Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 71 references

Trajectories into Careers in the Quantum Industry: Beyond Knowledge and Skills

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-07-31 · grok-4.5

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Quantum-industry entry comes from four co-occurring trajectories, not coursework alone.

desk verdict Clean interview typology of four co-occurring entry paths into quantum industry—useful beyond KSA lists, with sampling limits the authors already own. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.28462 v1 pith:IGZBDJZI submitted 2026-07-30 physics.ed-ph

Shams El-Adawy , A.R. Piña , Benjamin M. Zwickl , H.J. Lewandowski This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.ed-ph
keywords quantumindustrycareertrajectoriesworkforcedevelopmentexperientiallearningprofessionalnetworkssituatedQISEeducationthematicanalysis
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks how people actually get into quantum-industry jobs, rather than what degrees or skill lists they should hold. From interviews with 36 employees across many company types, it finds four recurring trajectories: continuity of academic research practice into industry work, reframing of earlier technical expertise for quantum uses, gradual engagement through internships, schools, workshops and similar opportunities, and entry opened by professional networks. These paths usually appear together in a single person’s story. Degrees and courses supply a necessary foundation, but interviewees do not treat them as enough by themselves; what matters is applying knowledge in real settings and being recognized by people already in the field. The practical upshot is that education and workforce efforts need experiential learning and network access, not only new courses and pipelines.

What carries the argument

Four trajectories from thematic analysis of employee interviews (T1 continuity of research practice; T2 reframed technical background; T3 incremental engagement; T4 network-enabled entry), treated as complementary and often simultaneous mechanisms that position people for participation.

What would settle it

A broader sample of quantum hires—especially from outside the interviewers’ networks and from less-connected institutions—whose entry stories show no meaningful role for research continuity, expertise reframing, incremental engagement, or networks, or who treat coursework alone as sufficient.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Quantum industry professionals describe entry through four co-occurring trajectories—continuity of research practice from academia to industry, reframing of prior technical expertise for quantum applications, incremental engagement via professional opportunities, and network-enabled entry—so preparation is an assembled, socially mediated process rather than the simple acquisition of knowledge and skills.

Load-bearing premise

That answers from 36 employees, recruited largely through existing networks and asked under protocols built mainly to surface job skills rather than full career histories, fairly capture the experiences that actually enable entry.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Course and degree design alone will not prepare most students for quantum-industry roles.
  • Undergraduate research, internships, summer schools, and quantum-focused student programs become central, not optional, preparation.
  • Industry hiring that leans on personal referrals will systematically under-reach qualified candidates without those ties.
  • Educators should link conceptual courses to authentic practice and visible professional communities.
  • Structured, transparent entry points (internships, partnerships, conferences open across degree levels) can widen who can participate.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If network-enabled entry remains dominant, public investment in quantum education will convert unevenly into jobs unless paired with deliberate bridge programs.
  • The same four-trajectory pattern is likely to appear in other fast-moving interdisciplinary tech fields where roles are still forming.
  • Application and hiring processes that make experiential portfolios legible could reduce over-reliance on warm introductions.
  • Tracking which combinations of trajectories predict stable placement would turn the typology into a testable workforce model.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper analyzes interviews with 36 quantum-industry employees across 21 U.S. companies to characterize how professionals narrate their entry into the field. Using thematic analysis guided by a situated-learning framing, the authors identify four co-occurring trajectories: (T1) continuity of academic research practice into industry work, (T2) reframing of prior non-quantum technical expertise, (T3) incremental engagement via programs/internships/conferences, and (T4) network-enabled entry. Formal degrees are treated as a necessary foundation but not as sufficient preparation. The central claim is that preparation is assembled from educational, experiential, and relational experiences, so workforce support should extend beyond coursework and KSA lists to experiential learning and professional connections. Methods include dual coding with three-round IRR (60%→82% pre-discussion) and full consensus, with explicit non-exclusivity of trajectories (25/36 co-occurring).

