Choices for Ph.D.s in Engineering: Analyses of Career Paths in Academia and Industry

Monica Farmer Cox; Jiabin Zhu; Benjamin Ahn; Jeremi S. London; Shree Frazier; Ana T. Torres-Ayala; Rocio C. Chavela Guerra

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Vancouver, BC
Publication Date: June 26, 2011
Start Date: June 26, 2011
End Date: June 29, 2011
ISSN: 2153-5965
Conference Session: Post Graduate Experiential Programs and Insights
Tagged Division: Cooperative & Experiential Education
Page Count: 11
Page Numbers: 22.324.1 - 22.324.11
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--17605
Permanent URL: https://strategy.asee.org/17605
Download Count: 381

Request a correction

Jiabin Zhu is a Ph.D. student in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She obtained a B.S. in Physics from East China Normal University, a M.S. in Optics from Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), and a second M.S. in Biomedical Engineering from Purdue University. Her primary research interests relate to comparative study methods and frameworks in engineering education, global engineering, professional development and mentoring of engineering graduate students. She is a student member of American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE).

visit author page

biography

Benjamin Ahn Purdue University, West Lafayette

visit author page

Benjamin Ahn is a Ph.D student in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University.
He received a M.S. degree in Aeronautics and Astronautics Engineering from Purdue University and a B.E degree in Aerospace Engineering from University of New South Wales, Australia. His research interests are re-examining the professional engineering practice in U.S. universities and industries and, the role of the Graduate Teaching Assistants in engineering classes.

visit author page

biography

Jeremi S. London Purdue University, West Lafayette

visit author page

Jeremi London was the Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) student working on the NSF EEP Research Project during the 2007 - 2008 academic year. Jeremi interned at the headquarters of Anheuser-Busch Companies, beginning in their Research Pilot Brewery during the summer of 2004, returning as an Analyst to their Corporate Quality Assurance Department in 2005, and working as a Product Supply & Transportation Coordinator for the Central Region in their Logistics Department in summer 2006. Jeremi graduated from Purdue University in May 2008 with a B.S. in Industrial Engineering, and immediately joined General Electric Healthcare in Wisconsin as a Quality Assurance Specialty in the Invasive Cardiology group. Recently, Jeremi returned to Purdue University to pursue graduate studies. Upon completion, she hopes to gain a M.S. in Industrial Engineering and a Ph.D. in Engineering Education.

visit author page

author page

Shree Frazier

biography

Ana T. Torres-Ayala University of South Florida

visit author page

Ana T. Torres-Ayala is a doctoral candidate in Higher Education at the University of South Florida. She holds a B.S. degree in Computer Engineering from the University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez and a M.Eng. degree in Computer and Systems Engineering from Rensselear Polytechnic Institute. She has experience in the telecommunications industry where she worked for Lucent Technologies. Before beginning her doctoral studies, Ana was also an Information Technology instructor. Her research interests include: preparing future engineering faculty, improving teaching and learning, distance education and underrepresented student success.

visit author page

author page

Rocio C. Chavela Guerra Purdue University, West Lafayette

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Choices for Ph.D.s in Engineering: Analyses of Career Paths in Academia and IndustryEngineering doctoral education encounters a variety of challenges as determined by policymakers, industrial professionals, or as self-reported by engineering doctoral students. Thesechallenges relate to the students’ lack of training for jobs outside of academia, their inefficiencyto adjust to change or to lead a change, and the narrow disciplinary training of graduate students.Considering the challenges facing engineering doctoral education, multiple initiatives have beenlaunched to help the preparation of engineering doctoral students for a changing society. Theseefforts include the emphasis of the translation of engineering education research to practice(ASEE, 2009), the restructuring and design of a systematic engineering doctoral curriculum(Everett, Imbrie, & Morgan, 2000), the integration of project-, problem- or experiential-basedlearning into doctoral students’ educational activities (Smith, Johnson, Johnson, & Sheppard,2005) and the piloting of global engineering program or co-op programs for the development ofengineers’ global competencies (Downey, Lucena, Moskal, et al.). Recognizing the efforts ofthese initiatives, however, empirical studies are needed to understand the outcomes of Ph.D.students’ learning to gain a practical view about the educational outcomes and career trajectoriesof engineering doctoral graduates.This study focuses on the career paths of engineering Ph.D.s from the perspectives of industryand academia. In this report, we identified approximately 50 engineering Ph.D. graduates fromU.S. programs who (1) worked in industry first and now work on academia; (2) worked inacademia first and now work in industry; (3) worked only in industry; or (4) worked only inacademia. Using resumes from these professionals as artifacts, researchers present qualitativeand quantitative analyses about career trajectories of engineering Ph.D.s in industry andacademia and identify insights and opportunities for a future study about the challenges and thebarriers in the transition points of engineering Ph.D.s after graduation.References:American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) report (2009). Creating a Culture forScholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering Education: Ensuring U.S. engineering hasthe right people with the right talent for a global society.Downey, G., J. Lucena, Moskal, B.M. et al. (2006). The Globally Competent Engineer: WorkingEffectively with People Who Define Problems Differently. Journal of Engineering Education95(2): 107–22.Everett, L., Imbrie, P.K., and Morgan, J. (2000). Integrated Curricula: Purpose and Design.Journal of Engineering Education, 89(2), 167–175Smith, K.A., Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.W., and Sheppard, S.D. (2005), Pedagogies ofEngagement: Classroom-Based Practices, Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 1-15.

