READ THE INSTRUCTIONS!!
READ THE INSTRUCTIONS!!
READ THE INSTRUCTIONS!!!
Directions:
Write a paper (1,000-1,250 words) that synthesizes the Lindsay (2015); Lee, Chang, and Bryan (2020); and Klocko, Marshal, and Davidson (2015) articles. Your paper should include the following:
APA FORMAT STYLE
Introduction
An introduction that introduces and provides context for the topic. This includes presenting a clear thesis statement.
1. Identification of and support for three themes with evidence from each article. Synthesize your discussion of the topic to support your thesis.
THREE SEPARATE THEMES
THEME 1- STRESSORS
(READ ALL THREE ARTICLES AND FIND EVERYTHING FOCUSING ON HOW SRESSORS EFFECT THE SKILLS OF A RESEARCHER)
THEME 2- TIME MANAGEMENT
(READ ALL THREE ARTICLES AND FIND EVERYTHING FOCUSING ON HOW TIME MANAGEMENT IN THE DOCTORAL PROGRAM CAN EFFECT THE SKILLS OF A RESEARCHER)
THEME 3- FEEDBACK
(READ ALL THREE ARTICLES AND FIND EVERYTHING FOCUSING ON HOW FEEDBACK AND SUPERVISORY SUPPORT CAN HELP A DOCTORAL STUDENT TO SUCCEED AND CAN EFFECT THE SKILLS OF A RESEARCHER)
Conclusion
A conclusion that demonstrates support of your thesis statement, briefly summarizes the main points from your three themes,
Future Recommendations
makes recommendations for future research on the topic.
Assessment Description
In Topic 3, you read three articles about the skills of the researcher. In this assignment, you will identify three themes common to the articles and write a synthesis paper about research skills using evidence from the articles to support your themes. Use the skills you developed in RES-815 while completing the Emerging Writer Worksheet in which you identified themes, supported them with evidence from the articles, built a thesis claim, and outlined your paper.
General Requirements:
Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:
· Review the articles by Lindsay (2015); Lee, Chang, and Bryan (2020); and Klocko, Marshal, and Davidson (2015) located in the Topic Resources.
· This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
· Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
· Refer to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association for specific guidelines related to doctoral-level writing. The manual contains essential information on manuscript structure and content, clear and concise writing, and academic grammar and usage.
· You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Directions:
Write a paper (1,000-1,250 words) that synthesizes the Lindsay (2015); Lee, Chang, and Bryan (2020); and Klocko, Marshal, and Davidson (2015) articles. Your paper should include the following:
1. An introduction that introduces and provides context for the topic. This includes presenting a clear thesis statement.
2. Identification of and support for three themes with evidence from each article. Synthesize your discussion of the topic to support your thesis.
3. A conclusion that demonstrates support of your thesis statement, briefly summarizes the main points from your three themes, and makes recommendations for future research on the topic.
What works for doctoral students in completing their thesis?
Siân Lindsay*
Department for Learning Enhancement and Development, City University London, London, UK
(Received 7 February 2012; final version accepted 4 September 2014)
Writing a thesis is one of the most challenging activities that a doctoral student must
undertake and can represent a barrier to timely completion. This is relevant in light of
current and widespread concerns regarding doctoral completion rates. This study
explored thesis writing approaches of students post or near Ph.D. completion through
interviews. The study’s aim was to highlight factors identified by participants as
helpful or hindering thesis writing. The analysis revealed ‘helpful’ factors were related
to students’ intrinsic behaviours and supervisory support, particularly support that
adopted a ‘project-management’ style. Additionally, a subgroup of participants
discussed the merits of a continuous-writing approach which is further explored in
this paper with reference to the notion of writing to develop knowledge; this is
recommended for timely Ph.D. completion.
Keywords: doctoral; thesis; writing; Ph.D.; student; supervisor
Introduction and rationale
This study set out to identify, explore and understand the positive and negative factors
that can directly or indirectly enable doctoral students to write their thesis in accordance
with the recommended completion time for Ph.D. study at a UK university. The findings
presented are derived from interviews with doctoral students who were completing, or
had just very recently completed their doctoral programme. Two relevant theoretical
frameworks in the area of Ph.D. study were used to underpin the design and analysis
stages of this research, namely that of Latona and Browne’s framework for predicting
timely completions (Latona and Browne 2001) and Lee’s concepts of doctoral research
supervision (Lee 2008). The findings are examined to argue the case for a continuous
thesis-writing model, with reference to writing as a knowledge-producing activity
(Wellington 2010), and should prove applicable to most doctoral programmes in the
UK and beyond.
