Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

A Walden University Center for Faculty Excellence Tutorial Instructional Designer: Kristy Wake Subject Matter Experts: Dr. Paula Dawidowicz, Dr. Jennifer.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "A Walden University Center for Faculty Excellence Tutorial Instructional Designer: Kristy Wake Subject Matter Experts: Dr. Paula Dawidowicz, Dr. Jennifer."— Presentation transcript:

1 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

2 Welcome to Todays Webinar! Click the arrow to view panel Adjust audio setup as needed Ask questions throughout the webinar Technical Support: Evaluation link provided at end of webinar in the questions area September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 1

3 Todays 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 Coordinator Editor, JERAP Richard W. Riley College of Education and Leadership September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 2 Jennifer Smolka, Ph.D. Program Director, Ph.D. Program, Richard W. Riley College of Education and Leadership

4 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 students experience Can be Offered… Announcements Discussion Boards Assignments September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 3

5 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 September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 4

6 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 September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 5

7 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: September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 6

8 Committee September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 7 Committee Chair Committee Member (2 nd ) University Research Reviewer (3 rd )

9 Methodology Expert Feedback September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 8 Research Design & Method Methodology & Instruments Sample/participants Data Analysis Presentation of Data Primary on chapters 1, 3, 4, 5

10 Content Expert Feedback Placement in literature Social Change Overall Significance Primary on chapters 1, 2, 4, 5 Comprehensiveness of literature September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 9

11 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

12 Dissertation Feedback September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 11 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

13 Comprehensive Feedback All relative categories in the rubric should be commented upon Should reflect the stage of development September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 12

14 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. Im going to dialogue with the URR to see how we decide youd 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. September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 13

15 Quality Feedback September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 13

16 Best Feedback Continued… September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 13 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. Ill 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 elses 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, Id 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 youd 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. Im 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.

17 Poor Feedback Example From: Committee Member Regarding: 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. September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 13

18 Walden Faculty Policy September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 14

19 Time Management Techniques September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 15 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

20 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

21 Student Testimonials September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 18 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…

22 Student Testimonials September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 19 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…

23 Questions September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 20

24 Review Dissertatio n Structure Dissertation Committee Dissertatio n Feedback Comprehensive Feedback Policy for Timely Feedback Time Management Techniques Benefits of Quality Feedback Review of Content Covered Questions September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 21

25 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) September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 22

26 Presenter Contact Information Kristy Wake, M.S. Instructional Designer 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 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 September 2012| Proprietary and Confidential | Page 23


Download ppt "A Walden University Center for Faculty Excellence Tutorial Instructional Designer: Kristy Wake Subject Matter Experts: Dr. Paula Dawidowicz, Dr. Jennifer."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google