As per the requirements of the IST doctoral program, I have gone through three set of dossier reviews. Please click on the links to review the process of feedback for all three dossiers:

 

1. Dossier One Review

 

2. Dossier Two Review

 

3. Dossier Three Review

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dossier One Review

 

Advisory Committee: Professor Elizabeth Boling & Dr. Anne Todd Leftwich

Date: 10/22/13

Time: 4:0-5:0PM

 

Feedback

 

1. Navigation of website/ Information Display

 

Moving the Evidence of Teaching, Service, & Research within the main menu buttons. In my research page i will need to label which is my first-authored study. Link the studies to either a research document, or documentation of my work in that particular study. 

 

2. Candidate Statement

 

Writing my candidate statement in a journalistic fashion where i state my research/professional goal in the beginning and then write my journey and how i will achieve my goal. My candidate statement also needs to mention my primary focus area and the breadth and integration of my research, teaching and service. The paragraphs under those titles are not relevant and need to be moved into the Research page. I will need to communicate on how i am growing as a scholar. I need to assert in my candidate statement that i am preparing myself to work in an NGO and not a research university. Make that distinction very clear. 

 

3. Narrowing my research focus

 

We started by talking about my main research goal and framing my ideas within that research goal. My main research goal is to understand the "Design of technology-infused sustainable teaching and learning among the underserved populations". I will need to clarify this goal as i delve deeper into the literature of design thinking, establishment of innovations, interventions & adoptions (Rogers) and systemic change (Reigeluth, Banathy). My current first-authored study needs to be linked to this main research goal and so does the other studies i am involved in. I will need to refine my research statement as i frame my main research goals. Eventually i should be able to come up with a solid theoretical framework that will address my main research goal.

 

I will also need to provide detailed linkage to my minor in Social Informatics and demonstrate how minoring in Social Informatics will inform me about literature and practice i cannot gain from IST and how that will aid me in figuring out my main research goal. I will also need to add my literature review from 711, 691-1 in my research page to demonstrate that i have knowledge about key constructs of my main research goal. 

 

4. Providing a Teaching Statement

 

Since most of teaching experience is presentation and facilitation-based. I should mention in my teaching statement that i am developing teaching practices that are relevant to the NGO arena. Link all the evidence to supporting documentation.

 

5. Providing a Service Statement

 

I need to write a statement of service before the evidence. Link all the evidence to supporting documentation. 

 

Completed

 

• Site navigation and design

• Studies have been linked to an artifact

• Collecting literature on Innovations, Adoptions and Social Informatics to frame my larger research question

• Developed a theoretical framework for my larger research question and presented it as a poster session for my Social Informatics class

• Refined my larger research question and refining my research interest on digital inclusion and research on design

 

Action Items

 

• Review site and meet with advisors to get feedback

• Prepare presentation for Dossier II

 

Dossier Two Review

 

Advisory Committee: Professor Elizabeth Boling & Dr. Anne Todd Leftwich

External Reviewers: Dr. Ray Haynes & Dr. Gamze Ozogol

Date: 10/26/14

Time: 1:0-2:0PM

Dossier Two Candidate Statement

Dossier Presentation

 

 

Feedback

 

 

We provide feedback for your reflection and action based on a review of your dossier and presentation to the IST faculty on September 26, 2014. Our feedback is organized according to broad categories that serve as guidelines for evaluation. Those categories are: candidate statement, IST content, research, teaching, service, your oral defense, and overall progress.  

 

1. Candidate Statement

We appreciate the time and effort put into the design and display of your electronic dossier. It was visually pleasing however, it was not as accessible and you can improve this aspect of your dossier by clearly distinguishing linked evidence and documents.  You state that your career goal is to work for a Non-governmental organization that focuses on advocacy.  We are unable to see how your role in such an organization might relate to your research (traditional or action-research).  We need you to make the connection between your career goal and your research more explicit.  There is significant difference between the advocate’s role and the role of a Ph.D. trained researcher.  Consequently, we note some deficiencies in the way you define and integrate the constructs that for the basis of your research. A well-trained scholar/researcher may have specific interest but s/he needs grounding in the methods and theoretical underpinnings that support research about specific topics or interests. Obtaining this grounding will require you focus on clearly defining and explaining all constructs related to your primary research interest.  Please make sure that you revisit and clarify these constructs in your candidate statement as well as in your research products.        

