Doctoral Student Experience (DSE) Student Handbook Version ... · Dissertation course DIS9904A –...
Transcript of Doctoral Student Experience (DSE) Student Handbook Version ... · Dissertation course DIS9904A –...
1
Doctoral Student Experience (DSE)
Student Handbook
Version 1.0: October 2016
© Northcentral University
2
DSE Student Handbook
Table of Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 4
Section 1: The Dissertation Process ................................................................................ 5
1.1 Dissertation Courses and Committees ................................................................... 6
1.2 Dissertation Course Overview ................................................................................ 6
1.3 Dissertation Course Sequence ............................................................................... 8
1.4 Dissertation Template ............................................................................................ 9
1.5 DSE Dissertation Grading .................................................................................... 10
1.5.1 on Rubric .......................................................................................................... 10
1.5.2 ing Using the Dissertation Rubric ...................................................................... 11
1.5.3 Progression Criteria .......................................................................................... 11
1.5.4 sequences for Failing to Submit Weekly Assignments ...................................... 12
1.5.5 the Rubric ......................................................................................................... 12
1.5.6 ubmission Timeframes for Faculty Feedback .................................................... 13
1.5.7 Taskstream turnaround times (calendar days – midnight Sunday - MST*) ........ 13
1.5.8 ademic Performance Grades ............................................................................ 14
1.6 Taskstream Submissions ..................................................................................... 15
1.6.1 to Access Taskstream ....................................................................................... 17
1.6.2 Troubleshooting Taskstream ............................................................................. 18
Section 2: The Dissertation Committee ......................................................................... 20
2.1 Dissertation Committee Composition ................................................................... 20
2.2 Selection of Committee Members ........................................................................ 20
2.3 Committee Responsibilities .................................................................................. 20
2.4 Working with a Committee ................................................................................... 21
2.5 Changes in Committee Assignments ................................................................... 21
Section 3: Considerations and Policies (refer to the Catalog for most current info) ....... 21
3.1 Time Limits .......................................................................................................... 21
3
DSE Student Handbook
3.2 Academic Integrity ............................................................................................... 22
3.3 Code of Conduct .................................................................................................. 22
3.4 Satisfactory Academic Progress .......................................................................... 22
APPENDIX A: Concept Paper sections to Dissertation Proposal Sections Mapping . 25
APPENDIX B: Dissertation Rubric (Manuscript sample)……………………………….26
4
DSE Student Handbook
Introduction
This Handbook (and the documents referenced within) is a resource outlining major elements of the Northcentral University dissertation process. Students and faculty members involved in research and dissertation courses are strongly encouraged to read this Doctoral Student Experience (DSE) Handbook and associated documents (rubric and templates) before beginning work on a dissertation. The terms Dissertation Chair and Chair are used interchangeably within this document.
If you are a student and have questions not answered in this DSE Student Handbook or in any of the supplementary materials, please speak to your Dissertation Chair (academic issues) or Academic Advisor (program or degree issues). Note: Students are responsible for staying current with changes to their program. Check with your Academic Advisor if you have questions about your program of study.
Doctoral Students are identified when they have successfully passed their Comprehensive Examinations/ePortfolio course or end of program coursework as denoted in their Program curriculum outlined in the catalog. Students are encouraged to identify a researchable topic and their preliminary methods approach by the completion of program coursework. This process should be completed by the last course in the program coursework. Based upon the identified topic and methodology, an appropriate Chair and Subject Matter Expert (SME) will be aligned with the needs of each individual student and assigned accordingly.
5
DSE Student Handbook
Section 1: The Dissertation Process
The dissertation is the capstone accomplishment in the doctoral student’s degree program. The PhD dissertation has a research focus, and the applied degree (e.g. DBA, and EdD) is practice based. The doctoral dissertation is a substantial, scholarly work conducted independently by a student under the guidance of faculty members comprising the student’s Doctoral Dissertation Committee. In the dissertation process, the student:
Identifies a researchable problem substantiated through evidence Summarizes, analyzes, and integrates recent (generally five years or less)
scholarly literature and research relevant to the topic under study (ultimately) Presents original research in an area related to their program and
specialization. (While PhD dissertations contribute to the body of research, the applied doctorate dissertations typically contribute to practice).
Completes a final manuscript comprised of five Chapters: Chapter One: introduces the problem under study and the evidence
substantiating the existence of the problem; outlines an initial review of literature on the topic under study; articulates the purpose of the study; presents the research questions and theoretical foundation, and provides an overview of the research methods to be employed
Chapter Two: provides a detailed analysis of the theory/conceptual framework used in the study and offers a detailed synthesis of the available, current, scholarly literature on all aspects of the topic, including all relevant points of view
Chapter Three: provides the substantiation for the choice of methods and includes details on the planned research approach, design, and analysis
Chapter Four: presents the study findings Chapter Five: summarizes the research study and presents the research
implications and suggestions for future
The Dissertation process is generally broken into three broad stages: preparation and approval of the Dissertation Proposal (DP) which includes Chapters 1, 2, and 3; conducting the study’s research; and preparation and approval of the final Dissertation Manuscript (DM) which includes all elements of the DP, with the addition of Chapters 4 and 5 to complete the manuscript including the dissertation defense.
The Dissertation process is arduous and iterative. As students proceed through the dissertation process, they will be required to understand and apply faculty/committee feedback. Successful engagement with faculty requires a high level of conceptual understanding. Dissertation committee members review and substantively evaluate work submitted by students. Regular, iterative reviews of dissertation sections and drafts are a common –and important - practice in the process.
6
DSE Student Handbook
1.1 Dissertation Courses and Committees
NCU is implementing a revised dissertation course sequence and restructured committee model to support the changes in the dissertation course sequence. The main changes are noted in the table below.
The dissertation courses have been developed into a structured course model. NCU’s dissertation process is a model based on successful completion of course-based deliverables (including the DP and DM), evaluated against a rubric, created by NCU faculty. Each Chapter of the dissertation must meet minimum standards on the associated rubric, as scored by the Chair and the SME, of every criterion for a student to progress to the next course sequence block. A mapping of Concept Paper sections to Dissertation Proposal sections is included in Appendix A.
There will be instances where changes are required for a Chapter that has been previously approved. This frequently occurs when subsequent changes are made to other Chapters and results in changes needing to be made to previously approved Chapters. When this occurs, students must go back and revise and resubmit to the committee these modified Chapters. Once the committee approves the DP and the DM, the AR will review these documents using a checklist, aligned to University standards of scholarship and rigor, noting areas which may require additional changes to the documents. The approval of the AR is not required for the student to progress in their program however the feedback from the AR should be reflected in the final DP or DM.
1.2 Dissertation Course Overview
Dissertation Process
Student Chapter completion; Dissertation Proposal (DP) and Dissertation
Manuscript (DM) completion
Committee evaluation of student work utilizing rubric criteria throughout course
duration
Committee consists of Chair, Subject Matter Expert (SME), and Academic Reader
(AR)
Student makes weekly submissions of specified dissertation components for
committee review to scaffold learning and constructively build dissertation
components
Course progression determined by completed dissertation components (meets
rubric criteria – Appendix B)
All NCU Dissertation Proposals and Manuscripts reviewed by Academic Reader
(full time faculty) to ensure University standards of rigor and quality are met
7
DSE Student Handbook
After students have successfully passed the last course in their scheduled program coursework (e.g. Comprehensive Examination, ePortfolio, prospectus), they will be assigned into the dissertation course sequence. There are specific deliverables required for each course. Each course deliverable represents a portion of the overall dissertation process. In order to progress successfully into a subsequent dissertation course each final deliverable must be completed and must meet or exceed the minimum standards on the rubric as completed by the committee.
Remember, scholarly research is iterative and non-linear (however uncomfortable this may be while a student is going through the process). Making a change in a later version to correct an issue in a previous version may reveal new issues that need to be addressed in the subsequently, approved, version.
Ultimately, Northcentral University wants all students to succeed, but we also have to ensure that the institutional outcomes for doctoral dissertations meet quality standards. To that end, the steps of the Dissertation review process designed to facilitate student progress are:
1. Northcentral University’s Chairs and SMEs provide constructive feedback prior to
the DP stage. This is to ensure the student has a feasible and realistic plan to develop a well-conceived, substantive, quality dissertation. Individual Chapter reviews, throughout the development of the DP, serve to assess the topic is appropriate and the planned research is sound and practical within the scope of a doctoral program. The dissertation proposal ensures the problem is substantiated with evidence, the research methods and design are in alignment and serve the purpose and address the problem of the topic under study. In addition, the proposal allows the student to complete an exhaustive review of current scholarly literature addressing all relevant points of view on the topic under study including the theory or conceptual framework used to support the study.
2. The DP must meet the minimum standards on all rubric criteria by the Chair and subject matter expert to proceed to the next course in the dissertation sequence and begin the Institutional Review Board (IRB) application process.
