This is Part Two of a guest column written by Bing Han and Irina Gendelman, student affairs committee members who proposed writing a column about how advisors and professors identify important factors that predict graduate students' success in academia. For this purpose, Bing and Irina designed a survey and sent it to 52 graduate programs in communication. They received 54 faculty members' responses. Based on the received data, Bing and Irina extracted the dominant themes that the faculty members used to predict graduate students' success in their academic careers. In this column, we present Bing and Irina's research findings. If you have further questions or comments, please feel free to email Qi Wang or Rebecca Hains, or the original authors. We welcome diverse responses from our readers.

(Part One of this column)

How to Become a Professor: Faculty Perceptions of Communication Ph.D. Student Characteristics Needed to Succeed in Academia (Continued)

By Bing Han and Irina Gendelman

RQ3: What is the best research/publication model a graduate student should use (solo, collaboration, or both)?

Graduate students often do research in different ways: some do research on their own and are sole authors on their conference papers and publications; some do research in collaboration with others and are never the first author; some do research in collaboration with others and sometimes are first authors sometimes are not; some try all different ways, collaboration or alone. This question asks faculty members to identify the best research/publication model for graduate students to follow, if there is any.

Quite a few professors pointed out that no one best model exists and it completely depends on the area of study, the student's subfield in the field of communication. A general practice is that "interpretive humanistic work in communication is more suited to solo researchers; empirical work lends itself better to collaboration." As a professor noted:

If [the student] specializes in quantitative methods, then that student should be more involved in research teams, as that is how quite a bit of quantitative research is done. If a student is specializing in rhetorical methods, on the other hand, then he/she should work more independently.

The majority of professors believed that it is best for students to try a combination of independent and collaborative work. As one professor specifically pointed out, ideally, a mix of three ways should be tried: "(a) some collaboration with professors to learn how to do the work, (b) some collaboration with other grad students to get some breadth of exposure to ideas and build collaborative networks, and (c) some solo to demonstrate their own abilities." Therefore, doing research by using a mix of all different ways allows the student to get the best of their graduate education.

Even though independent scholarship is the goal of a Ph.D. education as demonstrated in the completion of a dissertation, most professors stressed the importance of working closely (collaborating) with a faculty mentor (a more experienced researcher or an able scholar) who can guide the student through the research and publication process. Regardless of which area the student is in (but especially to those on the social science track), doing collaborative work especially with faculty members, if possible, will be very beneficial for the student. As one professor noted:

The point is for the student and mentor (advisor) to work with each other in ways that help the student discover his/her voice. Whether the student is introduced to the conference and journal (revise/resubmit) processes via individual submissions or collaborations is less key than is the fact that the introduction occurs, and someone can be there to respond to questions about the maze.

In general, Students can learn a great deal from collaboration with a faculty member. They can get a comprehensive sense of the research and publication process. Since publication takes very long, faculty members can help students get started, tailor their studies to the broader literature, get used to revising, and deal with negative reviews. For students, it is important for them to get some initial publications, and faculty can be very helpful in this regard, because without being on research teams, students may not be able to "publish very much of substance."

Professors who recommend the use of a combination of independent and collaborative work even suggest a time table for using all the different ways of research. They advised that in the first few years, it is best for the student to "start with a project with a faculty member as a sort of apprentice," "learning how to conduct research and write well," and then from there, move toward independent work. As a transition to solo project, the student can seek out project teams that allow "more freedom for individual growth and initiative" as the first author. The student can also work with other students on projects, but professors warned that this should not happen too soon as "without faculty input, the product is less than optimal." Whether the student is working together with other students or work alone, some professors suggested that "the student seek out a faculty member with experience and whom s/he trusts to read and make comments on the work as it moves through the publication process."

RQ4: How critical are some of the qualities in contributing to a communication graduate student's success or failure in comparison with each other?
When faculty members were asked to rate the importance of qualities that may contribute to the overall success or failure of a graduate student in communication, they used 7 to indicate the most critical quality and 1 to indicate the least critical. Faculty members rated 25 qualities that may indicate success (see table 1) and 12 qualities that may indicate failure (see table 2). The ranking of these qualities in terms of their relative importance showed that the first four highest ranking qualities that may help graduate students succeed in academia are all motivational factors: motivation, passion for what they are doing, intellectual curiosity, and academic integrity. The next important factors turned out to be some crucial skills: methodological competence, writing skills, and time management skills.