Significance. The paper makes a timely and useful contribution to quantum education and workforce research by shifting attention from pipeline/KSA inventories to how professionals themselves assemble entry. The four-trajectory typology, co-occurrence pattern (Fig. 2), and concrete illustrative cases give educators and industry partners actionable language for designing research experiences, internships, and more transparent entry points. Strengths include a relatively large interview corpus for this subfield, transparent dual-coding/IRR practice, clear trajectory definitions (Table I), and appropriately scoped limitations (illustrative, not exhaustive). If the typology holds as a faithful reading of this corpus, it productively complements existing KSA and curriculum work rather than replacing it.

major comments (3)
  1. [§III.A–C; §V] §III.A–C and §V: The sample is recruited via purposeful/convenience/snowball methods through the team’s professional networks, and the employee protocol was originally built to elicit KSAs. T4 (network-enabled entry; 15/36) is therefore at risk of being partly amplified by recruitment and by who is reachable for interviews. The paper already calls findings “illustrative,” but the Discussion still draws fairly strong design implications about networks and accessible entry points. Please add an explicit interpretive caveat in §V on how network-based sampling may shape the salience of T4 (and possibly T1), and temper causal language (“enable entry”) toward “how successful entrants narrate preparation,” unless you can point to internal evidence that T4 is not mainly a sampling artifact.
  2. [§IV.A.3; Fig. 2] §IV.A.3 and Fig. 2: T3 is reported for 15 interviewees but “no participant described this trajectory in isolation.” That is an important structural finding, yet it is under-analyzed. If T3 never stands alone, the paper should clarify whether incremental engagement is best treated as a primary trajectory on par with T1/T2/T4 or as a supporting mechanism that typically co-occurs with continuity, reframing, or networks. A short analytic paragraph (and, if feasible, a simple co-occurrence summary beyond the binary columns in Fig. 2) would make the typology’s internal structure clearer and strengthen the claim that these are four distinguishable yet complementary trajectories.
  3. [Abstract; §I; §V] §IV–V claim structure: All participants already hold industry roles, so the data show experiences present in successful entry narratives, not which experiences differentiate entrants from non-entrants or unsuccessful applicants. The Abstract and §V sometimes read as if the four trajectories are demonstrated enablers of entry into the industry writ large. Please align claim language throughout (Abstract, end of §I, §V.A–B) with a success-case typology: these are recurring ways professionals construct preparation, not validated causal pathways or population rates. This is fixable in framing and does not require new data.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Fig. 1] Fig. 1 caption notes that companies may map to multiple activity types and that one interview can contribute to more than one row; consider adding a brief note in the main text on how double-counting affects interpretation of the partial sums.
  2. [Fig. 2] Fig. 2 is information-dense and useful, but the trajectory columns are hard to scan in text form. A small summary inset (counts per trajectory; number with 2+ trajectories) would help readers before the case narratives.
  3. [Table I] Table I is clear; consider adding the n’s (25, 17, 15, 15) directly in the table for quick reference.
  4. [§II.C; §III.B] §II.C cites situated learning and Sfard’s acquisition/participation metaphors appropriately as a lens. A sentence clarifying that the four trajectories are empirical themes, not deductions from Lave & Wenger, would reduce any impression that theory forced the coding.
  5. [Throughout] Minor copyediting: spacing anomalies such as “RESUL TS,” “T rajectory,” and accent/encoding issues in author names and citations (e.g., Piña, Müller) should be normalized in production.
  6. [§V.B] §V.B recommendations name specific programs (Qubit by Qubit, Quantum Scholars, a particular capstone). These are fine as examples but should be clearly marked as illustrative options, not findings implied by the interview sample.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: interview-induced thematic typology, not a derivation forced by construction or self-citation.

full rationale

This is a qualitative PER study. The central claim—that entry into the quantum industry is narrated through four co-occurring trajectories (T1–T4) beyond coursework/KSAs alone—is produced by thematic analysis of employee interview excerpts (N=36), with collaborative coding and three-round IRR rising to 82% pre-discussion and full consensus (§III.B; Table I; Fig. 2). There are no equations, fitted parameters, uniqueness theorems, or quantitative “predictions.” Situated learning [25–28, 48] is an interpretive framing lens, not a result derived from the authors’ own definitions. Self-citations to the team’s related work ([19] protocols/recruitment; [53, 54] role categories; other KSA/workforce papers) supply methodological context and figure labels but do not define or force the four trajectories. Per the hard rules, ordinary self-citation is not circularity when the load-bearing content is independently coded from primary interview data. Findings are scoped as illustrative (§III.C). No step reduces by construction to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

