Never "Done"

I am often sent drafts from students saying they are "done" with a section. It is so important to understand that you are not done with any part of the paper until the university approves the final draft. Every time a faculty member reads a chapter or section, he or she is sure to spot something they missed on previous reads. Why does this happen? Every time it is read, the reader is in a different cognitive mode. They may have recently run into issues with other students on APA format or grammar, and will be more aware of the issue when they read your paper. They may be more awake than previously or just had a cup of coffee.

Why is this important for you to remember? Because if you are in a mindset that you are done with a part of the paper you will tend to not reread it and add in new thoughts or ideas. It also makes you resentful and defensive when a reader points out problems, which is never good. You are writing a book; therefore, you must keep checking everything is consistent and written correctly. You would be very annoyed with a mystery writer who changes details between Chapter 1 and the middle or end of the book. It is similar with your dissertation, it is a whole project; while it is written in parts, you must continue to think of it as whole. The goal is to have the best dissertation you can have, to reach this goal, graciously accept criticism, make the changes, and learn about writing as you do so. 

Next time, we will discuss waiting. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Rewriting

You have rewritten your prospectus umpteen times for your chair. It is sent to your committee member who wants more changes. What is all this rewriting about? Are you really that bad of a writer?

Rewriting is an integral part of professional writing (as is criticism). It is tough to go back through and rework it again and again. However, it truly is part of the process and prepares you for peer review of future articles you will write. You are writing a very technical paper and it is easy to make errors, and not be precise. Keep in mind that changing things in one section of the paper often means having to change other sections. Always read the entire paper before resubmitting it, and make sure everything is consistent. There are no quick fixes in rewriting, but I can make a few suggestions.

Be gracious in accepting feedback; do not argue with the reviewer. If you truly feel he or she is wrong on a point, make an argument in a comment in your paper (support it with literature, APA manual). Always be polite, thank them for taking the time to read and critique your paper.

Carefully go through each comment and change it as needed. If it is a grammar or formatting issue, check the entire paper and make sure it does not show up again. Yes, I know how time consuming it is, but it will save you time in the end. While you may want to use the Replace function in Word, make yourself check each suggested change before replacing it. English is a fickle language; often what is correct in one circumstance is not in others, so double check.

Try reading your paper aloud to catch problems. If you find this does not work for you, ask someone who is a good writer to proof it for you. Again, no arguing! Thank them for helping you.

It is a great idea to keep notes of common problems you have in writing. You can then double-check these issues before submitting it to your reviewers. Read your writing critically, have you made clear arguments? Have you supported each statement with citations?

I find it helpful to think of rewriting as a challenge, I want to outwit the reviewer by making it as clear and correct as possible. While rewriting is not particularly fun, it can be a learning experience and will make you a stronger professional.

Next time, we will discuss being “done.”. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Prospectus: Faculty Review

You have finished a draft of your prospectus and sent it to me as your committee member, what am I looking for? I typically read through the paper twice. The first time I am looking at APA formatting, spelling and grammar issues. Be sure you double-check your citations and references with the APA manual; I will look at those closely. If you use any acronyms or abbreviations, make sure you spell them out the first you use them. If you use jargon (e.g., self-efficacy, locus of control, resiliency), make sure you define it (even if you think I know what you mean). A good rule of thumb is: would someone not familiar with your field of study know the term? If not, define it.

I then read it again concentrating on content. I want to make sure you are consistent in how you are describing your study throughout the paper. For example, if you are doing a qualitative study, you should not be using terms like "correlation." I will make sure your research questions are consistent with the literature you reviewed and your theory makes sense for your study. I will look for some predictions with your theory, as to how you expect the study to come out. I will look for evidence you understand your analyses and they make sense given your research questions. By the time I finish your paper, I should feel confident you understand the topic area and you are capable of doing the study. Finally, I will print out your references and go through the paper crossing off references as they are cited. They should come out even, no extra references or citations.

Personally, I use track changes and make many comments. I try to be clear in my concerns but would always want you to ask for clarifications if you were not sure what I meant. It is better not to guess if you are doing things right, save yourself some time and ask about issues.

Next time, we will consider rewriting. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu 

Prospectus: The Study

Nature of the Study

In the section Nature of the Study, you should describe your study methodology. The reader of this section is expecting to see specifics of how you will conduct your study. If you are using surveys, which one(s) will you use? How many participants are you planning to have? How did you arrive at this number? How will you recruit your participants? The more information you can provide, the better the reader can see you understand the research methods you are proposing to use.

Possible Types and Sources of Information or Data

The section is asking specifically, in your study what data will you use? Some possibilities include: test scores from college students, employee surveys, observations of children, interviews with practitioners, historical documents from state records, de-identified medical records, or information from a federal database.

Inappropriate sources to include in this section are literature you are reading, your committee, and any other data you have not previously addressed in the prospectus. This section should merely be a summary of what you have previously discussed in terms of data.

