Work in Progress: Exploring Qualifying Exam Experiences in Engineering Doctoral Students using Well-Being Constructs

Johan Tabora; David P O'Neill

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Publication Date: June 22, 2025
Start Date: June 22, 2025
End Date: August 15, 2025
Conference Session: ERM WIP III: Post-Undergraduate Engineering Education
Tagged Division: Educational Research and Methods Division (ERM)
Page Count: 10
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--57492
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/57492
Download Count: 2

Paper Authors

biography

Johan Tabora Northwestern University orcid.org/0009-0001-4355-0745

visit author page

Johan Tabora is a Postdoctoral Scholar at Northwestern University, McCormick School of Engineering. He studies the intersection of race, power, and STEM education, and is interested in understanding how these interactions shape the experiences of underrepresented Asian American populations in STEM.

He completed his Ph.D. in science education at the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Illinois Chicago. He holds a Ed.M. in teacher education from the Harvard Graduate School of Education, a M.S. in teacher education from the Harvard Graduate School of Education, and a B.S. in aerospace engineering from the Florida Institute of Technology, Prior to doing a postdoc, Johan taught high school physics for 20 years in the Chicago Public Schools.

visit author page

biography

David P O'Neill Northwestern University orcid.org/0000-0002-1609-7666

visit author page

David O'Neill is a Professor of Instruction and the Michael Jaharis Director of Experiential Learning for the Biomedical Engineering Department at Northwestern University. David read Engineering Science at University College, Oxford, receiving his M.Eng. and D.Phil. before undertaking a post-doc in the Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics. During these years, he taught undergraduate tutorials for Keble, New, University, and Harris Manchester Colleges, was College Lecturer for New College and a Senior College Lecturer in Engineering Science for Keble College. He has interests in the formation of engineering identity, and increasing synopticism at a curricular level.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

This work-in-progress research paper explores the experiences of engineering doctoral students (EDS) in the buildup to, and immediately after, their qualifying exam (QE). The QE is a crucial milestone towards earning a doctoral degree and serves as the entry point to both candidacy status and increasing research independence [1], [2]. Despite their importance, QEs are an understudied element in doctoral programs especially for underrepresented populations [3]. Qualifying exams may contribute to attrition rates, a well-established concern in doctoral engineering education [4], [5]. Studies on attrition have described how advisor support, academic climate, personal traits, and funding affect engineering doctoral education [5]. The QE, being a foundational experience, and intersecting with all four of the above factors, highlights the value of specifically investigating its impact on EDS’ well-being.

As a major stressor for doctoral students, QEs may threaten well-being [6]. Furthermore, passing the QEs and continuing on to graduate can incur costs to EDS’ well-being [7]. However, Shanachilubwa et al. [8] found that well-being is not solely mapped to attrition rates. We have anecdotal evidence that our institution’s biomedical engineering QEs are a major stressor for our students. Despite low attrition rates (<10%) we are thus motivated to understand the impacts of QEs on EDS.

The study population comprises 3rd year biomedical engineering (BME) PhD candidates at a mid-sized private R1 university who completed the QEs the prior summer. The interviews are semi-structured and use the PERMA-V framework [9], [10] to explore six constructs that comprise well-being: positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, accomplishment, and vitality. The analysis will be grounded in a constructivist epistemology that centers EDS’ meaning-making of their experiences [11].

The EDS population is not a monolith and we expect to find different subgroups of students for whom the QEs process has different impacts; this study outlines their diversity of these experiences. We plan to conduct a more comprehensive study of 2nd year BME PhD students’ experiences as they prepare for QEs. Thus, findings from this WIP will guide protocol development and participant sampling strategy, and identify appropriate temporal sampling points for the future, more comprehensive study.

Citation
Format

Tabora, J., & O'Neill, D. P. (2025, June), Work in Progress: Exploring Qualifying Exam Experiences in Engineering Doctoral Students using Well-Being Constructs Paper presented at 2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Montreal, Quebec, Canada . 10.18260/1-2--57492

TY - CPAPER
AB - This work-in-progress research paper explores the experiences of engineering doctoral students (EDS) in the buildup to, and immediately after, their qualifying exam (QE). The QE is a crucial milestone towards earning a doctoral degree and serves as the entry point to both candidacy status and increasing research independence [1], [2]. Despite their importance, QEs are an understudied element in doctoral programs especially for underrepresented populations [3]. Qualifying exams may contribute to attrition rates, a well-established concern in doctoral engineering education [4], [5]. Studies on attrition have described how advisor support, academic climate, personal traits, and funding affect engineering doctoral education [5]. The QE, being a foundational experience, and intersecting with all four of the above factors, highlights the value of specifically investigating its impact on EDS’ well-being.

As a major stressor for doctoral students, QEs may threaten well-being [6]. Furthermore, passing the QEs and continuing on to graduate can incur costs to EDS’ well-being [7]. However, Shanachilubwa et al. [8] found that well-being is not solely mapped to attrition rates. We have anecdotal evidence that our institution’s biomedical engineering QEs are a major stressor for our students. Despite low attrition rates (&amp;lt;10%) we are thus motivated to understand the impacts of QEs on EDS.

The study population comprises 3rd year biomedical engineering (BME) PhD candidates at a mid-sized private R1 university who completed the QEs the prior summer. The interviews are semi-structured and use the PERMA-V framework [9], [10] to explore six constructs that comprise well-being: positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, accomplishment, and vitality. The analysis will be grounded in a constructivist epistemology that centers EDS’ meaning-making of their experiences [11].

The EDS population is not a monolith and we expect to find different subgroups of students for whom the QEs process has different impacts; this study outlines their diversity of these experiences. We plan to conduct a more comprehensive study of 2nd year BME PhD students’ experiences as they prepare for QEs. Thus, findings from this WIP will guide protocol development and participant sampling strategy, and identify appropriate temporal sampling points for the future, more comprehensive study.

AU - Johan Tabora
AU - David P O'Neill
CY - Montreal, Quebec, Canada
DA - 2025/06/22
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Work in Progress: Exploring Qualifying Exam Experiences in Engineering Doctoral Students using Well-Being Constructs
UR - https://peer.asee.org/57492
DO - 10.18260/1-2--57492
ER -