LEARNING REFLECTIONS ON COURSE WORK AS A DOCTORAL SCHOLAR

Kartheek R. Balapala, Victor Mwanakasale, Monica Mwenya Chirwa

Abstract


In all fields of life science, research is a feeder system that provides essential knowledge, skill, and innovation. A six-month course of study that is required of all research scholars has been proposed and enacted due to research developments and quality improvements in doctoral research programs. The majority of difficulties were experienced during the thesis writing, viva, and correction phases of their research; nonetheless, better postgraduate centers and more accommodating financial aid policies are still required to foster inclusive learning environments for postgraduates. In order to meet the various requirements and expectations of full-time and distance-learning doctorate students, it is crucial for supervisors to be knowledgeable about a variety of postgraduate supervising methodologies. This research paper aims to study the scholar’s perception of the coursework and assessment during the first year of doctoral study.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


Keywords


assessment of course work, DSc Program, supervisory practices

Full Text:

PDF

References


Airasian, P. W., & Madaus, G. F. (1972). Functional types of student evaluation. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 4(4), 221-233.

Assessment. https://www.edglossary.org/assessment/2015.

Bell, C., & Harris, D. (2013). Evaluating and assessing for learning. Routledge.

Boud, D. (1986). Facilitating learning in continuing education: Some important sources. Studies in Higher Education, 11(3), 237-243.

Boud, D., & Brew, A. (1995). Developing a typology for learner self-assessment practices. Research and development in Higher Education, 18(1), 130-135.

Brew, A. (1999). Research and teaching: Changing relationships in a changing context. Studies in higher education, 24(3), 291-301.

Carver, S. M., Lehrer, R., Connell, T., & Erickson, J. (1992). Learning by hypermedia design: Issues of assessment and implementation. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 385-404.

Galton, F. (1889). Natural inheritance. Macmillan and Company.

Katuu, S. (2019, June). The utility of visual methods in the research odyssey. In 18th European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies (p. 164). University of Witwatersrand, South Africa: Academic Conferences and Publishing International.

Krauss, S. E., & Ismail, I. A. (2010). PhD Students' Experiences of Thesis Supervision in Malaysia: Managing Relationships in the Midst of Institutional Change. Qualitative Report, 15(4), 802-822.

Leach, L., Neutze, G., & Zepke, N. (2001). Assessment and empowerment: Some critical questions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(4), 293-305.

Macfarlane, B. (2004). Teaching with integrity: The ethics of higher education practice. Routledge.

Messick, S. (1989). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational researcher, 18(2), 5-11.

Moss, P. A. (1992). Shifting conceptions of validity in educational measurement: Implications for performance assessment. Review of educational research, 62(3), 229-258.

Moss, P. A. (1994). Can there be validity without reliability?. Educational researcher, 23(2), 5-12.

Shepard, L. A. (1993). Chapter 9: Evaluating test validity. Review of research in education, 19(1), 405-450.

Sidhu, G. K., Kaur, S., Fook, C. Y., & Yunus, F. W. (2013). Postgraduate supervision: Exploring Malaysian students’ experiences. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 133-141.

Sidhu, G. K., Kaur, S., Fook, C. Y., & Yunus, F. W. (2014). Postgraduate supervision: Comparing student perspectives from Malaysia and the United Kingdom. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123, 151-159.

Taylor, C. (1994). Assessment for measurement or standards: The peril and promise of large-scale assessment reform. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 231-262.

Walton, H. (1997). Small group methods in medical teaching. Medical education, 31(6), 459-464.

Zeng, L., Proctor, R. W., & Salvendy, G. (2011). Can traditional divergent thinking tests be trusted in measuring and predicting real-world creativity?. Creativity Research Journal, 23(1), 24-37.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v10i1.4643

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2023 Kartheek R. Balapala, Victor Mwanakasale, Monica Mwenya Chirwa

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2023. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).