Finally, state how you plan to analyze your data. If you are doing a quantitative study, indicate the statistical tests you are planning and the dependent, independent, and moderating variables. Will you need post-hoc tests for your analyses? Indicate if post-hoc tests are appropriate (if you do not remember what these are, check out the chapter in this book on quantitative analyses).

If you are doing a qualitative study, how will you analyze the data? Be specific about coding and themes. If you are doing a mixed method study, indicate how you will examine the quantitative and qualitative aspects separately and together.

Overview.

You have written a first draft of your prospectus, congratulations! However, there are still some things to work on. Make sure all parts of your prospectus are consistent, make sure you are using appropriate terminology (e.g., do not use terms like "correlation" when talking about a qualitative study). In quantitative studies, make sure the research questions align with methods/ variables, and your analyses.

Next time, we will consider your prospectus from the faculty perspective. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Prospectus: Research Questions

The next section of the prospectus is your research questions. The research questions are your overall questions/ issues you are examining in your project. Keep in mind research questions are NOT interview questions (a common error), they are the more overarching questions. For a quantitative study, you should indicate any survey measures you will be using in your study in the research questions. Let me give you as an example, some research questions from the Stadtlander et al. (2013) mixed method paper. There were three primary research questions for the study:

(RQ1 qualitative) How do the oldest describe their relationship with their primary health provider relative to their reported health practices?

(RQ2 mixed methods) How do scores on the personality measures self-efficacy (as measured by Schwarzer & Jerusalem's, 1995 measure), resiliency (as measured by Wagnild & Young, 1993 measure) interact with primary health provider relationship descriptions and reported health practices?

(RQ3 quantitative) Schwarzer and Jerusalem (1995) and Halisch and Geppert (2012) reported self-efficacy correlates with LOC in younger elderly individuals. Does this relationship continue into the oldest-old age group?

Next time, we will finish the prospectus. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Prospectus: Theoretical Framework

This section of the prospectus is examining the theory you will be using in your study (this is not the qualitative method you will be using). Describe the theory(s), then take it to the next step and lay out what the theory predicts will happen in your study. If you find you cannot come up with predictions, it may not be an appropriate theory. To develop predictions, think through each step of your study and how it relates to your theory. It may make it clearer to give you an example from a recent article I wrote with some colleagues (Stadtlander et al., 2013):

The patient-by-treatment-context interactive model of Christensen and Johnson (2002) provides the framework for the study. The model proposes that the relationship between patient characteristics (e.g., personality and beliefs) and patient adherence (e.g., preventative care) is moderated by the treatment context (e.g., primary health provider characteristics and behavior). The model has been successfully applied to specific illnesses; for example, renal insufficiency and hemodialysis (Christensen, Moran, & Ehlers, 1999) and cardiac rehabilitation (Christensen et al., 1999). It does not appear to have been previously applied in the present context of ongoing preventative care in older adults. The patient (Locus of Control [LOC], resilience, self-efficacy, beliefs, and behavior) and treatment (Primary Health Provider [PHP] characteristics, health behaviors) variables in the current study were derived from the literature and are consistent with this model.

From the perspective of the patient-by-treatment-context interactive model of Christensen and Johnson (2002), adherence (preventative care) is expected to be best when the patient's characteristics (personality and beliefs) are consistent with the treatment context (PHP characteristics and behavior; Christensen, 2004). Thus, in the current study, there should be consistent preventative care (adherence) when the patient has higher internal LOC (being proactive in health), higher resilience (inner strength and optimism, health-promoting behaviors) and higher self-efficacy (more likely to seek information and self-confidence) and to indicate that they like or feel comfortable with their PHP (treatment). In addition, it would be expected that there would be less preventative care (lack of adherence) when the patient has lower internal LOC (i.e., external; not proactive in health), higher powerful others and chance scores (increased trust in PHP). Other expectations include lower resilience (higher level of subjective complaints, fewer health-promoting activities), and lower self-efficacy (less likely to apply health interventions [preventative care] and less self-confidence) and to indicate that they do not like or feel comfortable with their PHP (treatment).

Next time, we will work on your research questions. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Prospectus: Background

In the prospectus background section, it is common to have literally a list of relevant studies. However, keep in mind if you choose to do it this way, it must include information as to how each article relates to your study. You need to provide a representative list of scholarship and findings that support the main assertions in the problem statement, highlighting their relationship to the topic (e.g., “The variable XX was studied with a similar sample by Smith (2010) and Johnson (2008),” or “Jones’s (2011) examination of industry leaders showed similar trends in the same key segments”).

Think of this section as a way to demonstrate you have done your homework on the topic and are demonstrating it to the reader. Make sure you include references you have cited earlier in the paper and how they relate to your study. When the reader finishes this section they should feel convinced you have done a good preliminary literature check and have identified the most relevant research for your study.

Next time, we will work on the framework of your study. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu