a walden university center for faculty excellence tutorial instructional designer: kristy wake...

A Walden University Center for Faculty Excellence Tutorial

Instructional Designer: Kristy Wake

Subject Matter Experts: Dr. Paula Dawidowicz, Dr. Jennifer Smolka, and Dr. Louis Milanesi

Providing Quality Feedback to Dissertation Students

Welcome to Today’s Webinar!

• Click the arrow to view panel• Adjust audio setup as needed• Ask questions throughout the webinar

• Technical Support: 800-263-6317• Evaluation link provided at end of

webinar in the questions area

September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 1

Today’s Presenters

Kristy Wake, M.S.Instructional Designer

Center for Faculty Excellence

Paula Dawidowicz, Ph.D. Ph.D. Education Research Coordinator

Ph.D., EdS Interim AEA CoordinatorEditor, JERAP

Richard W. Riley College of Education and Leadership


Jennifer Smolka, Ph.D.Program Director, Ph.D. Program,

Richard W. Riley College of Education and Leadership

Recall that Feedback…

More

than a

Grade

•Teaches students:•How

well they are doing

•How to improve

•How to continue to learn

It Should…

•Be personal, respectful, and specific

•Encourage reflection and critical thinking

•Acknowledge student’s experience

Can be

Offered…

•Announcements

•Discussion Boards

•Assignments


Outcomes

Recognize your roles and responsibilities within the committee Differentiate between quality vs. poor dissertation feedback Provide timely feedback to students Provide comprehensive feedback to students Discuss the reasons why quality dissertation feedback is both

beneficial for the student as well as the faculty member


Agenda

Dissertation Structure

Dissertation Committee

Dissertation Feedback

Comprehensive Feedback

Policy for Timely

Feedback

Time Management Techniques

Benefits of Quality

Feedback

Review of Content Covered

Questions


Dissertation Structure

• Developing Scholarly Writers

• Developing experience

• Passionate

• Anxious

• Goal Oriented

• Transitional Phase

• Guidance

Students Are:

• The dissertation is a

• Scholarly product: • Problem• Purpose• Research questions • Methodology • Data description • Results• Conclusions

Two Parts:


Committee


• Committee Chair

• Committee Member (2nd)

• University Research Reviewer (3rd)

Methodology Expert Feedback


• Research Design & Method• Methodology & Instruments• Sample/participants• Data Analysis• Presentation of Data• Primary on chapters 1, 3, 4,

5

Content Expert Feedback

• Placement in literature• Social Change• Overall Significance• Primary on chapters 1, 2, 4, 5• Comprehensiveness of literature


URR Role

September 2012 | Proprietary and Confidential | Page 10

• Advisory Member of Committee

• Highly Trained

• Represents the University

• Comprehensive Review/Feedback

• Communicates with the Chair

Dissertation Feedback


• Relationship with Student

• Refer Student to Rubric when Necessary

• Provide comments in first person using “I”

• Provide both Positive and Negative Feedback

• If Major Revisions are Needed, Limit Feedback

• Include a Summation

• Be Polite – “Can you rephrase this so I can better understand…”

• Offer suggestions rather than Criticism


• All relative categories in the rubric should be commented upon

• Should reflect the stage of development


Quality Feedback

Quality Feedback – from a second member –

• Thanks for the addition of the information in the review of literature. • I think there is a problem with the use of the word "relationship" in the questions. Relationship has a

connotation of "correlation" and you are not doing this, you are looking for differences. In addition in the purpose/research questions section you want 2-3 research questions that subsume all the questions you have and then in Methodology you can break out the questions.

• I think that in your table of justifying the questions you should refer back to the research questions.• Under data analysis, after seeing the research questions, I think you are going to have to do chi-square, it no

longer becomes an option. Also under the description of each analysis I think you can put in some null and directional hypotheses particularly related to the demographics. This is not the same as the null hypothesis that you had before (which wasn't really a null), these are only specifically related to specific questions and demographics. I’m going to dialogue with the URR to see how we decide you’d best present it because there are v Again this is not the same as you had before that I told you to take out, what you had before was an overall study hypothesis which was not null at all and couldn't really be tested, these that I have included now only relate to some of the demographic questions. I hope you see the difference.

