Andrew Hibel, HigherEdJobs: Dr. James, you are the assistant dean for academic affairs at Duke University which encompasses many different responsibilities. Would you briefly summarize some of your main tasks in this role and how your interests led you to this position in higher education?
Dr. Douglas James, Duke University: My position at Duke has been an ideal opportunity since I completed an interdisciplinary Ph.D. program at Northwestern University where my dissertation research focused on how teacher epistemologies inform classroom teaching. I also worked at NU’s Searle Center for Teaching Excellence to prepare materials and workshops for faculty development and TA training. In addition, I worked at Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary’s Stead Center for Ethics and Values to coordinate workshops on theological ethics, medical ethics, and business ethics. At Duke, I found a unique role where I could integrate both of these intellectual concerns — research on college teaching and ethics education — while serving as a ‘helping professional’ to support the professional development of graduate students — which is a critical audience since they will become the next generation of future faculty and intellectual leaders throughout the U.S. and our global economy.
Over the past 10 years at Duke, I have developed four primary areas of responsibility related to the academic and professional development of graduate students: training on effective college teaching, directing our Preparing Future Faculty program, coordinating research ethics training, and conducting research to identify best practices in graduate education.
Overall, I have regular contact internally with a wide range of Duke students, faculty, administrators and professional staff, while also maintaining external contact with colleagues, leaders and policymakers nearby and throughout the United States.
Hibel: As noted in your bio, you’ve been interested in the area of teaching excellence and training for many years and perform research to identify best practices in graduate education. What, if anything, has changed over the past decade in regard to graduate education? Have certain ideas or trends become more or less important?
James: At its core, I think the central mission of graduate education is to produce the next generation of scholars, scientists and thought leaders who advance the frontiers of knowledge and enhance our understanding of humanity, society, culture and the environment. That remains unchanged. However, I think graduate education continues to evolve in many ways that parallel other changes in society, industry, the global economy and higher education more generally. We are much more aware of demographic shifts, of the contributions of women and underrepresented minorities, and of the benefits of having a diverse pool of international and cultural perspectives on our campus. In addition, institutions have become more intentional to enhance the quality of graduate student life alongside their education. Dean Jackie Looney who leads our office of graduate student affairs led efforts to create a childbirth-adoption accommodation policy and child care subsidies for graduate student parents, and made strides to expand the career center staff available to graduate students. We also expanded support for health care coverage of enrolled graduate students, and recently have increased the amount of summer support available. Of course, training in research ethics has become mandated by NIH, NSF, and other federal agencies, so we have expanded that training.
Specific to teacher training, both the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) movement and recent focus on assessment of student learning outcomes have led to more formal courses and training on effective teaching — not only to ensure the quality of teaching assistants (TAs), but also to enhance their preparation for faculty careers. We now train students to become ‘critically reflective teachers’ (to borrow a phrase from Stephen Brookfield). In our certificate program, graduate students must develop an online teaching portfolio to showcase their formal knowledge of teaching and learning via a reflective teaching philosophy statement, document their teaching methods and student performance, engage in peer review of teaching, and provide evidence and products of their teaching experiences as TAs or instructors of record. Hiring institutions want to know that new faculty are capable of using instructional technologies, are skilled in classroom management issues, and can teach effectively in contexts where campus resources may be more limited than the very-high research universities in which most of them are trained.
Similarly, the economic downturn has led to internal and external pressures on most universities to produce well-qualified graduates in a shorter period of time, using fewer financial and human resources, while preparing graduates to succeed in an expanding number of career trajectories beyond academia and in more diverse institutional or cultural contexts.
Certainly teaching itself has changed. Last year I taught a seminar in a Telepresence classroom with several graduate students here on campus and others videolinked at Duke Marine Lab. Duke also switched from Blackboard to Sakai. So we try to model ways to utilize technology to enhance the learning experience both in and beyond the classroom.
Hibel: The Duke University Graduate School’s website 1 states the expectations of both the faculty and the graduate students, stressing the importance of a joint relationship, often through mentoring, in order to achieve success. What are the key elements and results of the mentoring relationship between faculty and students?
James: Actually, the Best Practices document you reference was developed to clarify expectations across four levels in which graduate education takes place — among graduate students, with faculty, in the departments, and in the graduate school itself. Many problems develop when there is a lack of clarity around expectations between one or more of these levels. Successful mentors are those who provide the right balance of support and challenge. Successful students are those who learn how to ask for support and feedback as they move toward becoming independent researchers. The ultimate goal of faculty engaged in graduate education is to make themselves unnecessary, other than as a colleague in the field with new researchers who ask good questions and contribute to new, meaningful knowledge in the field. Good mentors provide a balance of interpersonal and intellectual support. Graduate students want to know that faculty actually care about them as people.
