Good critical friends are hard to find: promoting peer review among doctoral students

IF 1.8 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education Pub Date : 2023-01-06 DOI:10.1108/sgpe-11-2021-0081
Deborah E. Tyndall, S. Powell
{"title":"Good critical friends are hard to find: promoting peer review among doctoral students","authors":"Deborah E. Tyndall, S. Powell","doi":"10.1108/sgpe-11-2021-0081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to examine entry-level PhD students’ experiences with participating in Critical Friends, a peer review protocol, used to support learning the threshold concept of literature review. It also sought to determine if, and how, students used the peer review protocol electively during their first year of doctoral study.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe authors used a sequential, QUAL-qual mixed-method design to guide the study. Reflective learning journals, surveys and interviews were collected from three cohorts of PhD students (N = 18).\n\n\nFindings\nThematic analysis revealed that giving and receiving writing critique was uncomfortable for these novice peer reviewers and many described emotional disciplining associated with vulnerability. Critical Friends offered a safe space to begin mastery of the literature review and begin transforming new researcher and writer identities. While Critical Friends was a positive experience for students, they struggled implementing the protocol on their own following the course.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThese findings support the need for faculty to embed peer review opportunities in courses during the first year to facilitate role modeling and mentoring. The findings also demonstrate the need to engage students with peer review early in the program to increase comfort, cultivate student resiliency for accepting critical feedback and build capacity for students to learn with and from others.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper advocates for the use of peer review practices early in the doctoral study to promote the development of researcher identity and positioning within the research community.\n","PeriodicalId":42038,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sgpe-11-2021-0081","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine entry-level PhD students’ experiences with participating in Critical Friends, a peer review protocol, used to support learning the threshold concept of literature review. It also sought to determine if, and how, students used the peer review protocol electively during their first year of doctoral study. Design/methodology/approach The authors used a sequential, QUAL-qual mixed-method design to guide the study. Reflective learning journals, surveys and interviews were collected from three cohorts of PhD students (N = 18). Findings Thematic analysis revealed that giving and receiving writing critique was uncomfortable for these novice peer reviewers and many described emotional disciplining associated with vulnerability. Critical Friends offered a safe space to begin mastery of the literature review and begin transforming new researcher and writer identities. While Critical Friends was a positive experience for students, they struggled implementing the protocol on their own following the course. Practical implications These findings support the need for faculty to embed peer review opportunities in courses during the first year to facilitate role modeling and mentoring. The findings also demonstrate the need to engage students with peer review early in the program to increase comfort, cultivate student resiliency for accepting critical feedback and build capacity for students to learn with and from others. Originality/value This paper advocates for the use of peer review practices early in the doctoral study to promote the development of researcher identity and positioning within the research community.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
善于批评的好朋友很难找到:促进博士生之间的同行评议
目的本研究旨在探讨初级博士生参与“批判性朋友”(Critical Friends)同伴评议协议的经验,该协议用于支持文献综述阈值概念的学习。它还试图确定学生是否以及如何在博士学习的第一年选择性地使用同行评议协议。设计/方法学/方法作者采用顺序、质量-质量混合方法设计来指导研究。本研究收集了三组博士研究生(N = 18)的反思性学习期刊、问卷调查和访谈。研究结果:专题分析显示,对这些初学的同行评议者来说,给予和接受写作评论是不舒服的,许多人描述了与脆弱性相关的情感约束。《批判之友》提供了一个安全的空间,让我开始掌握文献综述,并开始转变新的研究者和作家身份。虽然“批判之友”对学生来说是一次积极的经历,但他们在课程结束后很难自己执行协议。这些发现支持教师在第一年的课程中嵌入同行评议机会的必要性,以促进角色塑造和指导。研究结果还表明,有必要在项目早期让学生参与同行评议,以增加舒适度,培养学生接受批判性反馈的弹性,并建立学生与他人一起学习和向他人学习的能力。原创性/价值本文提倡在博士研究早期采用同行评议实践,以促进研究人员在研究社区中的身份和定位的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education
Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
How do Danish humanities PhD school leaders constitute their roles? Interactions of biography, place and time Advancing doctoral student professional development through a strengths-based cohort program Understanding how socio-historical contexts inform approaches to improving racial climate in stem graduate education within the United States Developing writing productivity in a graduate support community “We can work on this”: exploring supervisor approaches to feedback in the context of writing for a professional doctorate
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1