 

2. IST Content

We carefully reviewed your dossier and listened to your presentation. You demonstrate strong presentation skills and we found the incorporation of storytelling to be highly effective. We detect that your interests are diverging from traditional design in the ID field, however we found your discussion on the connection to IST content somewhat deficient.  A few sentences aimed at making these connections more explicit would significantly improve your section on breadth and integration. As with your candidate statement, we urge you to clearly define all related constructs and make explicit their links to IST. It is very important for you to be able to communicate how work fits within the ID field.

 

3. Research

We note that you are already published and that you have established collaborative relationship with others in efforts to publish your research/scholarship and we commend you for doing so.   

 

We have some concerns about your research that must be addressed.  In general, those concerns stem from a lack of clarity related the constructs you are interested and the inability to present an integrative picture of the constructs, your position, your assumptions and how the inform your research.  We urge you to pay attention to the foundational aspects of your research by developing clarity around: design, design practice, non-designers, design sense, differences in design related to face to face and online education, and making a credible literature-based case for teachers as designers.

More specifically, your first authored study has significant weaknesses that must be addressed. Those weaknesses are: 1) grounding the study with a broader literature base that will help you to gain more definitional clarity on your constructs; 2) the study lacks sufficient description that would aid understanding of the value of the research questions proffered, what was done, and how it was done i.e., methods; unit of analysis; data collection; data analysis; findings and how the relate to the research questions etc., etc.

 

4. Teaching

 

We note that you have instructional design experience and teaching experience and that you have actively sought to augment this experience by serving as a TA and that you are now engaged in teaching W200.  As a reflective instructor we would like you to take your learning from mentoring faculty and apply them to your own teaching experiences. We appreciate that you are taking on various roles as a PhD student in the department, a community participant and an AI...etc. This being said you need to figure out ways to balance all your responsibilities, and give the importance to all to the best standard, at all times.

 

5. Service

Your service work is good and varied and it is to be commended

 

6. Oral defense

Your presentation was very effective. In some instances you clarified confusion caused by reading your dossier alone and in other instance you could not because of the lack of an integrative perspective and a meta-view of your research. We believe you can overcome these issues by grounding your research in the literature and paying attention to construct definitions and relatedness.   

 

7. Overall quality of the your dossier

Your dossier could significantly be improved by being disciplined and precise.  This means broadly considering extant literature, carefully defining constructs explicitly stating how they relate.  Your first authored study can be significantly improved by providing rich description, answering the research questions within your study, and carefully adhering to guidance for good methods and data analysis.  The dossier process is not a simplistic, program- related requirement that is treated as a barrier to pursuing your interests.  It is a process designed to prepare you to be able to conduct well-grounded research.  We believe that you are capable taking the corrective actions to achieve your goals.  

 

Outcome of 2nd Dossier Review:

 

___ Fail                __X__ Conditional Pass              _____Pass

 

Conditions

 

• Improve first-authored study; method, research questions, connection of results to questions; analysis method in detail; how do assertions arise (give examples from data and analysis). This is due by December 15, 2014.  

• Produce a white paper pulling together your research related constructs. This white paper must include a coherent explanation of how they constructs relate and how they are used to inform your research focus and direction. This is due by March 15, 2015

• Improve the design and usability of your dossier so that readers can readily detect linked supporting evidence and documents. This is due by December 15, 2014. 

• Keep up with job responsibilities – ongoing. The concern here is not to allow one dimension of performance wilt when another aspect heats up.

 

Completed

 

• Dossier website design and usability

• Revised first-authored study

• Wrote the white paper on research related constructs

 

Action Items

 

• Currently awaiting feedback from Professor Boling on the white paper. 

• Sent first-authored study for publication at the Journal of Online Learning Research

• Developing the dissertation prospectus.

• Presenting Dossier III on April 2nd, 2015

 

Dossier Three Review

 

Advisory Committee: Professor Elizabeth Boling & Dr. Curtis J. Bonk

Dissertation Committee Members: Professor Elizabeth Boling, Dr. Curtis J. Bonk, Dr. Erik Stolterman, & Dr. Barbara Dennis

Date: 4/2/15

Time: 1:0-2:0PM

 

Documentation

 

• Dossier II conditions: White paper on Research related constructs, Revised First-Authored Study

• Research Goals

• Candidate Statement

• Pilot Prospectus

• Coursework completion letter