Hibel: Where do some programs fall short in providing a meaningful mentorship program? Why do you believe this occurs?
James: As we know from decades of research on teaching, most faculty ‘teach’ like they were taught, without formal training in teaching and learning. Similarly, many faculty likely ‘mentor’ as they were mentored. For some, they may think ‘trial by fire’ and learning on your own is the best way to learn. For others, they had the benefit of open communication, timely feedback on their work, and a collegial environment. I think the mentoring p can fall short when expectations and views are not made explicit — and where faculty and graduate students have different sets of expectations that are not made clear.
At Duke, we promote the idea that each graduate student should have ‘multiple mentors,’ and we began a Dean’s Awards for Excellence in Mentoring series to celebrate various elements of good mentoring (and teaching). Some institutions now assign ‘mentors’ to new faculty as a way to promote effective teaching and mentoring, and to socialize them to the institution — which is also the model of our PFF program. The heart of graduate education is still based on relationships — programs, awards and administrative procedures can only go so far to impact interpersonal relationships at the core of graduate student mentoring. Like many things in life, you get out of it what you put into it. Our goal is to encourage faculty and graduate students to make the investment of time and energy.
Hibel: According to the Midwestern Association of Graduate Schools, academic issues of “active discussion” are 1.) delivery of graduate education via distance technology, 2.) program assessment and accountability, and 3.) graduate student attrition. 2 Do you think these are common issues that encompass many graduate schools across the country and do you see any additional issues?
James: Yes, I agree these are current issues. I would also include the cost of graduate education and student support, as well as the career preparation concerns. It’s no longer enough just to write and defend a dissertation. To be hired and successful in academia, industry, or beyond, you will need the ‘so-called’ soft skills of networking, communication, managing people and budgets, and self-awareness. Applications remain high for many graduate programs, so issues of recruitment, selection and admission to ensure a good fit remain vital to an effective graduate program.
Hibel: What do you think online graduate education will look like in 2022 for schools that have traditionally been campus based?
James: That’s one of many big questions, and I’m well aware of the growth of online higher ed. However, a keynote speaker from MIT who does research on technology and self at the CGS meetings spoke to this and how her research is turning to question what is lost via online only. For Ph.D. training, I think we need to bear in mind the benefits of a physical campus, research labs, and face-to-face communication. While technology permits exciting ways to enhance both teaching and research, I think people still have a home somewhere. TAs may create video lectures for a flipped classroom, but then the idea is that they spend time ‘together’ exchanging ideas or working to solve problems. Similarly, I don’t know that lab research can be moved entirely to an online environment. Plus, I think we will begin to see more emphasis on benefits of a residential experience. And at Duke, they like to camp out for those basketball tickets! Academically, I have conducted research on ethics training for nanoscientists. And we have shown clear benefits to have interdisciplinary conversations with humanities and social scientists who raise very different questions from natural scientists — downstream effects on health and the environment. I think this would be difficult in an online environment — I wonder if such online approaches would only heighten the fragmentation of disciplines? Finally, the Council of Graduate Schools is a wonderful resource and has a publication related to Graduate Education in 2020. 3 Certainly we need to embrace technology, but as an educational researcher, I’m always concerned that we not lose sight of how it can be used to enhance learning, communication, and research. I’m sure things will be different in ways we cannot yet imagine about augmented reality and multi-user virtual environments. It will be interesting to see things unfold.
Hibel: Many colleges incorporate ethics classes into their curriculums. Why do think it is important that ethical practices/research are taught in graduate school?
James: First, following the America COMPETES Act, training in research ethics is now mandatory for any student supported on federal research grants, and NIH/NSF have clear criteria about how effective ethics training should be conducted. More importantly, beyond compliance, I think that as one moves into a more advanced field of knowledge and into a profession, there are new ethical issues that begin to emerge. To succeed, you will need to develop not only a basic awareness of the ethical issues, but also skills of ethical decision-making in order to carry out research or scholarship with integrity. We are training a generation in emerging fields of knowledge for careers that don’t yet exist. So they need the underlying capacity to embrace change, analyze issues and contexts, and make ethical decisions as their careers and research unfold. Moreover, there are growing ties to industry-university partnerships, as well as collaborative and international research projects. These issues make research even more complex.
Hibel: According to a recent report from the Council of Graduate Schools, The National Science Foundation says that about half of all doctoral students graduate with education related debt, often owing more than $50,000 4 In terms of best practices in graduate education, do you think there is a more responsible way students, institutions and/or government can help reduce this significant debt incurred?
James: Compared to median debt from law schools or medical schools, and given the likely future career earnings of someone with a Ph.D., one has to weigh whether or not that is ‘good debt’ in that it can propel your career forward and will pay off over time. Per media reports, the percentage of unemployed workers in the U.S. who have a Ph.D. is rather small. Nonetheless, I think institutions are taking strides to curb housing costs, expand stipends and summer support where possible, and increase resources for conference travel and professional development. Of course, like the ‘average American,’ there may be ways to better live within one’s means. I have begun to see graduate schools offering workshops on personal finance and I think that’s a great idea. I don’t have expertise in the financing of graduate education, and I’m not that familiar with the data behind this indebtedness.
Hibel: Do you think there are differences in best practices in graduate education for a private institution versus a public institution? Are there different challenges or measures for faculty and students?
James: At the institutional level, certainly there may be differences regarding how graduate education and support is administered, monitored, and reported. Public institutions are dependent upon the timelines and decisions of state budgets, representatives and officials. As such, that often might carry some additional reporting requirements related to faculty and student data or performance. Overall, I think the sense of what constitutes a ‘good’ graduate education are consistent and I suspect that conversations with graduate students would reveal they have very similar hopes and expectations regarding their coursework, independent research, and interactions with their adviser and committee. At Duke, I know we benefit from regular contact with UNC Chapel Hill and NC State University here in the Research Triangle Park. We often glean ideas from one another about how to enhance our efforts.
Hibel: Results from a 2012 survey of graduate deans on pressing issues show that the top issues are recruitment, admissions and enrollment management. 5 Do you think these fiscal challenges change the quality of students admitted or the quality of the programs resulting in less than best practices in graduate education?
James: More institutions are competing for the best and brightest students within the U.S. and internationally, and we have had an increase in the number of research master’s degree students. Thus, certain types of recruitment or admissions tactics might be used to sway potential graduate students to your institution, but students make decisions to apply based on faculty they hope to work with and research expertise. Of course, funding allocations are tied to the admissions and enrollment issues, so I would expect that is a key concern. In a tight economy, we must ensure that we educate potential applicants about the career options and benefits of pursuing a graduate degree. In conversations with older faculty or leaders, I often hear comments that indicate they might not have been admitted based on criteria today — that most graduate students now matriculate with more research, teaching or professional experience than in prior generations, and that we provide more professional development and training. So I think the future of graduate education is looking bright.
Hibel: Typically we end the interview with career advice, tips, etc. Referencing your personal experiences again, you direct the Preparing Future Faculty (PFF) program. What are your key points of advice that you share with students aspiring to become faculty members?
James: First, do your research on each institution and tailor your application materials to justify what makes you an exemplary applicant for THEM. It’s about fit.
Second, locate or request the school’s recent strategic plan since it will indicate how your research, teaching or service might align with institutional priorities — and funds. Third, seek out teaching or mentoring opportunities, and find ways to document your experience.
Hibel: Speaking in general terms of the interview process, what are some things (behaviors, traits, skills, etc.) that set apart an exceptional candidate from an average candidate?
James: Approach any initial interview, phone or Skype call, or campus interview as if you are a ‘colleague’ who will work alongside those conducting the interview, not as a graduate student or postdoc. I think one of the most important factors is in how you present yourself and ‘relate’ to the interviewees. If you come across as a graduate student wrapped up in your dissertation research, they may wonder if you can teach or advise their students or engage with them as a colleague. Don’t be stuck in the professional identity as a student. And, show humility and an interest to learn from them about their students, their work, and their campus. The one interviewing you has already made a commitment to the institution. They are seeking someone who is ready to make a similar commitment.
Hibel: What are your words of wisdom for someone working in the area of graduate education on how to excel within this field of higher education?
James: I just returned from the Council of Graduate Schools’ summer meeting where I had engaging conversations with colleagues who carry out similar responsibilities at other institutions. I would encourage others to participate in CGS and /or related professional associations as relevant to your work within the realm of graduate education — admissions, finance, student affairs, etc. I have been invited to lead workshops and/or serve as a consultant on matters of PFF, teacher training, and RCR at several institutions as a result of my active participation in professional organizations and by sharing ideas with colleagues. Of course, it’s wonderful to tap into the experience of others who have been engaged in the career longer than I have — and to find mentors from other institutions. Few of us expected to pursue a career in higher education administration, or in graduate education specifically. However, careers in higher ed have exciting potential for teaching, research, and service. I would encourage anyone who has an interest to conduct informational interviews with staff on his or her own campus — and to follow topics and trends in the news. And of course, take advantage of social networking and media sites like LinkedIn groups.