Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Education Research International
Volume 2014, Article ID 790750, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/790750
Research Article

Doctoral Dissertation Supervision: Identification and Evaluation of Models

1Department of Educational Foundations, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka +234, Nigeria
2Chris-Harris Research & Educational Services, Awka +234, Nigeria

Received 29 April 2014; Revised 13 July 2014; Accepted 18 August 2014; Published 8 September 2014

Academic Editor: Eduardo Montero

Copyright © 2014 Ngozi Agu and Christy O. Odimegwu. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. D. Scott, A. Brown, I. Lunt, and L. Thorne, Professional Doctorates: Integrating Professional and Academic Knowledge, Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press, Berkshire, UK, 2004.
  2. S. Bako, “Universities, research and development in Nigeria: time for a paradigmatic shift,” in Proceedings of the 11th General Assembly of CODESRIA, on Rethinking African Development: Beyond Impasse, Towards Alternatives, pp. 2–316, Maputo, Mozambique, December 2005.
  3. R. K. Henson, D. M. Hull, and C. S. Williams, “Methodology in our education research culture: toward a stronger collective quantitative proficiency,” Educational Researcher, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 229–240, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. D. Archbald, “Research versus problem solving for the education leadership doctoral thesis: implications for form and function,” Educational Administration Quarterly, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 704–739, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  5. N. K. Duke and S. W. Beck, “Education should consider alternative formats for the dissertation,” Educational Researcher, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 31–36, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. A. Holbrook, S. Bourke, T. Lovat, and H. Fairbairn, “Consistency and inconsistency in PhD thesis examination,” Australian Journal of Education, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 36–48, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. T. W. Maxwell and R. Smyth, “Research supervision: the research management matrix,” Higher Education, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 407–422, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. C. Riehl, C. L. Larson, P. M. Short, and U. C. Reitzug, “Reconceptualizing research and scholarship in educational administration: learning to know, knowing to do, doing to learn,” Educational Administration Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 391–427, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. L. S. Shulman, C.M. Golde, A.C. Bueschel, and K. J. Garabedian, “Reclaiming education’s doctorates: a critique and proposal,” Educational Researcher, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 25–32, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  10. J. Ainley, The 1999 Postgraduate Research Experience Questionnaire, DETYA, Australian Council for Educational Research, Evaluations and Investigations Programme, Higher Education Division, Canberra, Australia, 2001.
  11. R. Neumann, The Doctoral Education Experience: Diversity and Complexity, Department of Education Training and Science, Canberra, Australia, 2003.
  12. N. Murphy, J. D. Bain, and L. Conrad, “Orientations to research higher degree supervision,” Higher Education, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 209–234, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. G. Wisker, “Learning conceptions and strategies of postgraduate students: Israeli PhD students—and some steps towards encouraging and enabling their learning,” in Proceedings of the 2nd Postgraduate Experience Conference, Cape Town, South Africa, April 1999.
  14. B. J. Barnes and A. E. Austin, “The role of doctoral advisors: a look at advising from the advisor's perspective,” Innovative Higher Education, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 297–315, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. C. Halse and J. Malfroy, “Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professional work,” Studies in Higher Education, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 79–92, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. G. Harman, “Producing PhD graduates in Australia for the knowledge economy,” Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 179–190, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  17. C. M. Golde, “Should i stay or should i go? Student descriptions of the doctoral attrition process,” Review of Higher Education, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 199–227, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. T. Mainhard, R. van der Rijst, J. van Tartwijk, and T. Wubbels, “A model for the supervisor-doctoral student relationship,” Higher Education, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 359–373, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. C. Golde and G. Walker, Envisioning the Future of Doctoral Education: Preparing Stewards of the Discipline, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif, USA, 2006.
  20. Federal Ministry of Information, “FG sets benchmark for post-graduate programmes in Nigerian varsities,” March 2012, http://fmi.gov.ng/fg-sets-benchmark-for-post-graduate-programmes-in-nigerian-varsities/.