3. Upon final approval of the DP, the student applies to the Institutional Review Board (IRB). No data may be collected until IRB approval is obtained. Failure to observe this rule may result in the student’s dis missa l from Northcentral University.
4. Following IRB approval, the student conducts his/her research and writes the DM in the required manner. The DM is approved by the Dissertation Chair and SME. The approved DM is then sent to the AR for review against the checklist, which may result in the student having to make changes for improvement.
8
DSE Student Handbook
5. Upon final approval of the DM, the Dissertation Defense is scheduled. To pass this oral examination, the student must be able to explain and justify what was accomplished by the dissertation research.
1.3 Dissertation Course Sequence
The dissertation courses have been structured into discrete courses with specific deliverables at the end of each course. Additionally, each course requires engagement between the student and the Chair through weekly assignment submissions, similar to the current program coursework requirements. These weekly submissions are scaffolded to build the entire end of course deliverable. The final deliverable must meet the minimum standards of the evaluation process by the end of the course. A few times throughout each course, as noted in the syllabus and directed by the Chair, students submit assignments to the Chair and SME to receive feedback based on rubric criterion.
The dissertation sequence of courses has been designed to assist the student in scaffolding the development of the individual Chapters of the dissertation in a timely and scholarly approach. There are four 12-week courses. The deliverables to be evaluated at the end of the four courses include:
Dissertation course DIS9901A – Chapter One
Dissertation course DIS9902A – Chapter Two and Chapter Three; final DP
Dissertation course DIS9903A – IRB approval, data collection, and final Study Closure Form
Dissertation course DIS9904A – Chapter Four and Chapter Five; final DM and Defense
Students not meeting the minimum standards on the required deliverable at the end of the 12-week course will be assigned to an 8-week supplementary course. The 8-week supplementary course provides additional committee collaboration and support, University support, and a higher ‘hands-on’ process to expedite the student through the areas needing to be addressed in meeting the minimum rubric standards for each deliverable. These supplementary courses also allow for students to continue working on subsequent Chapters and deliverables in advance of starting the next 12-week course once the minimum standards have been met on the current course requirements.
If the student does not meet the minimum criteria of the required course deliverable within the 8-week supplementary course, the student is allowed to retake the 8-week supplementary course again. This second retake of the original dissertation sequence course is the final opportunity for the student to meet the minimum standards for the required course deliverable. Any student who does not meet the minimum criteria on the
DSE Student Handbook
9
rubric components for the final end of course deliverable will be dismissed from the University.
The dissertation course sequence includes 4 core 12 week courses and 8 supplemental courses. The course sequence format is below.
DIS9901A (12-week) – Chapter One DIS9901B (8-week) supplemental DIS9901C (8-week) supplemental
DIS9902A (12-week) – Chapter Two and Chapter Three; final Dissertation Proposal DIS9902B (8-week) supplemental DIS9902C (8-week) supplemental
DIS9903A (12-week) – IRB approval, data collection, and final Study Closure Form DIS9903B (8-week) supplemental DIS9903C (8-week) supplemental
DIS9904A (12-week) – Chapter Four and Chapter Five; final Dissertation Manuscript and Defense Dissertation course DIS9904B (8-week) supplemental Dissertation course DIS9904C (8-week) supplemental
In the following diagram, the dissertation course sequences are displayed. Each course sequence block has the required deliverable to meet minimum standards displayed to progress into the next course sequence block.
The table below illustrates the course sequence:
1.4 Dissertation Template
Chapters 2 & 3
Approved w/DP •DIS9901A •**DIS9901B
•**DIS9901C •DIS9902A •**DIS9902B
•**DIS9902C
•DIS9903A •**DIS9903B
•**DIS9903C
Chapters 4 & 5 w/DM Approved and Defense
•DIS9904A
•**DIS9904B
•**DIS9904C Chapter 1 Approved
IRB, Data Collection, Closure Form
**Only if needed
DSE Student Handbook
10
A template, formatted to APA standards, is available for use by students. There is also a template formatted to APA with detailed explanations for each section with examples for use by students who would like more direction on completing the sections of the dissertation. Differentiation is noted throughout the document for completing an applied (EdD and DBA) or research (PhD) dissertation. Students should use this template to complete their dissertation course deliverables. Remember students need to remove the explanation sections of the template when developing their work.
1.5 DSE Dissertation Grading
Students must submit something every week in their dissertation course for their Chair to review. Each course contains committee reviews for students to submit the assigned deliverable. Multiple times throughout the courses the student is required to submit the assignment in Courseroom as well as Taskstream (as noted in the syllabus or directed by the Chair). This deliverable will be reviewed by the Chair and SME against the stated rubric criteria in Taskstream. The final submitted deliverable(s) for the course must receive the minimum passing score for all rubric criteria, by all committee members, to receive a passing grade in the course (A or B). If any one of the criteria reflects less than the minimum score, the student receives an ‘F’ for the course and will be enrolled in the associated 8-week supplemental course.
The supplemental course allows the student additional time to complete the expected deliverable(s) to minimum rubric criteria for the dissertation course. In order to receive a passing score in the supplemental course the student must receive the minimum acceptable criteria, by the Chair and SME. If the student receives an ‘F’ in the first supplemental course (DIS990xB), they will be allowed to take the final supplemental course (DIS990xC) to satisfactorily complete the course deliverable(s). Any student who receives ‘F’ grades in both supplemental courses (DIS990xB & C) will not be eligible to enroll in additional courses and will be subject to dismissal from the University.
Dissertation sequence course grades will be assigned by the Chair according to passing rubric criteria: # of ‘exceeds’ vs. # of ‘meets’ (only for those criteria allowing for an ‘exceeds’) will be scored as an A or B between the reconciled scores given from the Chair and the SME; any end of course evaluation against rubric criteria selected as ‘does not meet’ will be assigned a course grade of F, reflecting the incomplete criteria. Not meeting minimum standards on all rubric criteria for an end of course deliverable indicates students must progress to a supplemental course to work on the criterion not meeting minimum standards before moving into the next sequence of courses. As a reminder: the iterative process in developing a dissertation may require the student go back and revise previously approved Chapters before a final DP or DM can be approved
1.5.1 ssertation Rubric
DSE Student Handbook
11
A rubric has been developed to align with the requirements of each of the Chapters (Appendix B – sample dissertation manuscript rubric) including the requirements for the dissertation proposal and manuscript. For each component in the dissertation, a student must meet the minimum standards of the rubric criteria, as scored by the Chair and SME, to proceed into the next dissertation course sequence.
1.5.2 Grading Using the Dissertation Rubric
The dissertation rubric (Appendix B) will be used to evaluate the work completed for required course deliverables against institutional expectation criteria. Students should use the dissertation rubric to self-evaluate their work before submitting to their Chair and Committee. All criteria must be designated as ‘Meets’ or ‘Exceeds’ in order for a successful grade to be achieved for the course deliverable and to progress onto the next course of the dissertation sequence. ANY criteria scoring a ‘Does Not Meet’ and the entire paper will be scored as failing and the student will be enrolled in the subsequent supplementary 8-week course. The DSE revised templates and rubric are aligned.
The nature of the dissertation may require revisions to previously approved Chapters to better align with changes made in subsequent Chapters. The three Chapters (1, 2, and 3) will not be considered as completely final (and for progression into IRB and Data Collection) until a Committee approved (meeting minimum criteria) dissertation proposal has been completed. The five Chapters (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) will not be considered as completely final (and for program completion) until a Committee approved (meeting minimum criteria) dissertation manuscript has been completed.
All five individual Chapters, the Proposal, and the Manuscript will be submitted to TurnItIn for originality by the Chair before they can be considered final. The target Turnitin Originality Report should have a similarity index of 15% or less. (excluding references, TOC, and template). TII reports must be submitted with the document feedback from the chair.
1.5.3 Course Progression Criteria
Course progression in the dissertation sequence is determined on students receiving the minimum passing score on all rubric criteria for the stated final course deliverable. The courses requiring passing scores on rubric criteria and substantiating the final course grade include:
DIS9901A/B/C: Minimum passing score of Chapter 1
DIS9902A/B/C: Minimum passing score of Dissertation Proposal
DIS9903A/B/C requires the submission and chair approval of the IRB Study Closure Form or the Not Human Subject Research (NHSR) Study Closure Form.
DSE Student Handbook
DIS9904A/B/C: Minimum passing score of Dissertation Manuscript and Oral Defense
The grading criteria include an ‘A’, ‘B’, or ‘F’. Students receiving an ‘A’ (100%) or ‘B’ (85%) as the final grade in the gradebook for the course will be enrolled into the next DIS990XA. Students receiving an ‘F’ (70%) as the final grade for the course will be enrolled into DIS990XB/C. DIS9903X requires the submission of the IRB Study Closure Form or the Not Human Subject Research (NHSR) Study Closure Form. Once the form is filed the Chair can assign a course grade at the end of the course of an ‘A’ (100%). At the end of DIS9903X, if a Study Closure Form has not been filed, meaning the student is still in IRB or data collection, the student will receive an ‘F’ (70%) and progress to the next supplementary course.
