The Purpose of a PhD in Engineering: Where Does Teaching Fit In?

Background: Institutions in the United States are classified by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. These classifications are largely delineated by the institutions’ focus on research versus teaching. Almost all professors in the US earn their doctorate degrees at doctoral universities with the highest research activity (R1), given that those institutions are the ones that confer PhD degrees; however, there exists a misalignment between earning a PhD at an R1 institution and preparing for a faculty career at a more teaching-focused institution (non-R1). Some professors pursue a PhD entirely for the teaching credential with the goal of teaching at an institution of higher education. With R1 institutions focusing primarily on research, the purpose of graduate education and its effectiveness in preparing the next generation of engineering faculty is put into question. Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore the following question: How do engineering assistant professors at US institutions experience the transition from graduate school at R1 institutions to their current faculty position at non-R1 institutions? Methods: Audio-recorded semi-structured ethnographic interviews were conducted with twelve participants, three representing each of four institution types (R2, R3, master’s, and baccalaureate). One participant at each institution type identified as female, and the other two identified as male. An inductive-deductive thematic analysis was conducted and resulted in three major themes. Results: The participants described feelings of misalignment between their graduate program and preparation for a faculty career, especially in terms of preparation for teaching, which was attributed to the research mission of the universities they attended (R1 institutions). In addition to feeling underprepared to teach, many participants described feeling unprepared for the emotional challenge of pursuing a position that is perceived to be less prestigious than a position at an R1 institution. Discussion and Conclusions: The results of the thematic analysis point to the need to reimagine the training graduate students receive to better align with future employment opportunities, especially preparation for teaching-focused positions and including preparation for non-academic positions. Additionally, the results indicate the need for a cultural shift toward doctoral training that is more inclusive of the diverse career interests of graduate students