2.4 Doctoral program issues: commentary on companion dissertations  (Page 13/14)

1. Highly effective companion dissertation programs require creating a departmental advocacy and commitment to this type of collaborative activity. Ideally, this advocacy and commitment should be established before the program is implemented.

2. Highly effective companion dissertation programs also require a department faculty to“bring on board”members of the graduate college responsible for final approval of each companion dissertation.

3. Since the concept of companion dissertations is not widely known, it would be informative if the first chapter of each companion dissertation referenced a dissertation appendix that explained this concept. Ideally, the appendix should have two parts. The first part should provide a brief but informative general description of the characteristics encountered in a companion dissertation. The second part should be designed to include a brief specific description of two pieces of information: (a) a brief explanation of the individual and collaborative contributions to be presented in the dissertation and (b) a list of other companion dissertation authors.

4. Finally, we recommend that the title reflect the companion study as in the following: Dissertation A. A study of the implementation of a standardized dress code and student achievement of African American students in a suburban high school: A companion study, and Dissertation B. A study of the implementation of a standardized dress code and student achievement of Hispanic students in a suburban high school: A companion study. Individuals who are reading one study, then know immediately to look for the companion to this study. If the indication is not listed in the title, the indication should be noted in the abstract.

Companion dissertations can provide unique opportunities for faculty and graduate students to collaborate. Such collaboration mirrors and simulates real-world academia in most instances today in which faculty find themselves more and more collaborating in research endeavors on either common research interests or via the use of various individuals’areas of expertise.

References

Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and difference Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Foucault, M. (1972). The archeology of knowledge. New York: Harper Colophon.

Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge. New York: Pantheon.

Humphry, J. D., Coté, G. L., Walton, J. R., Meinenger, G. A.,&Laine, G. A. (2005). A new paradigm for graduate research and training in the biomedical sciences and engineering. Advances in Physiology Education, 29, 98-102. Retrieved on January 10, 2007, from doi:10.1152/advan.00053.2004

Lyotard, J. F. (1984). The post‑modern condition: A report on knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

May, P. N. (1992). Field analysis of the integrated activity learning sequence approach to science instruction at the elementary school level. Part 1: Student performance. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(07), 2405. Retrieved on January 20, 2007, from http://proquest.umi.com.unx1.shsu.edu:2048/pqdweb?index=16&did=16&did=744122051&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=2&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1170335252&clientId=96