Buradasınız

Doktora Programı: Türk Üniversiteleri Doktora Programları İçin Bazı Öneriler

Doctorate Programme: Some Implications for Doctorate Programmes of Turkish Universities

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Doctorate programs describe the ultimate degree of science. Doctorate programs constitute the extent of passing on faculty- academic from deputy faculty in universities. On the other hand, practically, the ones who desire to come somewhere in bureaucracy are expected to have a PhD degree anymore. Doctorate programs are generally designed as two types on world-scale. The first one is ‚Doctorate in Philosophy (PhD)‛ that is based on earlier times, the other one is ‚Doctorate in Education (EdD)‛ which is younger compared to the first one (The first one was launched in Harvard University in 1993). According to Jablonski’s citation, studies (Osguthorpe & Wng, 1993; Deering, 1998; Kolbert et al., 1997; Nelson & Coorough, 1994) show that there is not a clear difference between these two types of doctorate programmes, nevertheless, while EdD is relatively predominant on professional development, PhD becomes more dominant on training of ‚scientist‛. Therefore, in this study it is conducted with the assumption that doctorate programs are generally designed in the same format and content. Without making distinction between fields, it could be asserted a typical doctorate program includes three sections; (1) subject field, (2) research field, (3) the field of interest and attitude towards the profession. In this study, a discussion on developments and implementations related to different dimensions of a typical doctorate programme has been stated, according to Britain and United States of America(USA)1 ‘s implementations. It could be mentioned that doctorate programmes of Turkish Universities have been institutionalized and achieved a certain quality on a large scale. However, putting forth the functions and implementations of particularly developed countries’ doctorate programmes and comparing (benchmarking) national doctorate programs with these ones will definitely contribute national doctorate programs’ progress in order to benefit from the good samples. Hence as a comparison (benchmarking) study, this is what exactly done in this study. The objective of this study is to put out the recent developments and practices of USA and British Universities’ doctorate programs, and to compare with Turkish doctorate programmes and eventually to contribute the growth of national doctorate programs.
Abstract (Original Language): 
Doktora programları, dünya ölçeğinde bilimde en üst dereceyi ifade eder. Doktora programları, üniversitelerde öğretim üyeliği yardımcılığından öğretim üyeliği aşamasına geçiş aşamasını oluşturmaktadır. Öte yandan pratikte, bürokraside bir yerlere gelmek isteyenlerin de artık doktora derecesi alması beklenmektedir. Bu denli önemli bir işlevi bulunan doktora programlarının çeşitli boyutlarındaki gelişme ve uygulamaların literatür yanında, özellikle de gelişmiş ABD ve İngiliz üniversitelerinin kataloglarından ortaya konulması, sonrasında da Türk üniversiteleri doktora programları için bazı çıkarımlar yapılması bu çalışmanın amacını oluşturmaktadır.

REFERENCES

References: 

Crayer, P. & Mertons, P. (2003). The PhD examination: support and training for supervisors and examiners. Quality Assurance in Education, 11 (2), 92-99.
Denicolo, P. (2003). Assessing the PhD: A constructive view of criteria. Quality Assurance in Education, 11 (2), 84-91.
Jablonski, A. ( 2001). Doctoral studies as Professional development of educators in the United States. European Journal of Teacher Education, 24 (2), 216-221.
Joyner, R. W. (2003). The selection of external examiners for research degrees. Quality Assurance in Education, 11 (2), 123-127.
Murray, R. (2003). How to survive your viva: Defending a thesis in an oral examination. Maidenherd: Open University Press.
Powell, S. & McCauley, C. (2002). Research degree examining - common principles and divergent practices. Quality Assurance in Education, 10 (2), 104-115.
Powell, S. & Green, H. (2003). Research degree examining: Quality issues of principles and practice. Quality Assurance in Education, 11 (2), 55-63.
Shaw, M. & Gren, D. H. (2002). Benchmarking the PhD - a tentative beginning. Quality Assurance in Education, 10 (2), 116-124.
Trafford, V. (2003). Questions in doctoral vivas: Views from the inside. Quality Assurance in Education, 11 (2), 114-122.
Wallace, S. (2003). Figuratively speaking: Six accounts of the PhD viva. Quality Assurance in Education, 11 (2), 100-108.
Walker, G. (2010). Admission requirements for education doctoral programs at top 20 American Universities. College Student Journal, Part A., 42 (2), 357-366.
http://gsep.pepperdine.edu/dissertation/education. İndirme Tarihi: 28.01.2011
http://gsep.pepperdine.edu/dissertation/education/policies. İndirme Tarihi: 28.01.2011
http://gsep.pepperdine.edu/education/edd-educational-leadership-administ.... İndirme Tarihi: 30.01.2011
http://www.alasu.edu/Graduate_Studies. İndirme Tarihi: 28.02.2011
http://www.alliant.edu/wps/wcm/connect/website/Home/Admissions/Graduate+.... İndirme Tarihi: 02.02.2011
http://www2.mercer.edu/Education/Academic_Programs/edleadership_p12.htm. İndirme Tarihi: 28.02. 2011
http://www.georgiasouthern.edu/majors. İndirme Tarihi: 05.02.2011
http://www.bsu.edu/gradschool/article. İndirme Tarihi: 05.02.2011
http://web.indstate.edu/sogs/newwebsite/usapp.htm. İndirme Tarihi: 12.02.2011
http://www.indiana.edu/~grdschl/admissions.php. İndirme Tarihi: 10.02.2011
http://www.indiana.edu/~bulletin/iu/educ_grad/2005-2007/doctoral.shtml. İndirme Tarihi: 10.02.2011

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com