[Hellen wafula Kamwele]

in reply to: Module 4, Session 4: Food for thought #5917

1. What do you think of the way the PhD assessment is done in Antwerp?
There is a lot of rigour in the process of assessing PhD in Antwerp which in my view ensures quality of the final output.
a. The added value of assessing the research and doctoral education separately is to ensure objectivity in process. It rewards the students efforts in all the stages that he has to go through. This acts as an inspiration to complete the PhD and the knowledge acquired will be able to be passed over to others with confidence. More over, one step helps build on the other hence gives confidence to a student once one is sure he has grasped doctoral education.

b. The combination of (bi)yearly evaluation ensures the student is on track and where there are problems, they are sorted on time and will eventually lead to timely completion of a quality thesis.
Yearly evaluation is also important as coherence of work can be ascertained and helps check set milestones.

c. What do you think of the possible pre-defence and the public defence? The two defences are good as they help the student be on target.
pre – defence has an added value of giving the students a chance to improve on the quality of his work by incorporating the comments given. It also prepares the student for the public defence as he would have gotten insights of what is expected in a defence and hence gives him confidence. Since the overall purpose of PhD is to generate new knowledge, public defence will help in disseminating his work.

2. How is it done at your university?
In my university, a student is given a chance to present his/her work before the school postgraduate committee, whereby comments are given to help improve the work further. Once satisfied with the work as per the post graduate requirements, the work is submitted to school of graduate studies who constitute an examination panel for the student for his defence.
3. What do you see as benefits and drawbacks of the different approaches?The different approaches are good as they build on each other hence neccesary.
4. Where do you see a possible improvement of the PhD assessment process? In my university, the performance of the student in doctoral studies should be considered as part of the final assessment as normally the performance of the research determines the fate of the student.

[Hellen wafula Kamwele]

in reply to: Module 4, Session 3: Coaching and Mentoring #5915

Mentoring and coaching are different but are both required by supervisors to help help build confidence and raise aspirations and eventually improvement of the students behaviour. However, one would be lucky to find a supervisor who is ready to mentor and coach. The supervisors put a shield between themselves and students reasons best known to themselves.

[Hellen wafula Kamwele]

in reply to: Module 4, Session 1: Ethics in Research #5914

The ethical considerations that are pertinent in social sciences are varied and includes being granted consent to carry out research by the ethics committee which is a rigorous process. When in the field, its important to seek consent before carrying out the interview, explain the purpose of the study, ensure confidentiality of data collected and the person interviewed.
When data collection involves taking of photographs, permission has to be sought and granted before doing so. However, the issue of declaring finances is not stressed so much by supervisors.
Safe custody of data is equally important as once in a while one is challenged on specific findings that one has to have data to fall back as evidence.
Ethical considerations can be nurtured to students through lectures in class, seminars and workshops.

[Hellen wafula Kamwele]

in reply to: Module 3, Session 3: Disciplinary differences #5913

Urban and Regional Planning is multidisciplinary in nature. It encampuses both horizontal and hierarchical knowledge structure.It hence falls under both the multi and trans disciplinary approaches.
The most suitable research design is the mixed method .

[Hellen wafula Kamwele]

in reply to: Module 2, Session 4: EPE resources’ assessment #5912

Having gone through the resources, i found them all very useful. The section on ” how examiners read a thesis’ was quite interesting as it highlighted the core sections and their relationships. This will guide my future process of examination.
Guidelines on literature review and theoretical framework was very insightful and i will share with the students that am currently supervising to help them navigate through.
How to write a conclusion was the most thought provoking as most students do not do the right thing. Now i know and they will benefit from this. thanks so much.

[Hellen wafula Kamwele]

in reply to: Module 2, Session 2: Scholarly community of practice #5791

A scholar is someone who is highly educated and has become a specialist in his area of study. He is well versed with the respective field and is abreast with any emerging issues in the same as he continues reading, researching and creating new knowledge.
A scholarship is a form of financial aid to help in furthering education.

For one to be active in academic community, it refers to one teaching in universities on exchange programme, supervising students from different institutions,examining thesis for students in different universities, collaborations in research, publishing, reviewing publications, and making presentations in conferences.

[Hellen wafula Kamwele]

in reply to: Module 1, Session 4: National Policies #5739

In Kenya, at national level, there the Commission for University Education which sets standards and ensures their implementation to ensure Quality of teaching and learning, and accreditation of institutions. At institutional level, there various documents anchored on the national policies and touch on the rules and regulations guiding postgraduate studies, research policy, etc

[Hellen wafula Kamwele]

in reply to: Module 1, Session 2: Supervision with a humanizing pedagogy #5389

Very insightful video. I do agree with the observations which are very critical in supervision journey. Lets accept people as different and respect the dissenting views so long as they contribute positively to knowledge production.

[Hellen wafula Kamwele]

in reply to: Module 1, Session 2: Variables and dynamics in the supervision process #5387

Religion /culture came into play when a masters student i was supervising was male and his culture is such that women are there to be seen only. The student was not taking instructions, leading to very little progress until he was given a male supervisor.

Age also plays a role for the students older than 50 years.They take time to grasp issues and others want to be assisted in writing their dissertations.

Timely feedback is key but is hardly the case both from supervisors and students which leads to the student taking too long to finish his work in the postulated period.

[Author]

Posts