  21. P. Okebukola, The State of University Education in Nigeria, National University Commission, Abuja, Nigeria, 2002.
  22. A. Olukoju, “The crisis of research and academic publishing in Nigerian universities: the twentieth century and beyond,” in Proceedings of the 28th Annual Spring Symposium on African Universities in the 21st Century, pp. 1–17, University of Illinois/CODESRIA, Dakar, Senegal, April 2002.
  23. C. Manathunga, “Supervisors watching supervisors. The deconstructive possibilities and tensions of team supervision,” Australian Universities Review, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 29–37, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  24. L. O. K. Lategan, “Why the fuss about research and postgraduate supervision?” in An Introduction to Postgraduate Supervision, L. O. K. Lategan, Ed., African Sun Media, Stellenbosch, South Africa, 2008. View at Google Scholar
  25. T. Wang and L. Y. Li, ““Tell me what to do” vs. “guide me through it”: feedback experiences of international doctoral students,” Active Learning in Higher Education, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 101–112, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  26. T. Vilkinas, “An exploratory study of the supervision of Ph.D./research students' theses,” Innovative Higher Education, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 297–311, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. G. M. Gurr, “Negotiating the “Rackety Bridge”—a dynamic model for aligning supervisory style with research student development,” Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 81–92, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  28. A. Blumberg, Supervisor and Teaching. A Private Cold War, McCutchan, Berkely, Calif, USA, 1974.
  29. J. Anderson, The Supervisory Process in Speech Language Pathology and Audiology, College Hill Press and Little Brown, Boston, Mass, USA, 1988.
  30. O. Dysthe, “Professors as mediators of academic text cultures: An interview study with advisors and master's degree students in three disciplines in a Norwegian University,” Written Communication, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 493–544, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. S. Knowles, “Feedback on writing in postgraduate supervision: echoes in response—context, continuity and resonance,” in Supervision of Postgraduate Research Education, A. Holbrook and S. Johnson, Eds., pp. 113–128, Australian Association for Research in Education, Coldstream, Australia, 1999. View at Google Scholar
  32. V. Kumar and E. Stracke, “An Analysis of written feedback on a PhD thesis,” Teaching in Higher Education, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 461–470, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. P. Race, Making Learning Happen. A Guide for Post-Compulsory Education, SAGE, London, UK, 2005.
  34. M. de Beer and R. B. Mason, “Using a blended approach to facilitate postgraduate supervision,” Innovations in Education and Teaching International, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 213–226, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. Federal Republic of Nigeria, Social Statistics in Nigeria, National Bureau of Statistics, Abuja, Nigeria, 2009.
  36. K. M. Elliot and D. Shin, “Student satisfaction: an alternative approach to assessing this important concept,” Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 197–209, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  37. T. Gruber, S. Fuß, R. Voss, and M. Gläser-Zikuda, “Examining student satisfaction with higher education services: using a new measurement tool,” International Journal of Public Sector Management, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 105–123, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. H. E. Campbell, K. Gerdes, and S. Steiner, “What's looks got to do with it? Instructor appearance and student evaluations of teaching,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 611–620, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. N. Vevere and V. Kozlinskis, “Students' evaluation of teaching quality,” US-China Education Review B, vol. 5, pp. 702–708, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  40. C. Glymour, “Why the university should abolish faculty course evaluations,” 2003, http/www.hss.cmu.edu/philosophy/faculty-glymour.php.
  41. D. Hammermesh and A. Parker, “Beauty in the classroom: professor's pulchritude and putative pedagogical productivity,” NBER Working Papers 9853, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  42. M. W. Lindahl and M. L. Unger, “Cruelty in student teaching evaluations,” College Teaching, vol. 58, pp. 71–76, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  43. F. Zabaleta, “The use and misuse of student evaluations of teaching,” Teaching in Higher Education, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 55–76, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  44. H. W. Marsh, K. J. Rowe, and A. Martin, “PhD students' evaluations of research supervision: issues, complexities, and challenges in a nationwide Australian experiment in benchmarking universities,” The Journal of Higher Education, vol. 73, no. 3, pp. 313–348, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus