Thursday, 13 August 2026

What My Ph.D. Taught Me That My Thesis Couldn't


A few weeks before my Ph.D. viva, I wrote this reflection. At the time, the thesis had been submitted, but one final milestone remained. On 1 April 2026, I successfully completed my viva and earned my doctorate. Reading these words today, I realize that while the Ph.D. gave me a degree, its greater gift was something else: it changed the way I think about learning, evidence, failure, teachers, and impact.

1. How has your thought process evolved with the research? 

Initially, my intent was to create a STEM course, test its efficacy, and submit the research. Today, I realize that the course itself was never meant to be the final destination. Its real value lies in what teachers do with the learning after the course. Perhaps the biggest change in me is that I no longer ask, "Did the intervention work?” I ask, “What happened after it worked?” Did teachers translate their learning into classroom practice? Did it change the way students experienced STEM? Was the learning sustained? Could the course respond to a rapidly changing educational landscape? Research taught me that statistical significance is important, but impact begins where the tables end. 
There was another humbling realization. I designed the course in 2022. By the time I completed my doctoral journey, AI had begun reshaping how teachers plan, teach, assess, and learn. It reminded me that educational research cannot end with publication. An intervention that was relevant when conceived must continue to evolve with the world in which teachers and students live. So, coming back to the question, it is no longer about the thesis and more about the learner. I want the teacher to feel empowered post the course. I want to make a DIFFERENCE for the educator. 

2. What have you learned over the three years?

In one word, 'PATIENCE.' You learn to be patient while designing the course, as I began creating the course, and my laptop malfunctioned. Every piece of data was lost, and the laptop had to be configured. For a few days, I was hesitant to even work on it, fearing data loss once again. I initiated my course in January 2023, and with more than 150 educators registering, I was elated, but when the course commenced, the number trickled to 35, and by the end, only 6 educators had completed the course. Those six educators taught me something that a perfect pilot never could. Low completion was not simply a disappointing number; it was data. It forced me to listen, redesign, and question my assumptions. 
In June 2023, I reopened the course for educators, and this time, more than 40 educators completed the course. After that, I had to chase the educators to complete tasks, request interview times, and then begin gathering and analyzing data. Simultaneously, I had to present and publish research papers. The process was arduous, as one paper was quantitative and the other qualitative. To ensure I had two publications, I wrote three papers and then sought platforms to present. 
And somewhere amidst the statistics, interviews, coding, and endless revisions came the moment every researcher waits for: the evidence began to tell a story. A teacher began seeking out free periods to create more opportunities for STEM learning in her classroom. On a rainy day, another educator took her students beyond the four walls of the classroom to observe how the changing weather affected the flora and fauna around them, eventually guiding them to design projects on rainwater harvesting. The course had made a measurable difference. But the qualitative voices of educators gave those numbers meaning. They helped me understand not only whether teachers had learned, but also how they experienced that learning, what challenged them, and what they needed next.
Finally comes the submission and viva, and the butterflies in your stomach create self-doubt. But overall, you learn that nothing happens overnight. Every process has its timeline, and you will also have to adhere to it. 

3. Would you work on the same theme again?

Preferably, but with a twist. If I designed the course again, I would not simply improve the content. I would redesign the learning ecosystem around the teacher. I would begin with an in-person engagement with educators, building a shared understanding of the purpose and relevance of STEM Education and how it can be meaningfully integrated into classroom practice. The sessions would allow educators to experience STEM first-hand through experiential and inquiry-based activities, reflect on their own practice, and undertake initial assessments before transitioning to the virtual course
During the course, I would want to conduct one-on-one meetings with each educator for 10 minutes/week to motivate and support them. I would also conduct synchronous meetings with all participants so they can interact, do group tasks with other members, and learn from each other. 
After the course, I would want to organize one more day of physical sessions for educators to do some STEM group activities, where I could assess them. Also include a feedback session where they share the strengths and shortcomings of the course so that the course can be designed to be more robust and relevant. 

4. What did the Ph.D not teach me?

My Ph.D. taught me research methodology, data analysis, and academic writing. But some of its most important lessons were not in the syllabus. It taught me to be comfortable saying, “I don't know.” It taught me that evidence can challenge beliefs I have held for years. It taught me that failure is sometimes data in disguise. And above all, it taught me that expertise does not mean having all the answers; it means learning to ask better questions.

5. Any final thoughts

To every person aspiring to get a doctorate, there will be times when you might want to throw everything and let go. Not everyone around you will understand why the Ph.D. matters so deeply to you. Some may see it as a personal pursuit disconnected from your professional responsibilities. Accept that not everyone needs to understand your journey. Growth often begins as a personal commitment, but the knowledge, discipline, and perspective you acquire ultimately influence the organizations, classrooms, and communities you serve.

So, if the Kavita of three years ago were sitting across from me today and asked, “Did we complete the Ph.D.?”

I would smile and say, “Yes.”

But I would probably add, "That turned out to be the least interesting part.”

Because somewhere between the failed pilot and the successful one, between datasets and interviews, rejected drafts and rewritten chapters, and self-doubt and the final viva, the researcher changed too.

The thesis was completed. The learning wasn't.

And perhaps that is what earning a doctorate really means.






