Veysel BOZKURT, Elvan YALÇINKAYA, Abdullah KARATAŞ, Mustafa TALAS, Arzu ŞAHİN

Doktora Ö¤rencilerinin Alg›lar›: Memnuniyetleri, Zorluklar›, Kazand›klar› Vas›flar ve Akademik Dergilerde Yay›n Performanslar›

Bu çal›flman›n amac›; doktora ö¤rencilerinin; doktora programlar›n›n içeri- ¤i, ö¤retim üyeleri ve doktora alan› konusundaki alg›lar›n› incelemektir. Ay- r›ca doktora ö¤rencilerinin akademik dergilerde yay›n yapma performansla- r›n› etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi amaçlanm›flt›r. Bu amaçla 15 farkl› üniversiteden 1367 doktora ö¤rencisine yüz yüze ve çevrimiçi olarak bir “Doktora E¤itimi De¤erlendirme Anketi” uygulanm›flt›r. Temel bileflenler analizi, 4 faktör ortaya ç›kartm›flt›r. Ders aflamas›nda doktora ö¤rencilerinin ço¤unlu¤u, doktora program›n›n içeri¤inden, doktora yap›lan alandan ve ö¤retim üyelerinden memnun olduklar›n› ifade etmifllerdir. Ancak zamanla ö¤rencilerin fark›ndal›klar› artt›kça, flikâyetleri de artmaktad›r. Yeterlik s›nav› aflamas›nda, doktora ö¤rencilerinin memnuniyetsizlikleri, en üst sevi- yeye ulaflmaktad›r. ‹kinci y›ldan itibaren, doktora ö¤rencilerinin doktora programlar›n›n içeri¤inden, doktora yap›lan alandan ve ö¤retim üyelerin- den memnuniyetleri, istatistiksel olarak anlaml› fark yaratacak flekilde azal- maktad›r. Özellikle sosyal bilimler alan›nda çal›flanlar, araflt›rma yöntemle- rinin yeterince ö¤retilmedi¤inden flikâyet etmektedir. Doktora ö¤rencileri- nin akademik dergilerde yay›n yapma performans›n› etkileyen faktörleri be- lirlemek için ikili lojistik regresyon uygulanm›flt›r. Doktora ö¤rencilerinin uluslararas› akademik sempozyumlara kat›l›mlar›, yay›n yapmalar›n› yorda- yan en önemli de¤iflken olmufltur. Di¤er yorday›c› de¤iflkenler; doktora ö¤- rencilerinin bir projede yer almas›, üniversitede araflt›rma görevlisi olarak çal›flmas› ve ders aflamas›n› tamamlamas›d›r. Doktora ö¤rencilerinin, dan›fl- manlar› veya meslektafllar› ile akademik kongrelere kat›l›m›n› teflvik etmek akademik dergilerde yay›n performans›n›n artmas›na katk›da bulunacakt›r.

Perceptions of Doctoral Students: Satisfaction, Difficulties, Gained Skills and Performance in Publishing in Academic Journals

The aim of this study was to examine the perceptions of doctoral students about the content of doctoral programs, faculty and doctoral field. It was also aimed at determining the indicators that affect doctoral students’ per- formance in getting published in academic journals. For this purpose, 1367 doctoral students from 15 different universities were administered a “Doctoral Education Evaluation Survey” face-to-face and online. Principal component analysis revealed 4 factors. The majority of doctoral students at the course stage are satisfied with the content of the doctoral program, the faculty members and the doctoral field. As the students’ awareness increas- es over time, their complaints increase. The dissatisfaction of doctoral stu- dents reaches the highest level, at the proficiency stage. Furthermore, from the second year on, there is a decline in the satisfaction of doctoral students with the content of the doctoral programs, with the faculty members and the opportunities offered by the doctoral field, to a statistically significant extent. Especially those working in the social sciences complain that research methods are not taught enough. Binary logistic regression was applied to determine the indicators affecting the publication performance of the doctoral students in academic journals. The participation of doctoral students in international academic symposiums emerged as the most impor- tant indicator. The other predictive variables are doctoral students’ partici- pation in a project, working as a research assistant at the university, and completion of the course stage. Encouraging the participation of doctoral students in academic congresses with their advisors or their colleagues will contribute to increasing their publication performance.

PDF

___

Akbulut, H., fiahin, Ç., & Çepni, S. (2013). Determination of faced prob- lems in doctorate thesis process: Education faculty sample. [Article in Turkish] Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp E¤itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20, 50–69.
Ames, C., Berman, R., & Casteel, A. (2018). A preliminary examination of doctoral student retention factors in private online workspaces. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 79–107.
Bahçeci, F., & Uflengül, L. (2018). Examination of thesis subject determi- nation criteria of postgraduate and doctorate students. [Article in Turkish] Turkish Journal of Educational Studies, 5(2), 85–96.
Bakio¤lu, A., & Gürdal, A. (2001). Role perception of supervisors and stu- dents in postgraduate thesis: Implications for administrations. [Article in Turkish] Hacettepe Üniversitesi E¤itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21, 9–18.
Bernstein, B. L., Evans, B., Fyffe, J., Halai, N., & Hall, F. L. (2014). The continuing evolution of the research doctorate. In M. Nerad, & B. Evans (Eds.), Globalization and its impacts on the quality of PhD education (pp. 5–30). New York, NY: Springer.
Christensen, M., & Lund, O. (2014). Doctoral education in a successful ecological niche: A qualitative exploratory case study of the relation- ship between the microclimate and doctoral students’ learning to become a researcher. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(3), 103–113.
Gardner, S. K. (2008). “What’s too much and what’s too little?”: The process of becoming an independent researcher in doctoral education. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(3), 326–350.
Golde, C. M., & Dore, T. M. (2001). At cross purposes: What the experiences of doctoral students reveal about doctoral education. Philadelphia, PA: A report prepared for The Pew Charitable Trusts. Retrieved from www.phd-survey.org (January 11, 2019).
Gube, J., Getenet, S., Satariyan, A., & Muhammad, Y. (2017). Towards “operating within” the field: Doctoral students’ views of supervisors’ discipline expertise. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12, 1–16.
Jairam, D., & Kahl, D. H. (2012). Navigating the doctoral experience: The role of social support in successful degree completion. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 311–329.
Karada¤, E., Daniflman, fi., Dulay, S., Öztekin Bay›r, Ö., & Tekel, E. (2018). Tough academic journey of research assistants in the Faculty of Education: PhD dissertation process. [Article in Turkish] Yüksekö¤retim Dergisi, 8(1), 103–112.
Katz, R. (2016). Challenges in doctoral research project management: A comparative study. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 105–125.
Kürflad, M. fi. (2015). Investigation of relationship between attitude toward scientific research and epistemological belief. [Article in Turkish] Abant ‹zzet Baysal Üniversitesi E¤itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(2), 217–246.
Lei, S. A. (2008). Factors changing attitudes of graduate school students toward an introductory research methodology course. Education, 128(4), 667–685.
Limon, ‹., & Durnal›, M. (2018). Phd students’ metaphoric perceptions on doctorate education and instructors. [Article in Turkish] Sakarya University Journal of Education, 8(1), 26–40.
Mainhard, T., Van der Rijst, R., Van Tartwijk, J., & Wubbels, T. (2009). A model for the supervisor-doctoral student relationship. Higher Education, 58(3), 359–373.
Mason, M. A. (2012). The future of the Ph.D. The Chronicle of Higher Education, May 3, 2012. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/ article/The-Future-of-the-PhD/131749/?sid=ja (January 11, 2019).
Özmen, Z. M., & Güç, F. A. (2013). Challenges in doctoral education and coping strategies: A case study. [Article in Turkish] Yüksekö¤retim ve Bilim Dergisi, 3(3), 214–219.
Parry, S. (2007). Disciplines and doctorates. Dordrecht: Springer. Sala-Bubaré, A., Peltonen, J. A., Pyhältö, K., & Castelló, M. (2018). Doctoral candidates’ research writing perceptions: A cross-national study. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 327–345.
Saral, D. G., & Reyhanl›o¤lu, D. (2015). An analysis of educational faculty students’ research self-efficacy in terms of a number of variables. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 1138–1145.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (International ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Wolfe, K. A., Nelson, A. B., & Seamster, C. L. (2018). In good company: A collaborative autoethnography describing the evolution of a successful doctoral cohort. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 293–311.