1.5.4 Consequences for Failing to Submit Weekly Assignments
Students failing to submit assignments weekly (after two weeks of non-submission) will be identified as ‘at-risk’ by the Chair which may result in outreach by the academic advisor, School designee, or other University representative. Course, institutional, or other consequences may be instituted for students’ failure to follow academic submission and course requirements.
1.5.5 Using the Rubric
Each rubric has specific criteria outlined based on the submitted deliverable. There are criteria where the only acceptable values are ‘Meets’ and ‘Does Not Meet’. There are other substantive criteria allowing for ‘Exceeds’, ‘Meets’, and ‘Does Not Meet’. Students are graded (for A or B grades) based only on the criterion allowing the scoring of an ‘Exceeds’ for final course deliverable.
The grading criteria include an ‘A’, ‘B’, or ‘F’.
Any reconciled rubric (reconciling Chair and SME individual rubric scores as managed by the Chair) scoring a single ‘Does Not Meet’ and the paper will be considered as not passing and the course grade must be marked as an ‘F’ grade and the student will be enrolled in the 8-week supplemental course DIS990XB/C.
If the number of Exceeds is greater than the number of Meets (FOR ONLY THOSE CRITERION ALLOWING FOR AN EXCEEDS SCORE) AND there have been no ‘Does Not Meet’ criteria. The student would receive an A.
If the number of Meets is greater than the number of Exceeds (FOR ONLY THOSE CRITERION ALLOWING FOR AN EXCEEDS SCORE) AND there have been no ‘Does Not Meet’ criteria. The student would receive a B.
TaskStream scoring has been designed to indicate if the final score is a whole number the student would earn a passing score (A or B).
12
DSE Student Handbook
13
If the final score results in a number with a decimal, the student has received a ‘Does Not Meet’ (.01) and the student will not pass. The decimal number indicates the number of ‘Does Not Meet’ criteria. The score for the final grade would be an ‘F’.
1.5.6 Submission Timeframes for Faculty Feedback
The dissertation course structure requires students to turn in an assignment every week. Assignment deadlines are Sunday at midnight, Mountain Standard Time. Students will upload their work in the assignment section of each week. Chairs will access the paper and download it from the assignment section. Chairs will provide feedback within the document and upload it in the same assignment section within the stated guidelines in the syllabi for feedback timeframes.
Students failing to submit assignments weekly will be identified as ‘at-risk’ (missing two weeks in a row) by the Chair which may result in University outreach and/or consequences for failure to attend.
1.5.7 Taskstream turnaround times (calendar days – midnight Sunday - MST*)
The rubric for evaluating the dissertation Chapters, Proposal, and Manuscript are in
Taskstream. For the weeks requiring Taskstream submissions the student must submit
to the Courseroom and Taskstream.
Chairs have 7 calendar days to provide feedback to students on weekly submissions. Chairs and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) have 7 calendar days to return feedback on work submitted in Taskstream. The exceptions to this rule include full Chapter 2 submissions in Taskstream, the submission of the Dissertation Proposal in Taskstream, and the Dissertation Manuscript in Taskstream all which allow a 14 calendar day turnaround time for feedback in Taskstream.
Feedback time frames are listed below:
- Chapter 1 (7 days)
- Chapter 2 (14 days)
- Chapter 3 (7 days)
- Dissertation Proposal Draft (14 days)
- Final Dissertation Proposal AR (14 days)
- IRB Approval Form (7 days)
- IRB Closure /NHSR Closure (7 days)
- Chapter 4 (7 days)
- Chapter 5 (7 days)
- Dissertation Manuscript Draft (14 days)
- Dissertation Oral Defense (7 days)
DSE Student Handbook
14
- Final Dissertation Manuscript AR (14 days)
*Submission back to the student must include a TurnItIn report for each
Taskstream link by the Chair (goal is to achieve a TurnItIn Originality Report
which has a similarity index of 15% or less (excluding references, TOC, and
template).
Assignments submitted after the course end date will not be included in the end of course grade.
1.5.8 Academic Performance Grades
Grades are based on the scoring criteria from the rubric. Students are graded according to their individual performance on the deliverable against the rubric criteria. Students are not compared with each other to determine a grade or performance ranking.
Grade points are assigned to academic performance grades as indicated and are used to calculate a Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) for each student. Grades are assigned in the dissertation course sequence by the number of exceeds, meets, and does not meet on the rubric from the reconciled committee scores. When the number of Exceeds criteria (of those criterion able to score ‘Exceeds’) is more than the ‘Meets’ criteria (for those criterion able to be scored ‘Exceeds’) the paper should be assigned an ‘A’. If any criterion score ‘Does Not Meet’, the paper will be determined as ‘not passing’ and will be scored an ‘F’.
Course grades are not to be submitted before the last day of the course.
DSE Student Handbook
15
1.6 Taskstream Submissions
Every three weeks, or as noted in the syllabus, all work completed throughout the dissertation courses should be submitted to Taskstream for review by the SME and the Chair. The work also needs to be submitted in the Courseroom to allow for progress monitoring. The SME and Chair will use the rubric to evaluate each component of the submitted document. The completed rubric and edited document will be submitted back into Taskstream by the Chair and SME. The Chair will then reconcile the scores. All criteria on the rubric must be marked as meets or exceeds by the committee in order for the student to move onto the next 12 week dissertation course.
The final draft of the DP and DM will be submitted to the AR by the Chair to be reviewed against a checklist of University criteria in Taskstream once the document has passed all the rubric criteria by the Chair and the SME. Recommendations from the AR should be made to the final DP and DM under the direction of the Chair. Any criteria not meeting minimum standard for the end of course deliverable and the student will be enrolled in the supplemental 8 week course.
The Taskstream submission timeframes are noted throughout the syllabi for the courses. Additional submissions can occur if the student completes a deliverable, and the Chair believes the deliverable is ready for evaluation by the committee.
The rubric has been developed for all Chapters, the proposal, manuscript, and front and back matter.
Grading Notes:
All criteria must be at an “Exceeds” or “Meets” on the rubric to be considered passing. Any criteria marked as ‘Does Not Meets’ results a paper not passing and will be assigned an ‘F’ grade for the Chapter/proposal/manuscript.
Once the proposal / manuscript is determined by the Chair and SME to be a minimum quality on the rubric the Chair can submit to the AR for review.
The following are the submission links and processes in Taskstream (TS):
- Chapter One (student submitted – TS notification to Committee) – Chair and
SME (evaluate, feedback, upload feedback – Chair reconciles and TS email sent
to student)
- Chapter Two – (student submitted – TS notification to Committee) – Chair and
SME (evaluate, feedback, upload feedback – Chair reconciles and TS email sent
to student)
DSE Student Handbook
16
- Chapter Three – (student submitted – TS notification to Committee) – Chair and
SME (evaluate, feedback, upload feedback – Chair reconciles and TS email sent
to student)
- Dissertation Proposal Draft (Chapters 1, 2, 3 and front and back matter) –
(student submitted – TS notification to Committee) – Chair and SME (evaluate,
feedback, upload feedback – Chair reconciles and TS email sent to student)
- Dissertation Proposal AR - Reader – Chair submits ‘passing’ proposal to AR –
TS email to AR - AR completes checklist and provides feedback
- Final Dissertation Proposal – Student revises based on AR feedback and Chair
direction and submits final, clean copy to Final Dissertation Proposal link – Chair
checks off as complete
- IRB Approval Form – Student Submits – Chair checks off as complete – if there
is a modification the Chair needs to return to the student to resubmit modification
approval form and the Chair signs off again on resubmitted approved
modification form
- IRB Closure Form – Student submits to Taskstream – Chair checks off as
complete
- Chapter Four (student submitted – TS notification to Committee) – Chair and
SME (evaluate, feedback, upload feedback – Chair reconciles and TS email sent
to student)
- Chapter Five – (student submitted – TS notification to Committee) – Chair and
SME (evaluate, feedback, upload feedback – Chair reconciles and TS email sent
to student)
- Dissertation Manuscript Draft (All Chapters including front and back matter) –
(student submitted – TS notification to Committee) – Chair and SME (evaluate,
feedback, upload feedback – Chair reconciles and TS email sent to student)
- Dissertation Manuscript AR - Reader – Chair submits ‘passing’ manuscript to
AR – TS email to AR - AR completes checklist and provides feedback
DSE Student Handbook
17
- Dissertation Manuscript Final – Student revises based on AR feedback and
Chair direction and submits final, clean copy to Final Dissertation Manuscript link
– Chair checks off as complete
Dissertation Oral Defense – Student submits final Oral Defense PPT and Chair
checks off as complete
Students are reminded while their submitted documents are being evaluated they are expected to continue conducting appropriate activities to advance their research. Resources and next steps are outlined in all the doctoral courses. Students are expected to continue working on subsequent Chapter components advancing their work towards a timely completion. Doctoral research is an ongoing, iterative learning process requiring extensive and continual effort. All available information for progressing through the doctoral dissertation courses are in all the dissertation courses allowing the student to work ahead while the committee works on evaluating the current paper.