Citation
Format

Cox, M. F., & Zhu, J., & Ahn, B., & London, J. S., & Frazier, S., & Torres-Ayala, A. T., & Chavela Guerra, R. C. (2011, June), Choices for Ph.D.s in Engineering: Analyses of Career Paths in Academia and Industry Paper presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC. 10.18260/1-2--17605

TY - CPAPER
AB - Choices for Ph.D.s in Engineering: Analyses of Career Paths in Academia and IndustryEngineering doctoral education encounters a variety of challenges as determined by policymakers, industrial professionals, or as self-reported by engineering doctoral students. Thesechallenges relate to the students’ lack of training for jobs outside of academia, their inefficiencyto adjust to change or to lead a change, and the narrow disciplinary training of graduate students.Considering the challenges facing engineering doctoral education, multiple initiatives have beenlaunched to help the preparation of engineering doctoral students for a changing society. Theseefforts include the emphasis of the translation of engineering education research to practice(ASEE, 2009), the restructuring and design of a systematic engineering doctoral curriculum(Everett, Imbrie, &amp; Morgan, 2000), the integration of project-, problem- or experiential-basedlearning into doctoral students’ educational activities (Smith, Johnson, Johnson, &amp; Sheppard,2005) and the piloting of global engineering program or co-op programs for the development ofengineers’ global competencies (Downey, Lucena, Moskal, et al.). Recognizing the efforts ofthese initiatives, however, empirical studies are needed to understand the outcomes of Ph.D.students’ learning to gain a practical view about the educational outcomes and career trajectoriesof engineering doctoral graduates.This study focuses on the career paths of engineering Ph.D.s from the perspectives of industryand academia. In this report, we identified approximately 50 engineering Ph.D. graduates fromU.S. programs who (1) worked in industry first and now work on academia; (2) worked inacademia first and now work in industry; (3) worked only in industry; or (4) worked only inacademia. Using resumes from these professionals as artifacts, researchers present qualitativeand quantitative analyses about career trajectories of engineering Ph.D.s in industry andacademia and identify insights and opportunities for a future study about the challenges and thebarriers in the transition points of engineering Ph.D.s after graduation.References:American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) report (2009). Creating a Culture forScholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering Education: Ensuring U.S. engineering hasthe right people with the right talent for a global society.Downey, G., J. Lucena, Moskal, B.M. et al. (2006). The Globally Competent Engineer: WorkingEffectively with People Who Define Problems Differently. Journal of Engineering Education95(2): 107–22.Everett, L., Imbrie, P.K., and Morgan, J. (2000). Integrated Curricula: Purpose and Design.Journal of Engineering Education, 89(2), 167–175Smith, K.A., Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.W., and Sheppard, S.D. (2005), Pedagogies ofEngagement: Classroom-Based Practices, Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 1-15.
AU - Monica Farmer Cox
AU - Jiabin Zhu
AU - Benjamin Ahn
AU - Jeremi S. London
AU - Shree Frazier
AU - Ana T. Torres-Ayala
AU - Rocio C. Chavela Guerra
CY - Vancouver, BC
DA - 2011/06/26
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Choices for Ph.D.s in Engineering: Analyses of Career Paths in Academia and Industry
UR - https://strategy.asee.org/17605
DO - 10.18260/1-2--17605
ER -