Doctoral education in chemistry: faculty perspectives on programmatic elements’ goals and outcomes

Abstract

This qualitative study investigates the goals and outcomes of the individual programmatic elements within US chemistry doctoral programs, based on faculty perspectives. Forty-six faculty participants were interviewed using an interview protocol that was refined through iterative input and consensus building. Faculty perspectives in this study identifies several programmatic elements—such as research, coursework, lab rotations, candidacy process, and teaching assistantship—and explores the goals and outcomes of each. While the program's structure aims to incorporate essential workforce skills as explicit goals and outcomes, findings indicate that this integration often remains questionable. Further analysis of the goals and outcomes yielded three main insights: there is a misalignment between stated goals and enacted practices, necessitating a holistic reform approach to align goals of programmatic elements with students’ career goals and program goals; the structure of some programmatic elements often causes stress and frustration, highlighting the importance of improved integration and support; significant issues with certainty of the goals and outcomes of programmatic elements were identified, suggesting systemic problems that could lead to ineffective education. Addressing these issues through enhanced clarity, alignment, and practical training is vital for improving the experience of doctoral education in chemistry and better preparing students for their careers. While this study focused on US chemistry doctoral programs, the findings offer a framework for improving doctoral programs by addressing misalignments, unclear goals and outcomes, and the integration of real-world skills, providing insights that are applicable across diverse global educational contexts.