Tuesday, 10 February 2026

Building Equity in STEM Classrooms

 

Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education is widely recognized as a cornerstone of economic growth, innovation and social development. Yet, across many education systems, girls remain underrepresented in STEM subjects and careers. As per digital feminist platform FeminisminIndia (May 23, 2025), in areas like data and AI, women make up roughly 26% of professionals, and in engineering and cloud computing, the share drops to around 15% and 12%, respectively. According to a January 2026 update from UNESCO, women comprise only 35% of STEM graduates worldwide, and this proportion has remained largely unchanged over the past decade, highlighting the persistent gender gap in STEM education and careers. According to the World Economic Forum, women made up only 28.2% of the STEM global workforce in 2024. These statistics compel us to ask three very important questions. 

  1. Why are women not taking up STEM education and pursuing STEM careers?

  2. How proficient is our education system in promoting girls in STEM?

  3. What proportion of the nation’s GDP is spent on enhancing STEM education? 


As a STEM trainer working with educators across the globe, I have observed a significant mindset-related challenge: STEM education is often perceived as being outside teachers’ primary scope of responsibility and is therefore entrusted to external providers. While this approach offers students valuable exposure to STEM concepts, it is separated from classroom instruction, leading to limited teacher involvement and accountability for student learning outcomes. Schools should invest in STEM training for teachers, equipping them with resources and supporting them in curriculum mapping. Also, consistent baseline and endline skill-based assessments measuring critical thinking, problem solving, digital literacy, data literacy, creativity and more, should be undertaken to check students' learning progress. 




Another common challenge is that teachers often equate robotics and coding with STEM education. While these are important, they represent only a subset of a much broader framework. In reality, STEM is embedded in everyday life. Take a simple, daily-use item like a toothbrush. The science of it lies in selecting materials that are safe, durable and hygienic, such as plastics, nylon or bamboo, and in understanding tooth structure, gum health and plaque formation to inform effective design. The concept of friction enables plaque removal without damaging enamel. The Technology may be as simple as a manual toothbrush or as advanced as an electric toothbrush with sonic technology, eco-friendly bristles, motors, pressure sensors, and rechargeable batteries. Some modern toothbrushes even incorporate Bluetooth connectivity, mobile applications, and AI-driven feedback to track and improve brushing habits. The engineering is evident in the ergonomic handle design for comfort and control, and the bristle movement and head flexibility to reach all tooth surfaces effectively. Mathematics underpins the precise measurement and arrangement of bristles, such as length, spacing, angles, and orientation, as well as the analysis of brushing effectiveness, wear rates, and user behaviour patterns. This illustrates how STEM is not confined to specialised tools or activities; it is everywhere. If we integrate everyday phenomena, activities, or products into classroom learning, wouldn’t students warm up more to STEM education? 





In STEM training for tribal teachers, the KEF team discovered how they use STEM on a day-to-day basis without realising it. Residing in rural areas, surrounded by flora and fauna, they face hardships in their daily routine and use critical thinking to resolve small issues. For example, to cross small streams, they build low-cost modular footbridges made from bamboo/wooden planks/recycled materials, anchored with ropes and stabilised with rocks. Thus, they are choosing materials that resist water damage, using levers (crowbars), pulleys/ropes, basic drilling or lashing techniques, estimating materials needed and total cost. They are also measuring stream width, plank spacing, height of bridge above water, height of handrail. They regularly apply STEM principles but are unaware of it. 

Another challenge in India is the narrow perception of STEM careers - largely framed around engineering and medicine, despite the vast and growing range of STEM professions available today. Far fewer students are encouraged to consider emerging and interdisciplinary careers such as marine biologist, environmental scientist, geologist, cartographer, transportation planner, information security or cybersecurity analyst, actuary, data scientist or analyst, AI and machine learning specialist, cloud architect or administrator, renewable energy technician (solar or wind), virtual or augmented reality architect, and user interface (UI/UX) designer. Broadening awareness about these opportunities is essential if students are to envision STEM as a diverse, future-ready career ecosystem. 


To augment this thinking, representation within the curriculum also matters. Textbooks, classroom examples and assessment tasks that highlight STEM careers, contributions of women scientists, engineers and technologists, along with male role models, will help counter stereotypes and expand students’ sense of what is possible. As per Insights IAS (December 2025), India’s Gross Expenditure on R&D (GERD) is stagnant at ~0.64% of GDP, compared to the global average of ~1.8% and China’s 2.4%. When governments actively support STEM education and promote girls’ participation in STEM, systemic change can occur through sustained investment in research and school infrastructure, gender-responsive education policies, curriculum reforms that integrate real-world and interdisciplinary STEM learning, and large-scale teacher professional development. Targeted scholarships, mentorship programs, early exposure initiatives and partnerships between schools, industry and research institutions could further expand access and aspiration for girls. Equally important is the development of national strategies that embed digital literacy, AI education and ethical technology use across schooling, ensuring that girls are not only consumers of technology but future innovators and leaders in STEM fields. 




Said astrophysicist and science communicator, Neil deGrasse Tyson - “Science literacy is the artery through which the solutions of tomorrow’s problems flow.”


References


  1. Society of Women Engineers. (2025). Global STEM Workplace. SWE. https://swe.org/research/2025/global-stem-workplace/

  2. Sanduja, J. (2025, May 23). The 35% problem: Unpacking gender gaps in STEM through the UNESCO GEM report. Feminism in India. https://feminisminindia.com/2025/05/23/the-35-problem-unpacking-gender-gaps-in-stem-through-the-unesco-gem-report3. Insights Editor. (2025, December 9). India’s STEM future. InsightsIAS. https://www.insightsonindia.com/2025/12/09/indias-stem-future/