Load-bearing commitments are standard qualitative-methods and situated-learning assumptions plus sampling/protocol choices, not free parameters or new physical entities. The central claim rests on treating interviewee narratives under a KSA-oriented protocol and network-recruited sample as valid evidence of enabling experiences, and on thematic categories as faithful characterizations of preparation rather than interviewer artifacts.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Thematic analysis of participant narratives can validly characterize distinct trajectories of preparation (Braun & Clarke-style coding with iterative refinement and IRR).
    Invoked throughout §III.B as the analytic method that produces T1–T4; standard in qualitative PER but not independently validated here against external outcome data.
  • domain assumption Situated learning / communities-of-practice framing (Lave & Wenger; Sfard participation metaphor) is an appropriate lens for QISE industry entry.
    §II.C and Discussion use this lens to interpret continuity, peripheral participation, and recognition; shapes what counts as a ‘trajectory’ versus a skill list.
  • ad hoc to paper Employee self-reports about which past experiences ‘enabled entry,’ under limited pathway probes, are sufficiently complete and unbiased for typology building.
    §III.C explicitly notes protocols were designed for KSAs and depth on past career development may be incomplete; still treated as adequate for the four-trajectory claim.
  • ad hoc to paper Purposeful, convenience, and snowball sampling via the research team’s U.S. quantum-industry networks yields a sample informative enough for illustrative trajectories across roles and company types.
    §III.A–C; Fig. 1–2 show breadth but not probability sampling; generalization is disclaimed yet implications for ‘students’ and ‘the quantum industry’ are drawn in §V.B.
invented entities (1)
  • Four trajectories T1–T4 (academic research alignment; reframed technical background; incremental engagement; network-enabled entry)
    purpose: Organize how professionals narrate enabling experiences and support the claim that preparation is multi-path and socially mediated.
    Analytic constructs induced from the interview corpus (§III.B, Table I), not postulated physical objects; independent_evidence is false in the sense of no external falsifiable handle beyond this coding scheme, though they are empirically grounded categories.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Trajectories into Careers in the Quantum Industry: Beyond Knowledge and Skills." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IGZBDJZI

@misc{pith2026260728462,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Trajectories into Careers in the Quantum Industry: Beyond Knowledge and Skills},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IGZBDJZI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.28462}
}
read the original abstract

Career preparation for participation in the quantum industry is often framed in terms of formal educational pipelines, workforce projections, and knowledge and skills needed for various roles. Less is known about how quantum industry professionals themselves characterize their preparation for participation in the field. In this paper, we analyze interviews with quantum industry professionals working across a range of positions and company types to examine the experiences that enable entry into the quantum industry. Using thematic analysis, we identify four trajectories: (1) continuity of research practice from academia to industry, (2) reframing of prior expertise for quantum applications, (3) incremental engagement through various professional opportunities, and (4) network-enabled entry. These trajectories often co-occur within individual narratives, showing that preparation emerges from a combination of educational, professional, and relational experiences. Our findings demonstrate that supporting preparation for quantum industry careers requires more than the design of formal coursework and degree programs. Our results highlight the importance of experiential learning opportunities that allow students to apply their knowledge and skills and develop professional connections that facilitate entry into quantum careers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.28462 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Distribution of the 36 employee interviews across [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Titles of individual positions, education, discipline, and trajectories (T1, T2, T3, and T4) of quantum industry [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Trajectory 1: Academic research training to industry alignment In trajectory one (T1), preparation is framed as conti- nuity of practice between academic research and industry work. Interview participants describe their prior research experience, most often at the doctoral level, as already constituting the type of work performed in their current roles, s...

  2. [2]

    Trajectory 2: Reframed technical background In trajectory two (T2), preparation was characterized by the reframing of expertise developed through prior technical work experience. Interview participants de- scribed becoming positioned to participate in the quan- tum industry by demonstrating how prior knowledge and skills developed in other professional co...

