Learning About and Benefiting From Peer Review: A Course Assignment for Doctoral Students at Two Different Universities

2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (6) ◽  
pp. 342-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen A. Sethares ◽  
Nancy S. Morris
Author(s):  
Beth Kania-Gosche

To improve graduation rates in doctoral programs, the Council of Graduate Schools has recommended more supports for dissertation writing. This article describes and evaluates through action research one such support, an online discussion board where students could post drafts of their dissertation and peer review each other’s work. Results of effectiveness were mixed because of the wide spectrum of student participation. Students did not feel they had the expertise to critically read another’s work, although they liked reading the instructor’s comments to other students. Future implementation of the discussion board might be more successful if it was utilized as a support group or frequently asked questions page rather than a place for peer review or if it was utilized for excerpts from the dissertation rather than entire chapters. Faculty involved with supervising doctoral students should consider what supports are being offered and continue to evaluate their effectiveness.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Sarbani Sen Vengadasalam

There is an urgent need to teach “Writing for Publications” classes to graduate and doctoral students. Though the debate about who should instruct such classes continues, the paper proffers best practices for writing instructors to use while teaching it. The paper highlights the need for scholar-participants to opt for modeling as a way to familiarize themselves with disciplinary and journal conventions. The paper expands on the way online peer review workshops could be conducted at milestone points in the semester to elevate and formalize peer reviews, so integral to the publication process. A sample syllabus with week-by-week activity break-up is offered.


Author(s):  
Stephanie Mazerolle ◽  
Thomas Bowman ◽  
Joanne Klossner

Purpose: Evidence suggested that athletic training doctoral candidates are being socialized through a variety of formal and informal experiences to prepare them for roles in higher education. It is unclear, however, if they are aware of the expectations associated with tenure and/or promotion which are necessary for transition into higher education. Perceptions of tenure and promotion among doctoral students preparing to enter the athletic training professoriate were investigated. Methods: Twenty-four students (16=females, 8=males, average age=28±3 years) completed one-on-one telephone interviews. Data were analyzed using a general inductive approach, with a peer review and multiple analyst triangulation completed for rigor. Results: Four primary themes emerged from the data: 1) there is a limited understanding of the guidelines and criteria for tenure and promotion, 2) knowledge of guidelines and criteria is perpetuated by mentoring, 3) research/scholarship is perceived as paramount for success, and 4) the belief that skills gained, regardless of the domain of tenure, can facilitate success in others. Conclusions: The findings suggest that doctoral students in athletic training are partially aware of the guidelines for tenure, but could benefit from additional mentoring.


Author(s):  
Peter Samuels ◽  
Mary Deane ◽  
Jeanne Griffin

This case study reports on a Writing in the Disciplines intervention for doctoral students in science education held at Coventry University in May 2010. Unique features of this event compared with previous ones are described, including the use of an online writing peer review system. An overview is provided of the subjects covered in the training and issues that emerged during the discussions. The outcome of the event on the day is discussed and an evaluation of the event as a whole is provided. Conclusions are drawn about the importance of developing social communities in writing, the effectiveness of supporting them with an online writing peer review system and the tensions created by the provision on subject specialist feedback alongside generic writing specialist feedback.


2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 52-57
Author(s):  
John A. Tetnowski

Abstract Cluttering is discussed openly in the fluency literature, but few educational opportunities for learning more about cluttering exist in higher education. The purpose of this manuscript is to explain how a seminar in cluttering was developed for a group of communication disorders doctoral students. The major theoretical issues, educational questions, and conclusions are discussed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 1552-1563
Author(s):  
Denise A. Tucker ◽  
Mary V. Compton ◽  
Sarah J. Allen ◽  
Robert Mayo ◽  
Celia Hooper ◽  
...  

Purpose The intended purpose of this research note is to share the findings of a needs assessment online survey of speech and hearing professionals practicing in North Carolina to explore their interest in pursuing a research-focused PhD in Communication Sciences and Disorders (CSD) and to document their perceptions of barriers to pursing a PhD in CSD. In view of the well-documented shortage of doctor of philosophy (PhD) faculty to attract, retain, and mentor doctoral students to advance research and to prepare future speech and hearing professionals, CSD faculty must assess the needs, perceptions, and barriers prospective students encounter when considering pursuing a doctoral research degree in CSD. Method The article describes the results of a survey of 242 speech and hearing professionals to investigate their interest in obtaining an academic research-focused PhD in CSD and to solicit their perceived barriers to pursuing a research doctoral degree in CSD. Results Two thirds of the respondents (63.6%) reported that they had considered pursuing a PhD in CSD. Desire for knowledge, desire to teach, and work advancement were the top reasons given for pursuing a PhD in CSD. Eighty-two percent of respondents had no interest in traditional full-time study. Forty-two percent of respondents indicated that they would be interested in part-time and distance doctoral study. The barriers of time, distance, and money emerged as those most frequently identified barriers by respondents. Conclusion The implications inform higher education faculty on how they can best address the needs of an untapped pool of prospective doctoral students in CSD.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document