1.6.1 How to Access Taskstream
You can upload your assignment to Taskstream using the steps outlined below.
Step 1: You will log into your Taskstream account via the website https://login.taskstream.com/signon/. If you do not know your Taskstream password, you can click the “forgot login” link at https://login.taskstream.com/signon/ and enter your last name and NCU student email address. Your Taskstream user name is your NCU email address. Password reset information will be sent to your NCU student email address.
Step 2. You will be directed to the Taskstream home page. On the home page, you will see the courses which you have been assigned in Taskstream. Click on the Program icon titled ‘Doctoral Student Experience (DSE)’.
Step 3: On the left side of your screen you will see a list of the different dissertation submission links. Click on the link corresponding to the dissertation component you are planning to upload (e.g., Chapter 1, Chapter 2, or the Dissertation Proposal).
Step 4: On the following screen, links for the assignment directions and rubric will be accessible. To review the assignment directions you can click on the directions. To review the rubric for the assignment you can click onto the rubric link.
DSE Student Handbook
18
Step 5: To upload your Dissertation assignment, click the “Attachments” icon at the bottom on the screen. Click ‘up load’ file and select the file you wish to upload.
Step 6: Once you have successfully uploaded your assignment, you will see it listed in the area “currently attached uploaded files.” You have the option to view, edit, or delete this file on the right side of the frame.
Once you have uploaded your assignment, click the “Save and Return” button on the bottom right of the screen.
Step 7: Once you click the “save and return” button, you will be prompted to submit the assignment you uploaded. Click the “Submit Work” button, at the top right of the screen.
Step 8: A pop-up window will appear verifying your submission. Click the ‘confirm submission’ button to send your work to your committee.
If you are experiencing problems and cannot submit your assignment please reach out to [email protected] for assistance. Please be sure to always use your NCU email when requesting assistance.
1.6.2 Troubleshooting Taskstream
System Requirements
Taskstream is a highly dynamic environment that requires the use of a compatible web browser to function effectively. Below are Taskstream’s web browser requirements.
Browser pop-up blockers must be disabled
Browser pop-ups must be enabled
Browser cookies must be enabled
Preferred browsers are Firefox (latest), Chrome (latest), and Internet Explorer (IE) 11.
JavaScript must be enabled
Limited functionality for iPhones, iPads, and other mobile devices such as a cell phone. A desktop or laptop computer is highly recommended.
Disabling Pop-up Blockers
A browser’s pop-up blockers must be disabled in order to use Taskstream. Here is a helpful website showing how to disable a browser’s pop-up blocker depending on your provider.
DSE Student Handbook
19
How to Disable Pop-up Blockers 1: https://help.taskstream.com/customer/en/portal/articles/1703865-how-do-i-disable-pop- up-blocker-?b_id=2104
Enabling Browser Cookies
Taskstream requires cookies to be enabled. The steps to follow to enable cookies vary based on the specific version of the Internet browser you use.
How to Enable Browser Cookies: https://help.taskstream.com/customer/en/portal/articles/1939609-does-taskstream- require-cookies-to-be-enabled-?b_id=2104
Enabling JavaScript
Taskstream requires the use of Java on your machine to use the split screen function during the evaluation of an artifact. Java is disabled by default on a Mac. Evaluators can visit Java’s website for download of the software and/or to learn how to enable Java within their web browser. https://www.java.com/en/download/help/enable_browser.xml
If you are experiencing problems with system configuration please reach out to [email protected].
DSE Student Handbook
20
Section 2: The Dissertation Committee
2.1 Dissertation Committee Composition
The Dissertation Committee provides a student with the direction, guidance, support, and feedback needed to complete all phases and Chapters of the dissertation. The Dissertation Committee consists of three Northcentral University faculty members. The Dissertation Chair has significant expertise in research processes, procedures, methodology, and proficiency in guiding the student through the dissertation process. The second committee member serves in the role of Subject Matter Expert (SME) bringing expertise in the field of study while also supporting the student in any methods approach. The Academic Reader (AR) has expertise in research methods and familiarity with the field of study and ensures the dissertation aligns to University standards of academic integrity, rigor, research methods, and quality.
This model allows continued support to students throughout the development of their dissertation components, even through times of committee members being out of office. When a committee member is out of the office the student is able to reach out to the other members with questions or for assistance.
2.2 Selection of Committee Members
A student receives an assignment to a Dissertation Chair, SME, and AR during the last course of their program coursework. The student identifies to their respective School Assistant Dean or other School designee their intended topic and methodological approach. The School Assistant Dean or other School designee will then assign the appropriate committee members, depending on faculty knowledge and experience of the topic in the students’ field of study, to support the needs of the student.
All students who are enrolling in their first dissertation (DIS) course will be assigned a Dissertation Chair, a SME, and AR. The selection of a SME will depend on faculty knowledge, availability, and experience of the topic in the students’ field of study. All committee members will be assigned by the disciplinary School.
2.3 Committee Responsibilities
The ultimate responsibility of the Chair of the Dissertation Committee is to determine whether the student has demonstrated the competencies and the accomplishments requisite to the award of their degree. The Chair is supported by the SME and AR in helping the student to complete their dissertation. Each member has a specific role in the success of each student. The Chair is the primary point of contact and mentor for the student. The SME supports the student in each of the courses through reviewing course deliverables and providing additional support as needed throughout the development of the proposal, IRB materials, and manuscript. The AR supports the
DSE Student Handbook
21
student through review with recommendations for final proposal and manuscript development.
2.4 Working with a Committee
All communication among students and Committee Members must be timely, open, and honest. All concerned should maintain a positive, respectful, and professional relationship.
The student must take responsibility to notify their Chair of any and all academic concerns prior to notifying anyone else in the institution. If the Chair has not been notified, the concern will not be considered. Examples of academic issues include, but are not limited to: document contents, structure and format; results of reviews by SMEs and ARs; alignment of SMEs to student discipline or topic; and, changing degree program track.
Students and their Dissertation Chairs should communicate regularly with one another using NCU provided communication tools. Chairs may also choose to communicate with students via telephone, teleconference, or videoconference. All communications outside the NCU course room or communication tools must be documented by the Chair in the course and/or other NCU systems as appropriate.
2.5 Changes in Committee Assignments
Student requests to change committee members are very rare. Students may request to replace a committee member only in very unusual situations and only after consulting with their academic advisor. Students must contact their academic advisor to discuss the process to change a committee member. Prior to requesting any such change, students are expected to use conflict management strategies to resolve issues surrounding communication and feedback. The scholarly journey is an iterative process and although students may not always agree with feedback they are expected to listen actively, reflect, and pose clarifying questions to overcome normal communication and personality differences.
In all situations involving requests for Committee changes, the decision of the Dean of the student’s disciplinary School (or Dean’s designee) as to what is in the student’s best interest is final.
Section 3: Considerations and Policies (refer to the Catalog for most
current info)
3.1 Time Limits
For current time limits, please review the Satisfactory Academic Progress policy in the NCU Catalog.
DSE Student Handbook
22
3.2 Academic Integrity
Northcentral University’s reputation depends on an uncompromising commitment to standards of academic integrity. The Northcentral University Academic Integrity Policy, to which all students and faculty members are bound, is available through your student or faculty member page.
Doctoral students are expected to follow the highest standards of professional ethics, intellectual honesty, and academic integrity. All work submitted to a faculty member in any course is subject to originality confirmation. Faculty members have the responsibility to reject work that fails to meet the standards outlined in the Northcentral University Academic Integrity Policy.
Northcentral University dissertation-related work is checked to ensure they meet Northcentral University standards of Academic Integrity. Plagiarism, misrepresentation, or fabrication of information or research results will not be tolerated and may be grounds for immediate dismissal from the University.
All Chapters, the Dissertation Proposal, and the Dissertation Manuscript will be submitted to TurnItIn for originality by the Chair before these documents can be considered final. The target Turnitin Originality Report should have a similarity index of 15% or less. (excluding references, TOC, and template). TII reports must be submitted with the document feedback from the chair.
3.3 Code of Conduct
All members of the Northcentral University community are bound by the Northcentral University Code of Conduct (COC) contained in the current Northcentral University Course Catalog and thus are expected to act in a professional manner at all times. Failure to adhere to the COC may lead to disciplinary action up to and including dismissal.
3.4 Satisfactory Academic Progress
For additional information regarding Satisfactory Academic Progress, please review the Satisfactory Academic Progress policy in the Catalog.
3.5 Assignment Deadlines and Final Course Grades
Assignments submitted after the course end date will not be graded and calculated in the final grade for the course. Course grades will not be assigned until after the course end date.
