A Word from the Ruler Lady: Carolyn Law

It was not so long ago that the mythic figure of the fierce Ruler Lady loomed large in grad school folklore. She lurked in graduate schools across the land, measuring the margins of theses and dissertations with uncanny (some say even preternatural) precision. She could stop the hearts of suppliant thesis and dissertation writers with a single wave of her terrible sword. I mean ruler. The unluckiest ones could expect to be sent away, trembling, to retype—literally, like on a typewriter—whole pages of their precious documents, in triplicate and on expensive cotton-bond paper.

Like all urban legends, there is perhaps a kernel of truth in the basic story, but over time such tales grow to incredible proportions and soon spiral out far beyond the bounds of reality.

I am the Ruler Lady at NIU, but I’m really not very fierce. And I do not use a ruler anymore, although I must admit that for many years I did. In fact, quite a lot has changed in the Thesis Office at NIU since I started out as Thesis and Dissertation Advisor in 1996. For one thing, theses and dissertations are born digital these days and thus the post-defense submission, review, and approval process is entirely electronic now. Other more recent changes in the Thesis Office, however, aren’t so much technological as programmatic.

Starting this Fall 2015, the Thesis Office is delighted to offer a full menu of targeted workshops to assist thesis and dissertation writers in all departments of the university to meet the specific Graduate School format requirements and general standards of quality for academic writing. My hope is that by meeting with students before they defend, answering their individual questions as they arise during composition, I can smooth out the sometimes bumpy road to final approval. To help me with that lofty goal, I have enlisted a couple of excellent GAs to the cause. Mike and Clare, who’ve been blogging in this space for several months, know exactly what you are going through. Their perspective has proven invaluable to me in designing new programs and services, updating our online resources, and creating a more student-focused office in general.

Please check out the calendar of upcoming workshops for Fall 2015 on the website (click here) and look for new offerings and events in the coming months.

The Thesis Office staff is alive and well in Adams Hall Room 104 and we’re eager to help you achieve your goals. Feel free to drop in the office without appointment Monday – Thursday 10 am – 2 pm to see how we may be of assistance to you. And be sure to subscribe to this blog. You’ll receive posts twice a month on a wide variety of topics of interest to thesis and dissertation writers at every stage in the process.

Finally, remember that although I may still strike fear in the hearts of graduate students, I promise to use my power only for good.

Break Time!

We’ve been posting some heavy material in our last few blog entries—so this post encourages you to relax! With many of us about to start (or have started) a new school year or semester, and others working hard in other ventures, I'm excited to tell you about the studies revealing the benefits of taking a break, especially outside. 

On June 23 of this year, NPR’s Patti Neighmond posted an article, “Take a Hike to Do Your Heart and Spirit Good.” In this piece, Neighmond references an NPR study on adult exercise. The poll revealed that about 50% of adults say they do exercise regularly, with walking being the most common activity. Neighmond reveals, however, that many people think walking isn’t good enough exercise, so they may skip it.

Neighmond then reports on studies by Dr. Tim Church of Louisiana State University. These studies show that while walking might not help adults lose actual pounds, it does help reduce belly fat and keeps the body generally healthier.

What does that have to do with writing? Well, Church also found that regular walkers have    

•     less anxiety
•        less depression
•        more energy

So for writers of serious, lengthy research, why not stop for a few minutes and take a walk to recharge--so to speak? And even if you are quite energetic already, there are more benefits of nature breaks...

In April 2014, Ellen Stuart from the Ernst & Young Leadership and Professional Development Center at NIU wrote a post called “Boost Your Brainpower!” for the LPDC Blog. Ellen reports that “spending time outside can actually boost your brainpower”; she references the British Journal of Sports Medicine, which finds that a “20 minute walk through ‘green space’… reduces ‘brain fatigue.’”

These ideas may be second nature (pun not entirely intended!) to most, but I think sometimes we need to be reminded and prompted to actually get outside!

Yet, as I was riding my bike on my favorite path recently, I began to wonder if even the smells around me had a positive influence—including that dank river smell. I did a quick Google search and found a piece that Bonnie Tsui wrote for The Atlantic City Lab entitled “The Smell of Nature Is Almost As Good As the Real Thing, As Far As Our Brains Are Concerned.”

Hmmm…really?

