About

Josipa Roksa is a Professor of Sociology and Education at the University of Virginia. Her scholarly inquiry centers on the extent to which education amplifies, preserves, or reduces social inequality, with a current focus on students’ experiences in STEM fields. Her earlier work has explored the development of critical thinking skills during college and the role of parenting practices in fostering student success and reproducing socioeconomic inequalities. She currently serves as the Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education in the Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost.

Research topics

• Sociology
• Social Science
• Psychology
• Pedagogy
• Artificial Intelligence
• Mathematics education
• Political Science
• Computer Science
• Developmental psychology
• Medical education
• Computational biology
• Biology
• Social psychology

Selected publications

• Gender Inequality in Publication Prestige Among Graduate Students in Biological Sciences

  Educational Researcher · 2025-04-21

  articleSenior authorCorresponding

  Gender parity in academia remains elusive, even in fields, such as biological sciences, that award approximately half of their PhDs to women. Based on a sample of graduate students in biological sciences followed over 5 years during their PhD programs, we find that women publish in journals with lower impact factors and are less likely to publish in top journals. Notably, gender inequality in journal impact factors holds only for total publications but not for first-authored publications, which implies that differential opportunities for collaborations leading to high-impact publications may be one factor hindering gender equity.

  PublisherDOI

• Providing holistic support to foster success of low-income students

  2025-08-04

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding

  The rising cost of college has brought financial aid policies and the reliance of students and their families on loans to the forefront of national debates. While these discussions impact most students attending higher education, they are particularly consequential for low-income students. Over time, financial aid policy at both the federal and state levels has increasingly moved away from need-based grants toward merit-based grants as well as loans, although need-based grants uniquely support low-income students. In addition to financial need, low-income students often lack access to comprehensive college counseling and support services in both high school and college. Thus, providing financial aid is necessary but not sufficient to ensure success of low-income students. Non-monetary support represents a crucial component of any effort to facilitate access and success of low-income students in higher education. Institutions that do not enroll a large proportion of low-income students would particularly benefit from examining their policies and practices by reflecting on the fundamental question of “who are we built to serve?”

  PublisherDOI

• Balancing Equity in General Chemistry Laboratory Courses: The Complex Impact of Specifications Grading on Student Success and Opportunity Gaps

  JACS Au · 2025-05-19 · 6 citations

  articleOpen access

  Specifications grading has been proposed as an alternative grading method to better promote student success over traditional grading schemes. Within the chemistry community, specifications grading has been growing in popularity over the past decade as demonstrated by the rise of publications and conference talks. While several studies describe shifts in the final grade distribution as a result of the implementation of specifications grading, no study explores the differential impact on students of different social identities. In this study, we analyze over 9700 final course grades of a year-long general chemistry laboratory course under both traditional and specifications grading schemes. Data are analyzed by individual student's social identities (i.e., gender, generation status, underrepresented minority status, and transfer student status) and students' intersectional identities. Our results are mixed and conflicting. More systemically minoritized students pass these courses with high grades under specifications grading, but opportunity gaps between systemically minoritized students and their systemically advantaged counterparts remain. The results of this implementation show that the impact of specifications grading on students is complex and that much still needs to be understood about students' experiences with different grading schemes and their impact.

  PublisherDOI

• Is Affirmative Action Fair? The Myth of Equity in College Admissions

  Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · 2024-02-26 · 5 citations

  article1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Breaking points: exploring how negative doctoral advisor relationships develop over time

  Higher Education · 2024-04-22 · 15 citations

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Support without Status: Inequities in Student–Advisor Relational Dynamics between First-Generation and Continuing-Generation Doctoral Students

  Education Sciences · 2024-04-23 · 3 citations

  articleOpen access

  One of the most important developmental relationships in the doctoral student experience is that of the faculty advisor, and yet we know little about whether and how advisor relationships vary between first-generation and continuing-generation doctoral students. Drawing on qualitative interviews with 83 late-stage doctoral students in biological sciences, we explore differences in student perceptions of their relationships with advisors. Narratives reveal a continuum of relationship types, including strained, evolving, supportive, and equal. In equal relationships, doctoral students feel more like collegial partners working alongside their advisors. While continuing-generation and first-generation students are similarly represented among strained and evolving relationships, first-generation students rarely attain equal relationship status. The presented findings offer implications for understanding how inequality shapes student–advisor relationships, the role of collegiality in doctoral education’s hidden curriculum, and the supports needed to foster equity for first-generation students in graduate programs.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• After the PhD: the role of advisors and social connections in the job search process

  Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education · 2024-06-27 · 2 citations

  articleSenior author

  Purpose While ample literature describes students’ experiences during graduate school, fewer studies examine how doctoral students transition into full-time employment post degree completion. The purpose of this study is to examine how faculty advisors, as well as other individuals, shape students’ experiences during a critical period in their graduate education – the job search. Design/methodology/approach This study is based on interviews with 47 PhD students in biological sciences in the US. This is a descriptive qualitative study, based on in-depth, semi-structured interviews. Findings Results reveal distinct roles that faculty advisors play in the job search process, including supportive, unsupportive and sponsorship. Supportive advisors offer opportunities for skill development and specific guidance during the job search process. Sponsorship advisors go beyond providing general support to leverage their personal networks to assist in the transition into full-time employment. Unsupportive advisors are on the other end of the spectrum and do not provide any assistance. In addition, the majority of doctoral students rely on individuals beyond their advisors during the job search, and they do so regardless of what type of support they receive from their advisors. Originality/value Presented findings highlight the complex constellation of social connections that graduate students draw on for entry into the career and make a compelling case for extending socialization research to dedicate more attention to students’ transition into full-time employment after degree completion.

  PublisherDOI

• Inequality in Higher Education

  2023-06-24 · 1 citations

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding

  More recently, a growing body of research has explored racial/ethnic and gender inequities in higher education. The two dominant sociological traditions reviewed—status attainment and social reproduction—have originated from concerns regarding socioeconomic inequality. Combining insights across the different dimensions of inequality would amplify their contributions to understanding college student success. Whereas the status attainment tradition provides extensive descriptions of the contours of inequality, the social reproduction tradition illuminates the mechanisms that produce that inequality. The social reproduction tradition has been critiqued for providing a myopic view of the role of cultural (and social) capital by emphasizing reproduction and not considering the prospect of mobility. College major is a central factor in the discussion of gender inequalities in higher education. Sociological research on various dimensions of inequality, including sexual identity, immigrant generation, and disability, is largely absent in higher education.

  PublisherDOI

• Beyond technical mastery: inequality in doctoral research skill development in the biological sciences

  Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education · 2023-04-07 · 3 citations

  articleSenior author

  Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine how doctoral students in the biological sciences understand their research skill development and explore potential racial/ethnic and gender inequalities in the scientific learning process. Design/methodology/approach Based on interviews with 87 doctoral students in the biological sciences, this study explores how doctoral students describe development of their research skills. More specifically, a constructivist grounded theory approach is employed to understand how doctoral students make meaning of their research skill development process and how that may vary by gender and race/ethnicity. Findings The findings reveal two emergent groups, “technicians” who focus on discrete tasks and data collection, and “interpreters” who combine technical expertise with attention to the larger scientific field. Although both groups are developing important skills, “interpreters” have a broader range of skills that support successful scholarly careers in science. Notably, white men are overrepresented among the “interpreters,” whereas white women and students from minoritized racial/ethnic groups are concentrated among the “technicians.” Originality/value While prior literature provides valuable insights into the inequalities across various aspects of doctoral socialization, scholars have rarely attended to examining inequalities in research skill development. This study provides new insights into the process of scientific learning in graduate school. Findings reveal that research skill development is not a uniform experience, and that doctoral education fosters different kinds of learning that vary by gender and race/ethnicity.

  PublisherDOI

• “It’s a Strength That I Draw From”: First-Generation Background as a Cultural Resource in Law School

  Journal of First-generation Student Success · 2023-05-04 · 4 citations

  articleSenior author

  The literature on first-generation college students largely focuses on the challenges they may experience in college, and this orientation extends to studies of graduate students. We contribute to an asset-based understanding of first-generation student experiences by illuminating how first-generation students in a selective law school use their background as a cultural resource. Using qualitative interviews with 16 first-generation law students, findings reveal how students draw on their backgrounds as a source of motivation and purpose, social support, resourcefulness, and appreciation for the value of difference. Presented findings have important implications for understanding first-generation student experiences in professional school settings and background-specific resources that help facilitate success in graduate school.

  PublisherDOI

Recent grants

• Collaborative Research: Progressions of Skill Development in Biology Doctorates

  NSF · $412k · 2014–2019

Frequent coauthors

• Richard Arum

  20 shared

• David F. Feldon

  Utah State University

  12 shared

• Michelle Maher

  University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

  8 shared

• Teniell L. Trolian

  Albany State University

  6 shared

• Karen Jeong Robinson

  5 shared

• Jesse McCain

  5 shared

• Blake R. Silver

  George Mason University

  5 shared

• James Peugh

  Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center

  4 shared