Students’ Persistence in Doctoral Programs in Higher Education
Introduction
Research Background and Research Problem Approximately 50% of those who begin the doctoral programs do not persist to graduation (Ivankova & Stick, 2007). Social and work commitments, high rates of failure, and institution based factors are some of the key factors influencing doctoral students’ persistence in the program (Spaulding & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2012; Ivankova & Stick, 2007). Nearly two million students are pursuing graduate degrees in American higher education (Hart, 2012). Out of this number, about 20% of the graduate students are enrolled in doctoral programs (Ivankova & Stick, 2007). However, approximately 50% of the students who begin their doctoral programs do not persist to completion (Ivankova & Stick, 2007). Studies have shown that high rates of failure and the constant increase in time to degree are the major challenges in doctoral education (Spaulding & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2012). The objective of the study will be to analyze the literature and draw critiques with a view to addressing the research problem. Research Questions Significance of the Study This research will add to an area of study related to students’ persistence in doctoral programs in order to emphasize the need for addressing the issues relating to doctoral students’ attrition. This study will promote doctoral education especially for adult students considering such learning experience. Literature Review Doctoral students’ attrition has been always as a result of the high rates of failure including other factors such as student frustration with program procedures and policies (Lee & Choi, 2011). Other findings reveal that the factors influencing doctoral students’ persistence are related to students’ integration into their faculties (Ivankova & Stick, 2007). Adult students form the larger proportion of doctoral students who begin the programs but do not persist to completion (Jones, 2013). Theoretical Framework The theoretical foundation for the research will be based on Tinto’s student integration, Bean’s student attrition, and Kember’s dropout models in a view to addressing the research problem. Tinto’s model theorized doctoral students’ persistence as the result of students’ integration with their faculties (Tinto, 1975). Bean’s model theorized students’ attrition as the outcome of their attitudes (Bean, 1980). Kember redefined Tinto’s model through focusing on adult students’ experience in distance learning (Kember, 1989). Research Design and Methodology This research will be based on a qualitative analysis of the literature with a view to gaining a comprehensive knowledge of the issues surrounding doctoral students’ persistence, ethical considerations, as well as the possible solutions to the research problem (Vaismoradi, Turunen, & Bondas, 2013). Furthermore, relevance, credibility, and accuracy of the study will be ensured through focusing majorly on scientific journals. References Bean, J. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: the synthesis and test of a causal model of student attrition. Research in Higher Education (12), 155-187. Hart, C. (2012). Factors associated with student persistence in an online program of study: A review of the literature. Journal of Interactive Online Learning 11(1). Ivankova, N., & Stick, S. (2007). Students’ persistence in a Distributed Doctoral Program in Educational Leadership in Higher Education: A mixed methods study. Research in Higher Education 48(1), 93-135. Jones, M. (2013). Issues in doctoral studies-forty years of journal discussion: Where have we been and where are we going. 83. Kember, D. (1989). A longitudinal process model of dropout from distance education. Journal of Higher Education 60(3), 278-301. Lee, & Choi, J. (2011). A review of online course dropout research: Implications for practice and future research. Educational technology Research and Development 59(5), 593-618. Spaulding, L., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. (2012). Hearing their voices: Factors doctoral candidates attribute to their persistence. International Journal of Doctoral Studies 7(1), 19-219. Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research (45), 89-125. Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & Health Sciences 15(3), 398/405.