Well, yes. Tsui provides good evidence for using aromatherapy during those times when you can’t get outside. Tsui refers to a study touting the benefits of walking outside done by Qing Li, an immunologist at Tokyo’s Nippon Medical School. In this study, Li found that “walks in the woods boosted natural killer immune cells that helped fight infection and cancer,” and he, as I (patting myself on the back), “came to suspect that it was the natural scents of evergreens and other trees that did the bulk of the work." Some countries are now even promoting “forest therapy,” according to Tsui. Read Tsui’s piece to learn about Li’s findings on sniffing cypress scents and more. 

So while I might fire up the aromatherapy diffuser soon, right now, it’s beautiful outside. I’m going to take a walk and view and smell the real outdoors. I hope that you can too.

In the News! (helpful hints)

I stumbled across a three part series by David D. Perlmutter in The Chronicle of Higher Education a few weeks ago. The series is titled “The Completion Agenda.” I want to note at the outset that these articles are based in part on Perlmutter’s own experience as a graduate student and a professor, which made the content that much more credible. 

In Part 1, Perlmutter's thesis is the following: Just finish your dissertation. There is no such thing as the perfect dissertation. Perlmutter reminds graduate students that their written work is not a dissertation until it has been defended and submitted. Until you have reached these final stages, your document is nothing more than a word file saved on your computer or USB drive. Do not put off completing the work because you have discovered some new study related to your topic, a new piece of secondary research that may or may not be relevant to your thesis, or because you found out about a class offered in some other department that you think might offer a new perspective related to your field. Simply finish the dissertation! Do all the requisite research, but remember that your dissertation is a work in progress that can be revised and updated over several years after you have completed your graduate school program and moved on to the next phase of your professional life.

In Part 2, Perlmutter reflects on the defense (previously written about on this blog). He shares an entertaining anecdote -- one that, I must admit, reflects the concerns that I have about my own future defense experience:

I recall being startled at the dissertation defense when professors in the young man’s department began delivering scorching assessments of his theory, method, cases, and conclusions. As the incendiaries kept flying I grew concerned about his health. He whitened, started sweating visibly, and several times laid his forehead on the table. When it came my turn to speak, I froze and ended up sputtering, "Well, you have answered all my questions!" and fell silent.

But then something incredible happened: The candidate was asked to leave the room, and the committee briskly and unanimously voted in favor of passing his dissertation with minimal revisions. He was ushered back in to the accompaniment of back slaps, clapping, and exclamations of "Welcome, Doctor!"

Turns out that the scene was a norm in the department, a version of some tribal coming-of-age ritual, except the scarring was mental, not physical. Misery and stress were inflicted to test resolve and fortitude. Survival meant passing.

I read this passage and all I could think was, “Not cool, dude. Not cool.”

Perlmutter does offer some invaluable advice when it comes to prepping for the defense. First, constant communication with your committee. Provide them with copies of the complete dissertation a month before the defense. Follow this up with emails or face to face meetings in order to get each instructor’s reaction to your dissertation. 

Second, Perlmutter’s advice is: “Know your material cold.” Apparently, it is not uncommon for graduate students to walk into their defense and completely blank out. You may know one section better than another, or you may have forgotten some content because it was written a long time ago. Make the time to re-read your own dissertation in its entirety before you step into your defense. 

Third, remember what you learned in your undergraduate communications class – speak clearly, precisely, and provide handouts. Consult with your director and make sure that you know how much time you will have for the defense. Do NOT read from your dissertation. Rehearse. And if you are going to be using technology during your defense, make sure that you have a back-up plan in case the tech does not work the day of your defense. 

Always remember: Defend your work, but do not become defensive about your work. 

Part 3 addresses the post-defense stage. Recall that you will receive one of two responses from your committee – Pass or Fail. If you pass your dissertation defense, you will receive one of two marks on your results form:  Pass: The Thesis/Dissertation Requires No Further Review By The Committee or Chair OR Pass: The Thesis/Dissertation Requires Revisions or Corrections Which Must Be Reviewed.

Perlmutter indicates that this latter response is more likely. Remember, there is no such thing as a perfect dissertation; therefore, do not freak out if your committee asks for additional revisions after the defense.

The article advises that you take detailed notes when receiving feedback from your committee. Make sure that you create an itemized list (if necessary) of changes that need to be made to your dissertation. Afterwards, be sure that the entire committee concurs with the needed revisions. Remember that even after you make these final changes, you will need to show another clean draft of your dissertation to your committee. The question you need to ascertain is: will it be acceptable if you only deal with your director when updating your dissertation? Or do you need to work with each member of the committee individually? 

Most importantly: Do not leave your committee without getting a due date for the final draft of your dissertation. Many jobs will expect you to have finished your dissertation prior to starting your employment. If you are still revising your dissertation as you start your new job, it will be possible for you to fall behind in revising your dissertation as you prioritize projects required at your new job.

One final note: I want to remind NIU graduate students that it is still possible that after you revise your dissertation/thesis for your committee, your document may need further alterations to ensure that your work has been formatted according to publication standards as outlined on the NIU Thesis and Dissertation Office website. If any of the content on our website is unclear of if you have any questions about writing, formatting, or editing your dissertation/thesis, please feel free to contact us or speak with the director of your committee. 

The message that I took from each of the three parts was this: Finish the dissertation. Just finish. That is the hardest part. Finish!

I found Perlmutter's articles to be insightful, easy to read, and they helped me realize that my own situation as a graduate student is not all that different from his own and many others. While Perlmutter's articles focus on doctoral student experiences, I highly recommend master's and doctoral students read each of these articles. Links to the three part series are provided below.

If you have any comments or questions, please feel free to post them to the blog or on our Facebook page.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Part 1 (click here)

Part 2 (click here)

Part 3 (click here)

Reviews of Guidebooks on the Topic of Oral Defense

Today, I’d like to follow up on our last post, “The Defense Rests.” After reading Mike’s July 9 post, I felt better about the oral defense that many of us will face (or have faced). Yet I was left with a question: Mike mentioned that all committee members of the defense he observed had paper copies of the student’s dissertation. Since our office only requires students to bring one paper copy to Adams Hall Room 223 (three weeks in advance of oral defense date for the “outside” reader), were the paper copies Mike noted provided to the committee by the defending student? I would guess “yes,” but I also started wondering, what other preparatory tasks exist that we "defenders" might wish to know about?

To find out, I did some research. Below, I’ve summarized what a few of the books we keep around The Thesis Office say on the matter of the oral defense. *Note: most of what follows applies for doctoral students--unless your master's thesis requires an oral defense.

Theses and Dissertations: A Guide to Planning, Research, and Writing by R. Murray Thomas and Dale L. Brubaker (Bergin & Garvey, 2000 ). 

This book is geared towards students in the “social and behavioral sciences” (Preface), but its chapter on the oral defense could help any presenter. The authors devote 7 of 277 pages to the defense, which may sound short but is actually one of the longer treatments. Thomas and Brubaker begin by pointing out that the oral defense is usually the “penultimate” (257) step to graduation, mentioning that students might still have revisions after the defense, as Mike also explains in his post. The book then delineates “7 cases of concern” for defenders, including issues of study validity and significance; candidates' and advisors’ roles; objections; “committee member debates”; and “inadequate proofreading” (Thomas and Brubaker 257).

The authors then go through each of the above topics in Q&A format, mimicking how an advisor would respond to student questions. The following points sum up the chapter:

              ·  2 and 1/2 pages devoted to validity issues, aimed for defense of qualitative studies

              ·  Preparation for the question, “What does it mean?”

o   offer your take on the different types of “meaning”

o   state which applies to your study (260)

              · Preparation for other situations, including the “intrusive advisor” (261)

o   don’t worry if committee members seem inattentive

o   keep quiet when committee members debate

o   generally, “answer … questions precisely and concisely, and then STOP” (263)

Finally, the authors mention that many students don’t believe that “spelling, grammar, and format” are of main concern, but they note that faculty members are in the “business” of “fostering responsible scholarship” (Thomas and Brubaker 263). The authors caution students to proofread thoroughly before the oral defense to avoid additional revisions.

