Factors associated with mentoring and supervising US doctoral students with LD and/or ADHD

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to explore advisor–advisee relationships from the perspective of doctoral students with learning disabilities (LD) and/or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). While some research exists on the importance of doctoral advisor/advisee relationships generally, few studies have focused on advisor support for doctoral students with LD and/or ADHD. Design/methodology/approach In total, 20 doctoral students from various US institutions with an average age of 28 years old participated in this study. In all, 2 participants had a dual diagnosis of LD and ADHD, 3 were diagnosed solely with LD and 15 solely with ADHD; 15 of the participants with ADHD indicated that they take medication. Each graduate student participated in an hour-long semi-structured Zoom interview inquiring about their disability and their relationship with their advisor. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed inductively. Findings The relationship between the participant and their advisor was the key theory. In total, 6 participants disclosed their disability status to their advisor with positive results, 2 had negative outcomes and 12 did not disclose for various reasons. The overarching theme of the study is that advisors are supportive of doctoral students with LD and/or ADHD whether or not they know about the student’s disability. Support was seen in offering flexible and strict deadlines, advocating on the student’s behalf and/or forming personal relationships with students. Research limitations/implications One of the biggest challenges of this study was recruiting participants. Graduate students with LD and ADHD are justifiably afraid of facing discrimination; therefore, it was difficult to identify participants despite having IRB approval and placing a very high value on confidentiality. The sample was consequently limited in size as well as in terms of race and gender diversity and was not representative of students with LD and/or ADHD in higher education. Qualitative research is typically not generalizable and the same was true for this study. This study gives a broader glimpse into the experiences of doctoral students with ADHD than those with LD. Additionally, when one of the researchers began each interview, she revealed that she also has a learning disability. While this may have helped participants feel more comfortable, it also could have influenced their responses. Practical implications This study undertakes a more detailed investigation than previous research on the experiences of individuals with LD and/or ADHD in doctoral programs in the US. The findings provide current data on perceptions of advisor–advisee relationships in the students’ own voices. Social implications Given the emphasis on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in US higher education, students with LD and/or ADHD need to be actively engaged in these conversations. With increasing numbers of students with LD and ADHD entering higher education and pursuing graduate degrees, faculty must be prepared to support all their students. By assessing strategies for positive mentor–mentee relationships among doctoral students with LD and/or ADHD, institutions can continue to foster increased diversity, creating doctoral programs and developing future faculty who more accurately represent the world in which we live. Originality/value The population studied doctoral students with LD and/or ADHD in the USA adds to the literature. The findings in terms of disclosure as it relates to advisors also adds to the literature. Doctoral students in the USA are dropping out at high rates making this an area that needs exploration.