Abstracts
Abstract
This article presents an assessment tool for doctoral students preparing their comprehensive portfolio. This tool was created from my firsthand experience in the Joint PhD program in Educational Studies—a collaboration between three universities in Ontario, Canada: Lakehead University, Brock University, and the University of Windsor. Following the three criteria for evaluation of the comprehensive portfolio in the program handbook, I developed nine sub-criteria (three for each criterion). This assessment tool can be used for educational purposes, as doctoral students begin to organize and narrate their doctoral journey. Students can map their experiences to the sub-criteria developed, allowing them to be explicit about how their presented scholarly tasks have helped in preparing them for candidacy. While this tool has an obvious application for students within the Joint PhD program, students in other programs with similar requirements may also find it useful due to its theoretical grounding in literature on the process of scholarship.
Keywords:
- doctoral studies,
- comprehensive examinations,
- portfolios,
- assessment,
- candidacy
Résumé
Cet article présente un outil d’évaluation destiné aux étudiants de doctorat qui préparent leur portfolio. Cet outil a été créé à partir de mon expérience personnelle dans le programme conjoint de doctorat en pédagogie — une collaboration entre trois universités en Ontario, au Canada : l’Université Lakehead, l’Université de Brock et l’Université de Windsor. En suivant les trois critères d’évaluation d’un portfolio que contient le manuel du programme, j’ai développé neuf sous-critères (trois pour chaque critère). Cet outil d’évaluation peut être utilisé à des fins pédagogiques alors que les doctorants commencent à organiser leur parcours doctoral. Les étudiants peuvent suivre les neuf sous-critères développés, ce qui leur permettra d’expliciter la façon dont les tâches universitaires présentées les ont aidés à se préparer à leur candidature au doctorat. Bien que cet outil ait une application évidente pour les étudiants du programme de doctorat conjoint, les étudiants d’autres programmes ayant des exigences semblables peuvent également le trouver utile en raison de son ancrage théorique dans la littérature au sujet du processus de recherche.
Mots-clés :
- études doctorales,
- évaluations globales,
- portfolio du doctorant,
- analyse,
- candidature
Appendices
Bibliography
- Barone, T., & Eisner, E. W. (2012). Arts based research. SAGE.
- Bayley, J. G., Ellis, J. B., Abreu-Ellis, C. R., & O’Reilly, E. K. (2012). Rocky road or clear sailing? Recent graduates’ recollection and reflections of the doctoral journey. Brock Education Journal, 21(2), 88–102. https://doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v21I2.279
- Bloxham, S., & Boyd, P. (2007). Developing effective assessment in higher education: A practical guide. McGraw-Hill.
- Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Research, 34(6), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034006003
- Bouma, G. D., Ling, R., & Wilkinson, L. (2012). The research process (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
- Brooks, R., te Riele, K., & Maguire, M. (2014). Ethics and education research. SAGE.
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. (2018). Tri-council policy statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans.
- Clark, A. M. (1998). The qualitative-quantitative debate: Moving from positivism and conformation to post-positivism and reconciliation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 27(6), 1242–1249. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00651.x
- Cobia, D. C., Carney, J. S., Buckhalt, J. A., Middleton, R. A., Shannon, D. M., Trippany, R., & Kunkel, E. (2005). The doctoral portfolio: Centerpiece of a comprehensive system of evaluation. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44(4), 242–254.
- Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE.
- Evans, D., & Kowanko, I. (2000). Literature reviews: Evolution of a research methodology. The Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing: A Quarterly Publication of the Royal Australian Nursing Federation, 18(2), 33–38.
- Freer, J. (2020). Students’ attitudes toward disability: A tripartite intervention [Doctoral dissertation, University of Windsor]. Scholarship at UWindsor Open Access. https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/etd/8360
- Fiedler, R., & Baumbach, D. (2005). Portfolio as a comprehensive exam: Instigating change. In C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber, & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2005--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education international conference (pp. 26–33). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/18942/
- Fisher, C. B., Fried, A. L., & Feldman, L. G. (2009). Graduate socialization in the responsible conduct of research: A national survey on the research ethics training experiences of psychology doctoral students. Ethics & Behaviour, 19(6), 496–518. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420903275283
- Gardner, S. K. (2009). The development of doctoral students: Phases of challenge and support. ASHE Higher Education Report, 34(6), 1–127.
- Gefen, D. (2019). The philosopher’s corner: A post-positivist answering back. Part 1: Good for you, Karl Popper! The Database for Advances in Information Systems, 5(2), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3330472.3330475
- Jacobs, R. L. (2013). Developing a dissertation research problem: A guide for doctoral students in human resource development and adult education. New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 25(3), 103–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/nha3.20034
- Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014
- Joint Ph.D. Educational Studies Program. (2020). Joint Ph.D. program handbook. https://jointphd-ed.lakeheadu.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/JointPhD-2020-Handbook_final-1.pdf
- Kilbourn, B. (2006). The qualitative doctoral dissertation proposal. Teachers College Record, 108(4), 529–576.
- Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrows, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006
- Loughead, T. O. (1997). The doctoral comprehensive examination: Fine-tuning the process. Counselor Education and Supervision, 37(2), 140–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.1997.tb00539.x
- McAreavey, R., & Muir, J. (2011). Research ethics committees: Values and power in higher education. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14(5), 391–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2011.565635
- Meadows, K. A. (2003). So you want to do research? 2: Developing the research question. British Journal of Community Nursing, 8(9), 397–403. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjcn.2003.8.9.11572
- Popovic, S. (2019). Teaching, service and research: The role of social networks in scholarly identity development [Unpublished doctoral comprehensive portfolio]. University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada.
- Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. Hutchinson
- Randolph, J. J. (2009). A guide to writing the dissertation literature review. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(13), 1–13. https://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=14&n=13
- Sandberg, J., & Alvesson, M. (2011). Ways of constructing research questions: Gap-spotting or problematization? Organization, 18(1), 23–44.
- Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63–75.
- Sinner, A., Leggo, C. Irwin, R. L., Gouzouasis, P., & Grauer, K. (2006). Arts-based educational research dissertations: Reviewing the practices of new scholars. Canadian Journal of Education, 29(4), 1223–1270. https://doi.org/10.2307/20054216
- Takacs, D. (2003). How does your positionality bias your epistemology? Thought & Action, 19(1), 27–38.
- Thanh, N. C., & Thanh, T. T. (2015). The interconnection between interpretivist paradigm and qualitative methods in education. American Journal of Educational Science, 1(2), 24–27. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/79e6/888e672cf2acf8afe2ec21fd42a29b2cbd90.pdf
- Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big tent” criteria for excellence in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
- Wasley, P. (2008, July 11). Portfolios are replacing qualifying exams as a step on the road to dissertations. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/portfolios-are-replacing-qualifying-exams-as-a-step-on-the-road-to-dissertations/
- Weir, P., Thompson, M., Markey, S., Wagner, D., Nalbantoglu, J., Crump, A., & Ryoo, A. (2017). Re-imagining PhD: Doctoral comprehensive exam [Consultation document]. Canadian Association for Graduate Studies.