  3. [3]

    Entry into the quantum industry was described as a sequence of engagements that gradu- ally increased participants’ familiarity with the field and its practices

    Trajectory 3: Incremental engagement In trajectory three (T3), preparation emerged as a process of increasing participation in quantum-related activities over time. Entry into the quantum industry was described as a sequence of engagements that gradu- ally increased participants’ familiarity with the field and its practices. Through these engagements, ind...

  4. [4]

    Trajectory 4: Network-enabled entry In trajectory four (T4), preparation was enabled through access mediated by recognition from individu- als already within the quantum industry. Participants described moments in which connections such as former colleagues, mentors, professional connections, or friends played a decisive role in enabling entry into the in...

  5. [5]

    As shown in Figure 2, 25 of the 36 interviewees in our dataset lever- aged more than one trajectory

    Co-occurrence of trajectories Although the trajectories characterized the different types of experiences, interview participants often drew on multiple trajectories within their narratives. As shown in Figure 2, 25 of the 36 interviewees in our dataset lever- aged more than one trajectory. Participants often de- scribed how different experiences such as r...

  6. [6]

    Trajectory of a senior optical system integration engineer One of our interviewees is currently a senior optical system integration engineer at a company that works on quantum computing hardware, algorithms and soft- ware, and networking and communication. Their tra- jectory into the quantum industry aligns with trajectory one (T1), in which preparation f...

  7. [7]

    Computing in general is shifting, so why should we just limit our- selves? Let’s look at quantum computing

    Trajectory of a quantum computational scientist One of our interviewees is a quantum computational scientist at a company that wants to use quantum com- puters to enhance their business. Their trajectory into the quantum industry mostly aligns with trajectory two (T2), in which preparation for participation in the quan- tum industry is framed through the ...

  8. [8]

    Their entry into QISE careers combines trajectories one, two, and three (T1, T2, and T3)

    Trajectory of a government-industry advocate One of our interviewees is a government industry advo- cate at a company that does quantum computing hard- ware, algorithms and software, and consulting. Their entry into QISE careers combines trajectories one, two, and three (T1, T2, and T3). While formal coursework and research experience provided a technical...

Show all 71 references
  1. [9]

    Hey, there’s this com- pany, they are a startup

    Trajectory of a test and integration engineer One of our interviewees is a test and integration engi- neer at a company that does quantum networking and communication, computing hardware, and algorithms and software. Their entry into the field aligns with tra- jectory four (T4...

  2. [10]

    National Quantum Initiative, National quantum initia- tive,http://quantum.gov/(2018)

    2018

  3. [11]

    N. S. Subcommittee on Quantum Information Science and T. Council, National strategic plan for quantum in- formation science and technology workforce (2022)

    2022

  4. [12]

    Congress, CHIPS and science act of 2022 (2022), pub- lic Law No: 117-167

    U. Congress, CHIPS and science act of 2022 (2022), pub- lic Law No: 117-167

    2022

  5. [13]

    National Science and Technology Council, Subcommittee on Quantum Information Science, Quantum information science and technology workforce development national strategic plan,https://www.quantum.gov/wp-content/ uploads/2022/02/QIST-Natl-Workforce-Plan.pdf (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    Taylor, The US CHIPS and science act of 2022 (2023)

    M. Taylor, The US CHIPS and science act of 2022 (2023)

    2022

  7. [15]

    M. F. Fox, B. M. Zwickl, and H. J. Lewandowski, Prepar- ing for the quantum revolution: What is the role of higher education?, Physical Review Physics Education Research 16, 020131 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    Kaur and A

    M. Kaur and A. Venegas-Gomez, Defining the quantum workforce landscape: a review of global quantum educa- tion initiatives, Optical Engineering61, 081806 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    Greinert, R

    F. Greinert, R. M¨ uller, P. Bitzenbauer, M. S. Ubben, and K.-A. Weber, Future quantum workforce: Competences, requirements, and forecasts, Physical Review Physics Ed- ucation Research19, 010137 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    Greinert, M

    F. Greinert, M. S. Ubben, I. N. Dogan, D. Hilfert- 12 R¨ uppell, and R. M¨ uller, Advancing quantum technology workforce: industry insights into qualification and train- ing needs, EPJ Quantum Technology11, 82 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    D. Li, P. Gupta, Y. L. Yang, E. C. Broyles, L. Goel, Z. Zhang, and C. R. Kenley, Developing an undergrad- uate quantum workforce, 2024 IEEE International Con- ference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) 3, 34 (2024)

    2024

  12. [20]

    J. L. Rosenberg, N. Holincheck, and M. Colandene, Sci- ence, technology, engineering, and mathematics under- graduates’ knowledge and interest in quantum careers: Barriers and opportunities to building a diverse quantum workforce, Physical Review Physics Education Research 20,...

