which academic standards are perceived as modest, students do not feel they need to dedicate significant time to their studies. They are thus more inclined to work.

References

Bekova, S. (2021). Does employment during doctoral training reduce the PhD completion rate? Studies in Higher Education, 46(6), 1068-1080.
Beerkens, M., Magi, E., & Lill, L. (2011). University studies as a side job: Causes and consequences of massive student employment in Estonia. Higher Education, 61(6), 679-692.
Body, K. M. D., Bonnal, L., & Giret, J. F. (2014). Does student employment really impact academic achievement? The case of France. Applied Economics, 46(25), 3061-3073.
Bozick, R. (2007). Making it through the first year of college: The role of students’ economic resources, employment, and living arrangements. Sociology of Education, 80(3), 261–285.
Choi, Y. (2018). Student employment and persistence: Evidence of effect heterogeneity of student employment on college dropout. Research in Higher Education, 59(1), 88-107.
D’Amico, R. (1984). Does employment during high school impair academic progress? Sociology of Education, 57(3), 152–164
Darolia, R. (2014). Working (and studying) day and night: Heterogeneous effects of working on the academic performance of full-time and part-time students. Economics of Education Review, 38, 38-50.
Entwisle, D. R., Alexander, K. L., & Olson, L. S. (2000). Early work histories of urban youth. American Sociological Review, 65(2), 279–297.
Entwisle, D. R., Alexander, K. L., & Olson, L. S. (2005). Urban teenagers. Youth & Society, 37(1), 3–32.
Greenberger, E., & Steinberg, L. D. (1986). When teenagers work: The psychological and social costs of teenage employment. New York: Basic Books.
Johnson, M. K. (2004). Further evidence on adolescent employment and substance use: Differences by race and ethnicity. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 45, 187–197.
Kocsis, Z., Alter, E., & Pusztai, G. (2022). The role of student employment in persistence and efficiency in STEM higher education. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 10(4), 831-848.
Riggert, S. C., Boyle, M., Petrosko, J. M., Ash, D., & Rude-Parkins, C. (2006). Student employment and higher education: Empiricism and contradiction. Review of Educational Eesearch, 76(1), 63-92.
Simón, H., Díaz, J. M. C., & Costa, J. L. C. (2017). Analysis of university student employment and its impact on academic performance. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 15(2), 281-306.
Staneva, M. (2020). Employment alongside Bachelor's Studies in Germany: Implications for Education Outcomes, the School-to-Work Transition and Equity. Springer VS.
Thies, T. (2022). International students in higher education: the effect of student employment on academic performance and study progress. Higher Education.
Warren, J. R., LePore, P. C., & Mare, R. D. (2000). Employment during high school: Consequences for students’ grades in academic courses. American Educational Research Journal, 37(4), 943–969
Wenz, M., & Yu, W.-C. (2010). Term time employment and the academic performance of undergraduates. Journal of Education Finance, 35(4), 359–374.
Yanbarisova, D. M. (2015). The effects of student employment on academic performance in Tatarstan higher education institutions. Russian Education & Society, 57(6), 459-482.

Return to top

Return to menu