The rationale behind this study originated from conversations with five Senior Tutors
for Research (STR) to initially understand the impact factors that affect the rate of
progression and completion of Ph.D. study. Most STRs admitted that the Ph.D.
completion rates in their school or department were not ideal. When asked why, all
STRs talked about the writing up of the thesis as a phase which represented a major
stumbling block for Ph.D. students. In English doctoral programmes, writing up of the
thesis is typically the last major activity that a Ph.D. student does before the viva voce
examination (the ‘live voice’ examination whereby a doctoral student must successfully
*Email: Sian.Lindsay.1@city.ac.uk
Teaching in Higher Education, 2015
Vol. 20, No. 2, 183–196, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2014.974025
© 201
Developing Practitioner-Scholar Doctoral Candidates as Critical Writers
Barbara A. Klocko
Central Michigan University
Sarah M. Marshall
Central Michigan University
Jillian F. Davidson
Central Michigan University
In this study, we sought to understand how students perceived the dissertation as practitioner-scholars
and part-time doctoral students in advanced doctoral programs in educational leadership. The results
indicated that the expectations associated with scholarly writing present major hurdles for doctoral
students, and the dissertation process can be lengthy, filled with anxiety, stress, and doubt. Doctoral
faculty members are often called upon to advise students as they balance their personal and professional
demands with those of the academy. We found that the essential part in this process is supporting
practitioner students as they transform into doctoral level writers.
In the realm of academia, writing skills are imperative to creating a lasting career, putting truth to the
adage of publish or perish (Ferguson, 2009). Since publications are commonly associated with academic
prestige, it is fitting that researching and writing a dissertation is the culminating activity for doctoral
candidates (Kucan, 2011). In our research and experience, we found that the dissertation process is
lengthy, filled with anxiety, stress, and doubt. In particular, the expectations associated with scholarly
writing presented significant challenges to success for doctoral students.
For practitioner-scholars, there are additional stressors to completing coursework and the culminating
dissertation. Graduate students who are also full-time practitioners must carefully pilot the balance
between graduate school, employment and life (Belcher, 2009; Lavelle & Bushrow, 2007; Manalo, 2006;
Nielson & Rocco, 2002; Ondrusek, 2012). Additionally, the need to alternate between the mindset of a
practitioner and that of a scholar impacts both the writing process and the framework with which one
embraces inquiry (Labaree, 2003; Ondrusek, 2012). Doctoral faculty members, and particularly doctoral
dissertation advisers, are often called upon to instruct and advise students as they balance their personal
and professional demands with those of the academy. One key part in this process is supporting
practitioner students as they redefine their identity as doctoral level writers.
BACKGROUND
In 2013, we undertook a study designed to review the writing challenges experienced by doctoral
candidates in an educational leadership department at a Midwestern university. Our original study was
Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 15(4) 2015 21
written in response to the literature base about the stresses facing practitioner-scholars as they advance
through doctoral programs (Belcher, 2009; Ferguson, 2009; Kamler & Thomson, 2008; Nielsen & Rocco,
2002; Ondrusek, 2012; Wang & Li, 2011 ); the concerns f
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
Volume 21, Number 1
January – 2020
Doctoral Students’ Learning Success in Online-Based
Leadership Programs: Intersection with Technological
and Relational Factors
HyunKyung Lee¹, Heewon Chang², and Lynette Bryan²
¹Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Seoul, Korea, ²Eastern University, PA, USA
Abstract
This study examines how technological and relational factors independently and interactively predict the
perceived learning success of doctoral students enrolled in online-based leadership programs offered in the
United States. The 73-item Online Learning Success Scale (OLSS) was constructed, based on existing
instruments, and administered online to collect self-reported data on three primary variables: student
learning success (SLS), relational factors (RF), and technological factors (TF). The SLS variable focuses on
the gain of knowledge and skills, persistence, and self-efficacy; the RF on the student-student relationship,
the student-faculty relationship, and the student-non-teaching staff relationship; and the TF on the ease of
use, flexibility, and usefulness. In total, 210 student responses from 26 online-based leadership doctoral
programs in the United States were used in the final analysis. The results demonstrate that RF and TF
separately and together predict SLS. A multiple regression analysis indicates that, while all dimensions of
TF and RF are significant predictors of SLS, the strongest predictor of SLS is the student-faculty
relationship. This study suggests that building relationships with faculty and peers is critical to leadership
doctoral students’ learning success, even in online-based programs that offer effective technological support.