    2024

  13. [21]

    El-Adawy, A

    S. El-Adawy, A. Pi˜ na, B. M. Zwickl, and H. Lewandowski, Insights from educators on build- ing a more cohesive quantum information science and engineering education ecosystem, Physical Review Physics Education Research21, 020144 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    K. A. Oliver, V. Borish, B. R. Wilcox, and H. Lewandowski, Education for expanding the quantum workforce: Students’ perceptions of the quantum indus- try in an upper-division physics capstone course, Physical Review Physics Education Research21, 010129 (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    J. C. Meyer, G. Passante, and B. Wilcox, Disparities in access to us quantum information education, Physical Review Physics Education Research20, 010131 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Pi˜ na, S

    A. Pi˜ na, S. El-Adawy, M. Verostek, B. T. Boyle, M. Cacheiro, M. Lawler, N. Pradeep, E. Watts, C. G. West, H. Lewandowski, et al., Landscape of quantum information science and engineering education: From physics foundations to interdisciplinary frontiers, Phys- ical Review Ph...

    2025

  17. [25]

    A. Pina, S. El-Adawy, M. J. Verostek, H. Lewandowski, and B. M. Zwickl, Investigating opportunities for diver- sity and growth in the landscape of quantum information science engineering education in the us, 2025 ASEE An- nual Conference & Exposition (2025)

    2025

  18. [26]

    Hughes, D

    C. Hughes, D. Finke, D.-A. German, C. Merzbacher, P. M. Vora, and H. Lewandowski, Assessing the needs of the quantum industry, IEEE Transactions on Educa- tion65, 592 (2022)

    2022

  19. [27]

    A. R. Pi˜ na, S. El-Adawy, H. J. Lewandowski, and B. M. Zwickl, Industry insights into quantum knowl- edge needed for the quantum information science and engineering workforce, 2025 PERC Proceedings 10.1119/perc.2025.pr.Pina (2025)

    2025 doi

  20. [28]

    El-Adawy, A

    S. El-Adawy, A. Pi˜ na, B. M. Zwickl, and H. Lewandowski, Experimental skills for undergraduate career preparation in quantum information science and engineering, arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.09382 (2026)

    2026 arXiv

  21. [29]

    El-Adawy, A

    S. El-Adawy, A. R. Pi˜ na, B. M. Zwickl, and H. J. Lewandowski, Industry perspectives on projected quan- tum workforce needs, 2025 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings PERC Proceedings, 148 (2025)

    2025

  22. [30]

    Devendrababu, S

    S. Devendrababu, S. Ganguly, and K. Hemachandran, Mapping quantum industry demands to education: a critical analysis of skills, qualifications, and modalities, EPJ Quantum Technology12, 105 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    El-Adawy and H

    S. El-Adawy and H. J. Lewandowski, Colorado quantum workforce report, https://www.colorado.edu/initiative/cubit/media/1004 (2025)

    2025

  24. [32]

    M. A. Cannady, E. Greenwald, and K. N. Harris, Prob- lematizing the stem pipeline metaphor: Is the stem pipeline metaphor serving our students and the stem workforce?, Science Education98, 443 (2014)

    2014

  25. [33]

    D. P. Forbes and D. A. Kirsch, The study of emerging industries: Recognizing and responding to some central problems, Journal of Business Venturing25, 589 (2010)

    2010

  26. [34]

    Lave and E

    J. Lave and E. Wenger, Situated learning: Legit- imate peripheral participation, Cambridge university press (1991)

    1991

  27. [35]

    Wenger, Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity, Cambridge university press (1999)