Surviving Your Dissertation: A Comprehensive Guide to Content and Process by Kjell Erik Rudestam and Rae. R. Newton (3^rd ed., Sage Publications, Inc., 2007) 

Another book for graduate students in the social sciences--this one has a positive feel with several examples of tables and figures for students. However, Rudestam and Newton devote only about 2 and 1/2 pages to “Dissertation Orals” (218). They frame the experience as a range from a “congenial ritual … to a more excruciating examination … by an unsympathetic faculty committee” (218). But Rudestam and Newton say, “You can make a number of reasonable preparations to make the experience a positive one” (218).

         Their biggest advice: 1) Know your study and 2) Take control

For example, Rudestam and Newton describe a candidate who arrived at her defense early, rearranged the furniture to her liking, and greeted the committee members as they arrived, as if she “had invited them to an event she was hosting” (219). The book then describes the typical oral defense format, which matches Mike’s experience fairly closely. The authors mention a possible “let down” after the event but hope students will view the defense as a “transformative experience” (Rudestam and Newton 220).

         The Portable Dissertation Advisor by Miles T. Bryant (Corwin Press, 2004) 

Bryant takes a “pragmatic” (xi) approach in this text, gleaned from his years of working with graduate students. He aims his book more towards the part time or “nontraditional” doctoral student (ix). He, too, devotes approximately 2 and 1/2 pages (of 150) specifically to the defense.

Bryant’s defense section starts with an Oscar Wilde quote:

          “The play was a great success, but the audience was a disaster.” 

Funny guy, that Oscar Wilde. And good choice of opening for Bryant because this quotation encapsulates the scary vibe of oral defenses: the audience, i.e., your committee; how will they be?

However, Bryant reassures that the majority of defenders pass, and here are his main pieces of advice:

o   Have a “plausible answer for every question asked” (140)

o   Speak with confidence and clarity

Bryant then mentions scheduling and room arrangement issues (may or may not be student’s responsibility) as well as reminds to set up and check technology ahead of time. Done! 

Finally, we have another book called Destination Dissertation: A Traveler’s Guide to a Done Dissertation by Sonja K. Foss and William Waters (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007 ). This is one of my favorite dissertation guides, and its chapter on the oral defense is like a 14-page How-to (book has 359 total pages). As this post is quite long already, I'll just note that the authors confirm most of what I’ve already reported and what Mike found in his experience, but they also give several example responses, and they list several ways to work with your main advisor and practice for the event. If you want a one-stop source of advice (albeit one that's a little wordy), I’d suggest that you check out this guide. 

Anyone have other helpful remarks? Please feel free to comment!

The Defense Rests

Recently, after a conversation with my director, I came to the realization that some day -- sooner than I may realize -- I am going to have to defend my dissertation. Normally, such an epiphany would stress me out considering all of the horror stories that other graduate students have revealed to me about the defense process.

But I decided that worrying myself over something that has not even happened yet was crazy and a waste of my time. Instead, I decided that if I wanted to prepare myself for what was coming, then I should sit in on a dissertation defense. After all, they are open to the public (the calendar of defenses can be found by clicking on this link).

You know what? It wasn't that bad.

The defense that I watched was for a doctoral student in the humanities. I cannot guarantee that her experience is typical for every graduate student, but I had the sense that her dissertation defense followed a fairly standard format.

The proceedings began with the members of the dissertation committee and the doctoral candidate taking their seats around a long conference table. The director began the defense by introducing himself and the other committee members, and followed this with a review of the day's agenda. I liked how the director was letting the candidate know beforehand what all she could expect to take place.

The entire procedure consists of nothing more than a q&a. It reminded me a great deal of an exit interview. The candidate's answers basically are a narrative -- X is my topic; I chose X as my topic because . . . ; my thesis about X is the following . . . .

The director started the questioning. The candidate was asked why she chose her topic and what she learned about her topic. Next, she was asked what she learned from her graduate school experience -- she was a more mature student compared to many of her peers and I had the impression that her committee was interested in ascertaining what aspects of her education proved beneficial so that they might be replicated with future students -- and, finally, what did she experience through the research and writing process. These were very easy questions that any graduate student could answer. They helped to relax the candidate, establish rapport, and let everyone know that while the defense is serious business, it was nothing more than a conversation between colleagues.

As the candidate answered, she transitioned into a detailed discussion of her topic. She chose to incorporate a powerpoint presentation into the defense process that I found very stimulating.

