 |
| FA13-Dossier#2-Oct. 4th |
Today is a big day for IST folks. 12 IST seniors had their Dossier #2 review presentation and were asked some questions about their research, teaching and service experiences and future goals. My dossier #1 review will be Spring 2014, and my dossier #2 review will be Spring 2015. After participating in 6 IST doctoral students' dossier #2 review today, the following are my takeaways from this presentation.
Questions asked by faculty members that I think are important and will be asked again and again in future dossier #2 reviews.:
1. In your focused research area, who are the authors you're drawing from?
2. Why is your research/teaching/service related to our field?
3. How do you characterize yourself as a researcher?
4. So what? Why is it important? Why should others be interested to your topic?
5. How do the authors you cited influence in your research and teaching?
I think I've learned a lot from today's dossier #2 review. First, I think a fully comprehensive understanding of what I am doing in my research study and the conversations among authors in literature review is a must. It would make myself look more professional and like a real scholar if I could define different important terms with examples and let audience understand my focused area. I'm not sure whether it's because some presenters were too nervous, sometimes they could not clearly explain the fundamental terms or concepts in their research areas. This is something that I will need to keep reminding myself not to forget about the basics. Also, I felt that it would be the best situation if a main research area was decided at the very beginning stage and then have most of the teaching and service experiences built around the main focused area. This way, all the evidence of knowledge and skills would be a lot stronger and tie with research profession.
Question about dossier #2 presentation skill: Is it better to quickly go through all related research projects and studies I've involved in to show that I have rich knowledge and experiences in a certain area or to focus on only one or two main studies and explaining specifically about research questions, methods, results, and implications?
1. In your focused research area, who are the authors you're drawing from?
2. Why is your research/teaching/service related to our field?
3. How do you characterize yourself as a researcher?
4. So what? Why is it important? Why should others be interested to your topic?
5. How do the authors you cited influence in your research and teaching?
I think I've learned a lot from today's dossier #2 review. First, I think a fully comprehensive understanding of what I am doing in my research study and the conversations among authors in literature review is a must. It would make myself look more professional and like a real scholar if I could define different important terms with examples and let audience understand my focused area. I'm not sure whether it's because some presenters were too nervous, sometimes they could not clearly explain the fundamental terms or concepts in their research areas. This is something that I will need to keep reminding myself not to forget about the basics. Also, I felt that it would be the best situation if a main research area was decided at the very beginning stage and then have most of the teaching and service experiences built around the main focused area. This way, all the evidence of knowledge and skills would be a lot stronger and tie with research profession.
Question about dossier #2 presentation skill: Is it better to quickly go through all related research projects and studies I've involved in to show that I have rich knowledge and experiences in a certain area or to focus on only one or two main studies and explaining specifically about research questions, methods, results, and implications?
No comments:
Post a Comment