Perceptions of PhD Qualifying Examination by Doctoral Students and Directors
Conference:
ECER 2010
Format:
Paper

Session Information

22 SES 07 C, Academic Work and Professional Development

Paper Session

Time:
2010-08-26
15:30-17:00
Room:
M.B. SALI 16, Päärakennus / Main Building
Chair:
Mariana Gaio Alves

Contribution

Qualifying examination is a requirement for doctoral students in many programs to continue to their PhD study. While the format of this examination changes in departments, it may include paper-pencil exam, verbal exam, or take home assignment, or some combinations of these options. Decisions about the format of the qualifying examination are generally made by a PhD committee in each department.

 

Doctoral students generally do not have clear knowledge of the content and standards of the qualifying examination. This uncertainty causes students to study too hard and disappoint after taking the examination because they use only a little part of their knowledge (Nerad & Cerny, 1997). Estrem and Lucas (2003) found out that only 43% of the 59 doctoral programs which they examined had explanations about the purpose of the examination. Unfortunately, 97% of them did not contain any information about the assessment. Researchers also emphasized that the efficiency of the assessments should be investigated. Frustenberg and Nichols-Casebolt (2001) conducted a study by using qualitative research methods and asked questions to directors of doctoral programs about qualifying examination. Two themes emerged from this data: first one is to provide opportunity for students to strengthen their knowledge and the second one is to provide support for students’ development in their dissertation. On the other hand, when directors were asked what should have been assessed in examination, some stated that the mastery of students’ knowledge should be assessed and some others focused on some specific knowledge. Another idea indicated the importance of the assessment of some skills such as analyzing, organizing, integrating different areas of knowledge and criticizing the given information. This study documented that the doctoral program directors did not have a common view of the content of the examination.

 

The present study intends to investigate the perceptions of PhD students and directors about the qualifying examination. PhD students’ experiences related to examination and perceptions of the directors enrolled in this process will be examined. In this study, following research questions will be sought:

·         Is there any difference between students’ perceptions of the qualifying examination before and after taking the examination?

·         Is there any difference between the students’ and directors’ perceptions about the qualifying examination?

·         What are the perceived effect of the qualifying examination on students’ emotional stance, academic development, and life style?

Method

Participants of this study will be PhD students who are preparing for the qualifying examination and who have already taken examination, and directors or members of qualifying examination committee in several doctoral programs at Middle East Technical University in Ankara, Turkey. Three interview protocols developed by the researchers will be used for data collection. Pre-examination protocol and post-examination protocol focus on doctoral students’ perceptions about qualifying examination. Director protocol focuses on directors’ or committee members’ perceptions. The pilot studies of the interview protocols have been completed. Documents provided for the PhD students in doctoral programs about the scope of the qualifying examination will also be gathered as an additional data source. One-to-one interviews will be conducted by the participants and audio-recorded. The transcribed interviews will be analyzed through inductive coding strategies suggested by Miles and Huberman (1994).

Expected Outcomes

The findings from the pilot study suggest that the doctoral students are generally not aware of the evaluation process. They believe that their efforts in studying for the examination would only be meaningful if they would have the chance to implement their learning in a research, however, they are not given such a chance. Doctoral students who have taken the examination express that they would like to have a feedback about their performances after the examination but they are not provided with this information. They claim that they have forgotten most of what they studied short after the examination. Doctoral students’ social life seems to be affected by the examination and they generally receive support from other examination takers. Qualify examination directors believe that the examination contributes to the doctoral students’ knowledge and skills. The findings of the real study are expected to provide the doctoral programs with the feedback for the examination process and the differences in perceptions of the examination implementers and takers. It is hoped that the study will contribute to the development of the qualify examination procedures in higher education.

References

Estrem, H, & Lucas, B. E. (2003). Embedded traditions, uneven reform: The place of the comprehensive exam in composition and rhetoric phd programs, Rhetoric Review, 22, 396-416. Frustenberg, A., & Nichols-Casebolt, A. (2001). Hurdle or Building Block: Comprehensive Examinations in Social Work Doctoral Education. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 21, 19-37. Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M.(1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd ed.).Thousand Oaks: Sage. Nerad, M. & Cerny, J. (1997). From facts to action: Expanding the educational role of the graduate division. In: Maresi Nerad et al. (Eds), Graduate Education in the United States (pp. 339-350). Greenwich, CTI: JAI Press.

Author Information

Middle East Technical University
Elementary Education
Ankara
ODTÜ
Elementary education
ankara
Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.