The big thing: she did not read the slides to the audience. I dislike when speakers do this. I find it tedious and unprofessional. The candidate clearly had good experience incorporating powerpoint into a lecture. I do not think that every graduate student needs to think about putting together a presentation for his or her defense. In this case, given her choice of topic, integrating the slides into her defense was ideal.

This brought the director's line of questioning to an end. Next, the other two committee members asked questions about specific passages or particular arguments found in the body of the dissertation. Everyone seated at the conference table had a paper copy of the dissertation in front of them so that everyone could refer to individual chapters or pages if need be. Passages were examined and the candidate was asked to clarify a couple of points.

After the committee was done asking questions, people in attendance but not directly affiliated with the candidate or the committee were invited to pose questions.

Once it was apparent that the session was complete, everyone was asked to vacate the room so that the committee could confer in private. After a few minutes, the candidate was invited back into the room to hear her results: Pass, or Pass but some revisions necessary.

The portion of the dissertation defense that I was allowed to witness lasted no longer than 45 minutes. It was a very casual affair. I was surprised coffee was not served. The experience felt as though it could have easily taken place in a cafe.

I noticed the candidate had her dissertation clipped into a three ring binder and there was a plastic divider separating each chapter. This allowed her to turn to the appropriate section of her dissertation quickly and effortlessly when prompted to do so by an examiner's question. This is one aspect of the defense that I would recommend that every graduate student follow. It made the candidate look poised and professional.

Now that I have watched a dissertation defense, I feel a lot better about the experience. I plan on attending more defenses in order to determine what other tips I might pick up that I can integrate into my own defense.

Until then, I have books to read, secondary research to track down, and lots of coffee to drink while I stay up late to write.
---------------------------------------------------

Have any thesis or dissertation defense tips? Know any classic thesis or dissertation defense stories? Feel free to comment on this blog or share them on with our Facebook group!

APA Basics, Part Two

     Some of you may have read our May 29 blog post, APA Basics, Part One. Today’s post is APA Basics, Part Two. This post focuses on wording practices according the APA Publication Manual. In both posts, I tried to follow APA guidelines for style and formatting. Questions or comments are welcome!

A Quick Note About Periods

     First, let’s dispense with the debate over how many spaces appear at the end of a sentence. Though the APA Publication Manual (2010) has stated, “Spacing twice after punctuation marks at the end of a sentence aids readers of draft manuscripts” (p. 88), the organization does not specifically require two spaces at the close of a sentence. According to Carolyn Law, Thesis and Dissertation Advisor at NIU, “The standard practice in all publishing is now one space after a period. Period.” For those interested in this practice’s development, Dave Bricker’s blog, The World’s Greatest Book, offers a quick look at its history. For now, though, let’s cover language guidelines.

“Writing Clearly and Concisely”

     “Writing Clearly and Concisely” is the third chapter in the Publication Manual. This chapter delineates many guidelines for APA style. Aside from the overarching goal of communication via the fewest words necessary (“Say only what needs to be said,” APA, 2010, p. 67), APA finds headings (and subheadings) necessary for organization of material. APA also promotes divisions of material into parallel bits, such as bulleted or numbered lists. While writers should emphasize the research and not the researchers, writers still should construct active voice sentences whenever possible, except for in the abstract. Oh, and “we” writers should NOT use the editorial “we”; a writer should use “we” only when the writer is part of a research team referenced.

Verb Tense and “Noun Strings”

     APA instructs writers to use only past tense and/or present perfect verbs in literature reviews and in descriptions of procedures done in the past (e.g., “Juarez found” or “The researchers have discovered”). Past tense must also be used to describe study results, while the present tense is utilized only to “discuss implications of the results and to present the conclusions” (APA, 2010, p. 66). For instance, a statement beginning with the words, “The findings point to a need for …” would be appropriate.

     APA also tells writers to untangle, or to rearrange, “noun strings” (66). These strings happen when several nouns accrue “to modify a final noun” (APA, 2010, p. 66). I found the following example of a noun string from Wikipedia helpful: “Underground Mine Worker Safety Protection Procedures”; see Wikipedia’s Noun string entry for more ideas here. Moreover, APA discourages wordiness of any type, such as the use of a phrase when only one word is needed For example, avoid the ubiquitous expression “due to the fact that”; instead say, “because.” Other redundant words or expressions should also be expunged. Writers should avoid phrases like “summarize briefly…” when a summary, by definition, is brief. So proofread carefully!

