Inside doctoral education in America: Voices of Latinas/os in pursuit of the PhD

Journal of College Student Development, Jul/Aug 2002 by Gonzalez, Kenneth P, Marin, Patricia

Based on the work of Freire (1970), we employed dialogical research methods (Padilla, 1993) to reveal and examine overt and hidden aspects of our experiences as Latina/o doctoral students. Six Latina/o doctoral students (including the authors) participated in the study. The design of the study included two phases. Phase one entailed constructing auto ethnographic narratives that described our doctoral experiences. Phase two involved using the narratives to stimulate a dialogue about our experiences in the academy. According to Freire, dialogue is a moment of praxis that enables individuals to achieve critical consciousness of their everyday realities. The findings describe the critical consciousness achieved. Our critical consciousness con- cerned: (a) the nature of the academy, (b) the forces perpetuating the academy's nature, and (c) an alternative framework for doctoral education.

Since the granting of the first PhD in the United States in 1861, doctoral education has been the centerpiece of American higher education. There is little doubt that the formation and success of doctoral programs have made American research universities the best in the world (Clark, 1995). The contributions of American research universities to society have been massive. From advances in the field of child development to the evolution of gene therapy, the American research universitiy has influenced the lives of many.

Despite the historical status and contributions of graduate education in the United States, the doctoral degree has recently become a target of controversy and reform (Geiger, 1997). Discussions surrounding the reform of doctoral education largely concern issues of time-to-degree (Anderson, 1998; Baird, 1993; Bowen & Rudenstine, 1992), relevance and response to national needs (Atwell, 1996), demand for new faculty (Messy & Goldman, 1995), and training of highly specialized researchers (Boyer, 1990).

Before any adequate reform effort can be achieved, however, an inventory of every key stakeholder must be conducted. Unfortunately, most researchers of doctoral education have ignored the doctoral student as stakeholder (Anderson, 1998). Far more often, researchers have responded to the concerns of faculty members, academic institutions, the federal government, private foundations, and more recently, for-profit corporations. By comparison, only a limited knowledge base exists concerning the experiences of students in pursuit of the doctorate (Anderson, 1998; Bowen & Rudenstine, 1992; Clewell, 1987; Goodchild, Green, Katz, & Kluever, 1997; Tinto, 1993). This limitation provided motivation for the current study.

The purpose of this study was to bring to the forefront the voices of Latina/o students in the process of attaining a PhD. We focused on Latina/o doctoral students for a number of reasons. First, we concurred with Hefferlin (1969), who argued that the greatest source for institutional reform lies in those who have been placed on the margins - in this case, Latinas/os. Second, the sparse production of Latina/o PhDs is serious enough to warrant further study on this topic (Wilds, 2000). Third, as an emerging majority ethnic group in many areas throughout the United States, it is in this country's economic and social interest to better understand how to improve Latina/o success in doctoral education (Carnevale, 1999). To provide context for the research study, a discussion of the relevant literature concerning Latina/o doctoral students follows.

LATINAS/Os IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION

Not until the 1970s, with the influence of the Civil Rights movement did Latinas/os begin to graduate from doctoral programs in notable numbers (Aguirre & Martinez, 1993). Since that time, the proportion of Latinas/os earning doctorates has increased only slightly. For example, from 1976 to 1996, the proportion of Latinas/os earning a doctorate increased by only 2.2% - from 1.3% in 1976 to 3.5% in 1996 (National Research Council, 1998). The small increase in the proportion of Latina/o doctorates is in stark contrast to the rapid growth of the Latina/o population in the United States; during that same period (1976 to 1996), the population of Latinas/os in the United States increased by 6.9% - from 4.1% in 1976 to 11.0% in 1996 (U.S. Census, 1999).

Compounding the dismal representation of Latinas/os earning doctorates in the United States is a small literature base describing the experiences of Latinas/os in doctoral programs. At present, only a handful of studies have been published on this topic. Gandara (1982, 1993, 1995) was one of the first scholars to examine the experiences of Chicanas/os who attained a terminal degree. Her work was unique in that it isolated factors that contributed to the students' high educational achievement. Gandara interviewed 45 Chicanas/os who attained a PhD, MD, or JD during the 1970s. Gandara found that strong emotional support, particularly from their mothers, in addition to attendance at highly integrated schools, was critical to the students' success. Cuadraz (1992, 1993) also examined the educational experiences of Chicanas/os in doctoral programs during the 1970s. Her sample included 17 Chicanas and 23 Chicanos who had enrolled in a social science doctoral program at the University of California, Berkeley. Her study is important in that she examined students who had either graduated from or dropped out of doctoral programs. As a result, she was able to assess their experiences from the perspective of both success and failure. Cuadraz employed the concept of marginality (Park, 1928; Stonequist, 1937) to describe the experiences of Chicanas/os in American doctoral programs. In particular, Cuadraz (1992) found that Chicanas were marginalized as a result of their race, class, and gender.