Development of the Scholar-Practitioner: Article Analysis Resubmission
Development of the Scholar-Practitioner: Article Analysis Resubmission by Calanthia Carter Calanthia. [email protected] edu Student ID #A00013887 School: Richard W. Riley College of Education and Leadership Program: Ph. D.
in Education Specialization: Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment Instructor: Joanne Heilman, Ph. D. Walden University Resubmission: January 29, 2012 Article Analysis Jazvac-Martek, M. (2009). Oscillating role identities: The academic experiences of education doctoral students.
Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(3), 253–264.Retrieved from the Walden Library using the Education Research Complete database. Central Research Problem Undertaking the task in doctoral education as a student is daunting enough without added ambiguity of how to fit within the academic sphere, and the influences imposed on the doctoral student. Jazvac-Martek (2009), addressed the need to understand the influences from within and without regarding experiences of doctoral students. This study viewed the task from the standpoint of “identity” – role, student, and academic, while seeking to dismantle the enigmatic personalities of the doctoral student in everyday events.Many researchers from varied fields have attempted to explain identity theory or they used it as an entangled net of generality.
Others have reduced it to students’ development of beliefs, values, and skills needed to participate in a world of academia. Past researchers have determined that identity is simply the administrators and advisors creating mini self- models. Supporters of these models place limitations on understanding the student as a diverse, multi-directional individual.Jazvac-Martek attempts to bring unity to the definition of identity by fixing the limits normally placed on experiences in doctoral education, (p. 254) as she makes use of Role Identity Theory.
Research Findings This study utilized Role Identity Theory because it does not limit the student to a strict, rigid role, but allows the individual to exercise the freedom to describe their unique role regardless of the input or reaction of others. Simultaneously, the author recognizes that the individual has to make his identify valid based on the reaction of others in the sphere of profession.However, the perception of success or failures based on a combination of intrapersonal motivations determines the student’s personal expectations. The theory evolved to align with the author’s intent of the study, which was to determine how doctoral students view their identity and experience as they perform various task in becoming a peer or scholar. The author’s data source involved a single week log of experiences, pre-interview questionnaires, and two interviews to discuss the logs and the questionnaire. (p.
57) The author identified, analyzed, and reported patterns in the collected data from a qualitative software analysis program. Jazvac-Martek discovered that students recounted times when they felt like peers and times when they realized they were still doctoral students or candidates. The author also found that regardless of the experience (i. e. facilitating studies, writing papers or proposals or interviews for a faculty position) the students gained a sense of power and a sense of progress.
(p. 259) Strengths and WeaknessesThe research by Jazvac-Martek is commendable and offers a much needed discussion on the expectations and motivations of doctoral students. However, I would have preferred a larger and more diverse group of participants. The limited list of participants does not seem to provide the objectivity needed to make assumptions that role identity varies in relationship to responses from academia. The author was adamant that Role Identity Theory offered the best solution.
Especially in terms of how doctoral students viewed themselves when interacting with faculty and staff in the doctoral study, the author showed favoritism.For this reason alone, this reader found it might prove difficult to consider duplicating Jazvak-Merek research design and methods. (APA Manual, 31) The author’s knowledge of the research and the current thought in the area of identity were impressive. Reflections In the discussion, the author highlights the conflicting role of the doctoral student. In this case, as new doctoral students, there is little need or chance of struggling with role identity, because the journey begins with awe and excitement coupled with the self image, clearly, of a student role.
There is a definite need for confirmation, but I am not sure if it comes from role placement as much as from belief in the abilities to reach the level of an academic. (Richardson, 2006) In settings outside of the academic environment, there is a feeling of belonging to the academic arena, because the role as the facilitator of study groups and content leader for a grade level shift my perception. Reference American Psychological Association. (2010), Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, Sixth Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Jazvac-Martek, M. 2009).
Oscillating role identities: The academic experiences of education doctoral students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(3), 253–264. Retrieved from the Walden Library using the Education Research Complete database. Richardson, V. (2006). Stewards of a field, stewards of an enterprise: The doctorate in education.
In C. M. Golde ; G. E. Walker (Eds. ), Envisioning the future of doctoral education: Preparing stewards of the discipline (pp.
251–267). Stanford, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.