908 resultados para Doctoral Education
Resumo:
As pre-registration nurse education programmes evolve within the United Kingdom, it is imperative to involve patient/client groups within the research process, as the outcome may invoke a change in the care delivery of the registered nurse (RN). This paper focuses upon children and how children might hypothetically contribute to informing a generic nursing programme in their capacity as a rights holder and expert in their own lives. Even though their contribution and value has been debated around their capacity as research advisor, research participant and co researcher, this paper explores how the child's view of their experience of hospital and of the good nurse could be best captured. Research is a powerful vehicle that can enable their voice to equally inform UK nurse educators and policy makers so that the child's health care needs are effectively met in hospital by RN's who complete a generic programme.
Resumo:
Graduate students’ development as researchers is a key objective in higher education. Research assistantships provide distinctive spaces where graduate students can be nurtured and shaped as novice researchers as they develop theoretical and methodological knowledge. However, few scholars have investigated graduate student research assistants’ experiences and the ways these experiences are influenced by institutional regulations, informal practices, and social relations. The purpose of this case-within-a-case study was to explore the research assistantship experiences of full-time and part-time doctoral students in Education at an Ontario university. I present separate subcases for full-time and part-time students, and an overarching case of research assistantships in one program at a specific period of time. The main question was how do institutional regulations, informal practices, and social relations influence full-time and part-time doctoral students’ access to and experiences within research assistantships. My objective was to draw from interviews and documents to acquire a thorough understanding of the organizational characteristics of research assistantships (i.e., structures of access, distribution, and coordination of participation) to explore the ways institutional regulations, informal practices, and social relations promote, prevent, or limit full-time and part-time students’ legitimate peripheral participation in research assistantships. Although I devoted particular attention to the ways students’ full-time and part-time status shaped their decisions, relationships, and experiences, I was conscious that other factors such as gender, age, and cultural background may have also influenced doctoral research assistant experiences.
Resumo:
Vol. 2 by H. E. Moore, J. H. Russel, and D. G. Ferguson.
Resumo:
The analysis of doctoral theses conducted in a scientific field is one of the pillars for the status of the field and this has been raised within the project Mapping the Discipline History of Education. With this work we intent to broaden and deepen our previous studies in the field of Doctoral thesis in History of Education. We have already presented some results about Doctoral thesis focused in one particular subject (History of Education in Franco’s times) in 2013, and Doctoral thesis registered in the Spanish database for dissertations, TESEO, in 2000, 2005 and 2010 in 2016. Starting from the works already presented about the thesis in France, Switzerland, Portugal and Italy, the aim of that article was to study the thesis included in TESEO which have among their descriptors “History of education”. We have analyzed variables such as national or local character, the study period and the duration. In ISCHE 38 (Chicago 2016), we intend to analyze the Doctoral thesis presented in Spanish universities during a decade but focusing neither on a particular subject nor on a database. Thus the main differences with our earlier researches are the criteria: On the one hand, we are going to decide if a doctoral thesis belongs or not to our field, and on the other hand we are not going to use only a database but we will try to find the Doctoral thesis in any base, repository or source.
Resumo:
The Collaborative Cohort Model (CCM) for research supervision was developed and piloted as an alternative to the Apprentice Master Model (AMM), which is currently used with most doctoral dissertations. The CCM was developed in response to concerns about completion rates and the quality of research supervision. The feedback from the initial cohort of doctoral students who have experienced the model is presented.
Resumo:
Although the sciences were being taught in Australian schools well before the Second World War, the only evidence of research studies of this teaching is to be found in the report, published by ACER in 1932 of Roy Stanhope’s survey of the teaching of chemistry in New South Wales and a standardized test he had developed. Roy Stanhope was a science teacher with a research masters degree in chemistry. He had won a scholarship to go to Stanford University for doctoral studies, but returned after one year when his scholarship was not extended. He went on to be a founder in 1943 of the Australian Science Teachers Association (ASTA), which honours this remarkable pioneer through its annual Stanhope Oration. In his retirement Stanhope undertook a comparative study of science
Resumo:
The high level of scholarly writing required for a doctoral thesis is a challenge for many research students. However, formal academic writing training is not a core component of many doctoral programs. Informal writing groups for doctoral students may be one method of contributing to the improvement of scholarly writing. In this paper, we report on a writing group that was initiated by an experienced writer and higher degree research supervisor to support and improve her doctoral students’ writing capabilities. Over time, this group developed a workable model to suit their varying needs and circumstances. The model comprised group sessions, an email group, and individual writing. Here, we use a narrative approach to explore the effectiveness and value of our research writing group model in improving scholarly writing. The data consisted of doctoral students’ reflections to stimulus questions about their writing progress and experiences. The stimulus questions sought to probe individual concerns about their own writing, what they had learned in the research writing group, the benefits of the group, and the disadvantages and challenges to participation. These reflections were analysed using thematic analysis. Following this analysis, the supervisor provided her perspective on the key themes that emerged. Results revealed that, through the writing group, members learned technical elements (e.g., paragraph structure), non-technical elements (e.g., working within limited timeframes), conceptual elements (e.g., constructing a cohesive arguments), collaborative writing processes, and how to edit and respond to feedback. In addition to improved writing quality, other benefits were opportunities for shared writing experiences, peer support, and increased confidence and motivation. The writing group provides a unique social learning environment with opportunities for: professional dialogue about writing, peer learning and review, and developing a supportive peer network. Thus our research writing group has proved an effective avenue for building doctoral students’ capability in scholarly writing. The proposed model for a research writing group could be applicable to any context, regardless of the type and location of the university, university faculty, doctoral program structure, or number of postgraduate students. It could also be used within a group of students with diverse research abilities, needs, topics and methodologies. However, it requires a group facilitator with sufficient expertise in scholarly writing and experience in doctoral supervision who can both engage the group in planned writing activities and also capitalise on fruitful lines of discussion related to students’ concerns as they arise. The research writing group is not intended to replace traditional supervision processes nor existing training. However it has clear benefits for improving scholarly writing in doctoral research programs particularly in an era of rapidly increasing student load.
Resumo:
While the studio is widely accepted as the learning environment where architecture students most effectively learn how to design (Mahgoub, 2007:195), there are surprisingly few studies that attempt to identify in a qualitative way the interrelated factors that contribute to and support design studio learning (Bose, 2007:131). Such a situation seems problematic given the changes and challenges facing education including design education. Overall, there is growing support for re-examining (perhaps redefining) the design studio particularly in response to the impact of new technologies but as this paper argues this should not occur independently of the other elements and qualities comprising the design studio. In this respect, this paper describes a framework developed for a doctoral project concerned with capturing and more holistically understanding the complexity and potential of the design studio to operate within an increasingly and largely unpredictable global context. Integral to this is a comparative analysis of selected cases underpinned by grounded theory methodology of the traditional design studio and the virtual design studio informed by emerging pedagogical theory and the experiences of those most intimately involved – students and lecturers. In addition to providing a conceptual model for future research, the framework is of value to educators currently interested in developing as well as evaluating learning environments for design.