Doctoral Program Democracy Studies

Online Poll Evaluation Results

November 2014

This poll was conducted to evaluate the 1st year (Oct 2013 – Oct 2014) of the Doctoral Program Democracy Studies hosted at the University of Zurich.

Twenty-one doctoral students participate the DPDS, of which twenty fully completed the standardized questionnaire (95.2 %).

1.ProfileofrespondentsThe following four graphs summarize individual key characteristics of the DPDS participants.

2.AssessmentofintensivecourseondemocracyThe following graphs show the respondents’ satisfaction with the intensive course on democracy which was compulsory for all program participants.

The satisfaction levels range as follows:

Not at all = 1 Slightly = 2 Partly = 3 To a large extent = 4 Completely = 5

13#

6#

1# 1#

Field&of&master&degree&(n=21)#

Poli.cal#Science#

Media#and#Communica.on#Science#

Philosophy#

Other#

11"9"

1"

Origin&of&master&degree&(n=21)"

Swiss"university"

University"abroad"

No"answer"

16#

3#1#

Employment*(n=20)#

Reserach#collaborator#and/or#teaching#assistant#

Scholarship#

Other#12#

9#

Gender&(n=21)#

Male#

Female#

2

From a general point of view, the course participants were satisfied with the democracy course and its lecturers. Nevertheless, they pointed at two structural weaknesses which were at the expense of some students’ motivation during the course: First, the level of the different modules and discussions varied a lot. Without prior knowledge in the disciplines, participation

4.12%(n=17)'

4.72%(n=18)'

3.44%(n=18)'

3.39%(n=18)'

3.50%(n=18)'

4.06%(n=18)'

3.67%(n=18)'

1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

was'a'good'mixture'of'lecturing'and'discussion.'

was'well'organized'in'a'prac@cal'sense'(clear'when/where'it'would'take'place,'etc.).'

enabled'me'for'(more)'interdisciplinary'thinking.'

covered'a'sufficient'wide'range'of'topics'in'the'field'of'media@za@on.'

covered'a'sufficient'wide'range'of'topics'in'the'field'of'dena@onaliza@on.'

covered'a'sufficient'wide'range'of'topics'in'the'field'of'poli@cal'theory.'

contributed'to'a'more'comprehensive'understanding'of'some'major'challenges'to'democracy.'

The%course%...%

Sa@sfac@on'(mean)'

4.12%(n=17)'

3.89%(n=18)'

4.39%(n=18)'

4.41%(n=17)'

4.56%(n=16)'

3.94%(n=17)'

1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

engaged'sufficiently'with'ques=ons'and'comments.'

made'me'think'cri=cally'and'independently.'

gave'a'construc=ve'feedback'on'my'two'wriGen'essays.'

communicated'in'a'comprehensible'way.'

were'well'prepared.'

were'well'chosen.'

The%lecturers%...%

Sa=sfac=on'(mean)'

3.39$(n=18)'

3.00$(n=18)'

2.88$(n=17)'

2.71$(n=17)'

1.78$(n=18)'

1.61$(n=18)'

3.29$(n=17)'

3.25$(n=16)'

1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

My'interest'in'challenges'to'democracy'has'grown'because'of'this'course.'

I'could'extract'important'informaEon'from'one'or'the'other'module'session'for'my'dissertaEon.'

Too'much'Eme'was'spent'on'essay'wriEng.'

Too'much'Eme'was'spent'on'reading.'

Too'much'Eme'was'spent'on'discussions.'

Too'much'Eme'was'spent'on'lecturing.'

The'course'requirements'(readings,'preparaEon'of'discussions,'essays)'were'appropriate.'

The'discussions'in'the'individual'module'sessions'were'good'and'useful.'

