Engineering PhD Returners and Direct‐Pathway Students: Comparing Expectancy, Value, and Cost

BackgroundProfessionals who pursue a doctorate after significant post‐baccalaureate work experience, a group we refer to as returners, represent an important but understudied group of engineering doctoral students. Returners are well situated to leverage their applied work experiences in their advanced engineering training.Purpose/HypothesisWe drew on results from the Graduate Student Experiences and Motivations Survey to explore the dimensionality of our scales measuring value and cost constructs. We used these scales, as well as measures of student expectancy of success, to compare returners with direct‐pathway students.Design/MethodWe surveyed 179 returners and 297 direct‐pathway domestic engineering doctoral students. We first conducted Exploratory Factor Analysis on our cost and value measures. We then used both Ordinary Least Squares and Ordinal Regression Model analyses to assess the relationships of various student characteristics and experiences (including returner status) with student expectancy of success and the emergent cost and values factors associated with doctoral study in engineering.ResultsFactor analysis revealed three categories of values (interest, attainment, and career utility) that were largely consistent with those in Eccles’ expectancy‐value framework. A similar analysis identified three categories of costs (balance, financial, and academic) associated with pursuing a PhD. Returners felt significantly less confident in their ability to complete their degrees prior to enrolling and perceived higher levels of all cost types than direct‐pathway students.ConclusionsGiven the differences between returning and direct‐pathway students, it is important to consider how universities might best recruit and retain returners. Tracking returner status could be critical in better supporting these students.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/140046/1/jee20182.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/140046/2/jee20182_am.pd

Mobilising Knowledge through Global Partnerships to Support Research-informed Teaching: Five Models for Translational Research

Education Futures Collaboration Charity The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. The Publisher's final version can be found by following the DOI link.Improving the quality of teaching is of global concern: UNESCO’s Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4c in the Education 2030: Framework for Action calls for high quality teaching for all. The OECD challenges the education system to improve Knowledge Management. JET’s (2015) special issue: Translational Research (TR) and Knowledge Mobilisation in Teacher Education introduced the concept of ‘translational’ or ‘theory to practice’ research - well-established in medicine but not in education. Five TR models were subsequently developed by the MESH charity’s international network with organisations in South Africa, Bangladesh, Australia, Pakistan, UK. These distinct models engage 1) university staff and teachers 2) subject associations, 3) research units, 4) an international NGO working in crisis settings, 5) PhD tutors and students. Each model shares common features forming the MESH Translational Research methodology introduced in this article. A TR repository is part of the MESH knowledge mobilisation strategy giving teachers access to research summaries which, overtime, accumulate knowledge. TR publications called MESHGuides (www.meshguides.org) complement existing forms of publication. This article proposes the MESH TR methodology as one affordable and scalable solution to OECD and UNESCO’s challenges of keeping teachers up-to-date and making new knowledge accessible to teachers regardless of location

Science at the Bicentennial: a report from the research community.

154 p.Scientific research in the United States has grown up in close relation with other parts of the national life, at once affected by and affecting intellectual, social, and economic developments. An assessment of the present state of the American research enterprise therefore merits inclusion in our national self-accounting at the Bicentennial. This Eighth Report of the National Science Board is offered as part of that accounting. Specifically, the Report is intended to show what critical problems appear to be developing in the operating research sectors that will decrease the effectiveness of research unless properly addressed. A question to that point was put to broadly-informed persons in the research community. This Report provides the means by which their responses can be made widely known.http://gbic.tamug.edu/request.ht

Obesity prevention and personal responsibility: the case of front-of-pack food labelling in Australia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Australia, the food industry and public health groups are locked in serious struggle for regulatory influence over the terms of front-of-pack food labelling. Clear, unambiguous labelling of the nutritional content of pre-packaged foods and of standardized food items sold in chain restaurants is consistent with the prevailing philosophy of 'personal responsibility'. An interpretive, front-of-pack labelling scheme has the capacity to encourage healthier patterns of eating, and to be a catalyst for improvements in the nutritional quality of food products through re-formulation. On the other hand, the strength of opposition of the Australian Food and Grocery Council to 'Traffic Light Labelling', and its efforts to promote a non-interpretive, voluntary scheme, invite the interpretation that the food industry is resistant to any reforms that could destabilise current (unhealthy) purchasing patterns and the revenues they represent.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This article argues that although policies that aim to educate consumers about the nutritional content of food are welcome, they are only one part of a broader basket of policies that are needed to make progress on obesity prevention and public health nutrition. However, to the extent that food labelling has the capacity to inform and empower consumers to make healthier choices - and to be a catalyst for improving the nutritional quality of commercial recipes - it has an important role to play. Furthermore, given the dietary impact of meals eaten in fast food and franchise restaurants, interpretive labelling requirements should not be restricted to pre-packaged foods.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>Food industry resistance to an interpretive food labelling scheme is an important test for government, and a case study of how self-interest prompts industry to promote weaker, voluntary schemes that pre-empt and undermine progressive public health regulation.</p