3.6 Incomplete Grades
DSE Student Handbook
23
Students may request an incomplete grade extension if they meet the following requirements:
An unforeseen circumstance threatens a student’s ability to complete a course by the scheduled course end date.
The student has completed 75% of the course
The student has a “C” average for the assignments submitted thus far
The student is earning a passing grade in the course at the time the "I" grade is requested
NOTE: The following Doctoral courses are not eligible for an incomplete grade:
- DIS9901A and B - DIS9902A and B - DIS9903A and B
- DIS9904A and B
Incomplete grade extension requests are submitted to faculty for review. Faculty may approve a request at their discretion if students meet the eligibility criteria listed above. Incomplete grade request decisions are final and cannot be appealed.
3.7 Unsatisfactory Grades for Dissertation Courses
DIS9901A-9904C – Students who are unable to earn a grade of “B” or better by the third course within in a dissertation block (DIS990XA, DIS990XB, and DIS990XC) are subject to dismissal from the University.
3.7.1 Repeating Doctoral Sequence Courses
Students enrolled in course codes CMP9600 through CMP9799 and DIS9901A through DIS9904C may be eligible to earn a repeated Doctoral Sequence (“RD”) grade for courses that were originally completed with a grade of “F” if subsequent attempts are completed with a “B” or better. Courses awarded an “RD” grade will not be used in GPA calculations. Some courses may not be eligible for a retake grade; students should work with their Academic Advisor to determine course repeat eligibility.
NOTE: A dissertation block consists of a 12-week dissertation course (DIS990XA) and two 8-week supplemental courses (DIS990XB and DIS990XC). For “F” grade(s) to be replaced, students must successfully complete the dissertation block with a grade of “B” or better by the end of the second supplemental dissertation course (DIS990XC).
3.7.2 Maximum “RD” Grade Policy for Doctoral Sequence
DSE Student Handbook
24
A student may utilize the “RD” grade a maximum of ten times during the Doctoral Sequence (CMP9600+ and DIS9901A+). Dean permission is needed prior to attempting the CMP course for a third and final time. During the dissertation, a student will be allowed a maximum of two RD grades per dissertation block.
DSE Student Handbook
25
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: Concept Paper sections to Dissertation Proposal Sections Mapping
Dissertation components percent CP aligned to DP
components
Chapter 1 - CP 80%
Chapter 2 - CP 20%
Chapter 3 - CP 35%
References
- CP 20%
Concept paper components
CP Introduction - Maps to DP Chapters 1 and 2
CP Statement of the Problem - Maps to DP Chapters 1 and 3
CP Purpose of the Study - Maps to DP Chapters 1, 2, and 3
CP Theoretical Framework - Maps to DP Chapters 1 and 2
CP Research Questions
- Maps to DP Chapters 1 and 3 CP Hypotheses (quantitative)
- Maps to DP Chapters 1 and 3 CP Definition of Key Terms
- Maps to DP Chapters 1 and 3
26
APPENDIX B: Dissertation Rubric (Manuscript sample)
DSE Dissertation Manuscript rubric and grading criteria
A rubric has been developed for all individual Chapters (1-5), the Dissertation Proposal (DP), and the Dissertation Manuscript (DM). Course grades will be determined using the rubric for DIS9901X (Chapter 1 meeting minimum criteria), DIS9902X (Dissertation Proposal meeting minimum criteria), and DIS9904X (Dissertation Manuscript meeting minimum criteria). Grading will be completed by the Chair and the Subject Matter Expert (SME) and the final scores will be reconciled to determine the final grade. The individual Chapter rubrics are in the courses for use by the student to self- evaluate and in Taskstream. Taskstream will be used as the evaluation tool for assessing student work by the committee. The final DP and DM will be read by the Academic Reader (AR) and comments and suggestions from the AR should be incorporated into the final papers under the direction of the Chair.
For all final Chapter, DP, and DM Taskstream submissions the Chair must run a TurnItIn report. The target Turnitin Originality Report should have a similarity index of 15% or less. (excluding references, TOC, and template). TurnItIn reports must be submitted with the document feedback from the Chair in Taskstream.
Students should use this rubric to self-evaluate their work before submitting to their Chair and Committee. All criteria must be designated as ‘Meets’ or ‘Exceeds’ in order for a successful grade to be achieved. If ANY criteria is scored as ‘Does Not Meet’, the entire paper will be scored as failing.
The nature of the dissertation may require revisions to previously approved Chapters to better align with changes made in subsequent Chapters. The five Chapters (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) will not be considered final until a Committee approved (meeting minimum criteria) dissertation manuscript has been completed.
The Dissertation Manuscript rubric is below.
DISSERTATION MANUSCRIPT FRONT MATTER APA Format –
writing/presentation
Not used for this criteria Consistently applies fundamental
APA formatting for TOC, List of
Tables, List of Figures, throughout
the DP. The template requirements
Inconsistently applies fundamental
APA formatting for TOC, List of
Tables, List of Figures, throughout the
DP. The template requirements are
27
DSE Student Handbook
are followed. not followed.
Performance Component Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Dissertation Manuscript Not used for this criteria All discussion related to the
proposed study is written in past
tense
Verb tenses are not matched with the
manuscript.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Introduction A well-written, scholarly, and
CHAPTER 1 A clear overview of the study is
The study overview is incomplete or
compelling narrative orienting the
reader to the context of the study.
The narrative flows from general to
specific framing the topic under
study within the literature (Applied
degree frames in practice – PhD
frames in adding to the literature).
provided. There is a flow from
general to specific of the topic.
Major points are adequately
supported by the literature (Applied
degree frames in practice – PhD
frames in adding to the literature).
unclear. Key elements are
inadequately addressed, all points are
not supported in the literature, key
concepts lack coherence and clarity.
Not framed to proper program of
study.
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Statement of the Problem A clearly articulated problem,
aligned with the material in the
Introduction, supported by strong
evidence (within the past year) is
identified and clearly discussed. The
significance of the problem is clearly
discussed. (Applied problem
discussed in evidence of the local
problem and larger population / PhD
problem framed in the literature
beyond a specific site documenting
the need for and importance of the
study).
A clear problem is explained and
supported through the material in the
Introduction. Strong evidence (most
within the past 5 years) is provided
and discussed. (Applied problem
discussed in evidence of the local
problem and larger population / PhD
problem framed in the literature
beyond a specific site documenting
the need for and importance of the
study).
The description of the problem is
incomplete or unclear. No evidence is
provided indicating the problem
exists. Evidence to support the
problem is dated. Lacks alignment
with the material in the Introduction.
The significance of the problem is not
discussed is unclear or not discussed.
(Applied problem is not discussed in
evidence of the local problem and
larger population / PhD problem is not
framed in the literature beyond a
specific site documenting the need for
and importance of the study).
28
DSE Student Handbook
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Purpose of the Study The purpose of the study is
succinctly articulated, and is a
logical response aligned to the stated
problem, a detailed summary of how
the study (will be – DP) (was - DM)
conducted is provided.
The purpose of the study is described
and aligns to the stated problem, a
summary of how the study (will be –
DP) (was - DM) conducted is
provided.
The purpose for the study is
incomplete or unclear. Key elements
are inadequately addressed and does
not align to the stated problem, study
details are not supported, and/or lack
coherence and clarity (DP or DM)
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Introduction to
Theoretical/Conceptual
Framework (not required for
grandfathered CPs but
recommended)
The theory(ies) or conceptual
framework used to frame the study
are identified, clearly articulated, and
discussed in the context of the
literature and study topic If multiple
frameworks are used, a clear
explanation is provided for how they
interrelate within the context of the
study topic and literature.
The theory(ies) or conceptual
framework used to frame the study
are identified and explained through
use of the literature and study topic.
If multiple frameworks are used, a
description is provided for how they
interrelate within the context of the
study topic and literature.
The discussion of the theory(ies) or
conceptual framework is incomplete,
unclear, or missing. Key elements are
inadequately addressed, all points are
not supported, and/or there is a lack of
coherence and clarity. If multiple
theories are used, a clear explanation
for their interrelationship is lacking or
missing. (NOTE: for grandfathered
applied dissertations this section was not
required – this criteria should be marked as
meets for these papers).
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Research Questions/
Hypotheses
Research question(s) are directly
answerable beyond a yes/no
response, are specific, testable
include the population and
environments/topics. Research
questions are directly aligned with
design and support the problem and
purpose. The core concepts
(qualitative) and/or operational
variables (quantitative) are described
Research question(s) are directly
answerable beyond a yes/no
response, fairly specific and testable
based on the data collected. Research
questions are aligned with design and
support the problem and
purpose. The core concepts
(qualitative) and/or operational
variables (quantitative) are included.
The research questions are incomplete
or lack coherence, clarity, not testable,
and/or not aligned to the problem and
purpose. The core concepts and/or
operational variables are missing.
29
DSE Student Handbook
(quantitative/mixed methods
studies only)
clearly and appropriately.
