Please provide a 150 word- response to each discussion post below:
1. At this point in the process there are ironically very few questions and yet so many questions that remain to be answered. For starters I find it difficult to ask questions about the process when I am not immersed in the process currently. I am reading information about the process and learning from others about how to start the dissertation process. However, the dissertation defense is shrouded in mystery. I am very intrigued by the prospects of beginning my research project.
The dissertation defense is one of the areas that appear to be a real unknown. When watching the dissertations to complete the first discussion I noticed several similarities and differences. Each of the similarities and differences left me to wonder if it is based on the submitted work or if it is a set amount of time that is scheduled ahead of time.
Another area of concern when considering the dissertation defense process is the aspect of approval. I often wonder how the approval systems work to bring a student towards the completion of the dissertation. These are all basic questions and concerns that are derived from the absence of knowledge about the exact process. Questions from the text like “What was the most significant aspect of the work you’ve done,” and “How will you communicate your work to the other scholars in the field” stand out as potential considerations (Roberts, 2018). I look forward to the challenge of completing the dissertation process and moving on to the next phase of my life.
2. Some of the tips for the dissertation defense were surprising to me. From my perspective they appear to be ways to manage the stresses of the process. These include breathing exercises, relaxation techniques, staying calm, and controlling emotions. This tells me that the process can be stressful, but it is important to be prepared for these circumstances by maintaining your composure (Roberts, 2018). In addition, there appears to be an emphasis on building and maintaining confidence. As a speaker, criticisms need to be accepted and appreciated to grow for the experience, maintaining eye contact and smiling is valuable to exude confidence and a positive attitude, and being sharp and precise with your responses is important to invoke a good impression on the observers (Roberts, 2018).
Reference
Roberts, C., Hyatt, L. (2018). The Dissertation Journey, 3rd Edition. [[VitalSource Bookshelf version]]. Retrieved from vbk://9781506373331
3. In my observations of the dissertation defenses presented, I noticed several similarities and differences. Regarding the presentation format, both candidates delivered formal presentations summarizing their research, methodologies, findings, and conclusions. This was followed by a question-and-answer session, where I observed variations in the length and depth of discussions. In some instances, the committee took a more active role, steering the conversation. The presenters demonstrated confidence, knowledge, and a sense of humor, making their presentations engaging. Additionally, both candidates incorporated personal backgrounds and discussed the practical applications of their research to their lives or future endeavors.
The committee evaluation process was a common feature in both defenses. Comprising faculty members or field experts, the committees demonstrated a high level of knowledge in the researched areas. Their role was crucial in evaluating the rigor, validity, and contribution of the candidates’ work. The rigorous examination aspect varied, with some committees being more critical than others. This critical examination focused on probing the theoretical frameworks, research designs, data analyses, and the overall significance of the studies. Furthermore, both defenses were open to the public, allowing peers, colleagues, and interested individuals to attend. One of the candidates expressed gratitude to her family for attending, highlighting the public nature of these academic events and the importance of familial support.
Brown, T. (2023). Personal Experience. Author. (n.d.).
4. To get a better understanding of the dissertation process I viewed three dissertation defenses. To this assignment, I will focus on two of the three dissertations written by Raichle Farrelly and Beth Karlin. There were some similarities and some differences of note that help me to understand the dissertation process.
Farrelly and Karlin shared some similarities in their dissertation defenses. Each of the dissertation defenses were presented as if they were speakers at a conference. They spoke of their topic as experts in front of a group of people and then answered any questions that arose from the audience. In addition, they both chose to keep the presentation very simple. They limited the amount of information that showed up on the screen and focused on disseminating the pertinent outlying information orally (Farrelly, 2012; Zarlab, 2014). Despite the many similarities between the two dissertation defenses there were also some differences. One of the differences that stood out was the length of the dissertation defenses. Farrelly defended her dissertation for 43 minutes and 15 seconds while Karlin defended her dissertation for one hour and 27 minutes and 53 seconds. The main difference between the time was the amount of time spent of question and answering for Karlin. The questioning portion of the defense lasted roughly 39 minutes which was nearly the amount of time spent on the dissertation presentation is stark comparison to the 8 minutes that Farrelly spent for the questioning and answering portion of her dissertation defense. The second difference of note between the two dissertation defenses was the amount of detail and the section within the defense. Lastly, the topics were different as well with Farrelly speaking on the Activity theory and Karlin speaking on Energy Feedback (Farrelly, 2012; Zarlab, 2014).