General$assessment$

SaEsfacEon'(mean)'

57.14&(n=12)'

28.57&(n=6)'

46.62&(n=10)'

28.57&(n=6)'

38.10&(n=8)'

52.38&(n=11)'

0%' 10%' 20%' 30%' 40%' 50%' 60%'

A'populist'Zeitgeist'in'Western'Europe?'(Rooduijn)'

MediaCzaCon'of'democracy'(Esser)'

Global'democracy'K'What'is'at'stake?'(Dingwerth)'

VarieCes'of'democraCc'governance'in'the'context'of'deKnaConalizaCon'(Lavenex)''

NormaCve'challenges'to'democracy'(Miller)'

Some'fundamentals'on'democracy'(Cheneval)'

The&following&courses&were&of&par<cular&interest&for&me&

3

in discussions was almost impossible. Second, the workload compared to the credits delivered for participation was considered to be too high.

3.AssessmentofcompulsorytransferableskillworkshopsThe following graphs show the respondents’ participation in and satisfaction with the two transferable skills workshops, one of which is compulsory for the program participants.

Almost all participants considered it very reasonable to have the workshop(s) as part of the compulsory program activities. The general satisfaction level was slightly higher for the writing course than for the project management course.

4.AssessmentofresearchcolloquiumThe following graphs show the respondents’ satisfaction with the research colloquium which is compulsory for all program participants.

8"

9"

2" 1"

Compulsory*workshop*par/cipa/on*(n=20)"

Scien/fic"wri/ng"in"English"Scien/fic"project"management"Both"None"

3.44$(n=9)&

4.44$(n=9)&

4.78$(n=9)&

4.11$(n=9)&

3.11$(n=9)&

4.22$(n=9)&

3.78$(n=9)&

4.00$(n=9)&

1& 2& 3& 4& 5&

This&workshop&enabled&me&to&write&research&papers&in&English&more&fluently.&

It&is&reasonable&that&this&workshop&is&part&of&the&compulsory&program&acEviEes.&

The&first&program&year&is&the&appropriate&point&in&Eme&to&aHend&this&workshop.&

I&recommend&this&workshop.&

More&input&is&needed&to&further&develop&my&wriEng&skills.&

Expenditure&of&Eme&and&value&of&this&workshop&were&even.&

This&workshop&provided&sufficient&pracEcal&knowledge&and&experience.&

This&workshop&met&my&expectaEons.&

Sa,sfac,on$with$wri,ng$skill$workshop$

SaEsfacEon&(mean)&

3.09%(n=10)'

3.91%(n=10)'

4.82%(n=10)'

4.18%(n=10)'

2.80%(n=10)'

4.00%(n=10)'

4.18%(n=10)'

3.91%(n=10)'

1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

This'workshop'enabled'me'to'organize'my'disserta?on'project'more'efficiently.'

It'is'reasonable'that'this'workshop'is'part'of'the'compulsory'program'ac?vi?es.'

The'first'program'year'is'the'appropriate'point'in'?me'to'aIend'this'workshop.'

I'recommend'this'workshop.'

More'input'is'needed'to'further'develop'my'project'management'skills.'

Expenditure'of'?me'and'value'of'this'workshop'were'even.'

This'workshop'provided'sufficient'prac?cal'knowledge'and'experience.'

This'workshop'met'my'expecta?ons.'

Sa,sfac,on%with%project%management%workshop%

Sa?sfac?on'(mean)'

4

The general satisfaction level of the research colloquim was rather high. Irrespective of that, a few critical comments were made regarding the timing of the colloquium (at the beginning of the semester, bloc course) and the students’ engagement in the discussions, two aspects which seem to be related to each other. Another critical issue was the repsondents’ limited ability to learn (more) from the different presentations about social science research.

5.AssessmentoflearningagreementThe following graphs show the respondents’ satisfaction with the learning agreement which each program participant is obliged to design and sign together with his/her supervisor/s.

With the exception of the money available for the method school and the à la carte activities, respondents were satisfied with the learning agreement as an individually tailored PhD training instrument.

2.00$(n=19)'

4.33$(n=18)'

4.50$(n=20)'

1.70$(n=20)'

1.25$(n=20)'

1.56$(n=18)'

4.72$(n=18)''

1.63$(n=19)''

3.78$(n=18)''

3.95$(n=20)''

2.90$(n=20)'

1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

The'papers'were'provided'too'late'to'prepare'properly.'