    E. Wenger, Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity, Cambridge university press (1999)

    1999

  28. [36]

    Wenger-Trayner and B

    E. Wenger-Trayner and B. Wenger-Trayner, Learning in a landscape of practice: A framework, Routledge , 13 (2014)

    2014

  29. [37]

    J. P. Gee, Chapter 3: Identity as an analytic lens for research in education, Review of research in education 25, 99 (2000)

    2000

  30. [38]

    Quantum Economic Development Consortium (QED-C), State of the global quantum industry 2026, QED-C Re- ports (2026)

    2026

  31. [39]

    J. C. Meyer, G. Passante, S. J. Pollock, and B. R. Wilcox, Today’s interdisciplinary quantum information classroom: Themes from a survey of quantum informa- tion science instructors, Physical Review Physics Educa- tion Research18, 010150 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    J. C. Meyer, G. Passante, S. J. Pollock, and B. R. Wilcox, Introductory quantum information science coursework at us institutions: content coverage, EPJ Quantum Tech- nology11, 16 (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    C. D. Porter, Z. Atiq, and E. Fletcher, Creating a mod- ular, workforce-relevant undergraduate curriculum for quantum information science and engineering for all peo- ple, in Proc (2022) pp. 365–70

    2022

  34. [42]

    Asfaw, A

    A. Asfaw, A. Blais, K. R. Brown, J. Candelaria, C. Cantwell, L. D. Carr, J. Combes, D. M. Debroy, J. M. Donohue, S. E. Economou, et al., Building a quantum engineering undergraduate program, IEEE Transactions on Education65, 220 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Goorney, E

    S. Goorney, E. Karydi, B. Mu˜ noz, O. Santesson, Z. C. Seskir, A. A. Tudoran, and J. Sherson, The quantum technology job market: data driven analysis of 3641 job posts, EPJ Quantum Technology (2026)

    2026

  36. [44]

    U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Tech- nology, Advancing american leadership in quantum technology,https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/ CHRG-118hhrg52451(2024), hearing before the Com- mittee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives, 118th Congres...

    2024

  37. [45]

    Gonzalez-Maldonado, E

    D. Gonzalez-Maldonado, E. Edwards, and D. Franklin, Introducing quantum computing to k-12 teachers through a professional development workshop, Proceed- ings of the 57th ACM Technical Symposium on Com- puter Science Education V. 1 , 414 (2026)

    2026

  38. [46]

    Ganapati and T

    S. Ganapati and T. S. Ritchie, Professional development and career-preparedness experiences of stem ph. d. stu- dents: Gaps and avenues for improvement, Plos one16, e0260328 (2021)

    2021

  39. [47]

    K. A. Edwards, H. Acheson-Field, S. Rennane, and M. A. Zaber, Mapping scientists’ career trajectories in the sur- vey of doctorate recipients using three statistical meth- ods, Scientific Reports13, 8119 (2023)

    2023

  40. [48]

    Fracchiolla, B

    C. Fracchiolla, B. Prefontaine, and K. Hinko, Community 13 of practice approach for understanding identity develop- ment within informal physics programs, Physical Review Physics Education Research16, 020115 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    Bell, Informal stem education: From personal to pro- fessional, 2019 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, Provo, UT, January (2020)

    J. Bell, Informal stem education: From personal to pro- fessional, 2019 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, Provo, UT, January (2020)

    2019

  42. [50]

    Prefontaine, C

    B. Prefontaine, C. Mullen, J. J. G¨ uven, C. Rispler, C. Rethman, S. D. Bergin, K. Hinko, and C. Fracchiolla, Informal physics programs as communities of practice: How can programs support university students’ identi- ties?, Physical Review Physics Education Research17, 020134 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    El-Adawy, A

    S. El-Adawy, A. C. Lau, E. C. Sayre, and C. Fracchiolla, Motivation and needs of informal physics practitioners, Physical Review Physics Education Research20, 010125 (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    Rosa and F

    K. Rosa and F. M. Mensah, Educational pathways of black women physicists: Stories of experiencing and over- coming obstacles in life, Physical Review Physics Educa- tion Research12, 020113 (2016)

    2016

  45. [53]

