Curriculum vitae analyses of engineering Ph.D.S working in academia and industry

• Autores: Monica F. Cox, Tasha Zephirin, Nikitha Sambamurthy, Benjamin Ahn, Jeremi S. London, Osman Cekic, Ana Torres, Jiabin Zhu
• Localización: The International journal of engineering education, ISSN-e 0949-149X, Vol. 29, no. 5, 2013, págs. 1205-1221
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • In recent years there have been discussions surrounding the under-preparedness of Ph.D. graduates of highly specialized doctoralprograms, lacking interdisciplinary focus and professional skill development, to succeed in future complex work environments. Toaddress these concerns, Golde and Walker suggest re-conceptualizing doctoral education such that Ph.D. holders are developed as‘‘stewards’’ of their disciplines. To provide initial insights into how engineering can be viewed through a stewardship lens, theauthors conducted a content analysis of thirty-six curricula vitae of engineering Ph.D. holders who have been employed in one offour occupational sectors- (1) academia only, (2) industry only, (3) academia and then industry, or (4) industry and then academia.This effort seeks to operationalize their experiences into the three tenants of the stewardship framework—generation, conservationand transformation—and provide a new perspective for future discussions around the preparation and expectations of engineeringPh.D. holders. Industry participants reported higher generation and conservation than academia only participants; academia toindustry participants reported higher instances of generation followed by conservation; industry to academia participants, onaverage, reported higher generation; and a new category, ‘‘other,’’ was the lowest instance across all groups.