This pattern of ranking motivational factors ahead of specific skills is further confirmed in the ranking of the qualities that may contribute to the failure of a graduate student. When asked which factors were most critical in contributing to a student's failure, faculty members rated lack of motivation and lack of intellectual curiosity as the two most important factors followed by lack of specific skills: poor writing ability, procrastination (poor time management skill), and methodological incompetence.

Conclusion
Two predominant themes emerge from the answers to the four questions in this article. Motivation and writing skills are the most frequently mentioned characteristics that may help predict a communication Ph.D. student's career success. In the first question, participants' answers consistently and overwhelmingly confirmed that taking "initiative," "engagement" and "hard work" are the most important characteristics of a successful graduate student. Naturally, those who take the initiative to acquire necessary skills will get work done. Writing skill is reported as the most important skill for a graduate student's career success. Not surprisingly, the importance of these characteristics supported by the qualitative data was further confirmed by the quantitative data in the fourth question when participants ranked relevant qualities. Motivation, passion for what they are doing, and intellectual curiosity were ranked as the first three most important qualities for a graduate student's future success in academia, followed by skills like methodological competence, writing skills, and time management skills. The ranking of the factors that may contribute to a graduate student's failure also showed that lack of motivation and intellectual curiosity as the two primary causes of failure followed by poor writing skills, poor time management skills, and methodological incompetence. Interestingly, while motivation was ranked highest in the quantitative answers, the qualitative answers indicated that not everyone defined "motivation" in the same way. When faculty got a chance to write in more depth, they often referred to qualities that were aligned closer to the more action oriented "initiative." In other words, while a student may be motivated to complete their Ph.D., they may still require "hand holding" to do it. The qualitative answers helped distill that for many respondents, motivation meant the ability to take initiative.

In the second question, although faculty members disagreed about whether time to complete a Ph.D. is a good indicator of a graduate student's future success, the reasons they gave, reflect whether they put the emphasis on motivation or skills. Those who recommended a quick approach emphasized that if a student is highly motivated, he or she should be able to finish the program earlier than normal. Those who suggested a steady approach focused on the importance of spending time sharpening one's research skills including writing skills, methodological skills, conceptual skills, and publishing skills. In answering the third question about the best research/publication model for graduate students, the majority of participants agreed that a combination of individual and collaborative work is the best.

Faculty members and departments play a crucial role in introducing graduate students to the values and skills of being successful academics. Early and explicit introduction to these expectations will help students assess their goals and understand what action they need to take in achieving a rewarding career.

Table 1: Ranking of Student Characteristics Indicating Success

Table 2: Ranking of Student Characteristics Indicating Failure

About Our Guest Columnists
Bing Han (M.A., University of International Business and Economics, Beijing, China) is a doctoral student in the Department of Communication at the University of Maryland, College Park. Ms. Bing Han's major interests are in the area of intercultural communication and negotiation and conflict management. Her research interests center on conflict in interpersonal, intercultural, and international arenas. She likes reading literature and philosophy. She likes playing tennis.

Irina Gendelman is a PhD student at the University of Washington. Irina's interests are in urban communication, public art, digital technologies and instructional development. Her primary research is focused on the intersection between physical spaces and communication technologies. She is a co-founder of the Urban Archives project at the UW (www.urbanarchives.org). She is currently working on her dissertation about the discursive and material construction of history and heritage in Seattle's Central District. Irina also works as an instructional consultant for the UW's Center for Instructional Development and Research.

Call for Guest Columnists' Contributions
If you have a topic or some ideas that you hope to share with other students, please email Qi Wang at qwang@villanova.edu or Rebecca Hains at rebecca@hains.net. We would like to have this column be a space for information exchange between students. Even if you are a brand new student, you may have some unique insights. Your contribution may benefit other graduate students. Please join us!