The'end'of'the'first'program'year'was'the'appropriate'point'in'Bme'to'present'my'elaborated'research'idea.'

60'minutes'per'session'was'the'right'amount'of'Bme.'

I'would'appreciate'it'to'have'colloquium'sessions'elsewhere'than'in'Zurich'(to'strengthen'academic'and/or'social'relaBonships).'

The'colloquium'was'badly'organised'in'a'pracBcal'sense'(not'clear'when/where'it'would'take'place,'etc).'

I'would'have'preferred'to'be'discussed'by'peers'instead'of'advanced'scholars.'

My'discussant'did'a'good'job.'

In'general,'the'discussants'were'not'very'useful.'

I'personally'got'valuable'feedback'from'the'audience'when'I'did'my'presentaBon.'

The'discussions'were'generally'good.'

I'generally'learnt'a'lot'about'social'science'research.'

Sa/sfac/on$with$research$colloquium$

SaBsfacBon'(mean)'

3.38$(n=16)'

4.50$(n=18)'

1.61$(n=18)'

3.94$(n=17)'

4.41$(n=17)'

4.31$(n=13)'

1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

The'money'available'for'method'school(s)'and'other'à'la'carte'ac@vi@es'is'sufficient.'

The'Learning'Agreement'is'sufficiently'flexible'as'it'allows'for'adjus@ng'my'method'school(s)l'and'other'à'la'carte'ac@vi@es'in'accordance'with'my'work'progress'and'eventually'modified'needs.'

I'would'have'preferred'to'spend'my'@me'just'wri@ng'my'thesis'rather'than'doing'these'ac@vi@es.'

I'have'gained'experiences'that'are'important'for'my'CV'and'/'or'for'my'future'(academic)'career.'

I'expect'the'method'school(s)'and'other'à'la'carte'ac@vi@es'to'contribute'to'successful'comple@on'of'my'Ph.D.'

The'method'school(s)'and'other'à'la'carte'ac@vi@es'I'did'during'the'academic'year'20013U2014'met'my'general'expecta@ons.'

Sa-sfac-on$with$à$la$carte$ac-vi-es$

Sa@sfac@on'(mean)'

2"

4"

8"

5"

6"

3"

2"

2"

3"

2"

1"

9"

0" 1" 2" 3" 4" 5" 6" 7" 8" 9" 10"

Other"

Language"course"

Teaching"

Transferable"skills"workshop"(pedagogic"skills,"presentaDon"skills"etc.)"

InternaDonal"conference"/"coIauthored"paper"

InternaDonal"conference"/"singleIauthored"paper"

SubjectIspecific"course"at"another"Swiss"university"

SubjectIspecific"course"at"University"of"Zurich"

Method"course"at"another"Swiss"university"

Method"course"at"University"of"Zurich"

SubjectIspecific"school"

Method"school"

Diversity)of)à)la)carte)ac0vi0es)

Total"counts"

44.7$

27.7$

40.4$

57.4$

61.7$

0$ 10$ 20$ 30$ 40$ 50$ 60$ 70$

I$recommend$this$ac8vity.$

More$input$is$needed$to$further$develop$my$skills/knowledge.$

Expenditure$of$8me$and$value$of$ac8vity$were$even.$$

Ac8vity$provided$prac8cal$knowledge$and$experience.$

Ac8vity$met$my$expecta8ons.$

Assessment'of'à'la'carte'ac/vi/es'

Agreement$(in$%)$

5

In the past academic year 2013-14 most doctoral students attended summer schools and engaged in teaching. A majority of respondents was satisfied with the à la carte activities of their choice.

6.AdditionalprogramactivitiesThe following graphs show the respondents’ needs and desires regarding additional courses and workshops.

As regards the subject-specific training, a course on the conceptualization and measurement of democracy is of major interest for the respondents. In the field of methodology, courses on multilevel models, case studies and content analysis gain popularity. Training on publication strategies, effective presentation and the acquisition of external funding is mostly needed and desired in the field of transferable skills.