If hypotheses are included, they are
singular, clear, balanced, specific,
and testable based on the data
collected and align to the study
problem, purpose, and design.
If hypotheses are included, they are
singular, clear, balanced, specific,
and testable based on the data
collected and align to the study
problem, purpose, and design.
The hypotheses are incomplete or lack
coherence and clarity, are not testable
or not aligned to problem, purpose,
and/or design – FOR QUALITATIVE
STUDIES MARK THIS AS MEETS
– IF THE OTHER CRITERIA HAVE
BEEN MET
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Nature of Study A brief and coherent overview of the
study design, variables/constructs,
instruments, and analyses is
provided, based on current literature
explaining why the proposed method
and design are the optimum choices
to address the study’s research
question(s).
A brief overview of the study design,
variables/constructs, instruments, and
analyses is provided based on current
literature describing why the
proposed method and design were
chosen to address the study’s
research question(s).
The brief overview of the study is
incomplete or unclear. The proposed
method and design are not clearly
described. Components of the study
design, variables/constructs,
instruments and analyses are missing.
Little to no explanation for the chosen
method and design is provided.
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Significance of the Study A clear, succinct summary of the
contribution the study will provide to
the larger field of study is well-
articulated. The need for the study is
described and aligned with the
problem and articulates negative
consequences if the study is not
conducted, with supportive current
literature.
A summary of the contribution the
study will provide to the larger field
of study is provided. The need for
the study is described and aligned
with the problem and is supported
with current literature.
The anticipated contribution of the
study is incomplete or unclear. The
need for the study is not discussed and
there is a lack of current literature
supporting claims. The significance
does not align with the problem.
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Definition of Key Terms A complete definition, with
appropriate citations, is provided for
Definitions are provided with
appropriate citations for most terms
The definitions of key terms are
incomplete or unclear. Personal
30
DSE Student Handbook
key terms related to the dissertation
topic not commonly used or
understood. Terms are in
alphabetical order and in own words.
related to the dissertation topic.
Terms are in alphabetical order.
descriptions are used, too many
common words are used, methods and
theoretical terms are included.
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Summary Chapter ends with a clear and
succinct summary of the need and
purpose of the study, method and
design, anticipated contributions, and
transitions into the next chapter.
Chapter ends with a basic summary
of the need and purpose of the study,
method and design, anticipated
contributions, and transitions into the
next chapter.
The summary of the study is
incomplete or unclear, lacks focus on
the need and purpose of the study,
method and design, anticipated
outcomes, and transitions into the next
chapter.
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
CHAPTER 2 Introduction/literature search
strategies
The reader is completely oriented to
the topic areas covered and the
organization of the review. All
major themes/concepts are clearly
introduced. The strategy used for
searching the literature is well-
articulated.
The reader is adequately oriented to
the topic areas covered. An outline
of the flow of the chapter is
presented. All major
themes/concepts are introduced.
Literature search strategies are
presented.
The section is missing; or some topic
areas are not included in the
introduction or are not explained
clearly. The chapter outline is not
provided and the literature search
strategies are missing.
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Full Theoretical/Conceptual
Framework
All relevant theories and concepts
are covered in sufficient detail to
orient the reader to the research.
Detailed, concise description(s) of
the theory(ies)/conceptual
framework(s) are provided and
substantiated in the current literature.
The origin or sources of the
Most theories and concepts are
covered in detail to orient the reader
to the research. Description(s) of the
theory(ies)/conceptual framework(s)
are provided and supported in the
literature. The sources of the
framework are described and provide
the rationale for the choice of the
The section is missing; or some
theoretical foundations of the research
are not discussed or some relevant
theories are omitted. Student fails to
adequately elaborate on
theoretical/conceptual framework
introduction in Chapter 1 (NOTE: for
grandfathered applied dissertations
31
DSE Student Handbook
framework are described in detail,
and provide the rationale for the
choice of the framework for the
study through substantiation in the
historical and current literature.
framework for the study through
substantiation in the literature.
this section was not required – this
criteria should be marked as meets for
these papers).
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Research Themes Themes are arranged logically with
concise article analysis, comparison
of all points of views on the topic,
research findings, and a thorough
review of prior literature and
research exists. Within each theme,
topics are arranged from broad to
narrow, clearly related to the
problem, purpose, research
questions, and associated concepts.
Synthesis is achieved through
discussion of convergence and
divergence of scholarly literature.
Themes are arranged logically
analyzing all points of view with
prior research and findings on the
topic. Within each theme, topics are
discussed from broad to narrow
associated with the problem,
purpose, research questions and
associated concepts. Critically
evaluated scholarly literature noting
areas of convergence and
divergence.
Themes are random and unorganized,
concepts are not ordered, and some
relevant themes are omitted. Themes
do not follow a logical progression.
All points of view are not addressed
and relations are not with the problem,
purpose, and research questions.
Chapter reads more like a mini-book
report rather than a synthesized
discussion of scholarly literature.
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Summary All relevant information is well-
covered and refers to all the major
themes introduced in the
introduction. The reader is left with
enough information to be well-
acquainted with all topics necessary
to begin reading about the research
methodology.
All relevant information is
adequately covered and refers to
most of the major themes introduced
in the introduction. The reader is left
with enough information to be
familiar with the topics necessary to
begin reading about the research
methodology.
The section is missing; or some
relevant information or themes are
omitted. The summary does not
follow logically from the literature
review or the introduction.
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
CHAPTER 3 QUANTITATIVE
32
DSE Student Handbook
FOR QUANTITATIVE STUDIES ONLY – FOR QUALITATIVE SKIP TO NEXT SECTION Chapter 3: Introduction The reader is completely oriented to
the topic areas covered and the
organization of the chapter. All
themes/concepts are clearly
introduced.
The reader is adequately oriented to
the topic areas covered. An outline
of the flow of the chapter is
presented. All major
themes/concepts are introduced.
The section is missing; or some topic
areas are not included in the
introduction or are not explained
clearly. The chapter outline is not
provided and/or is unclear.
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Research Method and Design
QUANTITATIVE
Explains and justifies how the
research method and design are
aligned with the study problem,
purpose, and research questions.
Substantiates the appropriateness of
the research method and design, and
the appropriateness of the method
with the design to accurately
advance knowledge in the discipline,
alternate choices are discussed.
Describes how the research method
and design are aligned with the study
problem, purpose, and research
questions. Uses scholarly support to
describe how the design choice is
consistent with the research method,
and alternate choices are discussed.
There is a lack of alignment among the
chosen research method and
design and the study’s problem,
purpose, and research questions. There
is a lack of justification and alternate
choices for methods.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
33
DSE Student Handbook
Population/Selection of
Subjects QUANTITATIVE
Provides a detailed description of the
target population includes details to
the representativeness to the broader
population. There is a detailed
description of the methods and
inclusion/exclusion criteria used to
select the participants (sample) of the
study.
Power analysis is clearly described
and appropriately cited.
Provides a description of the target
population and the relation to the
larger population.
Inclusion/exclusion criteria for
selecting participants (sample) of the
study are noted.
Power analysis is described and
appropriately cited.
There is a lack of a description of the
sample, demographics, and the
representativeness of the sample to the
broader population. There is little to
no description of the
inclusion/exclusion criteria used to
select the participants (sample) of the
study.
A power analysis is not described and
appropriately cited.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
34
DSE Student Handbook
Instrumentation
QUANTITATIVE
Provides a clear, concise, detailed
description of the instruments used
(e.g., tests or surveys). Includes
detailed information regarding
instrument origin, reliability, and
validity. Explained any permission
needed to use the instrument(s) and
cited properly.
For Pilot Study: Provides clear,
concise, detailed description of
procedure for conducting a pilot
study (requires IRB approval for
pilot) if using a self-created
instrument (e.g., survey
questionnaire); clearly explained use
of a field test if practicing the
administration of the instruments is
warranted.
Provides a description of the
instruments associated with the
chosen research method and design
used (e.g., tests or surveys). Includes
information regarding instrument
origin, reliability, and validity.
Includes any permission needed to
use the instrument(s) and cited
properly.
For Pilot Study: Explained the
procedure for conducting a pilot
study (requires IRB approval for
pilot) if using a self-created
instrument (e.g., survey
questionnaire); explained use of a
field test if practicing the
administration of the instruments is
warranted.
Lacks a description of the instruments
associated with the chosen research
method and design used (e.g., tests or
surveys). Details missing regarding
instrument origin, reliability, and
validity. Lacks explanation of any
permission needed to use the
instrument(s) and cited properly.
Instrument permissions are missing in
appendices
For Pilot Study: Did not clearly
explain the procedure for conducting a
pilot study (did not conduct pilot) if
using a self-created instrument (e.g.,
survey questionnaire); no explanation
of a field test if practicing the
administration of the instruments is
warranted
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Operational Definitions Concisely states and explains the
study variables examined as being
measurable and/or observable.