    National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Undergraduate research experiences for STEM Students: Successes, Challenges, and Opportunities, Na- tional Academies Press (2017)

    2017

  46. [54]

    Zohrabi Alaee, M

    D. Zohrabi Alaee, M. K. Campbell, and B. M. Zwickl, Impact of virtual research experience for undergraduates experiences on students’ psychosocial gains during the covid-19 pandemic, Physical Review Physics Education Research18, 010101 (2022)

    2022

  47. [55]

    Werth, C

    A. Werth, C. G. West, and H. Lewandowski, Impacts on student learning, confidence, and affect in a remote, large-enrollment, course-based undergraduate research experience in physics, Physical Review Physics Educa- tion Research18, 010129 (2022)

    2022

  48. [56]

    K. A. Oliver, A. Werth, and H. Lewandowski, Student experiences with authentic research in a remote, intro- ductory course-based undergraduate research experience in physics, Physical Review Physics Education Research 19, 010124 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Sfard, On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one, Educational researcher27, 4 (1998)

    A. Sfard, On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one, Educational researcher27, 4 (1998)

    1998

  50. [58]

    P. W. Irving and E. C. Sayre, Becoming a physicist: The roles of research, mindsets, and milestones in upper- division student perceptions, Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research11, 020120 (2015)

    2015

  51. [59]

    Rethman, J

    C. Rethman, J. Perry, J. P. Donaldson, D. Choi, and T. Erukhimova, Impact of informal physics programs on university student development: Creating a physicist, Physical Review Physics Education Research17, 020110 (2021)

    2021

  52. [60]

    Etikan, S

    I. Etikan, S. A. Musa, R. S. Alkassim, et al., Compar- ison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling, American journal of theoretical and applied statistics5, 1 (2016)

    2016

  53. [61]

    Parker, S

    C. Parker, S. Scott, and A. Geddes, Snowball sampling, SAGE research methods foundations (2019)

    2019

  54. [62]

    A. Pina, S. El-Adawy, H. Lewandowski, and B. M. Zwickl, Categorization of roles in the quantum industry, arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.11820 (2025)

    2025

  55. [63]

    El-Adawy, A

    S. El-Adawy, A. Pi˜ na, B. M. Zwickl, and H. Lewandowski, Profiles of roles in the quantum industry, arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.04292 (2026)

    2026

  56. [64]

    Braun and V

    V. Braun and V. Clarke, Using thematic analysis in psy- chology, Qualitative research in psychology3, 77 (2006)

    2006

  57. [65]

    Faizan, The importance of professional networking: A pathway to career success, Scientific Societal & Behav- ioral Journal1, 59 (2025)

    R. Faizan, The importance of professional networking: A pathway to career success, Scientific Societal & Behav- ioral Journal1, 59 (2025)

    2025

  58. [66]

    J. P. Zwolak, M. Zwolak, and E. Brewe, Educational com- mitment and social networking: The power of informal networks, Physical Review Physics Education Research 14, 010131 (2018)

    2018

  59. [67]

    Heffernan, Academic networks and career trajec- tory:‘there’s no career in academia without networks’, Higher Education Research & Development40, 981 (2021)

    T. Heffernan, Academic networks and career trajec- tory:‘there’s no career in academia without networks’, Higher Education Research & Development40, 981 (2021)

    2021

  60. [68]

    qubitbyqubit.org/(2026)

    Qubit by Qubit, Qubit by qubit,https://www. qubitbyqubit.org/(2026)

    2026

  61. [69]

    M. B. Bennett, J. ´E. Arrow, S. Novack, and N. D. Finkel- stein, Investigating student participation in quantum workforce initiatives, arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.14698 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  62. [70]

    K. A. Oliver, V. Borish, B. R. Wilcox, and H. J. Lewandowski, Influence of an undergraduate quantum capstone course on students’ post-graduation careers, 2025 Physics Education Research Conference Proceed- ings 10.1119/perc.2025.pr.Oliver (2025)

    2025 doi

  63. [71]

    K. A. Oliver, S. El-Adawy, B. R. Wilcox, and H. J. Lewandowski, A survey of undergraduate student per- ceptions of the quantum industry in the United States (2026), In preparation

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed July 31, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.