See section 3.09 of the Publication Manual for more tips for clarity.

No Bias

     Finally, APA is committed to reducing bias in language. As stated in the Publication Manual (2010), “Scientific writing must be free of implied or irrelevant evaluation of the group or groups being studied” (p. 70). The general guidelines for doing so are good for any type of writing: be specific and be deliberate in word choice. APA writers must acknowledge study participants and describe them with sensitivity for, and understanding of, the social construction of identity. An example statement that acknowledges participants while specifying the exact group would read: “Of the tenth-graders who completed the survey …” as opposed to the following: “Of the students who were given the study to complete …” When naming groups, use the identifying terms that each group prefers, and avoid language that “objectifies a person,” such as “wheelchair bound” (APA, 2010, p. 76). Here, rather state, “People who require wheelchairs” instead. Most biases are cleared up by being as precise as possible in description.

Concluding Thought

     Simply, APA style calls for clear, concise, and specific writing, with some arbitrary rules for certain sections of a document. As mentioned in our previous APA post, the best source for information is the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6^th edition) as well as the APA Style website.

Should Social Media Be Used as Secondary Sources?

Facebook. Twitter. Tumblr. YouTube. Pinterest. It can be argued that these social networking sites have made life entertaining, simpler, and, in some cases, informative. Individuals, researchers, businesses, and academic institutes venture onto one or more of these sites for a variety of reasons. However, a question has come up in the Thesis and Dissertation Office: Should information found on social media be used in a thesis/dissertation?

If you were to consult the new-ish page on our office website labeled Documentation Styles, you would come across the how-to-cite-social-media link. This is a graphic that explains how to properly document social media in your thesis/dissertation. Providing said graphic might imply that the NIU Thesis and Dissertation Office endorses the use of social media as a form of credible secondary research. But it's not that simple.

According to a survey conducted in 2014, the Pew Research Center reports that 52% of adults who go online have accounts with two or more social media sites, Facebook being the most popular. Seventy percent of Facebook users and 36% of Twitter users check their accounts daily (click here to review data).  In 2015 it was reported that thanks to the ubiquity of Smartphones, 92% of teens go online daily while 24% report being online “almost constantly” (click here to review data). Earlier this week, it was discovered that 61% of the Millenial generation go to Facebook for news as opposed to watching local news programs on television (click here to review study).

You may be wondering, What does any of this have to do with me or with my field of research? For those of you pursuing degrees in the sciences, it’s been reported that 47% of scientists affiliated with the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) “use social media to talk about science or read about scientific developments.” Further, 19% of AAAS scientists follow the blogs and 12% follow the tweets of various experts in their fields (click here to review report). In other words, the professional community relies on information that is disseminated digitally. As reported in the science journal Nature, there are even sites like ResearchGate and Academia.edu that are exclusively for researchers and whose goal is to promote collaboration, peer review, and to share advances in respective fields (click here to read article). 

All of this begs the question: If relying on social media is good enough for the professional community, why is there is a stigma associated with citing a piece of research from Facebook, YouTube, Tumblr, or Twitter on one’s thesis/dissertation?

Here is the (tentative) conclusion that we arrived at in the office: Is the information found via social media reliable? Has the author taken the time to assess the content in order to determine its legitimacy and overall value to the thesis/dissertation? In the end, this is what matters most. 

Given the amount of time people spend on, the individuals using, and the motivation behind relying on social media, it can be argued that future generations of graduate students may come to depend more and more on social media when searching for secondary materials. In time, these sites will accrue so much information that they will become general studies databases or even subject-specific databases in their own right, thereby eliminating any stigma an author might experience when identifying a source on his or her references page as having come from social media.

Then again, in spite of my beliefs concerning social media, all of the research that I have used in my dissertation thus far has been copies from professional journals or tracked down in the stacks in Founders Library. I don’t know why, but I just can’t bring myself to cite a blog or rely on a Facebook post for research even though I know that they exist. Maybe the stigma regarding the use of social media in my dissertation is all in my head.

Please feel free to share any comments you might have about this topic on our blog or Facebook page. 

By the way, if you’re interested in a laugh, try reading a series of ridiculous tweets about possible humanities dissertations on The New Yorker website (click here).