Study variables are described in
terms of being measurable and/or
observable.
Discussion of the study variables
examined is lacking information
and/or is unclear.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
35
DSE Student Handbook
Procedures
QUANTITATIVE
Clearly described all the steps and
procedures for conducting the study
in replicable detail, including
participant recruitment and
notification, and informed consent.
IRB ethical practices are explained.
Described the procedures for
conducting the study in enough
detail to practically replicate the
study including participant
recruitment and notification, and
informed consent. IRB ethical
practices are noted.
Procedures are not clear or replicable.
Steps are missing and recruitment,
selection, and informed consent are
not established. . IRB ethical practices
are missing or unclear.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
36
DSE Student Handbook
Data Collection and Analysis
QUANTITATIVE
Provides in replicable detail a
description and process of the data
collected, coded/processed and
analyzed, and the process used in
gathering the data respective to the
chosen method and design.
Clearly demonstrates
alignment/mapping between the data
collected and the research questions
and/or hypotheses of the study.
Includes the data analysis processes
including, but not limited to:
Thoroughly described the statistical
tests performed and for what
purpose/outcome, coding of data
linked to each RQ, the software used
(e.g., SPSS, Qualtrics).
Provides a description of the data
collected and the processes used in
gathering the data.
Explains alignment between the data
collected and the research questions
and/or hypotheses of the study.
Includes the data analysis processes
including, but not limited to:
Described the statistical tests
performed and for what
purpose/outcome, coding of data
linked to each RQ, the software used
(e.g., SPSS, Qualtrics).
Did not clearly provide a description
of the data and the processes to collect
data. Lack of alignment between the
data collected and the research
questions and/or hypotheses of the
study.
Did not clearly provide the data
analysis processes including, but not
limited to: Did not clearly describe
the statistical tests performed and for
what purpose/outcome, coding of data
linked to each RQ, the software used
(e.g. SPSS, Qualtrics).
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
CHAPTER 3 QUALITATIVE Chapter 3: Introduction The reader is completely oriented to
the topic areas covered and the
organization of the chapter. All
themes/concepts are clearly
introduced.
The reader is adequately oriented to
the topic areas covered. An outline
of the flow of the chapter is
presented. All major
themes/concepts are introduced.
The section is missing; or some topic
areas are not included in the
introduction or are not explained
clearly. The chapter outline is not
provided and/or is unclear.
37
DSE Student Handbook
Performance Component Exceeds (2) Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
QUALITATIVE METHODS ONLY
Research Method and Design
QUALITATIVE
Explains and justifies how the
research method and design are
aligned with the study problem,
purpose, and research questions.
Substantiates the appropriateness of
the research method and design, and
the appropriateness of the method
with the design to accurately
advance knowledge in the discipline,
alternate choices are discussed.
Describes how the research method
and design are aligned with the study
problem, purpose, and research
questions. Uses scholarly support to
describe how the design choice is
consistent with the research method,
and alternate choices are discussed.
The study phenomenon, boundaries
of case(s) and/or constructs explored
are described.
There is a lack of alignment among the
chosen research method and
design and the study problem,
purpose, and research questions. There
is a lack of justification and alternate
choices for methods
There is no clear discussion of the
study phenomenon, boundaries of
case(s), and/or constructs explored
Concisely states the study
phenomenon, boundaries of case(s)
and/or constructs explored
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Population/Selection of
Subjects QUALITATIVE
Provides a detailed description of the
target population includes details to
the representativeness to the broader
population. There is a detailed
description of the methods and
inclusion/exclusion criteria used to
select the participants (sample) of the
study.
Provides a description of the target
population and the relation to the
larger population.
Inclusion/exclusion criteria for
selecting participants (sample) of the
study are noted.
There is a lack of a description of the
sample, demographics, and the
representativeness of the sample to the
broader population. There is little to
no description of the
inclusion/exclusion criteria used to
select the participants (sample) of the
study.
38
DSE Student Handbook
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Instrumentation
QUALITATIVE
Provides a clear, concise, detailed
description of the instruments used
(e.g. observation
checklists/protocols, interview or
focus group discussion Handbooks).
Includes detailed information
regarding instrument origin,
reliability, and validity.
Provides a description of the
instruments associated with the
chosen research method and design
used (e.g. observation
checklists/protocols, interview or
focus group discussion Handbooks).
Lacks a clear description of the
instruments associated with the chosen
research method and design used (e.g.,
observation checklists/protocols,
interview or focus group discussion
Handbooks).
Provides clear, concise, detailed
description of process and
procedures for conducting an expert
review of instruments (e.g., provides
justification of reviewers being
credible – reviewers may include,
but not limited to NCU dissertation
team members, professional
colleagues, peers, or non-research
participants representative of the
greater population); clearly explains
use of a field test if practicing the
administration of the instruments is
warranted.
Includes information regarding
instrument reliability and validity.
Describes process for conducting an
expert review of instruments (e.g.,
provides justification of reviewers
being credible – reviewers may
include, but not limited to NCU
dissertation team members,
professional colleagues, peers, or
non-research participants
representative of the greater
population); describes use of a field
test if practicing the administration
of the instruments is warranted.
Details missing regarding instrument
reliability and validity. Did not clearly
explain the process for conducting an
expert review of instruments (e.g.,
provides justification of reviewers
being credible – reviewers may
include, but not limited to NCU
dissertation team members,
professional colleagues, peers, or non-
research participants representative of
the greater population); and/or did not
clearly explain use of a field test if
practicing the administration of the
instruments is warranted.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
39
DSE Student Handbook
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Procedures QUALITATIVE Clearly described all the steps and
procedures for conducting the study
in replicable detail, including
participant recruitment and
notification, and informed consent.
IRB ethical practices are explained.
Described the procedures for
conducting the study in enough
detail to practically replicate the
study including participant
recruitment and notification, and
informed consent. IRB ethical
practices are noted.
Procedures are not clear or replicable.
Steps are missing and recruitment,
selection, and informed consent are
not established. . IRB ethical practices
are missing or unclear.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Data Collection and Analysis
QUALITATIVE
Provides in replicable detail a
description and process of the data
collected, coded/processed and
analyzed, and the process used in
gathering the data respective to the
chosen method and design.
Clearly demonstrates
alignment/mapping between the data
collected and the research questions
of the study.
Explains the coding process of data
linked to RQs. Clearly described the
transcription of data; the software
used for textual analysis (e.g. Nivo,
DeDoose), and justified manual
analysis by researcher. Explained the
use of a member check to validate
Provides a description of the data
collected and the processes used in
gathering the data.
Explains alignment between the data
collected and the research questions
of the study
Identified the coding process of data
linked to RQs. Described the
transcription of data; the software
used for textual analysis (e.g. Nivo,
DeDoose), and described manual
analysis by researcher. Described the
use of a member check to validate
data collected.
Did not clearly provide a description
of the data and the processes to collect
data. Lack of alignment between the
data collected and the research
questions of the study.
Did not clearly identify the coding
process of data linked to RQs; did not
clearly describe the transcription of
data; the software used for textual
analysis (e.g. Nivo, DeDoose), nor
justified manual analysis by
researcher. Missing or unclear
explanation of the use of a member
check to validate data collected
40
DSE Student Handbook
data collected.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Assumptions/Delimitations/
Limitations QUALITATIVE
Describes and explains the
assumptions/delimitations/limitations
inherent to the choice of method,
design, scope, and mitigating
processes to include, but not limited
to: threats to credibility,
trustworthiness, and transferability.
The limitations and delimitations are
described to the wider context of the
impact to these on the study.
Outlines the
assumptions/delimitations/limitations
to the choice of method and design.
Including key elements such as, but
not limited to: threats to credibility,
trustworthiness, and transferability.
Did not clearly outline the
assumptions/delimitations/limitations
(or has missing components) inherent
to the choice of method and design.
Did not include or lacking key
elements such as, but not limited to:
threats to credibility, trustworthiness,
and transferability.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Ethical Assurances Thorough explanation of compliance
with the standards for conducting
research as appropriate to the
proposed research design and aligned
to all IRB requirements is provided.
Compliance with the standards for
conducting research as appropriate to
the proposed research design and
aligned to IRB requirements is
described.
Discussion of compliance with the
standards for conducting research as
appropriate to the proposed research
design and is not aligned to IRB
requirements is missing or lacking.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Summary Chapter concludes with a clear,
organized, and concise summary of
key points discussed/presented in the
Chapter. No new information is
presented.
Chapter concludes with an organized
summary of key points
discussed/presented in the Chapter.
Chapter did not conclude with a
summary of key points from the
Chapter, elements are missing,
incomplete, and/or new information is
presented.
41
DSE Student Handbook
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
CHAPTER 4 Introduction A clear and concise overview of the
purpose of the research study is provided. This section includes an
organized flow of the chapter that is
clearly organized around the research
question(s)/hypotheses.
An adequate overview of the purpose
of the research study is provided.