11"

3"

6"

2"

Conceptualizing"and"measuring"democracy"" Democracy"promo9on"in"and"through"interna9onal"organiza9ons"

Media"and"democracy"in"theory"and"prac9ce" Other"0"

5"

10"

15"

Subject(specific-courses-of-interest-(n=21,"mul9ple"answers"were"possible)"

7"

5"

11"

1"

8"

2"

8"

5"

0"

5"

10"

15"

Causal"inference" Introduc7on"to"networks"

Mul7level"analysis"(52.4"%)"

Scale"analysis" Case"study"methodology"(38.1"%)"

Process"tracing" Content"analysis"(38.1"%)"

Other"

Method'courses'of'interest'(n=21,"mul7ple"answers"were"possible)"

12#

2#

5#

7#

11#

4#

8#

10#

2#

Publica0on#

strategies#(57.1#%)#

Modera0on#of#

groups#

Conflict#and#

nego0a0on#

management#in#

academia#

Giving#and#receiving#

cri0cism#in#academia#

Acquisi0on#of#

external#funding#

(52.4#%)#

Media#coaching#for#

doctoral#students#

Leadership#

competencies#for#

doctoral#students#

Effec0ve#

presenta0ons#(47.6#

%)#

Other#

0#

5#

10#

15#

Transferable*skills*courses*of*interest*(n=21,#mul0ple#answers#were#possible)#

6

7.WorkingconditionsThe following graphs summarize respondents’ satisfaction with the structural conditions of being member of the doctoral program Democracy Studies.

Data show that a large majority is either not affected by any problems or does not perceive it as such. So far, there is only limited need in additional research funding for the next academic year 2014-15 (see below).

8.PersonalprogressThe following graphs show respondents’ satisfaction with their personal progress over the past academic year.

4.00$(n=8)&

4.10$(n=10)&

4.00$(n=13)&

2.50$(n=8)&

1& 2& 3& 4& 5&

The&doctoral&program&sufficiently&facilitates&the&con@nua@on&of&par@cipa@on&even&under&difficult&circumstances&(e.g.&disease,&maternity&/&paternity).&

The&doctoral&program&provides&sufficient&freedom&for&an&academic&stay&abroad.&

By&applying&for&addi@onal&field&work&money&I&can&improve&my&proceeding&with&my&Ph.D.&

I&would&have&preferred&to&be&closer&to&my&supervisor&than&to&the&NCCR&headquarter&(or&research&ins@tute).&

Sa*sfac*on$with$working$condi*ons$

Sa@sfac@on&(mean)&

3"

3"

14"

Need$of$addi)onal$funding$in$2014/5$(n=20)"

Yes" no"(no"need)" I"don't"know"

1"

2"

0"

1"

Purpose(of(addi-onal(funding(in(2014/5((n=4)"

Stay"abroad" Data"collec6on" Data"analysis" Text"edi6ng"

7

For a large majority of respondents it is very important to complete their PhD on time, which will be in almost all cases 2017. Based on the data, not all respondents were satisfied with the speed they have progressed so far. They indicated several reasons for that, with a particular emphasis on professional commitments (see below).

2.25$(n=20)'

3.69$(n=16)'

3.81$(n=16)'

4.00$(n=20)'

3.21$(n=19)'

1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

I'could'not'spend'enough':me'on'my'Ph.D.'

I'am'going'to'submit'at'least'one'paper'to'a'peerDreviewed'journal'during'the'next'program'year.'

I'am'planning'to'publish'my'disserta:on'as'a'monograph.'

It'is'very'important'for'me'to'finish'my'Ph.D.'on':me.'

My'Ph.D.'work'progressed'at'a'speed'I'am'sa:sfied'with'during'the'past'program'year.'

Sa.sfac.on$with$personal$progress$

Sa:sfac:on'mean)'

2"

5"

3"

1"

1"

3"

Reasons'of'delay'with'the'disserta1on'(n=20)"

Not"ge0ng"enough"support"from"my"supervisor""My"job"in"a"research"related"insBtuBon""My"job"outside"academia""My"parBcipaBon"in"the"Doctoral"Program"Democracy"Studies""Family"commitments""Other"

3"

13"

4"

Expected(year(of(comple0on((n=20)"

2016" 2017" 2018"

14#

1#

2#

1#

0#0#2#

Professional+goals+(n=20)#

Academia#(67.7#%)# Public#sector## Private#sector##

Think#tanks## NGO/GO## Media##

Other##

8

At this point in time, a large majority of respondents plans to pursue a career in the academia.

9.SupervisorThe following graph summarizes respondents’ satisfaction with their supervisor(s). It becomes evident that currently most doctoral students are highly satisfied and have no need in any ad-ditional measures to monitor the cooperation between doctoral student and supervisor. But as regards the supervisors’ engagement in motivating doctoral students, there is some room for improvement.

10.ProgramcoordinatorThe following graph indicates the respondents’ satisfaction with the coordinator of the pro-gram, which is very high on all dimensions.

11.GeneralassessmentThe final graph summarizes the respondents’ satisfaction with the doctoral program in general and its components in particular.

1.33$(n=12)'

4.00$(n=1)'

3.95$(n=20)'

4.50$(n=18)'

4.45$(n=20)'

1.40$(n=20)'

1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

I'would'appreciate'it'if'the'board'of'directors'followed'more'closely'the'rela@onship'between'my'supervisor(s)'and'me.'

In'case'of'tensions,'interven@ons'by'or'discussions'with'the'board'of'directors'improved'the'situa@on.'

My'supervisor(s)'mo@vated'me.'

When'I'needed'to'see'my'supervisor(s),'I'could'usually'get'an'appointment'rela@vely'soon.'

I'think'my'supervisor(s)'responded'construc@vely'when'I'contacted'him/her/them'about'issues'related'to'my'thesis.'

My'supervisor(s)'did'not'seem'interested'in'my'Ph.D.'progress.'

Sa+sfac+on$wit$supervisor(s)$

Sa@sfac@on'(mean)'

4.19%(n=16)'

4.85%(n=20)'

1.10%(n=20)'

1.25%(n=20)'

5.00%(n=20)'

5.00%(n=19)'

4.85%(n=20)'

1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

If'I'had'a'problem'with'my'supervisor(s),'I'would'consider'asking'the'program'coordinator'for'advice'or'support.'

Doctoral'school'acGviGes'(e.g.'workshops)'were'well'prepared'and'organized.'

The'moderaGon'of'the'research'colloquium'by'the'coordinator'made'me'feel'uncomfortable.'

In'general,'I'did'not'get'enough'informaGon'from'the'program'coordinator'about'what'is'going'on.'

When'I'approached'the'program'coordinator,'I'felt'she'made'a'real'effort'to'help'me.'

Usually'I'get'quick'and'helpful'answers'to'the'queries'I'address'to'the'program'coordinator.'

It'is'useful'that'a'program'coordinator'is'available'for'us'doctoral'students.'

Sa,sfac,on%with%program%coordinator%

SaGsfacGon'(mean)'

9

Allmost all doctoral students appreciate to be member of the doctoral program. They are (very) satisfied with the program staff, the supervisors, their individual learning agreement and the research colloquium. Some objections were made against the compulsory transferable skills workshops and the democracy course (see above).

As regards the operational level of the program, the timing of course activities can be optimized. A better balance between the three program disciplines is also considered important by the respondents, particularly with regard to any democracy module to be organized in future.

4.80%(n=10)'

4.75%(n=8)'

5.00%(n=20)'

4.63%(n=19)'

4,17%(n=18)'

4,10%(n=20)'

3,67%(n=18)'

3,47%(n=17)'

4,05%(n=20)'

1' 2' 3' 4' 5'

'student'representa7ve’s'work'in''board'of'directors'

'program'board'of'directors'

'program'coordinator'

my'supervisor(s)'

'Learning'Agreement'

'research'colloquium'

'compulsory'transferable'skills'workshops'

'intensive'course'on'democracy'

'doctoral'program'

General%sa3sfac3on%with%...%

Sa7sfac7on'(mean)'