• I would appreciate it is you would highlight new or significantly fixed information, as otherwise I have to go back and forth between screens to find what it added, etc. It would just be very helpful to me.

I think you are getting there, so if you consider what I have written here (clean up the questions, and info to data

analysis) then you should be well on your way.


Quality Feedback


Best Feedback Continued…


Hello Candidate, Thanks for getting what you had previously done on your prospectus to me this week. I hope I have given you lots of food for thought. I enjoyed our phone call conversation last week with you. It helps me understand you as a candidate and where we need to go in this project study. I’ll attach the rubric that you need to follow for the building of your prospectus along with a former student of mine from last semester whose work might give you guidelines as to what the end product will look like. Sometimes seeing someone else’s work helps. I have obtained permission from her to use her prospectus as an example. I understand the pressure you must be under finishing up on your job that you have now and preparing for your new position in January. In addition, you are taking an online class, which I understand to be very demanding. My recommendation would be to start and work on this task section-by-section. For next week, could you see about more information on the description of the problem? If this will change due to your new position in January and you feel you cannot provide the information needed, I’d then like to see the review of the literature section start to be filled in. This gives me information about what you are reading and helps me know how to guide your progress. If you’d like to chat in the near future about the use of participants, the problem statement, and discuss your theoretical foundations for your study, let me know. I’m here to help. Thanks again. Wishing you all the very best. Dr. Chair P.S. I will forward this on to Dr. Second Member just to keep him informed.

Poor Feedback Example

From: Committee MemberRegarding: Dissertation Proposal

“There is not much in the way of detail here, but a case study approach would be appropriate. I'm OK with what she has done.”


Walden Faculty Policy




• Spreadsheet or database with the names of students and the date they submit anything for review, AND the due date feedback should be sent to them

• Some students find the 14 day wait time dissatisfactory. One professor states that she lets the student know that she has received the draft and when she expects to return it. She also suggests what the student should work on while she is doing the review (keep the students engaged).

• Use of dissertation checklists

• “Make a Date with the Paper”

Benefits of Quality Feedback

September 2012 | Proprietary and Confidential | Page 16

Student further develops as a

scholar practitioner

Student is recognized for their

skills Student forms a stronger relationship

with the faculty member

Student has the opportunity to learn from their mistakes

Student experience at

Walden is enhanced

Student Testimonials


“Her positive and individual comments after each assignment

were extremely rewarding and motivational…”

“She made me feel as if she were actually there. She had higher

expectations and I learned more. I have more feedback/contact with her

in this one course than all four previous courses combined. Her method of teaching made a huge difference in my interest level and

desire to learn!”

“It was an honor to have X as my instructor. Her positive comments

made me a better writer…”

Student Testimonials


“I feel that they are the experts and we are learning; therefore, they

should be giving input.”

“The feedback did not help me evaluate my work. She simply

restated the directions and put a ‘You effectively….’ in front of them. I felt very isolated in this class, but this professor made no attempt to encourage me and make me feel

at ease about whether or not I was on the right track…”

“…I would like to see not just positive feedback, but also places

that I could improve…”

Questions


Review

Dissertation

Structure

Dissertation Committee

Dissertation

Feedback


Policy for Timely

Feedback


Benefits of Quality

Feedback

Review of Content Covered

Questions


Further Resources

• Self Paced Modules in ELMS:– Providing Feedback to Students (NFO)– Building Relationships with Students (NFO)

• eCampus Job Aids:– Providing Quality Feedback to Dissertation Students (CFE

Community)


Presenter Contact Information

• Kristy Wake, M.S.• Instructional Designer• [email protected]• Center for Faculty Excellence

• Paula Dawidowicz, Ph.D. • Ph.D. Education Research Coordinator• Ph.D., EdS Interim AEA Coordinator• Editor, JERAP--www.publishing.waldenu.edu/jerap • [email protected]• Richard W. Riley College of Education and Leadership

• Jennifer Smolka, Ph.D.• Program Director, Ph.D. Program• [email protected] • Richard W. Riley College of Education and Leadership


mailto:[email protected]



a walden university center for faculty excellence tutorial instructional designer: kristy wake...

Documents

confidential page

quality dissertation

limit feedback

negative feedback

poor dissertation feedback

methodology expert feedback

chair slide

leadership slide