The organization of the chapter is
described and is structured mainly
around the research
question(s)/hypotheses.
Overview of the purpose of the
research study is missing, lacking
clarify, and/or is overly lengthy;
containing unneeded discussions. The
organization of the chapter is missing
or unclear; including the organization
of the chapter around the research
question(s)/hypotheses.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Trustworthiness of data Trustworthiness of data reporting is clearly and concisely explained, along with any weaknesses to
interpretation of data collection or
analysis.
Note: Topics of discussion will
differ based on method. Qualitative
to include, but not limited to:
credibility, transferability,
dependability, and confirmability.
Quantitative to include, but not
limited to: validity, reliability, and
assumptions of statistical tests.
Trustworthiness of data is described.
Weaknesses to interpretation of data
collection or analysis are noted.
Note: Topics of discussion will
differ based on method. Qualitative
to include, but not limited to:
credibility, transferability,
dependability, and confirmability.
Quantitative to include, but not
limited to: validity, reliability, and
assumptions of statistical tests.
Trustworthiness of data is not
discussed, lacking, or unclear. Any
weaknesses to interpretation of data
collection or analyses are missing or
unclear.
Note: Topics of discussion will differ
based on method. Qualitative to
include, but not limited to: credibility,
transferability, dependability, and
confirmability. Quantitative to
include, but not limited to: validity,
reliability, and assumptions of
statistical tests.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
42
DSE Student Handbook
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Presentation of Results Results are presented clearly and logically in line with the research questions or hypotheses. The
structure of the analysis is clear,
organized, and flows for the reader
from the questions. Themes and
specific data points associated with
the aligned research questions are
clear and focused. Results are
presented without discussion or
interpretation. Specific themes are
aligned to the research questions and
any statistical significance or
relevance is highlighted. Tables and
figures are used and presented
clearly and appropriately.
Results are presented in line with the
research questions or hypotheses.
The structure of the analysis is
mostly organized and aligned with
the questions. Themes and data
points associated with the aligned
research questions are clear. Results
are presented with little to no
interpretation. Themes are aligned to
the research questions and any
statistical significance or relevance is
highlighted. Tables and figures are
used and presented appropriately.
Results, themes, and/or statistical
significance are not aligned to
research questions or hypotheses.
There is a lack of structure in analysis
and the steps for analysis are missing
or unclear. The structure of the
analysis is organized and aligned from
the questions. There is a presence of
interpretation and discussion in this
section of the results. There is an
absence of tables and figures or they
are present but not clear or
appropriate.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
Evaluation of Findings A clear and concise explanation of what findings mean is provided. Discussion includes clearly
delineated connections to
theoretical/conceptual framework.
All findings are compared to relevant
and current scholarly literature.
Description of what findings mean is
included. Discussion includes
theoretical/conceptual framework
identified earlier. Most findings are
compared to the scholarly literature.
Brief report of what findings mean is
missing, unclear, or overly long.
Results are not clearly interpreted in
light of the theoretical/conceptual
framework. Little to no connection
back to the scholarly literature.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Summary Chapter concludes with a clear,
organized, and concise summary of
key points discussed/presented in the
Chapter. No new information is
presented.
Chapter concluded with an organized
summary of key points
discussed/presented in the Chapter.
Chapter did not conclude with a
summary of key points from the
Chapter, elements are missing,
incomplete, and/or new information is
presented.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
43
DSE Student Handbook
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) CHAPTER 5
Introduction The reader is well-oriented to the
topic areas covered and the
organization of the review. All
major themes are clearly introduced
and explained.
The reader is adequately oriented to
the topic areas covered. An outline
of the flow of the chapter is
presented. All major themes are
introduced and explained.
The section is missing; or some topic
areas are not included in the
introduction or are not explained
clearly. The chapter outline is unclear
or not provided.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Implications (discussion of
findings)
Findings are concisely and clearly
discussed by research question and
hypotheses. Clear and logical
conclusions are developed and
presented based on actual research
findings. Results are examined in the
context of the literature review,
problem, purpose, alignment with the
theory/conceptual framework, and
significance of the study. Includes
critical discussion of the implications
for practice (Applied) and, in the
context of the literature, how the
study builds to the existing body of
research (PhD).
Findings are discussed by research
question and hypotheses. Clear
conclusions are presented based on
actual research findings. Results are
framed in the context of the literature
review, problem, purpose, alignment
with the theory/conceptual
framework, and significance of the
study. Includes discussion of the
suggestions for practice (Applied)
and, in the context of the literature,
how the study builds to the existing
body of research (PhD).
Findings are not clearly aligned to
questions or hypotheses. Conclusions
are vague and unsubstantiated in study
findings. Over generalizations are
present. There is a lack of
organization of results to study
problem, purpose, theory/conceptual
framework, and significance. There is
lack or unclear discussion for
suggestions in practice (Applied) or
how the findings can contribute to the
existing research base of scholarly
literature (PhD).
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Recommendations for
Research
All recommendations are clearly
drawn from study findings.
Recommendations for future
research considerations and practical
applications of the study are clearly
explained and framed in the
scholarly literature.
Recommendations are supported by
study findings. Future research
considerations and practical
applications of the study are
described, including some
connections to the scholarly
literature.
Study findings are not clearly tied to
recommendations. Recommendations
are vague or not appropriate.
Discussion for practical application of
findings and future research are
missing or lacking clarity.
44
DSE Student Handbook
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”) Conclusions Strong, concise, conclusion including
summary of study,
importance of study, and the problem
addressed. Strong ‘take-home’
message of the study is presented and
clearly articulated to the
professional and academic
organizations as stakeholders for the
study findings.
Descriptive conclusion including
summary of study, importance of
study, and the problem addressed.
Discussion includes ‘take-home’
message of the study to the
professional and academic
organizations as stakeholders for the
study findings.
No clear conclusions are presented.
There is a lack of organization around
the importance of the study and how
the results respond to the study
problem, demonstrate significance,
and contribute to exciting literature or
practice.
Performance Component Exceeds Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
BACK MATTER FOR DISSERTATION MANUSCRIPT Citations Not used for this criteria Current (no later than five years old
– unless seminal research), relevant,
scholarly literature is used
appropriately, all claims are
substantiated in the literature, there is
an absence of personal opinion,
avocation, bias, anthropomorphisms,
and informal language.
Numerous old (beyond five years)
resources used, claims are
unsubstantiated in the literature,
research bias is present and claims
based on personal opinion are
included. Frequent use of
anthropomorphisms and informal
language is noted.
Performance Component Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
References Not used for this criteria References are aligned from the text
to the reference list and vice versa.
References reflect proper doi
notations and are documented
appropriately. All references exist
and all links are properly working.
References are not aligned from the
text to the reference list and vice
versa. References are not
documented properly to doi notations.
Some references do not exist and
some links are not properly working.
Performance Component Meets (1) Does Not Meet (.01)
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
45
DSE Student Handbook
Dissertation Manuscript – Grading
Each rubric has specific criteria outlined based on the submitted deliverable. There are criteria where the only acceptable values are ‘Meets’ and ‘Does Not Meet’. There are other substantive criteria allowing for ‘Exceeds’, ‘Meets’, and ‘Does Not Meet’. Students are graded (for A or B grades) based only on the criterion allowing the scoring of an ‘Exceeds’ for final course deliverables.
The grading criteria include an ‘A’, ‘B’, or ‘F’.
Any reconciled rubric scoring a single ‘Does Not Meet’ and the paper will be considered as not passing and the course grade must be marked as an ‘F’ grade and the student will be enrolled in the 8-week supplemental course DIS9904B/C.
If the number of Exceeds is greater than the number of Meets (FOR ONLY THOSE CRITERION ALLOWING FOR AN EXCEEDS SCORE) AND there have been no ‘Does Not Meet’ criteria. The student would receive an A.
If the number of Meets is greater than the number of Exceeds (FOR ONLY THOSE CRITERION ALLOWING FOR AN EXCEEDS SCORE) AND there have been no ‘Does Not Meet’ criteria. The student would receive a B.
FOR FINAL GRADING OF A COURSE DELIVERABLE AND DECIDING THE COURSE GRADE (only use the grading criteria below for determining final course deliverables):
Appendices Not used for this criteria Appendices are appropriate to the
manuscript including elements such
as, but limited to, survey tools and
instruments. There is alignment
between text and appendices.
Appendices lack organization, missing
components, or incomplete details
There is misalignment between text
and appendices.
Performance Component Meets Does Not Meet
Comments (required for all
“Does not meet”)
46
DSE Student Handbook
TaskStream scoring has been designed to indicate if the final score is a whole number the student would earn a passing score (A or B).
If the final score results in a number with a decimal, the student has received a ‘Does Not Meet’ (.01) and the student will not pass. The decimal number indicates the number of ‘Does Not Meet’ criteria. The score for the final grade would be an ‘F’.
Version/Revision History:
Version 1.0: Published 10/10/2016