Keywords: online education, online learning success, leadership doctoral program, technological factors,
relational factors
Doctoral Students’ Learning Success in Online-Based Leadership Programs
Lee, Chang, and Bryan
62
Introduction
Student learning success (SLS) is everyone’s business in higher education. Learning success among doctoral
students in growing online programs is a particular concern for three reasons. First, doctoral student
completion, an indicator of learning success, is known to be at a lower rate than other educational endeavors.
The PhD Completion Project evaluated doctoral completion rates and attrition patterns across major
universities in the United States and Canada and found that only 56.6% of students completed their
programs with the lowest completion rates occurring in the social sciences and humanities (Sowell, Zhang,
Redd, & King, 2008). Considering that each individual and institution embarking on the PhD journey is
investing significant time, money, and intellectual resources, unsuccessful doctoral learning means a
substantial waste of resources to the students themselves, their fam
1
SYNTHESIS PAPER
Skills
of the Researcher Comment by Benjamin: A strong title should be informative, striking and appropriate. Learn how to craft effective titles: scribbr.com/academic-writing/forging-good-titles-in-academic-writing.
Consider this suggestion: (optional) Comment by Kirsten: Hi Asha, I’m Kirsten! I’m excited to review your layout again 🤓. Comment by Kirsten: In APA 7, the running head on the title page no longer includes the words “Running head.” It should only contain the page number and the (shortened) paper title. The running head is omitted in student papers, unless your instructor tells you otherwise.
Fayola Asha Dozithee
Grand Canyon University
Res-820: The Literature Landscape Comment by Kirsten: There should be a colon between the course number and name. If I am mistaken that this is the course number and name, you can delete the colon.
Instructor’s Name Comment by Kirsten: A title page should include the following: paper title, author name(s), author affiliation, course number and name, instructor’s name, assignment due date, and page number. For an example, see this page: https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/paper-format/title-page
March 20, 2022 Comment by Kirsten: There should be no extra white space before or after a new heading or between paragraphs, it should be exactly double spaced.
To ensure there are no minor spacing errors:
Click Line and Paragraph Spacing > Line Spacing Options > (Make sure under “Spacing” that “Before” and “After are at 0pt and that “Don’t add a space between paragraphs of the same style” is checked)
Skills of the Researcher Comment by Kirsten: On the first page of your body text, repeat the title, centered, in bold font. According to the APA Manual, authors shouldn’t use the heading “Introduction.” The text at the paper’s beginning is assumed to be the introduction and doesn’t need to be labeled as such.
A synthesis is a written argument that incorporates evidence from several sources. It is a complex process that necessitates analyzing various sources and discovering common threads that connect them. Several Ph.D. candidates are interested in a certain subject and use their research time to make significant advances in their field. One of the best things about getting a Ph.D. is the opportunity to do good research. This article identifies and supports three concepts described by Lindsay (2015), Lee et al. (2020), and Klocko et al. (2015). Generally, synthesis accompanies analysis; a researcher breaks down a concept or idea into its important parts (analysis) from which to draw meaningful conclusions or make good decisions about the topic or problem at hand (synthesis). Comment by Benjamin: The preferred order for an introduction is presented in this article: scribbr.com/thesis/writing-introduction-thesis. Comment by Benjamin Ron: Good. But what are these three concepts? Can you please outline the
Why Choose Us
- 100% non-plagiarized Papers
- 24/7 /365 Service Available
- Affordable Prices
- Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
- Will complete your papers in 6 hours
- On-time Delivery
- Money-back and Privacy guarantees
- Unlimited Amendments upon request
- Satisfaction guarantee
How it Works
- Click on the “Place Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
- Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
- Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
- Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
- From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.